Friday, August 8, 2014
My
comments: This superior court ruling enables the discovery
phase of the trial to begin. Perhaps, we will soon learn whether the
wireless industry has been covering up knowledge of the health risks of
mobile phone use.
The insurance industry has refused to provide product liability insurance on cell phones primarily due to this concern as they fear that cell phone litigation may turn out like tobacco or asbestos litigation did with huge punitive awards. My most recent press release, "FCC: 98 Scientific Experts Demand Stronger Regulation of Cellphone Radiation" makes the case that the scientific community has known for many years about the health risks of mobile phone radiation. The wireless industry, however, has confused government officials and the public by co-opting scientists to support the industry's disinformation campaign to buy time. -- 29 brain tumor lawsuits move toward trial in Washington, DC Arthur Firstenberg, Cellular Phone Task Force, Aug 11, 2014 Twenty-nine high-profile lawsuits brought by people whose brain tumors were caused by their cell phones are finally moving toward trial. Six of these cases were originally filed in 2001 and 2002. Many of the plaintiffs are no longer alive. On Friday, Judge Frederick H. Weisberg, in the D.C. Superior Court, admitted the testimony of five expert witness for the plaintiffs, and the 12- and 13-year-old cases will now move into the discovery phase. Each of the plaintiffs is asking for more than $100,000,000. There are 46 defendants including Motorola, Nokia, AT&T, Bell Atlantic, Cellular One, Cingular Wireless, SBC Communications, Verizon, Vodafone, the Telecommunications Industry Association, the IEEE, ANSI, the CTIA, and the FCC. The plaintiffs are represented by Jeffrey B. Morganroth of Morganroth & Morganroth, a law firm in Birmingham, Michigan. For over a decade the industry and the plaintiffs have played tug-of-war with the oldest cases, sending them back and forth between federal and state courts, and fighting over whether the plaintiff's claims were preempted by the Telecommunications Act of 1996. In 2009 the D.C. Court of Appeals, in Murray v. Motorola (982 A. 2d 764), ruled that the telecommunications companies could not be sued over brain tumors caused by cell phones manufactured after 1996. But since all of these plaintiffs had used pre-1996 phones, their lawsuits were allowed to go forward. They were also allowed to go forward on their claims that the defendants made false and misleading statements and failed to disclose information about the dangers of cell phones. These claims were brought under the D.C. Consumer Protection Procedures Act. In December 2013 and January 2014, testimony was heard from: DR. SHIRA KRAMER, a Maryland epidemiologist; DR. MICHAEL KUNDI, professor of epidemiology and occupational health at the Medical University of Vienna; DR. VINI KHURANA, a neurosurgeon and professor of neurosurgery at the Australian National University in Canberra; DR. IGOR BELYAEV, head research scientist at the Cancer Research institute at the Slovak Academy of Science in Bratislava, Slovakia; DR. WILHELM MOSGOELLER, professor and medical doctor at the University of Vienna Medical School’s Institute for Cancer Research; DR. DIMITRIS PANAGAPOULOUS, founder of the Radiation Biophysics Laboratory at the University of Athens; DR. ABRAHAM LIBOFF, professor emeritus of physics at Oakland University in Rochester, Michigan; and DR. LAURA PLUNKETT, pharmacologist and toxicologist in Houston. On Friday, August 8, 2014, the testimony of Drs. Kramer, Khurana, and Panagopoulos was disallowed. But the testimony of Drs. Kundi, Belyaev, Mosgoeller, Liboff, and Plunkett was admitted. They will testify at trial about "general causation," i.e. that cell phones can cause brain tumors. The lawsuits now move into the discovery phase, in which each side is compelled to produce documents and answer questions. This is the first time that the industry has had to turn over data. There will then be a fight over the admission of the testimony of witnesses on "specific causation," i.e. doctors and others who will testify that these specific cell phones caused these specific tumors. Friday's decision by Judge Weisberg allowed 13 of the cases, which have been consolidated in one action, to go forward. The other 16 cases are being tried separately, but the parties in those cases agreed to be bound by Friday's decision. Judge Frederick H. Weisberg, Washington D.C. Superior Court: Expert Preemption Order (page 5):
"Federal law is the supreme law of
the land, but there is no constitutional provision that says federal facts
are the supreme facts of the land. Federal law can preempt state law, but it
cannot preempt scientific fact. The scientific truth, whatever it may be,
lies outside of the FCC’s regulations about what is 'safe' or 'unsafe.'
