From the Desk of Dr. Andrew De Forest

April 14, 2007

Mr. John Harrisson, M.S., Executive DirectorCarden Academy of Maui Board of DirectorsDr. Jane Schumacher, Ph.D, Program Director

Aloha Mr. Harrisson,

To state the facts frankly is not to despair the future nor indict the past. The prudent heir takes careful inventory of his legacies and gives a faithful accounting to those whom he owes an obligation of trust. 

-- John F. Kennedy

Having been recently informed of Nextel’s effort to deliberately bypass the Grace Church Congregants and the entire Carden Academy Community of 200, including 128 children ages 5-14, and install another of their Microwave Towers dangerously near Carden Academy physical school rooms and children’s playground, without reasonable, proper or legal notification, I find it urgently necessary to clarify and correct the misleading graphics, comparisons and ‘safety data’ Nextel has given the Carden Administration for perusal. Nextel’s deliberate pre-meditated attempt to subvert public approval procedures, stretches the comprehension of this parent, and should compel all affected to thoroughly investigate the intent and motivation of such practices.

If this High Frequency MicroWave Tower is installed at the proposed location- or any other area with 100-900 feet of the Academy’s outer property lines- depending on which study you believe- the microwave radiation will definitely expose our children, administrative and teaching staff to the uncertain effects of High Frequency MicroWave Radiation, Stray Voltage and Ground Effects, Electric Effects, Pulsed Modulated and Continuous Wave radio frequencies, potential Elevated Non-Vertical Field Effects and Quantum Field effects from the transmission of their micro wave antenna, not to mention the obvious potential for mechanical failure in Kula’s high winds and catastrophic consequences considering its proximity to the children’s playground.

I thought it only prudent to wade through Nextel’s deceptive information and carefully provide the Carden Academy Community background information on MicroWave Frequency Effects and Research, the Cell Phone Industry, world wide research- historical and current- on the rational and common-sense concern over the planned location of such a tower near the Church, After Care Center(Fellowship Hall), playground and other structures where young children and adults spend the better part of the entire day.

I sincerely hope that the following compilation- on short notice- of highly relevant published and unpublished articles, laboratory research, epidemiological and clinical studies,

1

From the Desk of Dr. Andrew De Forest

correspondences, safety guidelines, tower site hazards, community actions and legal briefs from around the world, will reveal a most troubling picture of the EMF\MicroWave Industry drama that has been laid squarely in our lap, encouraging all involved to err on the conservative side of safety for our precious children and staff, particularly in light of Nextel’s underhanded and poorly planned installation agenda.

Fortunately, Grace Church, The Carden Academy Family and surrounding neighborhood members, has substantial academic and professional depth within its small population, and I believe after reading the enclosed materials, one will leave with a feeling of profound uncertainty and unwelcome distrust of Nextel’s agenda and threats to bypass our community, local jurisdiction and constitutional rights under the 10th Amendment, by going to the Federal Level. Mr. Harrisson, the alarms on troubling health effects of Cell Tower and phone Microwave Radiation indeed have been sounded some time ago, and in fact they were, as early as 1989, when independent of Communications Industry research began to reveal:- a change in calcium concentrations was identified with exposure to very low levels of microwave radiation(SAR of .05 - .005 W/Kg) University of Washington-1995: a study suggested a correlation between cell phone radiation and childhood leukemia; -1998: when a study demonstrated DNA damage at microwave levels 1\5 that of current US Safety Standards; -2001: In a letter to the Vermont House of Representatives, Dr. Henry Lai, Research Professor, Department of Bioengineering, University of Washington reviewed seven(7) laboratory studies from 1989 to 2000, demonstrating changes in the blood brain barrier, decrease in reproduction functions, decreased eating and drinking behaviour, DNA damage and molecular stress under very low exposures to microwave radiation.-2003: when yet another study demonstrated nerve cell damage in mammalian brain after exposure to microwaves; - 2005: in a study entitled ‘The Sensitivity of Children to Electromagnetic Fields’ published in the August 2005 Pediatrics for research recommendations: “Additional laboratory and epidemiologic studies relating to childhood leukemia and ELF magnetic field exposure were strongly recommended…. investigation of the potential effects of RF fields on cognition and the development of childhood brain tumors was considered particularly urgent…” ;

