By John Coates, Founder of RF Safe
My name is John Coates, and I am the founder of RF Safe. My journey in this fight began with loss. I wasn’t able to protect my first child, Angel Leigh Coates, from the risks of RF radiation. Out of ignorance, I didn’t know the dangers that were all around us. She paid the ultimate price, and I carry that with me every day.
Today, I am the father of a seven-year-old daughter who sits within 500 feet of a cell tower all day at school. I know the risks now, and I know what the science says about the dangers of prolonged RF exposure, particularly for children. Yet, I am legally barred from protesting that cell tower on the grounds of health concerns.
Let me be clear: I am being forced by law to sit back and watch my child be exposed to RF radiation under 500 feet from her desk at school without recourse – this is 1/3 of the safe distance required. This is a failure of our legal system, our regulatory agencies, and our commitment to public health. And it all comes back to a single unconstitutional law: Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
This law, signed by Bill Clinton, effectively silences the American people. It prohibits communities from challenging the placement of cell towers based on health concerns, even when those towers are near schools, playgrounds, or homes.
The Paradox That Silences Us
In 1968, Congress passed Public Law 90-602 to protect Americans from the risks of electronic radiation. This law required the FDA to:
- Continuously research the effects of radiation.
- Educate the public about potential dangers.
- Enforce safety standards to minimize harm.
This was a bold and visionary step forward—an acknowledgment that technology must be questioned and scrutinized to ensure it does not harm public health.
But in 1996, Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act was enacted. It created a direct contradiction by making it illegal to question the health risks of RF radiation in the context of cell tower placement. This effectively nullified the protections of Public Law 90-602 by removing the public’s ability to demand accountability.
- Public Law 90-602 mandates questioning and research.
- Section 704 forbids questioning and halts accountability.
This legal paradox has paralyzed our system, leaving agencies like the FDA and FCC unable—or unwilling—to fulfill their mandates.
The Consequences: A Public Health Crisis
The consequences of this contradiction are visible everywhere. Autism rates have soared from 1 in 150 children in 1992 to 1 in 36 by 2012. Neurological disorders like ADHD and other developmental challenges are becoming alarmingly common.
The science is there if we choose to see it:
- The BioInitiative Report: Over 1,800 studies document non-thermal biological effects of RF radiation, including DNA damage, oxidative stress, and neurological changes.
- The Yale Study: Prenatal exposure to RF radiation led to hyperactivity and memory deficits in mice, mirroring ADHD-like symptoms.
- Dr. Martin Pall’s Research: RF radiation disrupts calcium channels in cells, a mechanism linked to autism and other neurological conditions.
Children, with their developing brains and thinner skulls, are especially vulnerable. Yet, Section 704 ensures that parents like me cannot even question these risks when cell towers are placed near schools.
The FDA’s Failure to Act
Public Law 90-602 legally mandates the FDA to conduct ongoing research and educate the public about radiation risks. But the agency has failed to fulfill this duty:
- Halting Research
- The National Toxicology Program (NTP) found clear evidence of cancer in lab animals exposed to RF radiation. Instead of expanding this critical research, funding was cut, leaving the U.S. without any federally backed studies on RF risks.
- We now depend on research from other countries, many of which lack the resources for large-scale, long-term studies.
- Ignoring Non-Thermal Effects
- Despite overwhelming evidence, the FDA and FCC continue to rely on outdated 1996 standards that only consider thermal effects, ignoring the proven biological impacts of non-thermal exposures.
- Failing to Inform the Public
- Without public education campaigns, many Americans are unaware of the risks. They dismiss non-thermal effects as a “boogeyman,” not realizing that these risks are real and well-documented.
The Path Forward: Remove the Rot
The solution is clear: we must repeal Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act. This unconstitutional law violates:
- The First Amendment: By silencing public discourse on health risks, it denies citizens their right to petition the government.
- The Tenth Amendment: By preempting local control over zoning and health, it strips communities of their constitutional rights.
Removing Section 704 would restore the public’s freedom to question technology on health grounds. And once that freedom is restored, the rest will fall into place:
- Enforcing Public Law 90-602
- The FDA would be held accountable for resuming research, educating the public, and updating safety standards based on modern science.
- Modernizing FCC Guidelines
- Outdated 1996 standards would finally reflect current understanding, including non-thermal effects and real-world exposure scenarios.
- Empowering Communities
- Local governments and parents would have the power to challenge cell tower placements and demand safer infrastructure.
A Father’s Plea to Nicole Shanahan
Nicole, as a mother, attorney, and advocate for health equity, you are uniquely positioned to lead this fight. You understand the importance of questioning entrenched systems and protecting vulnerable populations. This issue is no different.
I am asking for your help. Not just for my daughter, who sits 500 feet from a cell tower every day, but for every child in America. For every family that doesn’t know the risks they face. For every community silenced by Section 704.
You have the influence and the platform to:
- Expose the Contradiction
- Show how Section 704 prevents Public Law 90-602 from protecting Americans, creating a public health crisis.
- Advocate for Repeal
- Rally leaders, scientists, and lawmakers to repeal Section 704 and restore constitutional rights.
- Inspire Change
- Use your voice to educate the public about RF radiation risks and the need for accountability.
This is more than a legal issue—it’s a moral imperative. Children are growing up in an environment saturated with radiation, and parents like me are legally barred from protecting them.
Conclusion: For the Love of Our Children
The rising rates of autism, ADHD, and other disorders are a warning we cannot ignore. The legal contradiction between Public Law 90-602 and Section 704 has silenced the voices that could demand change, allowing this crisis to worsen unchecked.
Nicole, your leadership could bring us one step closer to a solution. By repealing unconstitutional laws and restoring our right to question technology, we can protect future generations from harm. For the love of our children, let’s act now.
Angel Leigh Coates didn’t have a chance. Let’s make sure my seven-year-old daughter, and every child like her, does.
#Repeal704 #ProtectOurChildren #StopTheMadness
Ten FAQs
Below are frequently asked questions optimized for key search terms like “Section 704,” “Public Law 90-602,” “RF radiation,” “autism rates,” “Nicole Shanahan,” and more.
FAQ 1: What is the legal paradox between Section 704 and Public Law 90-602?
Answer:
- Public Law 90-602 (Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act of 1968) mandates federal agencies like the FDA to research, regulate, and inform the public about the risks of electronic product radiation.
- Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act (1996), however, prevents local governments and communities from citing health concerns when challenging cell towers or wireless infrastructure.
- Together, they create a paradox where one law requires protection from RF radiation, yet another law forbids questioning RF health risks, effectively neutralizing the 1968 law.
FAQ 2: How does Section 704 violate constitutional rights?
Answer:
- Section 704 strips away the First Amendment right to petition the government over health concerns about wireless infrastructure.
- It also overrides the Tenth Amendment, which traditionally vests local health and zoning decisions in state or local authorities.
- This “gag order” means communities can’t legally object to the placement of cell towers on health grounds, even if credible research suggests risk.
FAQ 3: Why is Public Law 90-602 so important for public health?
Answer:
- Passed in 1968, Public Law 90-602 was groundbreaking, mandating the FDA to keep pace with evolving technologies and ensure radiation safety.
- It requires continuous research, regulation, and public education on electromagnetic radiation risks.
- Without being free to enforce these duties, we’re left without updated safety standards or research to protect against emerging technologies.
FAQ 4: What research points to a link between RF radiation and rising autism rates?
Answer:
- Yale University Studies: Found that prenatal exposure to RF radiation in mice led to ADHD-like behavior.
- BioInitiative Report: Compiles over 1,800 studies showing non-thermal RF radiation effects on DNA, oxidative stress, and the nervous system.
- Dr. Martin Pall’s Research: Highlights how RF radiation can disrupt calcium channels, potentially affecting neurological and developmental processes.
- These findings suggest an urgent need to re-evaluate RF safety standards, especially given rising autism rates.
FAQ 5: How does Section 704 affect local communities and parents?
Answer:
- Local governments cannot use health concerns as a basis to reject cell tower placements, even near schools or residential areas.
- Parents who worry about RF exposure for their children have no legal pathway to challenge towers on health grounds.
- This has led to public frustration and confusion, as families feel powerless to protect their children from potential risks.
FAQ 6: Why aren’t the FDA and FCC updating safety standards for RF radiation?
Answer:
- FDA: Legally mandated by Public Law 90-602 to research and inform the public, yet it’s not enforcing its own mandate—partly due to lack of public pressure and the industry-driven environment that Section 704 enables.
- FCC: Its guidelines haven’t substantially changed since 1996. They primarily address thermal (heating) effects, ignoring non-thermal biological impacts that modern science has identified.
- This regulatory stagnation continues partly because Section 704 prevents communities from forcing the agencies to reassess RF standards.
FAQ 7: How did the National Toxicology Program (NTP) study factor into this issue?
Answer:
- The NTP conducted one of the most comprehensive U.S. studies on RF radiation, finding clear evidence of cancer in rats.
- Funding for this research was subsequently cut, leaving a major gap in understanding long-term RF exposure effects.
- This defunding contradicts Public Law 90-602, which requires ongoing study of electronic product radiation hazards.
FAQ 8: What role can Nicole Shanahan play in resolving this paradox?
Answer:
- As an attorney, philanthropist, and health equity advocate, Nicole Shanahan can shine a spotlight on how Section 704 prevents the enforcement of Public Law 90-602.
- Her platform allows her to mobilize legal experts, lawmakers, and communities to demand the repeal of Section 704 and reinstatement of the public’s right to question health impacts.
- By championing updated RF research and safety standards, she can help realign U.S. policy with scientific evidence.
FAQ 9: How does repealing Section 704 fix the issue?
Answer:
- By removing Section 704, local communities regain the freedom to challenge health risks associated with cell towers, driving public discourse and research.
- With public pressure restored, agencies like the FDA and FCC would be compelled to update safety standards in line with modern science.
- Public Law 90-602 could finally be enforced as intended, forcing ongoing RF research, regulatory oversight, and transparent public education.
FAQ 10: What immediate steps can concerned citizens take?
Answer:
- Raise Awareness: Share factual research and personal stories on social media using hashtags like #Repeal704, #ProtectOurChildren, and #StopTheMadness.
- Contact Representatives: Demand support for repealing Section 704 and enforcing Public Law 90-602.
- Follow Safe Tech Practices: Use speakerphone or wired headsets, keep devices away from children’s bodies, and turn off Wi-Fi/Bluetooth when not needed.
- Support Independent Research: Donate to organizations pushing for unbiased studies on RF exposure and public health.