PICTURE: Colin Gibson

Responses to the article were posted on the Hastings Independent Press website and can be read in full there. They came from individual readers, scientists, health professionals and from the industry.

“Finally, some actual debate! If people want this untested technology in their homes that’s one thing but individuals cannot escape ever increasing strength WiFi without drastic and incredibly expensive measures. Gosh. Truth in journalism… Whatever next?” Robin Doyle

“People need to be aware of what is coming and unite in demanding safety testing before allowing it to be installed. I think we should ask our mobile providers what their policy is on 5G and vote with our feet – maybe there is a provider out there who is not going to be jumping on the 5G wagon.” Carolyn Stevens

“Great article, thank you. It is so important to raise awareness of the risks of 5G, as sadly it seems that our government is not taking health concerns seriously, and is rolling out 5G without information and without getting consent from people. I work in the mental health profession, and I am very concerned about the reported effects 5G radiation can have on people, including their mental health.” Marijke Roberts

These views were not shared by one correspondent who posted under what we assume to be a pseudonym – Ida Lovelace. (Ada Lovelace was a Victorian Mathematician involved in developing the first ever computer). The comment from Ida Lovelace dismisses health concerns as ‘myth’ and counters that 5G might bring health benefits through increased technology in medicine and remote diagnostics. Lovelace writes:

“The article suggests that the frequencies used by 5G are carcinogenic. As the American Cancer Society points out, cell-phone towers use non-ionising radiation, which means …’they do not directly damage the DNA inside cells, which is how stronger (ionizing) types of radiation such as x-rays, gamma rays, and ultraviolet (UV) light are thought to be able to cause cancer.” Ida Lovelace

The article did not actually suggest that 5G is carcinogenic because no long-term health studies have been done using this technology. It did however refer to studies showing harmful effects (including DNA damage) from non-ionising radiation. 5G will use different technology: ultra high frequency, high intensity millimetre and sub-millimetre waves. Human experiments in this field has been carried out by the military, resulting in the development of crowd control devices. Recent research shows 5G waves interact with human eyes and skin and our sweat ducts act as antenna for 5G frequencies.

In December 2018 The Lancet medical journal published a paper warning that regulations controlling our radiation exposure are outdated, set in the 1990s with “the belief that only acute thermal effects are hazardous.” This has long been shown to be wrong. Regulations have not been updated, leaving them woefully inadequate to protect our health. 

Alasdair Philips is an expert in the field of electromagnetic research. He is Scientific Director of Powerwatch, an organisation working with government, business and universities which informs about biological effects of electromagnetic field exposure and promotes policies for a safer environment. He described our piece as:

 “An excellent, well-researched article. It is good to know that there is still some professional journalistic reporting of important issues – especially regarding our health and well-being.” Alasdair Philips

This comment and others were in stark contrast to Lovelace’s conclusion that the article was “biased, badly researched, misleading and contained many factual inaccuracies.” ‘She’ continues:

“The Bioinitiative Report, on which the article relies for most of its bogus authenticity, was self-published online, and was criticised for its bias and lack of balance.  The European Commission’s EMF-NET coordination group for investigating the impact of electromagnetic fields on health attacked the report’s lack of balance.” Ida Lovelace

In fact the Bioinitiative Report reviewed around 2,000 peer-reviewed studies of electro magnetic radiation effects. The report concluded, “existing standards for public safety are completely inadequate.” It’s worth noting that the above-mentioned EMF-NET group, which criticised the Bioinitiative Report, has itself been heavily criticised. An official complaint has been lodged with the European Ombudsman by 39 NGOs. They write: “In a field where alarming scientific evidence is accumulating” the EU has appointed an expert group “largely biased towards a pro industrial scientific viewpoint,”. 

In response to Lovelace’s comments we received one from Eileen O’Connor, Director of Radiation Research (radiationresearch.org). 

“It appears, Ida Lovelace, that you are defending economic interests as opposed to the human rights of tens of millions of people who are now ill as a result of exposure to RF radiation or about to be exposed to untested and unregulated 5G masts near their homes, work place, schools etc. This is a global issue with unparalleled amounts of money and power from industry.”

“One of the world’s leading insurance providers Swiss Re has recently rated 5G a ’high impact‘ risk. Who will indemnify UK citizens against 5G personal injuries or reduced property values? Will the UK Government allow installation of untested and unregulated technology?”Eileen O’Connor

A comment from Anna Watson referred to the halting of 5G in Brussels over radiation concerns. She quotes Environment Minister Céline Fremault as saying: 

“I cannot welcome such technology if the radiation standards, which must protect the citizen, are not respected, 5G or not … the people of Brussels are not guinea pigs whose health I can sell at a profit.” Anna Watson

During the 2016 US Presidential elections the Greens’ candidate Jill Stein entered the WiFi debate. Stein, a Harvard trained physician, said she was the only candidate “not poisoned by corporate money”. She was heavily criticised for expressing concern over children’s exposure to WiFi. She stated “Over 200 scientific experts… have called for more research into the health effects of radiation from devices like cellphones and WiFi, especially on developing children.” 