The experts have offered their opinions on the state of the scientific
knowledge and general causation. They have testified about the methodology
they used to reach those opinions. Their testimony on these points, at this
stage of the case, is not subject to preemption."
Judge Weisberg's ruling on expert witness admissibility
Michael Patrick Murray et al. v. Motorola, Inc. et al. Superior Court for the District of Columbia http://bit.ly/DC_expert_ruling
--
Court Allows Expert Testimony in Litigation Alleging Cell Phone-Linked Tumors According to Consumers' Legal Team WASHINGTON -- Aug 8, 2014 /PRNewswire/ -- A Washington D.C. superior court ruled that five scientific expert witnesses can testify for consumers suffering from brain tumors allegedly caused or promoted by cell phone use Ashcraft & Gerel LLPMorganroth and Morganroth PLLC Lundy Lundy Soileau & South L.L.P. and co-counsel said today. Judge Frederick H. Weisberg who is presiding over 13 consolidated lawsuits against the telecom industry ruled that experts met the Dyas/Frye legal standards and can offer testimony related to injury causation and health effects. The court held evidentiary hearings in December 2013 and January 2014 and reviewed hundreds of exhibits. Judge Weisberg noted that while the court did not decide the issue of whether cell phones cause brain tumors new scientific studies and information have emerged recently. His order referred to a May 2014 French case-control epidemiological study that found support for "a possible association between heavy mobile phone use" and brain tumors. Each of the plaintiffs in the litigation suffers from a brain tumor or is suing for a family of someone who died of brain cancer. The plaintiffs are represented by Morganroth and Morganroth PLLC of Birmingham Mich.; Ashcraft & Gerel LLP of Washington D.C. and Lundy Lundy Soileau & South LLP of Lake Charles La.; The Knoll Law Firm LLC of Marksville La.; Pribanic & Pribanic LLC of Pittsburgh; Frasier Frasier & Hickman LLP of Tulsa Okla.; and Bernstein Liebhard LLP of New York. Hunter Lundy of Lundy Lundy Soileau & South LLP said "The telecom industry argued for years that cell phone consumer litigants could not produce scientists who could relate exposure to cell phone radiation to tumors. The ruling today refutes that contention and our experts' opinions having met the Dyas/Frye test are admissible." Jeffrey B. Morganroth of Morganroth and Morganroth PLLC said "We now have opinions and testimony from prominent scientific experts that will be admissible and support our clients' claims that cell phone radiation can cause brain tumors in humans. With this landmark ruling the cases are moving forward to fact discovery." Michelle Parfitt and James F. Green of Ashcraft & Gerel LLP said "The evidence presented at the evidentiary hearings months ago only included publicly available materials and did not include any testing data or information in possession of the defendants. We will seek that information as soon as possible." The first of the consolidated cases is "Michael Patrick Murray et al. v. Motorola Inc. et al." Case No. 2001 CA 008479 B in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia. The defendants in the cases are Motorola Inc. Qualcomm Inc. Nokia Inc. Audiovox Communications Corp. and Samsung Telecomm American LLC. Contact: Erin Powers Powers MediaWorks LLC for Ashcraft Gerel LLP info@powersmediaworks.com. SOURCE Ashcraft & Gerel LLP http://bit.ly/1r1fns9
--
Darryl D'Monte Chairperson, Forum of Environmental Journalists of India (FEJI) International Federation of Environmental Journalists (IFEJ) Kinara, 29-B Carter Road, Bandra West, Mumbai 400 050, India Tel +91 22 2642 7088, 2645 9286 E-mail: darryldmonte@gmail.com
__._,_.___
|
|||||||||||
Friday, November 21, 2014
US legal case
Concerning Illegal Mobile Towers Near Bandra Schools.
|
Dear Mr. Kunte,
On behalf of the students, parents and
the residents living in close proximity to buildings with mobile
tower/antennae we write this letter.
We would like to bring to your notice
the issue of mobile tower antennae atop the following buildings:
1) Sarkar Plaza, Hill
Road, Bandra (W), Mumbai 400 050
2) Al Bait Apartments,
Waroda Road, Bandra (W), Mumbai 400 050
3) Baba Nagar, Waroda
Road, Bandra (W), Mumbai 400 050
4) Abudallah House,
Waroda Road, Bandra (W), Mumbai 400 050.
