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
When the first evidence came in that smoking caused lung cancer… everyone was in denial.
The tobacco industry (who made lots of money off of people smoking) spent lots of money to cover up the evidence, and hired their own scientists to produce what’s now referred to as ‘Tobacco science”.
This deception worked for 50 years!
This is called the “Tobacco Playbook”.
Fast-forward to 1990’s where the evidence of harm got so overwhelming that the Tobacco companies finally got slammed.
Who were the real victims though?
The millions of people who were led to believe that something was safe (tobacco), when in reality, it really wasn’t…
People were dying — all because an industry was afraid to lose money.
The doctors in this scenario, who could have helped — they were misinformed too. Most of them even scoffed at the silly idea that tobacco could cause cancer.
Now, I know you’re saying: “Great Nick! What does this have to do with EMFs?”
Let’s look at the facts, shall we?
In 2011: EMFs from cell phones, wifi and Bluetooth are declared a Class 2B “Possible” carcinogen.
November 2018 (a few days ago!): EMFs are confirmed a Class 1 “Definite” carcinogen by the US $25 Million NTP study.
“Tobacco” and “Asbestos” are also confirmed as Class 1 “Definite” carcinogens.
We are exposed to 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 times higher amounts of EMFs than our ancestors.
EMFs have been linked with fatigue, sleep disturbance, lowered fertility, anxiety, depression, cancer, dizziness, memory loss, ADHD, and a slew of other symptoms and conditions.
When it comes to EMFs, it’s not either you smoke or you don’t smoke. EVERYONE is 2nd hand smoking.
This includes 4 year olds. A 2014 survey by the American Academy of Pediatrics has showed that 75% of 4-year olds possess their own cell phone!
The Telecommunications Industry is following the “Tobacco Playbook” to the letter, and it’s working like gangbusters.
This all can sound grim, but trust me that there’s light at the end of the tunnel…
We don’t have to all be 2nd hand smokers. We can demand safer technologies. We can win this battle.
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.
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.
A Mississauga mother says she is protesting the Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board (DPCDSB) so her son can go to school.
Paulette Rende’s goal is to raise awareness about electro-hypersensitivity (otherwise known as Wi-Fi injury) and the need for digital device safety in Ontario schools.
“It’s a bigger problem than people realize,” said Rende.
Her son Alex, 17, a student at St. Paul’s Secondary School in Mississauga, suffers from electro-hypersensitivity. She says he has a “broad spectrum of symptoms,” including: headaches, congestion, heart palpitations, anxiety and nausea.
“To the detriment of students and teachers, the provincial government has been that ostrich with its head in the sand, ignoring the glaring gaps in health and safety guidelines,” said Rende in a release.
According to Women’s College Hospital (WCH), electro-hypersensitivity is a condition that develops when people are exposed to non-ionizing radiation from electromagnetic fields, such as high-energy radio waves and microwaves.
Common sources include cellphones, baby monitors, cell towers, plasma televisions and Wi-Fi, says WCH. The hospital operates an Environmental Health Clinic (EHC), which is funded by the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, for people with chronic complex environmentally-linked conditions such as chronic fatigue syndrome, multiple chemical sensitivity and electromagnetic-hypersensitivity
Rende is hoping a change in provincial government will lead to changes in school policy. She says other school boards across the province are having the same issues with Wi-Fi injury.
“I’m here (protesting) at a local level,” Rende adds.
“We understand and are sensitive to the safety concerns some community members have regarding the use of wireless technology (Wi-Fi) in schools,” Bruce Campbell, the school board’s manager of communications and community relations, said in an email.
“The health and safety of our students and staff is paramount to us. As with all public health issues, we take direction from our public health agencies,” he added
The board began Wi-Fi installations in late 2012, and since then have conducted yearly tests to measure radio frequencies using Health Canada’s Safety Code 6 standard, as a guide, said Campbell.
Currently, he said, tests indicate that the board’s schools are measuring significantly less than one per cent of the minimum standard defined by Health Canada. This is 99.99 per cent safer than Health Canada’s defined minimum standard.
Campbell said the board will “continue to rely on the expertise and standards of organizations like Health Canada, Peel Public Health and Wellington-Dufferin-Guelph Health to guide our use of technology, from a health perspective, in our schools.
“We are well aware of the specific concerns of this parent and have offered and/or provided numerous accommodations to try to meet the needs of the family,” Campbell said.
“These have included online courses, and having a teacher come to the home. We continue to reach out to them and are currently in the process of trying to set up a meeting to review the results of environmental testing carried out specifically in relation to their concerns at the school.”
Dignity Health Wifi, Health Dangers Of Wifi Frequencies, Health Effects Of Wifi, Is Wifi Dangerous To Health, Why Wifi Threats Health, Wifi And Your Health, Wifi Are There Any Health Risks, Wifi Bad For Health, Wifi Health, Wifi Health Concerns, Wifi Health Dangers, Wifi Health Issues, Wifi Health Risks, Wifi Radiation Health, Wifi Radio Waves And Health
5G antennas are 
What about cartoon characters smoking cigarettes?
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
A Mississauga mother says she is protesting the Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board (DPCDSB) so her son can go to school.
