5G antennas are popping up all across the United States, and a significant number of people are growing increasingly concerned over the long-term health effects of the high-speed communications technology. Unfortunately, it appears as though their trepidations are falling on deaf ears.
5G technology is alluring in that it offers download speeds up to 30 times faster than 4G. It is touted as the technology necessary for self-driving vehicles. Gaia.com elaborates,
The difference between 4G and 5G in terms of gigahertz, the unit of alternating current (AC) or electromagnetic (EM) waves that affect the transmission speeds of devices, is significant. 5G technology promises radio millimeter bands in the 30 to 300 GHz range, while 4G tops out at around 6GHz. When applied to video latency, this translates to speeds up to 60 to 120 times faster.
Lawmakers are anxious to see the new technology rolled out in their cities. CBS News reports Sacramento was one of the first cities in the nation to launch 5G under the leadership of Mayor Darrell Steinberg in 2017, but residents have voiced concerns over the public safety of the new technology.
Sacramento parents Aaron and Hannah McMahon, who have two young daughters, told CBS they had a 5G cell antenna on a pole just outside of their home. According to Aaron, experts have told him that his family is virtually “living in a microwave” with the tower so close to their residence.
“It’s scary, it’s a hard situation to be in,” Hannah McMahon said. “They can’t tell me that something that’s fairly new, and relatively untested, is not gonna be harmful in 10-15 years.”
And the McMahons are not alone. Homeowners in cities throughout the country are leading petitions to stop 5G construction in their neighborhoods, citing public health fears.
In an effort to assuage concerns, Sacramento commissioned an independent study on the safety of the 5G towers led by University of California Davis Professor Jerrold Bushberg.
Bushberg claims the towers emit “very low levels of exposure” and therefore do not pose a health threat. He adds the FCC sets guidelines for exposure to cell signals, and the exposure from the 5G antennas is well within the safe level.
But skeptical Americans do not necessarily find relief in that assessment. After all, the Food and Drug Administration frequently approves drugs later proven to cause serious long-term health consequences.
It’s worth noting the former chair of the FCC, Tom Wheeler, who was behind the big push for 5G technology, was also the former head of the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA), the vast telecoms lobby group. Current FCC Chairman Ajit Pai is also a proponent of 5G technology, and has even dismissed claims that the technology could interfere with weather observations, despite the studies in support of those observations. Pai has close ties to the telecommunications industry as a former Verizon lawyer. Is there a possible conflict of interest there?
While Dr. Bushberg could be completely correct in his assessment of 5G, the science is anything but settled. More than 200 scientists in more than 40 countries have warned about 5G’s health risks and have asked the European Union to follow “Resolution 1815 of the Council of Europe” — which asks the Council of Europe to take all measures to reduce exposure to electromagnetic fields and create an independent task force to reassess the health risks of the exposure. Those scientists declared in the “5G Appeal” to the EU:
We, the undersigned scientists, recommend a moratorium on the roll-out of the fifth generation, 5G, until potential hazards for human health and the environment have been fully investigated by scientists independent from industry. 5G will substantially increase exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) … and has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment.
They explain that because the technology is poorly transmitted through solid materials, it will require new antennas nearly every 10 to 12 houses in urban areas, significantly increasing EMF exposure. According to opponents of 5G, some potential effects of this exposure can include cancer, genetic damages, reproductive issues, cognitive and neurological disorders, to name just a few.
The National Toxicology Program (NTP) conducted a $25 million U.S. study and found a significant increase in the incidence of brain and heart cancer in animals exposed to EMF below the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines followed by most nations and significantly lower than the levels created by 5G technology.
Dr. Ron Powell is a retired U.S. Government physicist who has worked with this technology in the military, and has been an outspoken critic of 5G technology. He has claimed it “would irradiate everyone, including the most vulnerable to harm from radiofrequency radiation: pregnant women, unborn children, young children … the elderly, the disabled, and the chronically ill…. It would set a goal of irradiating all environments.”
While 5G has certainly not been “proven” to be harmful to the general population, since it is just now being implemented, it appears that concerns over 5G’s health risks are not unfounded. But what has been Sacramento’s response to concerned citizens such as the McMahons? It will make sure the FCC rules are followed and the cells are aesthetically pleasing, CBS Sacramento reports.