All these buildings go against the new Urban
Development Department vide Notification dated 4th March 2014 (No
TPS-1810/1975/CR NEW 65/12/DP/UD-13, Section 6 f Page 8) that has banned
mobile towers in and around schools, hospitals and other such public
institutions.
You will no doubt agree that not only
are these towers a hazard by themselves but the number of towers/antennae in
such close proximity to each other makes the cumulative impact even
greater.
In study after study it has been proved
that the impact of radiation on children and pregnant women is greatest and
therefore we are gravely concerned about the collective health of the
students in the surrounding schools – St. Stanislaus and St. Peter’s K.G.
As concerned government authorities we
hope you will take a serious note of our complaint and resolve the matter in
the shortest possible time. The illegal towers/antennae must be
removed with immediate effect before the effects of radiation begin to show
on our young students and adversely affect the next generation.
Yours sincerely,
On behalf of the PTA, St. Stanislaus
School, Bandra, Mumbai 400 050.
__._,_.___
|
|||||||||
August 9, 2014
The Secretary
Sarkar Plaza
Hill Road
Bandra (W)
Mumbai
Dear Madam/Sir,
On behalf of the students, parents and the residents living in
proximity to your building we write this letter.
Over the past few months much has been written about the ill effects
of electro- magnetic radiation especially from mobile tower antennae. People living near these towers are adversely
affected by a range of symptoms from sleeplessness, mood and behavioural
problems and over the long term, permanent DNA damage, immune system imbalance
and cancer. (Ref: Internationally
accepted, Bio-Initiative report 2012, researched by 29 independent scientists
and health experts from 10 different countries).
Pregnant women and children are most vulnerable because of which the
Urban Development Department vide Notification dated 4th March 2014
(No TPS-1810/1975/CR NEW 65/12/DP/UD-13, Section 6 f, page 8) has banned mobile
towers in and around schools, hospitals and other such public institutions.
We are concerned that inspite of this notification your building
antennae/ towers directly face the primary section and laboratories of the
school and play ground. Posing a serious
threat to the health of our young children and staff and the neighbourhood
children who play in the grounds post school hours.
Further as per the new amendment to section 79 of the Maharashtra
Co-operative Societies Act the onus of health hazards from the mobile towers is
on co-operative housing society who has installed the towers/ antennae.
It is with deep concern and worry we write to you urging you to view
this serious public health threat and speak to the operators about removing the
school facing towers with immediate effect.
We would be very happy to provide more information about the issue to
you and your residents.
Yours sincerely,
·
TERM Monisha Biswas, Dy Director General, TERM
CELL, Telecom Enforcement, Resource and Monitoring Cell, Ministry of
Communication and IT Dept or Telecommunication, Mumbai - ddgterm-mum@nic.in
·
Minister
of Communications & Information Technology Mr.Ravi Shankar Prasad.
mocit@nic.in / ravis@sansad.nic.in
·
·
Assistant Commissioner, BMC, H West Ward, Bandra,
400 050
August 5, 2014
The Secretary
Baba Nagar
Waroda Road
Bandra (W)
Mumbai
Dear Madam/Sir,
On behalf of the students, parents and the residents living in
proximity to your building we write this letter.
Over the past few months much has been written about the ill effects
of electro- magnetic radiation especially from mobile tower antennae. People living near these towers are adversely
affected by a range of symptoms from sleeplessness, mood and behavioural
problems and over the long term, permanent DNA damage, immune system imbalance
and cancer. (Ref: Internationally
accepted, Bio-Initiative report 2012, researched by 29 independent scientists
and health experts from 10 different countries).
Pregnant women and children are most vulnerable because of which the
Urban Development Department vide Notification dated 4th March 2014
(No TPS-1810/1975/CR NEW 65/12/DP/UD-13, Section 6 f, page 8) has banned mobile
towers in and around schools, hospitals and other such public institutions.
We are concerned that inspite of this notification your building
antennae/ towers directly face the primary section and laboratories of the
school and play ground. Posing a serious
threat to the health of our young children and staff and the neighbourhood
children who play in the grounds post school hours.
Further as per the new amendment to section 79 of the Maharashtra
Co-operative Societies Act the onus of health hazards from the mobile towers is
on co-operative housing society who has installed the towers/ antennae.
It is with deep concern and worry we write to you urging you to view
this serious public health threat and speak to the operators about removing the
school facing towers with immediate effect.
