The Big Plastic Head

Official radiation tests use a plastic head filled with liquid to represent our brains! This adult male plastic head is called the Specific Anthropomorphic Mannequin or SAM. Many experts, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, state that the decades old SAM model underestimates how radiation travels through a live brain.  2013 Research from the Proceedings for the National Academy of Sciences details how cell phones can create tiny hotspots within living brain tissue. 
Hotspots=Brain Damage.  

Shouldn't our government use the most up to date method of testing?

Large Military Men

These  guidelines were first developed in the 1960s for military personnel operating radar equipment. A 220 pound man is used as the model that WiFi devices are tested on. Children are much smaller than 220 pounds and their smaller head and smaller body size was NOT considered. Research now shows that children absorb up to ten times the radiation into their bone marrow than adults do.

Radiation is absorbed far deeper into children's bodies. Does this seem safe?

Heating Only

The guidelines are only based on preventing heating (thermal) effects, like what would happen if you stuck your head in a microwave. You would burn. Guidelines do not consider that low level microwave radiation (non-thermal) might harm our cells, tissue and brains when our bodies are continuously exposed. Research is clearly showing that non-thermal radiation levels do have an impact our bodies.

Safety standards must protect children's bodies from non-thermal effects.

30 Minutes

Current US guidelines only consider heating effects for 30 minutes of exposure, not for 24 hour daily exposure. The radiation limit was developed so that military personel could use radar. Wireless technology was not widespread like it is today. As long as the radiation did not burn or cook tissue in 30 minutes, it was considered "safe".

Do you know anyone who only uses the WiFi for just 30 minutes a day?

Reasons Why FCC Guidelines Do Not Protect Our Children

Myth: Government safety standards protect us.

Fact: The USA does NOT even have federally developed "safety" standards. The EPA, FDA and the CDC did NOT study the long term health effects, issue a report and make recommendations for a "safe" level. No! Instead, industry pressure and government loopholes resulted in the USA adopting guidelines that were developed decades ago for military men, not children. These guidelines are called "maximum permissible exposure" (MPE) limits.

No organization states that MPE limits are "safe".

The FCC gets an F for Safety

US Government Radiation Guidelines are Outdated and Irrelevant

Yes, Truth is Stranger Than Fiction.

As it turns out, the current Chair of the FCC is Tom Wheeler.

Q: Who is Tom Wheeler?
A: Tom Wheeler is the prior head of The Wireless Industry lobby group. He is accused of covering up research showing genetic damage from cell phone radiation.

Yes. We are not kidding.

The scientist Tom Wheeler hired in the 90's named  George Carlo, wrote a book called CELL PHONES about the whole mess. The name of the book is  Cell Phones: Invisible Hazards in the Wireless Age: An Insider's Alarming Discoveries about Cancer and Genetic Damage.

In this 2014 video of Tom Wheeler above, Americans are confronting Tom Wheeler in California. People are very concerned that the FCC is not bringing this issue to the EPA. People are concerned that there could be corruption at the highest levels of our government. What do you think? 

In the second video, George Carlo states that the Wireless Industry is committing "scientific fraud."

Should a former Wireless Lobbyist (Tom Wheeler) be in charge of protecting children against wireless corporate interests?

In Depth on the FCC

Learn about the RF Exposure Level Review going on NOW. 

Below is what our FCC states about reassessing radiation limits in the USA in 2013. You might want to read this several times... but it is important that you do.

"With respect to children. We recognize our responsibility to both protect the public from established adverse effects due to exposure to RF energy and allow industry to provide telecommunications services to the public in the most efficient and practical manner possible. "

(The FCC is saying it has responsibility to the people as well as the wireless industry)

"In the Inquiry we ask whether any precautionary action would be either useful or counterproductive, given that there is a lack of scientific consensus about the possibility of adverse health effects at exposure levels at or below our existing limits. Further, if any action is found to be useful, we inquire whether it could be efficient and practical."

(The FCC wonders if protecting our children would be "useful, counterproductive efficient or practical?" )

We parents are calling on our government for the best protections for our children!

Their health is non negotiable.  A corporations need to make money should not come before our children's safety.