-2005: published in Neuroepidemiology, regarding Acoustic Neuroma or Meningioma: ‘…digital cellular phones and cordless phones increased the risk to some extent… In the multivariate analysis, analogue phones represented a significant risk factor for acoustic neuroma.-2005: A compilation on Electro-Sensitivity in Sweden, based on the documents submitted to the Council for Work life Research in March 2000 from more than 400 people and from their relatives, doctors or engineers performing field reduction. The percentage of letterwriters with higher education was high – some were postgraduates and many were engineers – and they all had the ambition to describe their resulting handicap in as much detail as possible for the benfit of future research.-2006: published in Occupational Environmental Medicine(Austria), in the study entitled, Subjective symptoms, sleeping problems, and cognitive performance in subjects living near

2

From the Desk of Dr. Andrew De Forest

mobile phone base stations: ‘Despite the influence of confounding variables, including fear of adverse effects from exposure to HF-EMF from the base station, there was a significant relation of some symptoms to measured power density, this was highest for headaches. CONCLUSION: Despite very low exposure to HF-EMF, effects on wellbeing and performance cannot be ruled out, as shown by recently obtained experimental results; however, mechanisms of action at these low levels are unknown.’-A compiled chart(enclosed) of the huge range of ‘Public Safety Standards” From around the world demonstrating the wide variance and disagreement on what constitutes ‘safe’ in the environment of ongoing uncertainty of the damaging effects of Cell Tower exposure.-2006: published in International Archives Occupational Health, two case controlled studies ‘..shows significant increase in the risk for malignant brain tumours’- 2006: published in the American Journal of Epidemiology, “Among persons who had used cellular phones for 10 or more years, a doubled risk was found for glioma but not for meningioma.”-In a 2006 British article, “Health fears lead schools to dismantle wireless networks”, explained how teachers and students became ill after introduction of a wireless computer network in classrooms. Professor William Stewart, Chairman of the Health Protection Agency, said the evidence of potentially harmful effects of microwave radiation had become more persuasive over the past five years, and urged precaution.-The Cell Nucleus is Mutating, Interview with Professor Dr Heyo Eckel, a radiologist, lecturer at Göttingen University, vice chairman of the Health and Environment Committee of the German Medical Association. His scientific conclusion: electromagnetic, pulsed waves from transmitter masts and mobile phones affect and deform the cell nucleus. The effects are comparable with those of X-rays. As long as the harmlessness of mobile telecommunications is not proven, everything must be done to protect the population against potential health damage.

-Workshop on ODC(Ornithine decarboxylase), which plays an important role in DNA synthesis, Dr. Adey analyzed laboratory rat ODC levels after exposure to Motorola’s IRIDIUM cell phone microwaves and found decreased cerebral and cerebellar ODC activity in fetuses. She made additional suggestions on research in light of the profound ramifications of DNA alterations- Motorola denied Dr. Adey two further requests for funding.- September of 2006, International Institute of Biophysics and Dial M for Malignant, in an expose’ article a British publication dissects the cellular phone-research industry ties-A paper authored by Dr Robert Kane, Ph.D, Former Motorola Senior Research Scientist and Technical Staff Member, where he discusses second-hand RadioFrequency(RF) Radiation exposures- particularly commenting on the utter lack of research attention this topic deserves.-An AP article referencing a neighborhood in St. Louis who fought against T-Mobile’s installation plan on church property- the neighborhood’s 250 signed petition was met with the zoning department’s denial of permit… T-Mobile sued and won- based upon the ‘911’ argument, and the interesting fact that the FCC eliminates the ‘health factor’ argument in their approval of towers in neighborhoods. Other cases are before the Supreme Court and rest primarily on 10th Amendment arguments; however, as you know, eminent domain cases have recently been dealt severe blows in local communities throughout the states. Although some courts have refused to allow their legal tactics to throw the issue into federal courts, the cell phone carriers AND manufacturers continue to petition for reconsideration.

3

From the Desk of Dr. Andrew De Forest

-April of 2007 in a Microwave News Commentary that discusses recent studies: Taken together, the available epidemiological studies of long-term cell phone users point to a "consistent pattern" of increased risks of acoustic neuromas and brain tumors, according to a new analysis by the Hardell-Mild team in Sweden.

In their paper, which was posted on the Occupational and Environmental Medicine Web site yesterday, Lennart Hardell of Örebro University and Kjell Hansson Mild of the National Institute for Working Life in Umeå show that the tumor risk among those who have used mobile phones for ten years or more is highest on the same side of the head the phone was used (ipsilateral exposure). "These results are certainly of biological relevance since the highest risk was found for tumors in the most exposed area of the brain using a latency period that is relevant in carcinogenesis," they wrote, adding that, "Our findings stress the importance of longer follow-up to evaluate long-term health risks from mobile phone use."

The Swedish researchers and their American collaborator, Lloyd Morgan of Berkeley, CA, assembled a total of 15 case-control epidemiological studies, of which 11 had data for those who had used cell phones for ten or more years. In their meta-analysis, they found that the long-term, ipsilateral risk was two-and-a-half times higher for acoustic neuromas and twice as high for glioma (a type of brain tumor) as would normally be expected. Both risk estimates are statistically significant.

Earlier this year, a meta-analysis by members of the Interphone study group also reported an increased risk of ipsilateral brain tumors among those who had used mobile phones for ten or more years (see our January 22 post). Previously, Interphone researchers had found an elevated risk of acoustic neuromas among long-term users. See also our comment "Is There a Ten-Year Latency for Cell Phone Tumor Development?"- January of 2007, a report from the UK, where a large scale study suggesting long term users of mobile phones are significantly more likely(39%) to develop a certain type of brain tumour on the side of the head where they hold their handsets.

- Finally, a most important detailed and informative correspondence from George Carlo, Ph.D, M.S., J.D., Chairman of the Science and Public Policy Institute, Safe Wireless Initiative, to Ms. Carole Andrews of the Broward County School District, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida where he actively supports a cautionary approach of children’s exposure to wireless technology, and details the deliberate misdirection of several Cell Phone Industry financed studies that received wide press exposure ‘hailed as reassuring news by the wireless industry’. He continues with details of the studies that allegedly demonstrated no correlation of microwave frequencies to brain tumour formation, explaining the study’s blatant ‘misdirection’. He also discusses the limited time exposure in laboratory or older epidemiological studies where exposure lengths were less than they are today, and far less than our children would be exposed to for the entire day at school.

Mr. Harrisson, these are but a small sample of hundreds of studies from around the world that minimally should compel further truly ‘blind trust’ funded research into the untoward effects of such increasingly prolific frequencies. Please be reminded that the Communications industry

4

From the Desk of Dr. Andrew De Forest

has spent $41 Billion from 1994 - 2001 to lease frequencies from the Federal Government... $41 Billion…. and future profits are estimated to be in the trillion dollar range. Regrettably, this is an issue that we both know is insidious and recalcitrant to change, as lobbyists control the very legislation that allows paid consultants to perform research whose results impact the industry they are investigating.

Largely due to the Communications industry’s dominant financing of research on the health related effects of cell phone and transmission tower radiation, political pressures and a selective research bias, the public is exposed to a plethora of self serving industry opinions of otherwise legitimate research, misleading them into complacency instead of demanding an immediate sound, sensible and precautionary approach concerning cell tower installation sites in what eventually may precipitate a future public health debacle.

Nextel’s plans to erect their tower on Grace Church property may simply be an attempt to patch their system as a result of historically poor planning, as they claim the new tower is required to communicate with the other older microwave tower across Kula Highway; however, that is not our problem. We should make every attempt to dissuade Nextel from going forth with their installation plans minimally from a Public Safety and Property Value Preservation standpoint.

Of additional concern is Nextel’s use of very old health safety data supplied to the Hawaii Department of Health by the cell phone industry themselves. The letter being used to convince us of the safety of these towers is dated 1996, and the Department of Health relied upon the industry’s own data to reach their conclusion.

I have included herein germane and up to date research, reflecting current and ongoing scientific knowledge on the health effects of microwave towers and cell phones, as evidence in a written record, that should suffice to temporarily deny permits for introduction of wireless communications towers in their proposed location near Carden Academy of Maui playground and housing structures. The untenable increase in liability insurance along with the decreases in property value should discourage Grace Church, Carden Academy parents and surrounding neighborhood from hosting such a tower, despite the promise of revenue from Nextel.

The planned introduction of Nextel’s Microwave Producing Cell Phone transmission tower violates nearly all of the Safety Standards for microwave exposures set forth by other country’s Safety Boards, that are not influenced by the Communications industry. We may not know for another ten years(2006-2007 studies) if our children will suffer the consequences of our failure to act responsibly and prudently now.

While this letter includes strong verbiage, I regrettably believe the community will find out only too late that this tone may indeed have been terribly understated. The planned installation of Nextel’s Tower in close proximity to Carden Academy playground, aftercare room and instructional cubicles is simply not worth the risk to our children, our exceptional staff and our neighborhood.

5

From the Desk of Dr. Andrew De Forest

Sincerely Yours,

Dr. A. DeForestPaia, Hawaii

"Facts are stubborn, but statistics are more pliable." -   --  Mark Twain

How can we evaluate whether EMF exposures cause serious health effects?Clinical, Animal, Laboratory and Human studies can provide some explanations of the effects of:

MicroWave Radiation(MW) Elevated Non-Vertical Fields( ENVF)Radio Frequency(RF) Electric Field Effect(EFE)Electro Magnetic Field(EMF) Electromagnetic Field (EMF) EffectExtremely Low Frequency(ELF) Stray Electromagnetic Radiation and Ground CurrentsQFE(Quantun Field Effects), Specific Absorption Rate(SAR)

Laboratory: Rats, cadavers, synthetic models, ‘test tube’ type studies can give us important parts of the puzzle of the complex interactions of these fields with ourselves and children.

Clinical: We use the best equipment available to detect chemical, hormonal and neurological changes as animal models, including humans are exposed to said fields.

Epidemiology: We compare those exposed groups to unexposed groups of people, comparing different data sets or symptoms between the groups. Basically, the more often a disease conditions occurs in the presence of the agent or in this case multiple EMF’s, Microwave, Electric Fields, Stray Electromagnetic Radiation, etc, the stronger the association between the

6

From the Desk of Dr. Andrew De Forest

two, and the stronger the possibility that increased exposure to these fields will increase the incidence and\or severity of the disease(s).

There are many strengths and weaknesses associated with each method used to identify links between environmental exposures and untoward human health effects.

While there are many obvious ‘Why questions’ for Nextel sales, technical and legal representatives, I have chosen to begin this presentation with the following outline:

RESEARCH and FINANCIAL CONFLICT OF INTERESTThere exists an increasingly alarming accepted standard of Corporate research funding in this country. Nextel, Motorola and the huge communications industry use their combined financial and political persuasion to fund the majority of this research, thus dominating the current research by providing the funding to and for ‘sympathetic’ researchers and institutions who are, incredibly, under the very payroll of the cell phone company themselves. Often, the conclusion of these experimental results are extrapolated to falsely conclude that cell phone towers, cell phones and other known and even unknown EMF effects have either no discernable effect or no effect whatsoever on human beings. It therefore becomes critical to understand HOW the otherwise legitimate methods, materials and statistics justify such statements. Although this is described in greater detail elsewhere herein, suffice it clarify that the vast majority of Industry sponsored research utilizes the ‘SAR’ method of indirectly measuring microwave radiation. SAR Test(specific absorption rate) only measure temperature (thermal) increases, rather than actual microwave radiation

emissions. The thermal and non-thermal dividing line currently used as the basis for safety standards of radio frequency radiation exposures (SAR) is no more than a "red herring," a distraction from the public’s understanding of the actual health effects of microwave radio frequency radiation and therefore our ability to protect the public.. It increasingly appears invalid to distinguish ionizing(radioactivity- X-Rays) from non-ionizing radiation with respect to their health effects.  Furthermore, we simply do not have field equipment sensitive enough to measure the microwave frequencies and intensities at the levels where genetic damage and other biological effects have been seen in laboratory studies.

BYPASSING LOCAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

Communities are discovering, just like the Carden Academy Family, only too late, that the Industry either insidiously by-passes the normal procedure and safeguards created for the very protection set forth to protect the public, or rigorously prevents or seriously dilutes safety standards for exposures to such microwave fields. To pursue legal remedy is often the only route person(s) may engage in order to remove these towers, and again, find themselves fighting a corporate behemoth, with effectively unlimited legal funds to justify their installation

7

From the Desk of Dr. Andrew De Forest

regardless of proximity to schools or neighborhoods. (Please look at their additional lawsuit histories: industry, consumer and employee).

Nextel’s methods assault the very fabric of our constitutionally guaranteed freedom that ensures local authority and control over critical issues that will affect our lives and wellbeing. It becomes the responsibility of every person affected by these attempts to stand up and insist that corporate interests and our elected officials maintain integrity and submit to the rule of law and democratic process. Local control of land use issues and decisions is a cornerstone of our Bill of Rights under the 10th Amendment of Our Constitution. We must Protect Our Rights!

GRACE CHURCH’S PROPERTY VALUE WILL DECREASE DUE TO NEXTEL MICROWAVE TOWER

Real estate values are in fact REDUCED due to proximity of High Voltage power lines, cell phone towers.. certainly not increased. In the Appraisal Institute’s publication, The Home Environmental Sourcebook: 50 Environmental Hazards to Avoid When Buying, Selling, of Maintaining a Home specifies cell phone transmitting towers as one environmental hazard to avoid when either purchasing or selling a property.

During the 1998 session of the American Bar Association Annual Meeting on Environmental Law Activities, Microwave towers and Cellular Towers are discussed as factors that reduce values of real estate, making them more difficult to sell.

The Presence of a huge ugly cell tower will certainly detract from the beauty of the property, and add a stigma that prevents future buyers interest.

Who will pay for the increased liability insurance to cover all of these hazards? Nextel?

SAFETY “STANDARDS”Comparing Standards for general public RF exposure levels

(900 and 1800 MHz are the two main existing UK mobile phone bands)Prepared by Alasdair Philips, Technical Director, Powerwatch, June 2000Multiple signals should be added together, as the square root of the sum of squares of the individual signals.

Figures in bold in the table below are the main units given in the guidance.‘Near-field’ levels next to a working mobile phone handset vary enormously depending on the antenna design but can often exceed the electric field and power density levels set in the general exposure standards.

8

From the Desk of Dr. Andrew De Forest

General Public LevelsFrequency

MHzE fieldV/m

PowerW/m2

Power W/cm2

9

From the Desk of Dr. Andrew De Forest

NRPB, 1993 (Current UK Investigation Levels)

9001800

112194

33100

330010000

FCC OET65:1997-01 (USA)based on ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992

9001800

47 61

610

6001000

Canadian Safety Code 6 (SC6) 1993

9001800

47 61

610

6001000

ICNIRP, 1998 (recognised by WHO)CENELEC, 1995 (EU)

9001800

4158

4.59

450900

Australia 1988 (under review) 900 / 1800 27 2 200

Two USA research bases (1995) 30 - 100000 19 1 100

Poland (non-stationary people)(stationary people)

300 - 300000196

10.1

10010

Russia 1988 (general public) 300 - 300000 6 0.1 10

Italy, Decree 381 (1999) 30 - 30000 6 0.1 10

Toronto Health Board2000, proposal based on SC6/100

9001800

56

0.060.1

610

Swiss Ordinance ORNI ( for basestations ) From 1st.Feb.2000

9001800

46

notspecified

notspecified

EU & UK EMC Regulations equipmentsuscept test level (domestic & comm.)

30 - 2000 3not

specifiednot

specified

Typical max in public areas near base station masts (can be much higher)

900 & 1800 2 0.01 1

City of Salzburg, Austria, 1998 300 - 300000 0.62 0.001  0.1

Dr Cherry (NZ) proposal for now 300 - 300000 0.28 0.0002 0.02

Average US (EPA 1980)----->City Dweller max (FCC 1999)----->

approx30 - 300000

< 0.13< 2

< 0.00005< 0.01

< 0.005< 1

Broadband ‘natural’ background 300 - 3000

<

0.0000

3

< 0.00000001 < 0.000001

** Typical, close to handset antenna 900 & 180050 -

3002 - 50 200 - 5000

           

 

TOWER SITE PLANNING HAZARDS AND LIABILITIES-Will it powered by above or underground power lines- or batteries?-Reference Canadian engineering study that calls for 2.5 x’s the height for proper horizontal safety- Review Fire hazards-If battery, then lead acid issues, sulfuric acid environmental impact; explosion while charging, etc\ if sulfuric acid then must assess number of batteries and volume of sulfuric- may push

10

From the Desk of Dr. Andrew De Forest

them over into EPA regulation-Environmental Impact Study?-How will they decrease the RF intensity to safe background levels(impossible to do)

THE LIGHT BULB LIE

P(Watts) = I(current in Amps) * E(Voltage).What is the manufacturer of your transmitter? What voltage do your tower transmitters require? What size fuses? What size supply wires? 14 gauge? 12 gauge? Will it run on 110 volt service? 220? 440? How many and what kind of transformers will be utilized?

REMEDIES

Just say NO! to the planned installation of any communications towers in or near Carden Academy or any school in Hawaii. Just say NO! to the seditious methodology of bypassing Carden Academy’s Family!

11