Dear Senators Bray & Lanane, and Representatives Huston & GiaQuinta:

As Hoosiers, we would like to thank you for your incredible service to our State—in particular during this difficult pandemic. If this experience has unified us in any way, it’s brought us together around the reality that health matters, and our state plays an important role in protecting the lives of its citizens. However, our concerns today have nothing to do with Covid-19.

We're asking you to support Senators Ruckelshaus & Ford's, and Representatives Torr, Hamilton, & Schaibley’s March 12, 2020 request for a summer study on the impact of "small cell" transmitters—not just on our health, but also on our property values and local government authority. All of those legislators (who were then-seated) voted against SB213 in 2017, presumably out of concern for latter two principles. Little did they (or any) of our politicians know what would happen next: the U.S. Health & Human Services Department—which runs the National Toxicology Program (as well as the CDC)—released a 10 year, $30M NTP study in November of 2018 showing “clear evidence” of cancer in laboratory rats exposed to frequencies as low as 900-1800MHz used in 2G/3G/4G wireless technology. This corroborated the concerns from thousands of other studies (and by the WHO, which identifies these radiation sources as 2(b) possible carcinogens), and has led to a rapid shift in the previously-held consensus that non-ionizing radiation doesn’t lead to non-thermal harm (like DNA damage) in mammals.

Today—and even during this recent shutdown—certain wireless carriers are rushing to install small cell antennas within incredibly close distances of our homes, parks, businesses, and schools. While some of these may be 4G/LTE "gap-filling" transmitters using the 900-1800MHz previously studied, many of these small cells will, if they don't already, house 5G Millimeter Wave (MMW) equipment, which could use frequencies up to 60,000 MHz. Recent Congressional inquiry into this subject has yielded a terrifying fact: no federal testing has been done on the potential damage from these higher frequencies, and inexplicably, none is currently planned.

This abrogation of responsibility to make data-driven decisions may be explained by a number of factors, including entrenched lobbies which are coming under increasing scrutiny by our electorate (per recent Channel 6 Coverage documenting citizens concerns in communities like Fishers, which like Carmel, has published a map of its hundreds of pending permits in the absence of an adequate state database). Further, cities like Carmel, among a hundred others nationwide, have not only joined the federal chorus challenging the scope of the FCC’s recent actions—but have also voted (as recently as last October) to encourage a “limitation” of such unstudied and potentially hazardous frequencies prior to their rollout—a copy of which was addressed to the Statehouse and Congress. These continue to be installed within a few feet of Hoosier bedrooms and offices—and often without the federal warning stickers regarding human exposure made visible from eye-level.

Another encouraging development has been the international outcry—not just in countries across Europe (e.g. Switzerland, the Netherlands, and Belgium, which have placed effective moratoriums on portions of their 5G rollouts pending more information)—but also here in the United States. For example, Hawaii and New Hampshire led the way in passing State-level inquiries into the health and environmental impacts of 5G frequencies. New York’s pending Senate Bill 7992 seeks the same—ensuring that cities in these states will be able to await reasonable scientific inquiry before exposing their citizens to an effective field trial of potentially harmful radiation sources (like what may have happened in Ripon, CA prior to their antenna take-down).

We—along with the 2,760 other petitioners (as of May 9) who share these concerns in the other state-wide petition for more science—hope that these untested frequencies turn out to be safe and effective ways to deliver high-speed, low-latency data connections. If so, perhaps one day we can all enjoy the proposed benefits and increased consumer choice. But until then, turning a blind eye to consumer safety is not just anti-science—it’s unthinkable in our representative democracy to hoist such potential harms upon all Hoosier families, particularly without their knowledge and consent. In short, this experiment belongs back in our federal and state university laboratories prior to a rollout, and not in our schools or homes—especially without the additional data an Indiana legislative study could provide. Further, those who are convinced this technology is safe (despite the lack of evidence therefor) should have nothing to fear from an expedited legislative study of this topic—in fact, they should embrace it to clear the air about those concerns. Such state legislative studies are underway in other states, and they can happen here.

We implore our Legislative Council to approve this legislative study—not just in support of obtaining more data in the public interest—but also for the health and wellbeing of citizens across Indiana. We, like the concerned residents of other states and nations, deserve a reasonable inquiry into the increasingly foreseeable impacts of this technology without further delay.

Thank you for answering the call of the thousands of concerned voters who are pleading with you to join this simple request for more science today, and for your tireless work on behalf of all Hoosiers!