Emf Sensitivity Test, Emf Shield Test, Emf Test, Emf Test Meter, Emf Test Power Line, Emf Test Results, Emf Test Standard, Emf Testing Certification, Shungite Emf Test, Test Emf Your Home
Sprint was forced to shut down a cellphone tower that was located outside of a school in the suburbs of Sacramento, California. The tower location became a topic of controversy in recent years, as numerous children in the school have developed cancer.
At least 4 students at a San Joaquin County elementary school have gotten cancer since the cell tower was installed, and after a while, many of the parents began pointing the finger at Sprint.
Monica Ferrulli, the mother of one of the children diagnosed with cancer, says that her son’s doctors have indicated that this specific type of cancer is caused by something the patient was exposed to in their environment.
“We had a doctor tell us that it’s 100 percent environmental, the kind of tumor that he has,” Ferrulli told CBS Sacramento.
“It is classified as a possible carcinogen. That tells us that there is some evidence out there,” Ferrulli said. “We’re not naive to the fact that there could be other components out there — other environmental influences… but the bottom line that we feel in regards to this tower is it doesn’t belong there… if there’s any indications that it’s unsafe,” Ferrulli added.
Joe Prime, another parent who now has a child battling cancer as well, says that the towers need to go before more people are exposed.
“My son missed growing up with his friends. My son lost all of his hair. It’s not something that I wish on anybody to watch their child go through what our children have gone through,” Prime said.
Initially, the school district was hesitant to call off their deal with Sprint, but Prime and Ferrulli were able to apply enough legal pressure on them to get the tower removed.
Parents were also upset that Sprint provided the school district with a kickback of $2,000 per month for allowing the tower on their property.
Experts say that regardless of federal standards, it is dangerous to have young children by in such close proximity to these devices on such a regular basis.
Eric Windheim, an electromagnetic radiation specialist, says that these frequencies can have an effect on the cells of children because they are still growing and developing.
“I wouldn’t send my kids there at all, it absolutely is dangerous. Children are still developing, and their cells are still being divided. It’s the worst possible time in their life to be exposed. Instead of only going 300 yards like regular Wi-Fi, Y-Max can go 30 miles,” he said.
Sprint network project manager Dharma Nordell told CBS News that three tests have shown the tower is operating 100 times below the federal limit. Nordell said that the tower was removed because of the concerns of the residents, but when asked if he believed that the tower was giving people cancer, he replied “Absolutely not. It is not a safety concern to the community but we do hear the community’s concerns, so we’re quickly working to relocate the tower.”
John Vibes is an author and journalist who takes a special interest in the counter culture, and focuses solutions-oriented approaches to social problems. He is also a host of The Free Your Mind Conference and The Free Thought Project Podcast. Read More stories by John Vibes
In normal Whidbey life, the typical exposure of a child or adult to high-frequency, wildly pulsing, invisible, strong electromagnetic fields (EMF) is everyday common.
We walk and sit through millions of times more EMF than occurred in our environment just 10 years ago, when the iPhone debuted. EMF sources, wifi, cell phones, computers, bluetooth, “smart” machines and toys, etc. Many persons don’t seem to feel it at all, some feel mysteriously fatigued at odd times, some have chronic sleep problems, others even experience unexplained nosebleeds, mood swings and anxiety — some even elusive buzzing in the head.
Called “EMS,” for electromagnetic sensitivity, very prominent effects afflict perhaps 10 percent of the population, by many estimates. Exposures are cumulative, so many others still have these symptoms in their futures. Like with second-hand smoke, asbestos, mercury/lead, radon, and various chemicals in earlier times, and even today, industry now denies there is any health effect from all the radiation of our electronic toys.
Yet, there are now literally thousands of research projects, many peer-reviewed, in the last 10 years that confirm that there are mechanisms in our cells that respond adversely to this radiation. However, our industry-captured Federal Communications Commission, using an antiquated 1996 criterion related only to heating effects, pronounces that all of this is safe. A group on Whidbey Island, of which I am one founding member, C.L.E.A.R., which stands for Citizen League Encouraging Awareness of Radiation, held an event recently and showed a well-regarded and well-produced video summary of the EMF problem. It has special concern for our youths who are drenching themselves at home and school with strong electronic waves in their laps and at their ears and surroundings.
