Topic

radiation hazards

4 petitions

Update posted 1 month ago

Petition to Senator Bill Cassidy, Senator John Kennedy, Representative Rick Edmonds, Representative Yvonne Colomb, Governor John Bel Edwards

Louisiana Stop 5G!

Baton Rouge officials have allowed the installation of hundreds of 5G Small Cell Towers and Antennae.  5G in 5 Minutes The accumulated clinical evidence of sick and injured human beings, experimental evidence of damage to DNA, cells and organ systems in a wide variety of plants and animals, and epidemiological evidence that the major diseases of modern civilization—cancer, heart disease and diabetes—are in large part caused by electromagnetic pollution, forms a literature base of well over 10,000 peer-reviewed studies. Numerous studies show evidence of non-thermal cellular damage from non-ionizing wireless radiation used in telecommunications. https://youtu.be/BtstzRC1nI0 Dr. Sharon Goldberg Testimony The FCC uses outdated and useless science in reference to non-thermal radiation in their safety tests from 1996 based on the SAR (Specific Absorption Rate). They base these “safety guidelines” solely on thermal effects or tissue heating. However, the cancers and diseases developed in animals in these studies at radiation levels that were non-thermal. One of the largest studies ever conducted was a $30-million study on Cell Phone Radiation by the US National Toxicology Program (NTP). It found “clear evidence” of cancer, heart damage and DNA damage. EHTrust Testimony These studies indicate that government limits are non-protective and that non-thermal, non-ionizing RF does in fact cause harmful health effects.  Also, the wireless industry does not have one single study indicating that 5G is safe. Link to evidence is found here:    https://ehtrust.org/policy/fcc-safety-standards/ They want to deploy 5G small cell towers every 2-10 homes (includes your front yard), at schools, daycare centers, businesses, parks, bus stops, restaurants, hotels, apartments, malls, and hospitals. If the telecommunications industry’s plans for 5G come to fruition, no person, no animal, no bird, no insect and no plant on Earth will be able to avoid exposure, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, to levels of RF radiation that are tens to hundreds of times greater than what exists today, without any possibility of escape anywhere on the planet. These 5G plans threaten to provoke serious, irreversible effects on humans and permanent damage to all of the Earth’s ecosystems.  Scientists Speaking Truth More than 10,000 peer-reviewed scientific studies demonstrate harm to human health from RF radiation. Effects include: Alteration of heart rhythmAltered gene expressionAltered metabolismAltered stem cell developmentCancers and Tumors    Cardiovascular diseaseCognitive impairmentDNA damageImpacts on general well-beingIncreased free radicals                                                                   Learning and memory deficitsImpaired sperm function and qualityMiscarriage and InfertilityNeurological damageObesity and diabetesOxidative stress                                                                              Effects in children include autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and asthma. Frank Clegg Former President of Microsoft Canada: 5G is NOT SAFE https://youtu.be/DIV39-KOzh0 This country was built on freedom. And every human being should have the right to feel and live safely in their own home, place of education, place of business, place of worship and places of enjoyment without being poisoned by non-ionizing radiation 24/7. Please stand up to this atrocity and use your VOICE by signing this petition to halt 5G technology until it can be studied by experts and proven safe.  (Remember, you can switch your wifi and cell phone off. But you can't switch 5G cell towers off). 5G Truth-Is it Safe?

Jessica Lowe
605 supporters
Update posted 2 months ago

Petition to Gavin Newsom, Barbara Lee, Nancy Pelosi, David Chiu, Scott Weiner, Doug LaMalfa, Jared Huffman, John Garamendi, Tom McClintock, Doris O. Matsui, Ami Bera, Paul Cook, Jerry McNerney, Josh Harder, Mark DeSaulnier, Jackie Speier, Eric Swalwell, Duncan Hunter

CA - Assembly Bill 407 will cause extreme radiation exposure to Patients in California

California Assembly Bill 407 Why this bill is bad for patient care Written by: Coalition of concerned Radiologic Technologists in California* * * Assembly Bill- 407 (AB -407) will allow unskilled physicians, podiatrists and chiropractors to operate dangerous radiation equipment; this bill is headed through the California State legislature. If approved, this bill could lead to patients receiving excessive and unnecessary radiation doses that could cause them serious over radiation exposure to innocent patients who entrust their doctors with their healthcare. Currently, California is the only state where registered radiographers, and physicians and surgeons need to study, apply and pass for the state fluoroscopy permit. This is due in part to the Radiologic Technologists (RT) Act. This act was created in 1971, to protect the public at large. The act mandates that the person behind the fluoroscopy machine, an equipment that produces ionizing radiation, is certified; but moreover, that the fluoroscopy licensed team has had the necessary education, and training, and they are certified in fluoroscopy. This certification and permit assures patients & staff that during procedures they will receive the lowest dose of radiation possible. Unfortunately, AB-407 is inching its way to become reality, unless patient advocates and concerned citizens inform their representatives that AB 407 is bad for patient care. The existing mandate has assured countless patients whom undergo routine, elective and emergency surgeries and exams, the confidence that the surgeon and radiographer will do whatever is necessary to minimize radiation dose for the patient. Fluoroscopy is primarily used in hospitals, surgery and pain management centers, joint centers and more! They are being used in many applications. Some include: bone replacement (e.g. hip replacement), cardiac surgery, interventional procedures, stent placements, and many more applications. AB-407 will EXEMPT physicians, surgeons and chiropractors from taking the California Fluoroscopy Operators and Supervisors permit, thereby providing the convenient option of paying for the permit, without taking the exam. I explained this to my sister by saying; “it is like someone paying for a medical degree without having going through the education to get one.” Going through the process of being certified is a true litmus test of academic integrity and knowledge. An individual who studies, takes and passes & gets certified achieves a higher sense of knowledge thereby increasing outcomes, which in turn improves patient care. The argument being made by several organizations who supports AB-407, “to obtain a fluoroscopy and radiography permit under current California law, physicians and surgeons, and doctors of podiatric medicine, are required to undergo a laborious and lengthy examination process that can sometimes take months to complete, start to finish.” ( (Glazer, 2019) Wait a minute??… isn’t obtaining any permit and license laborious? In fact, don’t you want it to be a laborious effort? Nothing comes easy! More importantly, what about patient care? Patients who give their ultimate trust and care to surgeons need to be confident that every step is taken to ensure that the procedure is not only done correctly, but also performed with the least radiation possible. AB 407 does not provide this. Being non-certified is non-qualified. It is important to note, according to the Radiologic Health Branch of California (RHB), the accrediting arm of radiology for the State of California, indicates that approximately, 8, 800 individuals are certified as Supervisors & Operators (S&O) Fluoroscopy Permit holders. With only an 83% pass-rate, the idea of passing AB 407 seems irresponsible! Surgeons and doctors that need to operate the fluoroscopy equipment must have thorough understanding of topics such as: radiation protection, radiation biology, and radiation physics. This guarantees that a mechanism is in place to ensure that patients who undergo medical procedures will receive the lowest dose of radiation. While a majority of other states do not require certification for fluoroscopy, radiographers have been educated in these important topics. Radiographers serve as radiation safety experts in the surgical suites, and we constantly inform and remind the surgeon about dosage during the case. Supporters of this proposed legislation indicates that the Joint Commission now requires hospitals and ambulatory care centers “specifically require that hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers must verify and document that individuals who use fluoroscopic equipment participate in ongoing education that includes annual training on radiation dose optimization techniques, and safe procedures for operation of the equipment.” P. 3(Glazer, 2019). While this may have been the case, the Joint Commission has now redacted this information. Hence, supporter’s argument that this is a duplicative process is untrue. They also claim this will streamline the process and “allow physicians to enter practice more quickly.“ Glazer, 2019). To change a legislation that will allow physicians to practice medicine more quickly is not what the RT Act was created for. The RT Act was created to protect the public, and if this legislation passes, the RT act will be compromised. The California Radiological Society and the California Society of Radiologic Technologists, both who fervently oppose this legislation argues that the existing process works. It requires those who wish to operate the fluoroscopy equipment to study, take and pass the California Fluoroscopy permit. Physicians need to demonstrate knowledge of radiation safety practices and with the pass rate of 83%, there needs to be more oversight, resources and education, not less. The need for certification for surgeons is not only needed, but the best for patient care. The RT act should not be water down for the sake of a physician wanting to open their practice sooner.  What’s next? A legislative bill to allow non-pharmacists the ability to refill your prescriptions? Perhaps a bill that will allow physicians without an oncology background to treat patients with cancer? As outrageous as these two examples above; do you think that AB-407 may also fall in the same category? To allow non-skilled, non-certified individual to operate a machine that produces (potentially) large quantities of ionizing radiation to you or your loved one? Tell your local California representatives that AB 407 does not promote patient care. Remember, non-certified is non-qualified.  To find your representatives click here

Concerned Radiographers of California
983 supporters
Started 11 months ago

Petition to Nancy Pelosi, Kamala D. Harris, Gavin Newsom, Mike Levin

San Onofre Nuclear Waste: RECALL Defective Holtec Storage System. It’s a LEMON.

The San Onofre beachside nuclear waste storage facility is DEFECTIVE and must be RECALLED to prevent nuclear disaster in Southern California and beyond. To avoid nuclear disaster: We urgently petition our state and federal elected officials and commissioners to take immediate action to require Southern California Edison: 1.  STOP loading highly radioactive fuel waste into the defective Holtec storage system and RECALL the Holtec nuclear storage system.  2.  REPACKAGE all San Onofre nuclear waste into thick-wall transportable storage casks that are designed to be inspected, maintained and monitored to PREVENT radioactive leaks and explosions. 3.  MOVE the new thick-wall casks to higher ground, away from coastal flood hazards, and STORE the the casks in reinforced buildings.   Note: The waste must be repackaged BEFORE it can be moved.  The NRC requires both the canisters and the fuel inside to be inspected before transport, but the Holtec system is not designed for inspection of either.  The Holtec system is a Lemon. The bad engineering design cannot be remedied with training and procedural improvements. The thin-wall canisters (only 5/8" thick) are vulnerable to cracking, but technology does not exist to inspect for cracks or repair cracking canisters.   There is no plan in place to stop or contain a cracking, radiation-leaking, potentially exploding canister.  This is serious;  each canister contains roughly a Chernobyl nuclear disaster of radiation. What’s worse, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) recently admitted that the design of the Holtec loading system likely causes damage to the canisters as they are lowered into the steel lined storage holes, due to unavoidable "metal to metal" contact.  The damage initiates cracking.   So far, the NRC has refused to recall this defective system.  The Holtec nuclear waste storage system poses a clear and imminent danger to the health and lives of the citizens, and poses potential financial and ecological disaster for the state of California, and beyond. It should be RECALLED immediately, and the waste repackaged, as soon as possible, into thick-wall casks (10" to 19.75" thick) that can be inspected, repaired, monitored and transported.   For more information and source documents visit https://sanonofresafety.org  Listen to the President of Holtec explain that a through-wall crack will release millions of curies of radionuclides and it's not practical to try to repair a crack, even if you could find it.   https://youtu.be/euaFZt0YPi4    

One Human
8,720 supporters