And money is of course central to the story. As an indicator of where this is all going Wealth Daily asks “Are You Ready for the 5g Bull Market?” 

“…an incredible profit opportunity for investors, with the global 5G market forecast to reach $251 billion by 2025.” 

(secure.wealthdaily.com/189635)

WiFi World Tour

France
• 2011 French Cell Phone Statute: Manufacturers must display SAR Radiation levels for all phone models. Phones may not be marketed for children under 14.
• 2015  WiFi banned from nursery schools and must be be turned off in elementary schools when not in use. Cellphone ads must recommend protective headsets.
• The French National Library along with some other libraries and universities has removed all Wi-Fi networks.

Belgium 
• Public Health Regulations issued in 2013 restrict sale and advertising of mobile phones to children.
• Ghent banned Wi-Fi in pre-schools and day care.
• Phones now carry health warnings to use in moderation and use an ear piece.
• Information on radiation levels must be available at point of phone sales.

Spain 
• The Parliament of Navarra recommended the removal of WiFi from schools and urged a review of current exposure limits to incorporate the precautionary principle.

Israel 
• The Ministry of Education now requires schools to test radiation levels.
• WiFi banned in preschool up to 2nd grade and restricted in third and fourth grade classes to 3 hours per week.

5G SPY NETWORKS?
5G is the latest development in wireless communication. We’re promised faster Internet with greater capacity.

Thousands of experimental licenses have already been handed out around the world. The UK lined up Chinese company Huawei to bring us the new technology but this proved highly controversial. UK security chiefs have expressed concern that the 5G networks could enable cyber attacks and espionage. Governments in Australia, New Zealand and the USA have already blocked Huawei apparently due to similar fears.

The potential security risk has been widely reported but it isn’t the only problem with 5G. The journey from 1G to 4G has left us immersed in a dense but invisible electrosmog. 5G will dramatically increase our exposure. Cell towers and WiFi devices subject us to regular dosing of radio frequency electromagnetic radiation, RF EMFs. We can’t see it, but the evidence of harm is now overwhelming.

PICTURE: Colin Gibson

DAILY ZAP
In 2012 the Bioinitiative Working Group of international scientists and public health experts investigated 1,800 recent studies of EMF health risks.  They produced evidence of carcinogenicity and neurotoxicity in both humans and animals, reduction of melatonin and other free-radical scavengers, serious damage to human and animal sperm, DNA damage including loss of DNA repair mechanisms in human stem cells. EMF exposure in young animals resulted in abnormal behaviour. Exposure during pregnancy resulted in abnormal bone and brain development.

The researchers observe that biological changes occur within minutes of exposure to mobile phone masts, Wifi and smart meters. Long-term exposures can result in disrupted metabolism and reproductive function. In other words, constant daily zapping with EMFs can cause our vital systems to fail.

5G ELECTRO-BLANKET 
Current systems operate within the microwave part of the spectrum, but this wavelength is now saturated with our communication technology. 5G will occupy millimeter and sub-millimeter waves. These very short, dense waves will carry far more data but are easily obstructed by buildings and trees. In order for this system to work, vast numbers of mini-cells will be installed. We will still have the current masts but the new cells will be installed en masse, on lampposts and buildings. This will mean 24/7 exposure to EMFs of ultra-high frequency and intensity. 

The 5G proponents talk of plans to ‘blanket the Earth’ and they’re not exaggerating. Not only will there be billions of 5G cells on the planet but the intention is to beam waves from satellites in space. Telecom companies plan to launch an initial 20,000 satellites. They will emit powerful, focused beams, creating a mesh of wireless radiation surrounding the planet.

ELECTRIFRIED
The technology behind 5G came from US military research into non-lethal weaponised crowd control. When beamed at a crowd, the rays caused an intolerable burning sensation. These devices use millimetre waves in the 96GHz range, which penetrate the outer layer of the skin. Prolonged exposure causes radiation burns. Hopefully 5G is not going to
burn our skin, but it will expose us to wireless radiation on an unprecedented scale.  