Called “Generation Zapped,” it also gives many simple remedies that can be used to cut exposure to a fraction of the usual.
“Sacramento will be the first city in the country to get 5G cell service later this summer, but health concerns are now being raised about the equipment.
5G uses high frequency waves and is supposed to be 100 times faster than the current cell phone service. However, the 5G waves don’t travel as far as current wireless frequencies so instead of large cell phone tower equipment spread far apart, the 5G requires small cell sites closer together.”
“Firefighters in San Francisco have reported memory problems and confusion after the 5G equipment was installed outside of fire stations. The firefighters claim the symptoms stopped when they relocated to stations without equipment nearby.”
People suspect the 5G frequencies will cause problems having to do with oxygen. It was said by Joe Imbriano, an activist and researcher from Fullerton, California that when 5G reaches the frequency band of 60 GHz, the ability for a person’s blood hemoglobin to bind with oxygen will be damaged.
Researching his claims, they start to add up although it is difficult to confirm the thing about oxygen and hemoglobin. This article from an accredited website about radio frequencies called “Everything RF” is titled “Why is the 60 GHz Band not good for long-range communications?”
It reports that oxygen does in fact absorb 60 GHz frequencies at an extreme level, representing a spike of absorption ability, when you see how different frequencies on the millimeter spectrum interact with oxygen. However, the graph is talking about high altitudes and the atmosphere. One would assume 5G interacts with oxygen in a similar way at our altitude.
(Image credit: EverythingRF)
So Joe Imbriano was correct to say 60 GHz 5G will be absorbed by oxygen in an intense way.
Doesn’t that mean, just by common sense that the oxygen in our bodies, the oxygen we breathe and depend on would be saturated with 60 GHz frequencies? Doesn’t that mean our bodies will conduct the 5G like antennas?
Furthermore, wouldn’t our bodies acting as potent antennae for 60 GHz frequencies cause us all kinds of health problems? Where would we even escape to get away from them, if they saturate all major cities with this?
5G’s likely ill health effects can be divided into several categories.
Skin Problems
An Israeli study led by Dr. Yuri D Feldman on 5G frequencies found that they cause human sweat ducts to behave strangely. The study reports that human sweat ducts act as an array of very small, helix-shaped antennas when exposed to millimeter waves. That implies the human body could be even more conductive of it.
A study on that particularly feared 5G frequency of 60 GHz, referenced by the Center for Public Integrity concluded that “more than 90% of the transmitted (MMWs) power is absorbed in the epidermis and dermis layer.” It’s not going to be good for the skin, it would appear.
Heart Problems
A study from 1992 reported that frequencies in the higher 5G spectrum, ranging from 53-78GHz impacted the heart rate variability in rats. In other words, higher spectrum 5G could probably cause heart arrhythmia in humans. Another Russian study on frogs whose skin was exposed to these millimeter waves found that they cause heart arrhythmia.
Eye Problems
In 1994, a study was carried out in Poland to determine whether or not millimeter radiation impacted the eye’s transmission of light through its lens. They found that low level millimeter wave radiation produced lens opacity in rats: associated with cataracts forming.
So 5G could cause human beings to develop eye problems and cataracts, it would seem. This one is difficult to find a copy of, although the academic citation for it can be found at “Chernyakov, GM and Korochkin, VL and Babenko, AP and Bigdai E. Reactions of biological systems of various complexity to the action of low-level EHF radiation No Title. Millim Waves Med Biol. 1989; 1: 141–167.”
In addition, a Japanese experiment was conducted to see whether or not the feared 60 GHz frequency band could cause ocular problems. It found that “millimeter-wave antennas can cause thermal injuries of varying types of levels. The thermal effects induced by millimeter waves can apparently penetrate below the surface of the eye.”
This one is also difficult to find, but can be found at the academic citation “Kojima M, Hanazawa M, Yamashiro Y, Sasaki H, Watanabe S, Taki M, Suzuki Y, Hirata A, Kamimura Y, Sasaki K. ACUTE OCULAR INJURIES CAUSED BY 60-GHZ MILLIMETER-WAVE EXPOSURE. Health Phys [Internet]. 2009 [cited 2018 Mar 19]; 97: 212–8. doi: 10.1097/HP.0b013e3181abaa57.”
