FCC questions if protecting children from RF damage is "useful or counterproductive" = WRONG QUESTION

Microwave News (MWN) announced that the FCC has now "issued a package of rules and information requestst related to RF health and safety. The document is long and complex."

 

See their "short take" for the basic information.

 

MWN includes the following quote from the new FCC rules:

One of the key issues on the table is whether there is a need for precautionary policies, specifically to protect children (see ¶¶5-7 and ¶¶236-243):

[W]e ask whether any precautionary action would be either useful or counterproductive, given that there is a lack of scientific consensus about the possibility of adverse health effects at exposure levels at or below our existing limits. [¶6]

 

THE CORRECT QUESTION TO ASK IS:

"We ask whether precautionary actions should be implemented to potentially save lives despite the fact there is a lack of scientific consensus, which is divided down lines of industry-funded and independent studies. We also ask if it is ethical for regulatory bodies to ignore thousands of recent peer-reviewed studies and medical experts, both pediatric and environmental medicine practitioners, warning of unacceptable risks, especially to our most vulnerable populations, and including DNA damage - which could impact human life forever." 

 

Imagine the FCC continues to ignore at least half the science.
Say the chance was 50/50 that even as we speak
non-thermal pulsed microwaves/radiofrequencies were damaging your
family members' DNA, interrupting their heart and neurological function,
stunting fetal brains, shrinking children's cognitive abilities,
seeding cancers, and basically destroying people's quality
and quantity of life through sleep problems, eye, sperm problems,
unnecessary biological anxiety/depression/nervousness/irritability,
unnecessary medicines they wouldn't have needed,
unnecessary chronic and unusual health problems.

Say the odds of harm were 50/50 and one day next year, or five years down the road
"they" found out that they were 99% WRONG.
Oops, says the FCC.
Oops, says the industry.
Oops oops says the healthcare system
that denied any problem,
Oh, no, say consumers
who were not warned
or did not listen when they were.

Since when is technology more important than life?
Since when is it "counterproductive" to protect the vulnerable?