 If you want to learn more about FCC regulation, please read:

  • The Environmental Health Trusts FCC submission that chronicles the history of FCC guidelines and details how current regulations do not protect children. Click HERE

  • The comprehensive Bioinitiative Report 2012 written by experts around the world that documents the scientific basis for lowering the guidelines. Click HERE

  • The US-FCC Submissions organized by Dr. Moskowitz. Click HERE


The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

The AAP states FCC guidelines do not protect children! They called on the FCC to improve safety limits in 2013 stating, “Current FCC standards do not account for the unique vulnerability and use patterns specific to pregnant women and children. It is essential that any new standard for cell phones or other wireless devices be based on protecting the youngest and most vulnerable populations to ensure they are safeguarded throughout their lifetimes.”Read the letter here.

Class 2 B Carcinogen

In 2011, the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified wireless radiation as a "Class 2B Possible Carcinogen" based on credible evidence showing increased brain cancer rates from just 30 minutes a day exposure for ten years!  Currently several of those World Health Organization experts now state that the risk classification must be increased because the evidence has significantly increased since 2011! Read More HERE.

'Tis strange -- but true; for truth is always strange; Stranger than fiction.

-Lord Byron

"...Because the federal government is not minding the store, the current FCC standards are flawed." 

"...First our government has no entity that will say there are no health effects from long term low level exposures from non-ionizing radiation. One of the reasons for that is that in the past five years the EPA has spent a total of 25,000 in research in this area even though it is the health agency designated to be in charge of protecting people... no one at the federal level is looking into the effects of long term exposure even though the FCC has called for more research along with the EPA, NIH, NIOSH, FDA, NTIA and the NCRP. "

-Roger Mattson, former director of the EPA’s non-ionizing radiation standards activities with the Atomic Energy Commission and  the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in his testimony for Jefferson County (Colorado) Commission hearings on a super-tower proposal to be sited on Lookout Mountain in 2003.

Comments  Filed On Our Radiation Regulations by US Agencies in the past. 

The EPA: In official comments to the FCC about guidelines for evaluation of electromagnetic effects of RF radiation (FCC Docket ET 93-62, November 9, 1993), The Environmental Protection Agency found that the FCC's exposure standards are "seriously flawed." 

The FDA: The Food and Drug Administration commented to the FCC on November 10, 1993, that "FCC's rules do not address the issue of long-term, chronic exposure to radiofrequency fields." 

In 1999, the Radiofrequency Interagency Work Group wrote a letter to IEEE SCC28, in which they identified fourteen issues that "need to be addressed to provide a strong and credible rationale to support RF exposure guidelines." 

​Statement from Frank Marcinowski, Director, Radiation Protection Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: Generalization by many that FCC guidelines “protect human beings from harm by any or all mechanisms is not justified; …There is uncertainty about whether or not current guidelines adequately treat nonthermal, prolonged exposures… there are reports that suggest that potentially adverse health effects, such as cancer, may occur…” FCC guidelines are “based on the effects resulting from whole-body heating, not exposure of and effect on critical organs including the brain and the eyes.”

Baby Monitors

How Many Wireless Devices

Do You Own?

Good News!

These outdated 18 year old FCC safety standards are finally being reassessed by the USA! They are under formal review by the FCC (Proceeding 03-137).  Over 900 Submissions have been filed calling for urgent action to tighten current exposure standards.  The FCC specifically states it is not a health and science agency. We parents think the EPA should do a full human health risk review of the issue and set standards that put forth proven "safe" exposure levels.

We parents think that any radiation our government is allowing should be safety tested for kids because our children's health is what is a stake!

One Device Only

FCC guidelines do not consider the cumulative effects of radiation a person absorbs  from multiple tech devices. They only consider each device on it’s own. This makes sense decades ago as each soldier only had one radar! Ten years ago each person had just one wireless device- their cell phone. Now families have like ten wireless devices for every house.  If a child has a cell phone in their pocket all day,  sits under WiFi routers at school with a laptop on their laps all day next to a window overlooking the school cell tower on their playing field, what is this child’s total exposure? What will the health effects be ? We do not know because we have not done the research to even answer this basic question.

Shouldn't we consider the radiation exposures from all devices in our homes?


The EPA states that FCC guidelines only apply to short term heating effects and do not apply to children!
 “The FCC’s current exposure guidelines are thermally based and do not apply to chronic, non thermal exposure situations.”

(Wireless radiation in our homes and classrooms is chronic, non thermal radiation.)
“Federal health and safety agencies have not yet developed policies concerning possible risk from long term non thermal exposures. ....Incorporating information on exposure scenarios involving repeated short duration non thermal exposures that may continue over long periods of time (years)  with an exposed population that includes children, the elderly, and people with various debilitating physical and medical conditions, could be beneficial in delineating appropriate protective exposure guidelines.”

Read the EPA's letter here.

Parents For Safe Technology