Immune problems
A 2002 Russian study that set out to explore the effects of 42 GHz frequencies determined that when healthy mice were exposed to them, they had a drastic reduction of activity with cells involved with immunity: about 50%.
In other words, 42 GHz frequencies, close to the middle of the 5G spectrum, cause mice to suffer from immune system problems.
They concluded: “the whole-body exposure of healthy mice to low-intensity EHF EMR has a profound effect on the indices of nonspecific immunity.”
A detailed, complex looking but not impossible to understand study was published in 2010, about the very same frequencies Verizon is currently deploying: directly in the middle of the current Verizon 5G spectrum at 35 GHz.
The study was titled“Protein Changes in Macrophages Induced by Plasma From Rats Exposed to 35 GHz Milimeter Waves.” Guess what, it came from Texas based US Air Force Research Laboratories, and associated entities.
The study reads: “In agreement with this, prior studies conducted by our laboratory showed intravascular aggregation of leukocytes and upregulation of genes associated with immune cell recruitment and activation in the skin of rats at 6 and 24 h after exposure to 35 GHz MMWs at 75 mW/cm2until colonic temperature reached 41–428C [Millenbaugh et al., 2008]. Previous investigations also indicate that sustained MMW exposure can cause heating of internal tissues, presumably due to thermal conduction, and effects inperipheral blood cells and tissues distal to the initial siteof energy absorption.
A series of experiments performed in rats demonstrated that exposure to 35 GHz MMWs at 75 mW/cm2 for approximately 44–80 min produced elevations in skin and colonic temperatures and changes in heart rate, respiration rate, and blood pressure, with eventual circulatory collapse [Frei et al.,1995; Kalns et al., 2000; Millenbaugh et al., 2006].
In addition, increased levels of the oxidative stress marker, 3-nitrotyrosine (3-NT), were detected in peripheral blood lymphocytes and neutrophils of rats exposed to 35 GHz MMWs at 75 mW/cm2 for 44–60 min until body core temperature reached 41–428C [Kalns et al.,2000]. Based on these results, we hypothesized that 35 GHz MMWs can elicit the release of biologically active mediators into the systemic circulation leading todownstream responses in cells and tissues.The ability to elicit effects in immune cells has also been observed for other MMW frequencies”
So the exact frequencies Verizon just unleashed are known by even the US military, to cause an increase of proteins associated with inflammation, oxidative stress, and energy metabolism. Heating of internal tissues, that’s what the US military institutions admit 5G will cause.
Let’s back away from the research real quick and think about this with some common sense. We’re composed of water and oxygen, and we breathe oxygen. Oxygen is all around us. It shouldn’t take much more scientific information to suspect that frequencies known to be extremely interactive with oxygen would cause health problems in mammals, or even other life forms.
They bill it as being a revolution in technology, but those risks simply seem to outweigh the benefits.
According to GreenMedInfo, who published a very well sourced article about 5G, 180 scientists and doctors have called for a moratorium on 5G, understanding it will be hazardous to human health.
At this point, it doesn’t look like anyone is going to stop it. Now, all we can do is write articles like this, and hand them out to whoever cares on the street.
Sacramento is saturated with 5G now, and for the first three months people can use it for free: but nothing good is ever free.
Sources:
Sacramento CBS (https://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2018/05/29/questions-raised-about-5g-health-risks-months-before-sacramento-launches-service/)
Research Gate / Feldman Y, Puzenko A, Ben Ishai P, Caduff A, Agranat AJ. Human Skin as Arrays of Helical Antennas in the Millimeter and Submillimeter Wave Range. Phys Rev Lett [Internet]. 2008 [cited 2018 Mar 19]; 100: 128102. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.128102. (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51394628_Human_Skin_as_Arrays_of_Helical_Antennas_in_the_Millimeter_and_Submillimeter_Wave_Range)
US Military / “Protein Changes in Macrophages Induced by Plasma From Rats Exposed to 35 GHz Milimeter Waves” (http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a533666.pdf)
The Center for Public Integrity(https://www.publicintegrity.org/2018/03/02/21502/residents-worried-about-small-cell-safety-have-been-waiting-years-federal-guidance)
PubMed / Kolomytseva MP, Gapeev AB, Sadovnikov VB, Chemeris NK. Suppression of nonspecific resistance of the body under the effect of extremely high frequency electromagnetic radiation of low intensity. Biofizika [Internet]. 2002 [cited 2018 Mar 19]; 47: 71–7. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11855293)
PubMed / Potekhina IL, Akoev GN, Enin LD, Oleĭner VD. The effect of low-intensity millimeter-range electromagnetic radiation on the cardiovascular system of the white rat]. Fiziol Zh SSSR Im I M Sechenova [Internet]. 1992 [cited 2018 Mar 19]; 78: 35–41. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1330714)
We put tinfoil on our windows to stop cellphone signals – and it didn’t work
Jan Vermeulen
Concern over the effects of electromagnetic fields is not new, and those fearful of the potential negative consequences of extended exposure have long used aluminium foil to try and mitigate the effects.