THE OPPOSITION
For many scientists and doctors 5G is an experiment too far. Organised opposition to increasing EMF exposure has been on-going for years albeit with minimal media coverage. More than 3,000 physicians
from around the world signed a Doctors’ Appeal in 2012 warning of the risks of WiFi devices and calling for a halt to expansion of wireless technology.

In 2015, 247 scientists involved in the study of health effects from EMFs launched the International EMF Scientist Appeal. Signatories from 41 countries stated that agencies responsible for safety standards had failed to protect the public and ‘particularly children who are more vulnerable to EMF.’ The appeal was addressed to the World Health Organization and the United Nations.

They observed that there were more than 10,000 peer-reviewed studies showing harm to human health from low levels of EMFs. Effects were numerous and included altered heart rhythm, memory loss and learning problems, hyperactivity, neurological damage, miscarriage, and damage to both sperm and DNA.

Also, in 2018 the International Society of Doctors for Environment called for a standstill on 5G roll out by private phone companies until there was adequate involvement by health and environment agencies. They refer to a 2016 EU document describing 5G as a partnership between member states and industry. The EU paper promised experimental 5G in Europe by 2018 and full scale roll out by 2020 at latest.

THE INTERNET OF THINGS
The International Appeal ‘Stop 5G on Earth and in Space’ has now been signed by over 91,000 people from 168 countries. Signatories include environmental organisations and thousands of scientists and doctors. They state “5G will massively increase exposure to RF radiation…proven harmful for humans and the environment.” By 2020, millions of 5G base stations, 20,000 new space satellites and an estimated 200 billion transmitting objects will form the ‘Internet of Things’

Our homes will be full of objects emitting and receiving RF radiation, ‘smart’ stuff with embedded technology, from washing machines to babies’ nappies. Within a few years there will be an estimated trillion radiating things in the IOT. Satellites will ensure no area of the planet remains untouched by wireless radiation.

WHO CARES?
Around the world there is a furious backlash over issues of health and environment posed by increasing RF radiation exposure associated with 5G. What are governments doing to protect us?

In France a new law requires ‘Transparency, Information and Consultation for Exposure to Electromagnetic Waves’. WiFi devices are banned in nurseries and day care. Mobile phone manufacturers must recommend devices to protect the head. Compensation of people with electromagnetic sensitivity has begun and a judge in Toulouse has ruled that people with EM sensitivity may refuse smart meters.

In Brussels in April this year, 5G plans were halted by environment minister Celine Fremault. She stated “The people of Brussels are not guinea pigs whose health I can sell at a profit.” She was supported by 160 doctors signing the Belgian ‘Hippocrates Electrosmog Appeal’.

In Switzerland the roll out has begun amidst huge opposition. Moratorium demands are being filed almost every day. Geneva has requested that WHO investigate independent studies to determine the potential harmful effects of 5G.

In the UK we heard little of 5G until recent cabinet leaks. There is still no discussion of health and environment concerns. The job of UK health minister has been given to Matt Hancock, last year’s Digital Minister. Computerweekly.com described him as “first Cabinet minister with a digital background, …keen to impress…the tech sector that he’s on their side.” As health minister he maintains that approach by pushing for more IT technology in the NHS. But following his talk to the Royal Society he was accused of making “frankly ridiculous” claims and having “an astonishing level of ignorance”.

Is Hancock the Digital Dynamo really the best person to defend our health during the roll out of 5G? The government is currently relaxing safety standards in preparation for 5G. This means that last year’s radiation overexposure could become this year’s ‘perfectly safe.’ Phone companies will be able to say that exposures ‘remain within regulations’. All part of the government’s stated ambition to be a global leader in 5G.

Click here for further information about Stop 5G.

SOURCES FOR 5G RESEARCH 

https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-06-25/debates/7D18471E-627A-41C4-B338-11F278CEA9B7/ElectromagneticFieldsHealthEffects

https://www.blumenthal.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/at-senate-commerce-hearing-blumenthal-raises-concerns-on-5g-wireless-technologys-potential-health-risks

https://interestingengineering.com/the-danger-of-5g-5th-generation-cellular-technology-might-be-a-threat-to-public-health

https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/docs/aboutus.asp

https://www.saferemr.com/2018/10/powerwatchlist.html

https://medium.com/swlh/ir-saunas-and-5g-comparing-emf-exposure-2451166bf6d8

https://medium.com/swlh/demystifying-emf-a3091b5f9d6d

https://bioinitiative.org/table-of-contents/

https://bioinitiative.org/participants/why-we-care/https://es-ireland.com/

https://www.buglife.org.uk/news-and-events/news/could-our-obsession-with-mobile-technology-destroy-wildlife

https://parentsandconcernedcitizensagainst5g.com/william-wragg-mp-research-group/