Trifold

1. https://www.bitchute.com/video/ieHB5XHZBGKT/
2. https://www.mdsafetech.org/ntp-study-2016
3. Nov 13,2018, https://www.thehill.com/opinion/healthcare/416515-theres-a-clear-cell-phone-cancer-link-but-fda-is-downplaying-it
4. Limit guidelines in U.S. are from 200 uW/cm2 to 1000 uW/cm2 (2 W/m2 to 10 W/m2) for RF radiation depending on frequency.  Countries developed different standards based on either  *Thermal Effects *Non-Thermal Effects or *Precautionary Considerations. The values below are at 900MHz but vary with frequency and are as up to date as possible. EU standards have changed and there may be mandated lower limits. https://mdsafetech.org/conversion-and-exposure-limits-emr-emf/
5. https://www.efis.psc.mo.gov/Document/Display/161492 https://www.naturalscience.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/2015-06-22-WFNS-Factsheet-Interview-with-Barrie-Trower-english-WEB-.pdf
   • (P4) on the first one P5: I have one document where 40,000, in one year, 40,000 brain tumours were re-diagnosed as endocrine cancers.
   • P7 If you look at some of the studies where they have shown that there are no cancer rises from transmitters or mobile phones, what the industry and governments are very, very good at doing is, they will do a study, they will write up the study, they will give it to the press, the press will publish it…the press bring it out the next day: “Cancers are going down, mobile phones are found to be safe.” But then, when you get hold of the paper, and this was one particular experiment on mobile phones, and you find they discounted everybody under a certain age, they then discounted everybody over a certain age, they discounted people who use mobile phones for work, they discounted people who had two, they discounted people for some other reason, and in fact you ended up with, this particular paper, you only ended up with sixteen per cent of the total people that were being tested being on the statistics.
6. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/landmark-5g-case-against-fcc-hearing-set-jan-25/
7. https://wirecalifornia.org/case-20-1025-ruling/ https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/dccc75f8-ecdf-4186-8805-1b55a90b1bd1.pdf
8. https://mdsafetech.org/conversion-and-exposure-limits-emr-emf/
9. https://legislature.idaho.gov/statutesrules/idstat/title67/t67ch65/
10. https://wireidaho.com/trifold
11. http://www.wi-cancer.info/new_home.aspx
12. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/walla-walla-washington-residents-beat-att-plan-cell-tower-near-homes-school/?utm_id=20250116
13. Thanks to https://www.renseradio.com/ddees-gallery/

---

ONE MORE IMPORTANT LINK – Successes of Environment Health Trust 118^th Congress

Washington Update: Recap of the 118th Congress (2023-2024)

---

WHY NO QR CODE ON OUR TRIFOLD?

Reject Real ID, Don’t Use QR Codes Ever

Parsing the Digital Identity Agenda—or, Why QR Codes Are Not Your Friend

---

SAMPLE LETTER TO LOCAL LEGISLATORS

Your name, address, phone #, date

Dear (Commissioner / City councilman etc)

I am writing to encourage you to update your telecommunications code to prevent wireless telecommunications facilities (WTFs) in residential neighborhoods in our _______.

Idaho Code 67-6535 states  “Approval or denial of any application [for a wireless facility] to be based upon EXPRESS standards and to be in writing. (1) The approval or denial of any application required or authorized pursuant to this chapter shall be based upon standards and criteria which shall be set forth in the comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance or other appropriate ordinance or regulation of the city or county. Such approval standards and criteria shall be set forth in express terms in land use ordinances in order that permit applicants, interested residents and decision makers alike may know the express standards that must be met in order [for a telecommunication company] to obtain a requested permit or approval. Whenever the nature of any decision standard or criterion allows, the decision shall identify aspects of compliance or noncompliance with relevant approval standards and criteria in the written decision.

Idaho Code also states: “67-6502. Local Land Use Planning [LLUPA] Purpose. The purpose of this act shall be to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the people of the state of Idaho…

(i) To protect life and property in areas subject to natural hazards and disasters.

(j)  To protect fish, wildlife and recreation resources.

(k)  To avoid undue water and air pollution.”(2)

According to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, wireless microwave radiation is a health hazard and has mandated the FCC to update its safety standards to take into consideration the adverse effects of microwave radiation on children, the ubiquity of wireless telecommunications facilities since it last updated its standards (1996) and the effects on the environment (See EHT/CHD v. FCC case #20-1025, August 13, 2021). FCC has not done this.

Appraisal Journal and Realtor Magazine both report that property values near a cell tower drop by as much as 20%, and property owners virtually cannot sell their properties next to cell towers because of this.

For these reasons, I oppose WTFs of any size or G in my neighborhood and would like to be informed of your intent and when this topic will be on the meeting agenda. WTF antennas were never
intended to be in residential neighborhoods according to the 1996 Telecom Act.

I support an ordinance that provides wireless capability for small data ONLY (telephone calls and text) and fiber optics or copper cable for BIG data (internet, gaming, and videos) and
provides protective measures for our city and its residents that are within the law, such as banning cell towers in residential districts (like Eagle, Idaho has done).

Sincerely,

Your name.

(1) https://legislature.idaho.gov/statutesrules/idstat/Title67/T67CH65/SECT67-6535/

(2) https://legislature.idaho.gov/statutesrules/idstat/Title67/T67CH65/SECT67-6502/

---

LEGISLATOR CONTACT INFO: