During the Wi-Fi committee proceedings there was what appeared to be evidence of bias by the chair, with some of these comments evident in this 3rd meetings recording; potential conflicts of interest and what seemed to be libelous submissions as presentation evidence. You can decide for yourself by viewing the recordings of the meetings.
This meeting consisted of a number of community members reading out the submissions of scientists and other experts as their voice through any telecommunication device was denied which also denied them opportunity to respond to questions about the science itself. This denial and lack of flexibility to find a way to ensure scientists and other experts received opportunity, given the school district’s mandate to expand learning opportunities and connections to first hand knowledge around the world leaves the community with more questions than answers.
Further errors of HealthCanadaand its Safety Code 6 were shared as was the importance of demanding of the wireless industry a written statement of safety beyond the usual industry standard stating they meet the required government standards of Safety Code 6. As parents and the members of the public we need to make industry accountable for the safety of their products, insisting providers and manufacturers of Wi-Fi products and other wireless technology used in schools sign holdharmless contracts accepting all financial liability for future related health and disability claims as well responsibility for future lawsuits, confirming this technology is safe for long term use. If they can’t, school districts need to remove and cease installing all wireless technologies in schools until such time as industry will commit to our children’s safety.
On the agenda were two men, employed, one by regular employment of the school district in the IT department and the other in a contract with the school district working within the department. One would think that their employment positions alone would put them in a conflict of interest. The last of these two presenters did not reveal is position with the board during his presentation but rather was revealed by a member of Wi-Fi Committee. Both submitted documents which attempt to discredit the work of scientists who are speaking out on the issues of wireless technology. Are these statements not considered libelous? Should the school district have accepted such submissions?
Ian Frazer refers to the Danish Cell Phone study as submitted in his evidence. What’s not clear in his presentation is that the Danish study excluded “all corporate users, the “heavy” users of that time.” To read more on the flaws of this study click here.
We heard from a young student who’s been diagnosed with electromagnetic hyper sensitivities. His story is worth listening to as is that of his mother’s, who presented at an earlier meeting, talking of the struggles to figure out what’s causing her sons health issues. This young man is currently struggling to graduate from his high school.
Missing from this meeting was one parent voice that was denied by the chair with no notice or explanation until the day of the final Wi-Fi Committee meetings due to a perceived error.
Even more concerning is what seems an almost admission that these meetings were simply intended to appease the public into feeling heard. Read more about that here.