2. FCC guidelines are a ‘complete failure’ for protecting kids.

Davis pointed out research showing children are especially vulnerable to RF radiation.

Children’s unique physiology, including smaller heads and more fluid in their brains, results in proportionately greater absorption of RF radiation than adults.

Research shows children can absorb up to 30 times more the amount of RF radiation in their hippocampus and 10 times more in the bone marrow of their skull.

The FCC has refused to take this research into consideration when setting its wireless radiation exposure guidelines, she said.

EHT and other organizations, including CHD, successfully sued the FCC by arguing that the agency’s guidelines — which have not been updated since 1996 — were inadequate to protect human health and did not take recent science into account. Davis said:

“The U.S. Court of Appeals, the District of Columbia, determined that we were correct and ruled that the FCC’s policies on standards for testing phones and other devices were arbitrary and capricious and that the testing procedures, particularly as they relate to children and long-term exposures, were a complete failure.

“The court found the FCC had failed to provide evidence of properly examining long-term exposure, children’s vulnerability, the testimony of people injured by radiation sickness and impacts to the developing brain and reproductive system.”

The FCC still has not complied with the court’s mandate to review recent science and give a better explanation for how its current standards are adequate for protecting health.

3. Other countries have more stringent wireless radiation standards.

Scarato said that while the FCC’s standards have yet to reflect current science, other countries have taken action to set lower wireless exposure limits.

India, China, Russia, Italy and Switzerland all have limits that are a mere fraction of the FCC’s exposure limit, she said.

“And in some of those countries, there are scientists that are studying this issue ongoing,” she said. “However, in the United States, we don’t have that.”

No U.S. regulatory agency with health expertise has reviewed the scientific evidence of biological effects from RF radiation, she said.

“Not the EPA [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency], not the CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention], not the National Cancer Institute, the FDA [U.S. Food and Drug Administration or] the Department of Labor,” she added.

4. Pollinators may be impacted by 5G.

Levitt, who has researched the biological effects of RF radiation since the late 1970s, shared research on RF radiation’s negative impact on the environment and non-human species.

She said neither the FCC nor the state of Connecticut had ever conducted a NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) review for 5G.

Under NEPA law, federal agencies must assess whether projects they have authorized will cause harm.

Meanwhile, research indicates that rolling out 5G may especially hurt insects as they are “very inefficient thermo regulators” and “particularly vulnerable to temperature changes,” Levitt said, adding that “What impacts insects impacts us all.”

Many frequencies of wireless radiation, including the ranges used by 5G, cause an organism’s tissues to heat up which, in turn, can impact the organism’s functioning.

Research shows that 5G may be lethal to honeybees, she said.

Levitt pointed out that this would impact the human food supply. She warned, “We are flirting with catastrophic impacts from insect deaths alone, capable of punching holes in the entire food web. [The] Human food supply is endangered.”

Watch the presentations to the land use committee here: