>> RF FOR RADIO FREQUENCY IS USED BY WIRELESS DEVICES SUCH AS
YOUR LAPTOP OR CELL PHONE, TO TRANSFER INFORMATION.
CECE IS AN ADVOCATE FOR REDUCING EXPOSURE TO RF AND SAT DOWN WITH
ME RECENTLY TO DISCUSS HER EFFORTS TO REDUCE WIRELESS
DEVICES' USE IN ASHLAND BECAUSE OF UNKNOWN HEALTH CONCERNS.
>> WE HAVE SOMETHING IN ASHLAND PUBLIC SCHOOLS CALLED BEST
PRACTICES FOR MOBILE DEVICES.
AND WHAT IT SAYS IS THAT IN OUR CLASSROOMS, WHEN WE'RE NOT USING
THE WI-FI, WE SHOULD BE TURNING IT OFF.
AND WHEN WE ARE NOT USING THE DEVICES, ACTIVELY, THEN WE
SHOULD BE TURNING THEM OFF.
WE SHOULD ALSO SET THEM ON A SURFACE AND NEVER USE THEM ON
OUR BODIES.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE FINE PRINT THAT COMES WITH EACH DEVICE, IT
SAYS KEEP THIS X AMOUNT OF DISTANCE FROM YOUR BODY, OR YOU
WILL EXCEED THE FCC STANDARDS.
AND SO, WHEN OUR SCHOOL COMMITTEE BECAME AWARE OF THIS,
THEY WENT AHEAD AND DID THEIR DUE DILIGENCE, AND THIS IS THE
INITIAL POLICY THAT THEY PUT IN PLACE.
>> AND HOW DID YOU BECOME INVOLVED IN THIS?
>> I WAS AT BOOK GROUP ONE NIGHT AND A FRIEND OF MINE, AN
ELECTRICAL ENGINEER WAS READING A BOOK CALLED "ZAP" AND
MENTIONED THERE COULD BE SOMETHING UP WITH WI-FI, AND SO,
I JUST KIND OF MADE A MENTAL NOTE OF IT, AND THEN IT CROSSED
MY PATH AGAIN, AND I THOUGHT YOU KNOW, I USED TO BE THE EDUCATION
FOUNDATION PRESIDENT, AND I RAN SEVEN DIFFERENT CAMPAIGNS FOR
BRING TECHNOLOGY INTO THE SCHOOLS OVER THE YEARS, AND THEN
FROM THERE, I WENT TO WORK FOR THE SCHOOLS AS THE GRANT
COORDINATOR AND HELPED OUR TEACHERS GET i-PADS AND CHROME
BOOKS AND APPLE TVs AND SMARTBOARDS, AND SO, I THOUGHT,
IF THERE IS A POTENTIAL HARM FROM THIS, I SHOULD INVESTIGATE.
AND SO, I DID.
AND WHAT I FOUND WAS JUST UNBELIEVABLE.
SO, EVERY WI-FI DEVICE OPERATES OFF OF TWO-WAY MICROWAVE
RADIATION, AND THERE IS NO SHIELDING.
IF YOU ARE USING EVERYTHING HARD WIRED YOU HAVE AN ETHER NET
CABLE THAT SHIELDS THE RADIATION, BUT WHAT WE HAVE
TODAY, IS AIRBORNE MICROWAVE RADIATION THAT OUR CHILDREN AND
OUR STAFF SIT IN, FOR A GOOD SEVEN HOURS A DAY.
>> BUT SO, YOU WORKED IT OUT IN THE SCHOOLS, BUT IT'S
EVERYWHERE?
EVERYBODY HAS iPHONES.
OR WIRELESS DEVICES.
AND SO, ASHLAND DID A NICE THING, I AM SURE THAT YOU FEEL,
BUT THAT'S ONE TOWN.
HOW DO YOU REALLY -- >> AND I HAD NO IDEA THAT I WAS
A LONE VOICE RAISING THIS ISSUE.
I THOUGHT MAYBE I AM JUST THE FIRST ONE AROUND THE METRO WEST
BOSTON AREA, OR MAYBE THE FIRST ONE IN THE STATE.
I'VE BEEN TOLD BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH TRUST THAT
WE ARE THE FIRST BASKETBALL SCHOOL DISTRICT IN THE NATION TO
ADDRESS THIS, SO OTHERS HAVE FOUND ME AND ASKED, YOU KNOW,
HOW DID YOU DO IT?
AND I AM JUST VERY GRATEFUL THAT WE HAD A SCHOOL COMMITTEE THAT
DID THE DUE DILIGENCE AND DID THE RESEARCH.
>> YOU MUST HAVE GOTTEN SOME PUSHBACK BECAUSE IN ALL HONESTY,
IT'S A LOT OF INFORMATION THAT YOU ARE BRINGING OUT, AND THIS
IS A MATTER OF CONVENIENCE.
>> ABSOLUTELY.
>> SO TO SOME, THIS MIGHT HAVE BEEN SORT OF ANNOYING LIKE WHAT?
I HAVE TO TURN OFF MY PHONE?
>> I KNOW, AND IT IS, AND WE HAVE ALL BOUGHT THESE DEVICES,
AND THEY BRING SUCH, YOU KNOW, GREAT THINGS INTO OUR LIVES, AND
THE KIDS CAN PLAY WITH THEM AND THEY CAN STUDY WITH THEM, AND
IT'S BECOME A BIG SOCIAL MATTER -- PART OF OUR LIVES BUT NOBODY
KNOWS IT'S OPERATING OFF OF WHAT THE WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION
HAS CLASSIFIED AS A HUMAN CARCINOGEN, AND THERE ARE THOSE
WHO SAT ON THAT WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION COMMITTEE WHO
BELIEVE IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A ONE, WHICH IS A CLEAR HUMAN
CARCINOGEN.
BUT, CANCER IS ONLY THE TIP OF THE ICEBERG.
THERE ARE THOUSANDS OF STUDIES ACROSS THE WORLD, PEER REVIEWED
SOLID SCIENCE SHOWING BIOLOGICAL HARM.
AND IT TIES INTO INFERTILITY, AND IF YOU THINK ABOUT WHERE WE
KEEP OUR CELL PHONE OFTENTIMES, IT'S RIGHT HERE OR WHERE WE KEEP
A LAPTOP OR AN iPAD, AND IT'S RIGHT HERE ON OUR REPRODUCTIVE
ORGANS, AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY SHIELDING, ONLY SOFT TISSUE.
>> ON THE FCC'S WEBSITE THEY SAY THAT THERE IS NOT SUBSTANTIAL
SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE THAT LINKS WIRELESS DEVICES TO CANCER.
WHAT'S YOUR RESPONSE?
>> MY RESPONSE TO THAT IS THEIR WEBSITE IS OUTDATED, FIRST OF
ALL.
THEY HAVE HAD THOSE STATEMENTS UNDER REVIEW SINCE 2013.
WE'RE NOW SITTING HERE AT 2016, AND THEY HAVE NOT UPDATED IT FOR
THE CURRENT SCIENCE.
IF I COULD GIVE YOU JUST A BRIEF HISTORY LESSON.
BACK IN 2007, A GROUP OF WORLD SCIENTISTS GOT TOGETHER BECAUSE
THEY WERE STARTING TO SUSPECT THAT WHERE WE WERE GOING WITH
ALL OF THIS TECHNOLOGY COULD BE POTENTIALLY HARMFUL.
SO, THEY GATHERED UP ALL OF THE RESEARCH THAT WAS DONE OVER THE
LAST 50 YEARS BECAUSE THIS TECHNOLOGY CAME OUT OF OUR
MILITARY.
IT'S BEEN USED FOR RADAR, AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE NOW ADOPTED
IN A COMMERCIAL BASIS, SO IN 2007, THEY COMPILED THE RESEARCH
AND SAID YES, IT DOES LOOK LIKE THERE IS BUY LOGICAL HARM BUT WE
NEED TO KNOW MORE ABOUT HOW IT IS
BEING DEPLOYED TODAY SO OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, FROM 2007
TO 2012, THERE WERE MANY, MANY, MANY MORE STUDIES DONE, NOT JUST
ONE OR TWO BUT 1800 MORE STUDIES DONE, AND MOST OF THEM SHOW
CLEAR EVIDENCE THAT IT HAS BIOLOGICAL HARM SO IT WENT
THROUGH 2012 WHEN IT WAS RELEASED IN 2013.
THAT WAS ENOUGH PRESSURE ON THE FCC TO PUT THEIR STANDARDS UNDER
FORMAL REVIEW.
>> I AM SURE THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE PLENTY OF DEBATE GOING
FORWARD BECAUSE I AM SURE AS MANY PEOPLE THAT AGREE WITH YOU,
THERE IS OTHERS THAT DON'T, AND IT'S AN INTERESTING TOPIC AND
ONE THAT I AM GLAD YOU CAME IN TO SHARE.
THANK YOU.
>> YOU ARE WELCOME.
THANK YOU.