Health Committee on Oct. 28th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Dr. Duncan would like you to talk also about recommendations and our time is running out, so—

[Kirsty Duncan, Liberal, Etobicoke North, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

—could you please talk about the recommendations you would suggest?

[Dr. Martin Blank]

I think the recommendation is that the barn door is already unlocked and the horses are out of the stable, and the fact is that it's a little late to go back, but one should really not have been there. It's like the old Irishman's story, when he was asked, “How do I get to there from here?” He said, “Well, I wouldn't start from here”. I think we're in a position now where we've gone too far without having adequate preparation for what we've done.

I think perhaps it would be cautious to have a cease and desist; in other words, just stop instituting these things right away and take stock and see where we are, because there have been reports. This latest paper by Khurana and colleagues indicates that there is reason to believe not only the incidence of cancer that occurs from these tower studies but also these other neurologic symptoms like people with dizziness and all kinds of things like that.

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

Thank you, Dr. Blank.

We'll now go to Mr. Brown.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

We have heard interesting comments today. Certainly, coming from the City of Barrie, where I've seen some newspaper coverage of the concerns in Collingwood, it brings this very close to home. I haven't heard any of these concerns in my own schools, but seeing some of the coverage of what Mr. Palmer has talked about obviously has left me curious.

I wanted to know, first of all from Mr. Palmer, did the Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit ever get involved? Did they ever substantiate any of the effort that was raised?

[Rodney Palmer]

We've reported to them. They deferred to Health Canada, as did everybody else: that Safety Code 6 says it's safe. I've pointed out to them that, in fact, after reading Safety Code 6, on page 3, there's a disclaimer that says in a world of rapidly changing technology, “this code cannot cover all possible situations”.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Were you disappointed that the health unit didn't take it more seriously?

[Rodney Palmer]

They entirely failed. There are two cases of cardiac arrest, multiple cases of tachycardia, and defibrillators in every school, and they're ignoring it because Health Canada says it's safe.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

There's been reference to the BioInitiative Report. That seems to be brought up in reference to those who are concerned about this and the potential adverse reactions.

What is Health Canada's opinion on that BioInitiative Report? Is there any scientific basis that would substantiate it?

[Beth Pieterson]

In my opening remarks, I commented on the BioInitiative Report. It's Health Canada's position, as well as that of most international and other jurisdictional health agencies like Health Canada, that the BioInitiative Report was not peer-reviewed, although I heard Dr. Blank said a later version was peer-reviewed, and there were a lot of...that it has a lack of balance within it. They didn't present all of the new scientific evidence. They only considered more of the negative outcome reports rather than looking at all of them. It's most usual when you review science that you consider the whole scope of science showing one thing and the other thing, not just one thing--and that there were inconsistencies within the report.

It's Health Canada's position as well--as I said--as that of other international regulators that we do not support the findings.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

How does Health Canada respond to complaints and concerns that are raised? For example, when they see those front page headlines in a local newspaper in the spring or summer--whenever it was--with several dozen or several hundred concerned parents, how does Health Canada respond to verify or investigate those concerns that are brought to them?

Are there mechanisms or protocols that exist within Health Canada to look into those issues as they emerge?

[Beth Pieterson]

Not specifically. We certainly take them seriously and look to what's happening, but local health issues are the responsibility of the local health authorities.

As for the school boards, if they wanted some interaction with us, we would respond. For instance, the Toronto school board is asking Industry Canada to go into the schools and measure radio frequency there. It's another government department, but that's the government department responsible for it.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Are there any schools in the country that have been looked at either by a provincial ministry of health or the federal ministry of health? Are any school boards investigating—

[Beth Pieterson]

Not that I'm aware of. As I said, the U.K. has set up quite a systematic study of the effects of Wi-Fi there, and we're following that study.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

Normally if there were alarming health concerns, would you expect the local health unit to deal with it?

[Beth Pieterson]

I would, yes. Health effects, health care...yes. We would obviously be concerned. We review the literature. I think that when something like that has happened, the scientists go back and review, verify, and examine.

[Patrick Brown, Conservative, Barrie, ON]

In the case of what Mr. Palmer brought up, I'd certainly be interested in the reasons why or what action was taken by the health unit: why they didn't take action, why they believe they shouldn't have taken action.

I know that for a lot of local issues, the Simcoe Muskoka District Health Unit is pretty quick on their feet. So that's why your comments are obviously concerning--that you felt your concerns weren't met with that same level of enthusiasm.

For Mr. Muc—

[The Chair, Conservative, Joy Smith]

I'm sorry, Mr. Brown, your time is up. My apologies.

We now have to go to Mr. Pomerleau. I understand that Monsieur Dufour might share time. Keep in mind that you do have five minutes.

[Roger Pomerleau, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you for your presentation. Thanks as well to the witnesses who have joined us by video conference

Mr. Palmer, my question is further to what Mr. Brown just said. I wonder whether I correctly understood the French translation. Did you say that you had taken steps to report all the incidents that had occurred involving children in your schools and that no action was taken on that on the ground that theoretically that cannot happen?

[Rodney Palmer]

That is exactly right.

[Roger Pomerleau, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

Not very scientific, no?

[Rodney Palmer]

No one has come to our school to interview any one of these children. No one has done a case history to find out if they had these symptoms prior to Wi-Fi being installed. This is a simple diagnostic procedure that any physician would conduct and not a single one of them has.

The ones where the parents have taken studies that show the condition their child has are supported in the annals of science as occurring as a result of Wi-Fi or microwaves. These doctors have told those people Health Canada says they're wrong so they're not considering it, and instead they choose to medicate, do surgery, or ignore. But they have not yet asked any of them to move out of the Wi-Fi areas where their children are having these reactions.

[Roger Pomerleau, Bloc, Drummond, QC]

What did you do? Who did you contact to try to obtain a scientific analysis of the facts? You made the affair public, but whom did you contact in your region to have a serious analysis conducted? Did you contact Health Canada, for example? Science is based on facts, first and foremost, far more than theories. If you report facts, someone with a scientific mind should at least go and see whether what you say is true, tell you whether you are right or wrong, but based on facts and on an analysis of those facts.

[Rodney Palmer]

I agree with you completely, sir. We have been entirely discounted. The children have been discounted.

For example, we did contact a biologist who is the president of Lakehead University, who is a school administrator in our area. Lakehead has a campus in Simcoe County, in Orillia. He has banned Wi-Fi on his campus, and we asked the school board, the Simcoe County District School Board, to invite him to lecture about why as a biologist he knows that Wi-Fi is potentially harmful, and why he chose to not have it in his school and instead use fibre optic cables to hard-wire the computers. They refused to invite him in.

We asked them to invite Dr. Magda Havas, a professor at Trent University, published in peer review journals and doing research on electromagnetic radiation--which I know Beth Pieterson is well aware of--and specifically on microwave radiation. The Simcoe County District School Board ignored that and did not have her in. They instead invited Professor Muc to come in, who admitted that he has no knowledge of biological effects because he's not a biologist. He's a scientist; he speaks within his realm of training.

They didn't ask a biologist to come in. They didn't ask a doctor to come in. They didn't ask anybody who has training in the biological effects of microwave radiation to come in. Instead, they just keep deferring to Health Canada.