Using tinfoil hats is one method people have used to attempt to block radio waves and their electromagnetic radiation from reaching the brain.
The proliferation of cellular networks has raised similar concerns, with the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a specialised agency in the World Health Organisation, recently classifying radio frequency radiation as a possible human carcinogen.
It explained that the classification means that a causal association between radio frequency radiation and cancer is considered credible, but chance, bias or confounding can’t be ruled out with reasonable confidence.
Earlier this year, researchers from the Ramazzini Institute in Italy showed that rats exposed to cellular radiation developed brain and heart tumours.
However, despite exposing rats to a high dose of radiation for extended periods, the increase in occurrence of tumours was not statistically significant.
Researchers explained that findings such as these do indicate that further research into a possible link between cellphone signals and cancer is needed.
From tinfoil hats to tinfoil windows
Aside from potential cancer concerns, some people have reported that cellular signals have impacted their health in other ways — from headaches to mood swings.
At the end of 2016, residents of the Durban neighbourhood Glenmore said that they were suffering from short tempers, aggressive pets, and sleepless nights because of a new cellphone tower in the area.
Residents said they were “hoodwinked” into believing that the mast was put up for CCTV cameras, only to find that no cameras had been installed and MTN logos were on the tower instead.
One resident covered his bedroom windows in tinfoil, and reported that this improved the disrupted sleeping patterns he had been experiencing as a result of the tower.
Curiously, the city council said at the time that the tower was not active yet. The ill effects residents said they were feeling could therefore not be as a result of radio frequency radiation from the new tower.
This was not the first time residents of a neighbourhood complained about negative effects on their health, despite the fact that the tower they were complaining about was switched off.
To see if there is any merit to trying to block wireless signals by covering your windows in tinfoil, I repeated the experiment in my own home.
Results
Before covering my room’s window with aluminium foil, I measured the strength of the signal my phone was receiving.
The phone was connected to the Telkom mobile network, which is well-suited for a test like this, as Telkom has not been assigned any low-frequency spectrum to use in its mobile network.
Lower radio frequency spectrum lets cellular network providers cover a larger area with a single tower, and offer greater indoor penetration.
While Vodacom, MTN, and Cell C have spectrum assignments in the 900MHz band, the lowest frequency spectrum Telkom has to work with is around double that frequency — in the 1,800MHz band.
For the duration of this test, my phone remained connected to Telkom’s LTE and LTE-Advanced network, which runs on the operator’s 1,800MHz and 2,300MHz spectrum assignments.
Signal strength was measured using the MyBroadband Speed Test app. It reports the strength of the signal as seen by the Android operating system, in dBm.
Measurements were taken with the door open, closed, and with foil on the window.
Door open: –110dBm to –106dBm
Door closed: –110dBm to –106dBm
Foil on window: –110dBm to –106dBm
There was no perceptible difference in signal strength after the window was covered in foil.
This is to be expected. Even if foil reflected or absorbed the radio frequency signals used by cellular networks, such signals do not seek openings to reach your phone.
It is unlikely that covering your windows in foil will have any significant effect on the strength of the signal in your home, as it can simply penetrate the walls that surround those windows.
To truly block out the signals from a cellphone tower, you would have to construct a Faraday shield or cage of some kind but, as we previously discovered, that is easier said than done.
WASHINGTON, Sept. 24, 2018 /PRNewswire/ — Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers To Infrastructure Investment Order will be voted on Wednesday by FCC denying citizens and local government the right to stop 5G cell tower transmitters in front of their homes.
Despite widespread opposition to the roll out of 5G cell tower transmitters by residences, communities and local governments (National League of Cities Oppose, National Resource Defense Council opposes), FCC vote will override local measures to stop 5G cell transmitters in their communities.
More than 230 medical doctors and scientists from 40 countries expert in wireless radiation health effects have signed a formal appeal demanding a moratorium on the roll out of 5G due to the fact that wireless radiation “RF-EMF has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment” see www.5Gappeal.eu. Yet the FCC will be voting for an order that circumvents the consideration of environmental and health effects on a local level.
5G technology will emit millimeter wave radiation. The Army has reviewed 350 millimeter wave studies and cited nonthermal biological effects not protected by our current thermally based FCC guidelines-see www.5Ginformation.net for a copy of this report as well as other studies showing neurological and cancerous effects from current cell towers-see evidence of harm section. The military currently uses millimeter wave technology in its Active Denial System, a crowd control weapon.
FCC and FDA do not premarket Safety Test any wireless device or cell tower transmitter before testing them on the public. FCC and FDA do not post-market survey wireless devices or cell tower transmitters for cancerous or neurological health effects. They rely on an outdated human exposure standard that only takes into account thermal heating or burning. Currently individuals are already Microwave Sick from wireless radiation exposure-see Webster’s Dictionary definition Microwave Sickness.
CA Brain Tumor Association joins health and environmental groups nationwide in asking the FCC to delay or end its insistence on passing the Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers To Infrastructure Investment Order WT Docket #NO. 17-79; WC Docket NO. 17-84 which will be harmful to the health of communities and disrespectfully dismisses the input of local communities and governments nationwide.
Please Contact Kevin Mottus Outreach Director CA Brain Tumor Association for more information at Kevin.calibta@gmail.com.
When it comes to cell phone towers, there is increasingly the perception that a family does not want to live next to one. There is good reason for this as the research on health effects shows.
The following articles, videos and studies relate to declining property values around cell tower installations. Start with this excellent, recent investigative piece by a San Francisco Bay Area journalist:
1.) 94% of people surveyed would not buy or rent a home next to a cell tower:
2.) Palo Alto community successfully stops a proposed AT&T cell tower at a Catholic church. They cite a 20% drop in property values in other communities. A very effective campaign for any neighborhood to model:
As you can see in this recently NY Times article, Palo Alto residents really don’t like having cell towers in their community (even though they are the cradle of wireless technology). What do these tech people know that the rest of the population doesn’t?
This community in Berkeley recently did the same thing. They flooded the planning commission with 187 pages of emails against the tower and the application was denied.
3.) Here is an excellent study in The Appraisal Journal that shows cell tower installations negatively impact property values.
4.) NY Times article on how realtors have a hard time selling homes next to cell towers:
11.) Community stops new DAS cell tower system from being installed based on concerns of property values declining (December 15, 2015):
This is a Distributed Antenna System (DAS) cell tower antenna. Cities like San Francisco are placing multiple antennas like this on every block, right in front of people’s homes. They may look innocent, but they are very powerful emitters of microwave radiation that can cause health effects for home owners.
Note: Communities all around the country are stopping cell towers in their tracks. I get emails every week about this. Here is one community in Colorado that stopped a major tower. Also, this community in Berkeley recently stopped a tower from being built. It can be done if you get your entire community involved. The wealthy community of Hillsborough, CA recently stopped 16 cell towers from being installed after citizen outrage over not being included in the planning process:
This article examines whether proximity to cellular phone towers has an impact
on residential property values and the extent of any impact. First, a survey approach is used to examine how residents perceive living near cellular phone base stations (CPBSs) and how residents evaluate the impacts of CPBSs.
Next, a market study attempts to confirm the perceived value impacts reported in the survey by analyzing actual property sales data. A multiple regression analysis in a hedonic pricing framework is used to measure the price impact of proximity to CPBSs. Both the survey and market sales analysis find that CPBSs have a negative impact on the prices of houses in the study areas.
5G antennas are 
In normal Whidbey life, the typical exposure of a child or adult to high-frequency, wildly pulsing, invisible, strong electromagnetic fields (EMF) is everyday common.
Concern over the effects of electromagnetic fields is not new, and those fearful of the potential negative consequences of extended exposure have long used aluminium foil to try and mitigate the effects.
WASHINGTON