We would be very happy to provide more information about the issue to
you and your residents.
Yours sincerely,
Fw: [AACT] Report on Devra Davis talk
Why minimising ‘mobile’ conversations is a ‘no-brainer’
Did you know a cell phone in a moving car emits significantly greater
radiation, half of which could be absorbed by the brain while talking? A
renowned epidemiologist from the US warns users of this and other cell-phone
related hazards in the course of her recent talks in India. Darryl D’Monte
reports.
24
October 2014 -
Dr Devra Davis, a
well-known American epidemiologist, author and health activist, President
of Environmental Health Trust, a non-profit
organisation devoted to researching and controlling avoidable environmental
health threats, addressed a group consisting largely of Mumbai doctors
on 19 October, at the end of a gruelling three-week tour that included visits
to Delhi and Jaipur. This was in addition to three other talks in Mumbai
alone.
Davis is the author
of Disconnect: The Truth about Cell Phone Radiation, which has
also been published by Jaico this year with a foreword by Juhi Chawla Mehta,
the Bollywood star and philanthropist, who is one of Mumbai’s leading
campaigners for safe use of such ubiquitous devices.
The author mentioned
how proud she was as a first-time grandmother a decade ago to see her
10-month-old grandson crawl over to his father’s cell phone and switch it on.
She marvelled at the toddler’s ingenuity. Only after much research some years
later did she realise that the child was exposing himself to dangerously high
levels of radiation. In her book, she refers to Korean kids, addicted to
their phones, suffering from a form of brain damage known as “digital
dementia”.
Indeed, as a pamphlet
she distributed in Mumbai regarding precautions to take while using cell
phones stated, “children absorb more radiation than adults”. Models of
scans, courtesy of Prof Om P. Gandhi of the University of Utah and Green
America, contrast the brains of a five-year old, a 10-year-old and adult. The
potential absorption of radiation is very much higher the younger one is. As
Dr Davis punned, this is a “no-brainer”.
Parallels with the
microwave oven
The amount of
radiation depends on the frequency and amplitude of the waves. The
device that is most harmful is that which draws the maximum power. By that
token, microwave ovens, which use 1,000 watts, are the most dangerous, except
that the exposure is limited to a few minutes a day.
The invention of
microwave ovens came about accidentally, when scientists were working on how
to use radar technology for peaceful use after the Second World War. During
an experiment, a researcher found that the chocolate kept in his pocket had
melted, making him aware that such exposure generated heat. This led to the
domestic use of this appliance to heat or cook food.
The technology also
had to be adapted to rotate, so that all sides of anything to be cooked could
be covered. What might otherwise have been referred to as “radar
ranges” were renamed “microwave ovens”, which sounds more benign and
customer-friendly.
Davis makes the
frightening assertion that “cell phones are two-way microwave radios that
were never properly tested for safety”. Antennas for these phones are
continually searching for signals to send and receive information. “The body
or brain absorbs about half the radiation emitted from a phone at any time,”
she points out.
She particularly
cautioned against talking in a car due to the fact that the device constantly
searches for signals from the nearest cell tower and draws more power to
compensate for distance and mobility. Conversations in cars must account for
one of the longest uses of the phone by the well-to-do in this country,
considering the traffic snarls that grip every big city.
Radiation from cell
towers, inefficiently monitored in this country – thanks in part to the
effective lobbying of the phone industry and warnings that restrictions on
towers can lead to poor connectivity – is very dangerous, especially because
it is emitting 24x7 into homes that are too close for comfort.
Cell phones use less
than 2 watts, but there can be prolonged exposure, particularly given the
abysmal lack of knowledge among consumers here. We have been characterised as
a “cell phone nation”, with some 900 million users. In fact, there are more
phones than toilets or electricity connections. Davis hoped that the PM’s
“Make In India” exhortation would also lead to the development of safe phone
usage, which the rest of the world could learn from.
Pic:
Victorgrigas/Wikimedia
The hazards involved
A recent advertisement
for a mobile phone mentions that “every 7 seconds, someone upgrades to a
Gionee mobile…And right here in India. In a little over a year, we have 3
million happy users. And with each passing day, we are touching more hearts,
more rapidly.” The advertiser was supremely unaware about the literal
connotation of the possibly inadvertent last sentence.
According to
Davis, those who use phones more than 30 minutes a day on average for a
decade have a doubled or higher risk of contracting brain cancer.
