My name is Shaun Kranish, and I am the father of two young and beautiful girls. Their ages are three and six, and the older child has attended school at Keith Country Day School for a few years. As an electromagnetic radiation specialist, I made sure to measure my daughter's school and begin a dialog about the levels of radiofrequency (RF) radiation present. Long-term exposures, hours and hours a day, are the most concerning since electromagnetic radiation shows cumulative health effects.
I'm writing this story and making it public due to my concern for the health and well-being of the children at this school. The school has a lower school building, with numerous wireless devices transmitting RF radiation constantly. Upon measuring the school with professional equipment - specifically my Gigahertz Solutions HFE59B High Frequency Analyzer, I found the readings to be far higher than levels recommended by scientists, researchers, and the International Institute for Building Biology and Ecology (IBE). The readings are below the current governmental limits in the US - which are based only decades-old research looking only at the thermal (tissue heating) effects. However, the US is far higher than many other countries, sometimes in orders of magnitude.
Leading scientists in this specific field are warning the US and other countries to lower these limits to protect the public health. Hundreds of these scientists have formally petitioned the United Nations to urge its member states to lower limits and take immediate action to protect public health - www.emfscientist.org.
In 2011 the World Health Organization classified radiofrequency (RF) radiation - the kind used by cell phones, cell towers, WiFi routers and access points, and other popular modern wireless devices - as a Group 2B Possible Carcinogen. This group of agents suspected to cause cancer also includes lead, DDT, and engine exhaust. Agents are added to this list when they have been scientifically shown to likely cause cancer. This is a very serious matter being studied by top scientists - so many of whom are warning us that RF radiation does cause cancer, that the classification should be increased to Probable or Known Carcinogen, and that we need to curtail our exposure, especially to children!
In today's addicted dependency and fanatical devotion to cutting-edge technology in the west, changing habits and being precautious has been slow to become mainstream. I've noticed my own sensitivities to wireless technology, as has my wife, and since 2008 I've personally spoken to thousands of individuals who have as well. As a building biologist and health-conscious guy, as well as a professional in the field of electromagnetic energy exposure, I believe we should seek to reduce our exposure as much as possible right now while the jury is still out on how different frequencies and modulations (pulsing) affect our biology - our life.
So I measured and sought to reduce the exposure to my children and to the other children in the lower school (Pre-K through Grade 2) building at Keith School in Rockford, Illinois. While my own children fortunately have fared very well health-wise, for which I am so thankful, my wife and I have noticed that so many others have not. Many times the majority of students in classrooms or in the entire lower school building were all out sick on the same day. Just today - March 12 - I spoke with a parent of another child at the school and received the report that most of the school is sick right now.
One of the things researchers like myself believe is that certain exposure to artificial energy fields or radiation will, very much like ionizing radiation, affect the body's immune system. The natural immune system may become compromised and cannot perform its important functions of adapting to protect the body - from external and internal threats. RF radiation - especially in certain forms such a digital pulse-modulated bursts - may have a tremendous affect on little bodies.
I haven't done research to compare attendance and sick days with other schools, but I would be very surprised if Keith School did not show poor results. The frequency of sickness and missed school days, and antibiotic treatment are alarming to me.
I was working with the head of the school - Debra Dimke - to try to reduce the RF exposure to the children. My wife - who also taught as a substitute teacher at the school - was also concerned about the exposure. We had met and talked numerous times and had come up with some strategies for reduction. One thing we tried was installing cloth shielding material over the WiFi access points, and this reduced the radiation around 95%. No one reported connectivity issues to us.
The cloth material was removed by the custodian who cited "fire hazard" concerns. While I disagree about DC-powered access point causing such concerns, I installed another solution - aluminum screen material. This was also very effective at reducing the readings and bringing them much closer to recommended levels. Shortly after, however, the aluminum screen material was removed. No one notified my wife or me, or discussed who or why the material was removed. We were concerned, and suspected the school's IT guy. Our suspicions were soon confirmed, but no reason was given why the material was removed.
We still haven't heard one complaint about connectivity issues while the shielding was up. Why was the material being taken down when Deb Dimke had told us it was OK to put up? Why was the IT guy saying Ms. Dimke had told him that we did not have permission? At this point I asked the head of the school to step in and clear this up with the IT guy. We arranged for a meeting, and I sent additional evidence of the dangers of RF radiation to the school administration and everyone involved.
We had already taken out kids out of school, reluctantly, because Ms. Dimke had asked us to stop putting up the shielding material. As the material was being removed by, at that time, and unknown party, and we had been given permission to put it up, we kept putting it back up. We told Ms. Dimke and others by email that we did not feel safe having our children in the school with those levels of RF radiation. Measurements I took with my professional Gigahertz Solutions HFE59B High Frequency Analyzer had exceeded 200,000 µW/m² with corrected factor of 10 applied (raw measurement over 20 milliwatts per meter squared).
While our two daughters were missing school - the school our older daughter had gone to for years with all her friends, attending events and fundraisers, and in general being a very active member of the school community - it took about a week and a half to get a meeting scheduled. Finally the meeting was about to take place, when the very night before we were notified impersonally by email that the meeting was canceled - no reason given. An unspecific promise to attend to the issue was also included.
Was WiFi really that difficult to discuss as adults? Why was there so much resistance to even have a discussion on the matter? Scheduling a meeting and then cancelling without explanation? Is this a topic that isn't to be brought up? It seemed as if technology had become a religion, and questioning the health effects of a popular fad like WiFi was heresy.
Well, there are reasons why this form of radiation has made the Group 2B Possible Carcinogen list. Other notable members include lead, DDT, and engine exhaust, as well as electromagnetic fields (such as those from power lines, wiring errors, and other sources). Substantial evidence exists that Radiofrequency (RF) radiation causes cancer. And cancer is just the most severe of a very large number of documented health effects spanning decades and decades of research.
These are the reasons France banned WiFi in buildings like my daughters' school. These are the reasons hundreds of scientists in this field from around the world - over 40 different countries - have formally petitioned the World Health Organization to urge its member states to adopt lower limits in order to protect the public, especially the most sensitive members like children.
Studies in animals have shown and been replicated showing an increase in tumors of animals exposed to low levels - typical background WiFi/cell tower/cordless phone levels of pulsed digital RF radiation. We have people all over complaining of falling ill because of technology like this. Can't we put 2 and 2 together? Why is this technology so sacred that our children are made guinea pigs in this experiment despite serious evidence that it's dangerous?
Customer support service by UserEcho