FCC Wireless Radiation Standards Face Scrutiny Over Safety Concerns

0:00 Speaker 1 Sunday morning with us today is Odette Wilkins, and she’s the president and general counsel of Wired Broadband Inc. It’s a nonprofit that worries about the dangers of Wi-Fi. Well, Odette, what do you have to say on a Sunday morning?

0:17 Speaker 2 Yes, so I’m also president and general counsel of a national organization called the National Call for Safe Technology, and Wired Broadband is also a national group. You know, I got into... because I thought technology was helping people. And as long as that was the case, that’s fine. But if it’s hurting people, that’s where I draw the line,

0:39 as an attorney and as a person. We represent the interests of those who have been injured or disabled from wireless radiation. Cell phones, smart utility meters, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, you name it. And we represent both the New York and national interests. Now, what is happening... is that the FCC is under court order. It has been under court order

1:03 since 2021 to provide a reasoned explanation for why it failed to update its outdated wireless emission limits. Because this is causing a lot of harm to people. It includes, and they were supposed to look into the children’s vulnerability, long-term exposure, environmental and wildlife impacts. and the potential health impacts involving reproduction and DNA damage. So the FTC has

1:38 opened up a docket for public comment to do this. Now, this is kind of weird because the FTC already did a public comment back from 2013 to 2019, I believe it was, and they said there was nothing to see here.

1:53 And the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed with them. In 2021, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals said that the FCC acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner by not reviewing the 11,000 pages of scientific evidence of harm within their limits. So the plaintiffs went back to court, and they wanted the court to force the FCC to

2:16 come up with their report. What the FCC came up with last Friday was basically there’s nothing to see here. So I and the court said, no, there’s plenty to see here. And you have to go back to the drawing board and you have to tell us what you know, what is that situation? So the FCC, I’d like to

2:36 see what the how the court is going to be dealing with the FCC, since the FCC seems to be thumbing its nose at the court.

2:44 Speaker 1 And what is it? What did the court decide that the FCC is thumbing their nose at?

2:53 Speaker 2 Well, no, they haven’t decided that they’re thumbing their nose at them, but that’s what the FCC is doing. So I’ll be curious to see what the court has to say about the FCC’s answer, because the FCC has not responded to the request of the court to review all of the 11,000 pages of scientific evidence of harm within

3:14 their limits.

3:15 Speaker 1 So are you saying there’s harm to people? Absolutely. Listen, we’ve got another minute left. Tell us what the harm to people is so people know that. Yes.

3:31 Speaker 2 So the harm is that it causes oxidative stress, DNA damage. The government knows it. There’s a National Toxicology Program study that was done, concluded in 2018, and they found clear evidence of cancer in lab animals, clear evidence of cancer.

3:50 Speaker 1 Have you referred this to Dr. Oz? Maybe he’s interested in that.

3:54 Speaker 2 Oh, I’d be happy to refer it to Dr. Oz. The CIA declassified a 1977 Russian study earlier that showed harm from wireless radiation.

4:04 Speaker 1 And the U.S.

4:05 Speaker 2 Naval Academy, Medical Academy, 1971, linked 23 chronic diseases based on 2,300 studies. People have been suffering. They have been disabled because of this radiation. And there’s a constellation of symptoms. Oxidated stress, cognitive dysfunction, DNA damage, cardiomyopathy.

4:25 Speaker 1 When you have more information, would you please contact us and we’ll let the people know? Yes, absolutely. Thank you so much for calling.

4:35 Speaker 2 Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you.