Teenagers who start to use these phones – often inseparable companions, even
kept under their pillows at night – have a 4-5 times greater risk of
contracting such cancer.
Several studies have
shown that prolonged exposure to cell phone changes the brain. If someone
holds a phone to one’s ear for 50 minutes, there is a change in glucose
metabolism, which Davis terms “the brain’s fuel”, in exactly those areas
reached by cell phone radiation.
One reason why there
is so little data on the ill effects of cell phone radiation is that it can
take 40 years after such exposure to develop. This was conclusively shown in
Hiroshima and Nagasaki, when cancers in victims of the two atom bombs dropped
by the US over Japan took this long to manifest.
Experiments on
starving rats, which were trained to find their way through a maze by being
fed at the end of it, showed that they were too disoriented after exposure to
radiation to negotiate their way any longer.
A worrying development
is the rise in breast cancers among women who stuff their phones in their
bras. A Chinese-American 34-year-old in the US developed such cancer because
she stored it there for four hours a day. Racially, she had genes which are
not as a rule cancer-prone, and she was a regular runner to boot. In Turkey,
women who store their phones under their chadors have also been found to be
affected.
Men are by no means
immune to the risk. Six years ago, Dr Ashok Agarwal, Director of Research at
the Centre for Reproductive Medicine at the Cleveland Clinic, found that men
who use phones two to four hours every day have a 30 per cent lower sperm
count than non-users. Those who spoke for more than four hours had a 40 per
cent lower sperm count.
Prior to concerns
about cell phones, and even subsequently, men used to wear them
provocatively, in “gun-slinger” fashion – suspended from the belts around
their waists, which was far too close to their reproductive organs. If
nothing else, such findings, which impact males literally “below the belt”
and can give rise to testicular dysfunction and impotency, should arouse
awareness of the dangers of reckless use of phones.
Davis notes how the
user manuals of cell phones – always couched in the tiniest of print – do
specify warnings, which no one reads. The companies are merely meeting the
letter of the law in doing this. Thus, for instance, Blackberry warns
customers to keep phones an inch away from any part of the body whenever it
is turned on, “including the abdomen of pregnant women and the lower abdomen
of teen agers”. Apple cautions customers to keep its IPhone at least 15mm
(5/8 of an inch) away from the body.
A Global Campaign for
Safer Cell Phones lists several don’ts while using cell phones, which every
person ought to be aware of. These include:
·
Do
not hold the phone directly against your head or body; use the speaker phone
or other hands-free device
·
Beware
of a weak signal; your phone works harder and emits more radiation
·
Protect
children, pregnant women and prospective fathers
·
Never
sleep with your phone; keep it at more than an arm’s length
·
Only
corded – not cordless – phones do not emit microwave radiation
Davis cites how
tobacco companies obfuscated the dangers of smoking even though these were
known half a century before restrictions came into effect. In her 2009 book,The
Secret History of the War on Cancer, she reproduces an advertisement
showing a medic in a white coat with the text: “More doctors smoke Camel than
any other cigarette”. Another shows a baby urging its mother to smoke.
She is invariably
questioned what the alternative is, since people are loath to give up using
phones. The answer clearly lies in observing all the necessary precautions
and cutting the use to the minimum necessary. Prof Girish Kumar from the
Electrical Engineering Department of IIT Mumbai, who was present for two of
Davis’ talks, always mentions how he uses his phone for only 5 minutes a day
to receive messages. He shuts it off for the rest of the time.
Cell phone companies
should erect higher towers, well above the height of any buildings in the
vicinity, and there should be more towers, each less powerful, which would
obviously work out to be more expensive. However, Davis calculates that a
minuscule charge to customers of Rs 2 per month on the use of phones would
raise sufficient funds to provide all protective mechanisms necessary.
Is anybody listening?
Darryl D'Monte
24 October 2014
Darryl D'Monte, former Resident Editor of The Times of India in
Mumbai, is Chairperson of the Forum of Environmental Journalists of India and
founder President of the International Federation of Environmental
Journalists.
--
Darryl D'Monte Chairperson, Forum of Environmental Journalists of India (FEJI) International Federation of Environmental Journalists (IFEJ) Kinara, 29-B Carter Road, Bandra West, Mumbai 400 050, India Tel +91 22 2642 7088, 2645 9286 E-mail: darryldmonte@gmail.com
__._,_.___
|
|||||||||||||||||
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)