Fears and evidence grow as roll-out looms
To keep up to date, go to: https://www.5gawareness.com/ ; to see a list of over 250 doctors and scientistsurgently calling on the UN and its sub-organizations, the WHO and UNEP, and all UN Member States, for greater health protection on EMF exposure, see: https://emfscientist.org/ .
WATCH: 5G Apocalypse – The Extinction Event
Plans for a pilot project to provide high-speed 5G wireless Internet in Brussels have been halted due to fears for the health of citizens, according to The Brussels Times (1/4/19).
‘I cannot welcome such technology if the radiation standards, which must protect the citizen, are not respected, 5G or not,’ it quotes Environment Minister Céline Fremault as saying. The Brussels region has particularly strict radiation standards for telecom applications of 6 volts per metre.
The Brussels action on 5G’s potential hazards contrasts markedly with the attitude of the British Government, typified by this highly ill-informed reply from Margot James, MP, from the Dept of Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, last October to a written question.
‘A considerable amount of research has been carried out on radio waves and we anticipate no negative effects on public health. The Government expects that existing UK technical standards will be adhered to throughout the development and deployment of 5G products and networks. These standards draw on the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection [ICNIRP], which takes into account the well-researched effects of radio waves.’ (Hansard, 16 Oct, 2018)
Her reply demonstrates the irresponsibility of the Government in considering only the much-criticised and discredited ICNIRP guidance, as exposed by Dr Erica Mallery-Blythe, founder of Physicians’ Health Initiative for Radiation and Environment (PHIRE) and Dr Andrew Tressider, both members of IGNIR (International Guidelines on Non-Ionising Radiation), which has developed a set of Guidelines for electromagnetic exposure that properly takes account of the huge body of evidence for non-thermal effects.
Current EMF safety limits in most Western countries are based on the view that only thermal (heating) effects can be a hazard to health, as reflected in ICNIRP’s safety limits, which only consider the effect of heating averaged over a six-minute period and completely ignore the large amount of research over the past 20 years establishing the reality of non-thermal hazards caused by EMFs. This, of course, suits many governments, including ours, which appear more interested in ensuring their continued tax revenue from the telecoms industry than they are in imposing tougher safety limits to protect the public.
ICNIRP is due to issue updated guidelines later this year but already, based on recent relaxing of limits in Finland, it seems likely to reduce its standards rather than tighten them, in view of recent comments by its chair, Eric van Rongen, who told The Telegraph (3/3/19) regarding 5G, ‘It is not set up as a public health experiment but of course you can consider it as such.’
EU Appeal to halt 5G
Fears about 5G radiation hazards have grown in recent years; in 2017 many scientists and doctors from 36 countries signed an EU Appeal asking the EU to halt the roll-out of 5G until independent research can show that the radiation will not harm especially infants, children, pregnant women, as well as the environment (Cad 97). Since then the number signing the Appeal has risen from 180 to 230 (www.5gappeal.eu).
In the UK Southampton, as well as areas of London, is one of the first cities to trial 5G, while a further 11 towns will go live later this year, some as early as May, including Birkenhead, Blackpool, Bournemouth, Guildford, Newbury, Portsmouth, Plymouth, Reading, Stoke-on-Trent, Warrington and Wolverhampton.
American Senate challenge
In the US in February a Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee hearing on the future of 5G wireless technology and their impact on people and the economy, Senator Richard Blumenthal highlighted concerns over the lack of any scientific research and data on the technology’s potential health risks, blasting the Federal Communications Commission and the FDA for failing to conduct any research into the safety of 5G.
Prof Martin Pall, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry, Washington State University, is a strong critic of 5G. He has published seven showing an exquisite sensitivity to EMFs in the voltage sensors in each cell, such that the force impacting these has massive impacts on the cell biology of our bodies.
He believes that many organisms will be even more impacted than humans, including insects and other arthropods, birds and small mammals and amphibia. He includes plants and trees because they have leaves and reproductive organs that are highly exposed. He predicts major ecological disasters due to 5G, including vast fires because EMF exposure make plants much more flammable.
Despite such warnings, five companies plan to launch thousands of low-and medium-orbit satellites, although a vigorous appeal to the UN, WHO, EU and governments of all nations aims to halt such plans (www.5gspaceappeal.org), currently with over 63,300 signatories from 168 countries. Unless they are stopped, millions of new 5G base stations on Earth and 20,000 new satellites in space, an estimated 200 billion transmitting objects, will be part of the ‘Internet of Things’ by 2020, creating chronic, inescapable radiation.
Green Party initiative
As far as political parties, the only action seems to be from some alert Green Party members who have proposed a Motion for the Party’s conference in June calling for an urgent moratoriumon 5G until independent research is conducted on its potential hazards. If adopted, the Green Party will be the first UK party to oppose the imminent roll-out of 5G. Members can back the Motion via: https://tinyurl.com/5G-Morat .
Other groups are trying to alert people: Powerwatch has warned about EMFs for decades; ES-UK issues a very comprehensive newsletter of latest developments; more recent groups like www.5gexposed.com keep people well up to date, while in Gateshead campaigner Mark Steele is in legal action with his local council, accusing them of surreptitiously introducing 5G via the street lighting (www.saveusnow.org).
Neither Lloyd’s of London nor Swiss Re, one of the world’s biggest re-insurance companies, will underwrite liability policies for EM radiation due to the health risk.
You need to act now! Time is running out to protect yourself, your children, your animals, the bees and the countryside. Start by signing this petition for an independent enquiry into the health and safety risks of 5G; it needs 100K signatures by 3 June to trigger a debate in Parliament: http://tinyurl.com/y53ktkco . Make it happen!
ICNIRP (International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) and their AGNIR (Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation) 2012 biased report.
Read Dr Sarah Starkey’s critical exposure of the report in her paper (which is open access), criticising the omission of contradictory research, lack of recognition of non-thermal hazards, and general bias and lack of balance:
https://cdn.website-editor.net/2479f24c54de4c7598d60987e3d81157/files/uploaded/reveh-2016-0060.pdf
For a good discussion of ICNIRP’s conflicts of interest: https://betweenrockandhardplace.wordpress.com/2019/05/31/leszczynski-brief-opinion-on-5g-and-health/