We Have No Reason To Believe 5G Is Safe

Discussion in 'Scientific Studies' started by haidut, Dec 4, 2019.

  1. haidut

    haidut Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2013
    Messages:
    17,202
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA / Europe
    It is always pleasing to see that a bastion of corrupt, institutionalized science such as the Scientific American is publishing editorials exposing 5G wireless technology for what it is - a known human carcinogen that has also been already causally linked to virtually every chronic health condition known to medicine. Considering this damning evidence, to have FDA and FCC reaffirm the "safety" of exposure limit standards adopted in the mid 1990s is a travesty and a sad testimony about just how profoundly those agencies have become "captured" by the very industries they are supposed to regulate and reign-in. What's even worse is that (as the article itself bemoans) 5G wireless technology will not replace right away 4G/3G or even older technologies, for which there is already a mountain of evidence proving their detrimental effects on health. Btw, guess what the wireless industry told us when it was deploying 2G/3G/4G decades ago? The all too familiar - "trust us, it's safe". So, not only are the same unfounded claims of safety now being made about 5G as well but this new and untested technology will co-exist with the older (and provably dangerous) technologies for decades to come. As such, the negative effects on health may very well be synergistic. In an ironic twist of fate, there are rumors that one of the first deployments of 5G in government buildings may very well be at FDA and FCC locations. Maybe only if there is a dramatic drop in health among agency staffers will make them finally start taking the risks of these technologies seriously...

    We Have No Reason to Believe 5G Is Safe

    "...The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently announced through a press release that the commission will soon reaffirm the radio frequency radiation (RFR) exposure limits that the FCC adopted in the late 1990s. These limits are based upon a behavioral change in rats exposed to microwave radiation and were designed to protect us from short-term heating risks due to RFR exposure. Yet, since the FCC adopted these limits based largely on research from the 1980s, the preponderance of peer-reviewed research, more than 500 studies, have found harmful biologic or health effects from exposure to RFR at intensities too low to cause significant heating."

    "...Citing this large body of research, more than 240 scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on the biologic and health effects of nonionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal, which calls for stronger exposure limits. The appeal makes the following assertions: “Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.”

    "...The FCC’s RFR exposure limits regulate the intensity of exposure, taking into account the frequency of the carrier waves, but ignore the signaling properties of the RFR. Along with the patterning and duration of exposures, certain characteristics of the signal (e.g., pulsing, polarization) increase the biologic and health impacts of the exposure. New exposure limits are needed which account for these differential effects. Moreover, these limits should be based on a biological effect, not a change in a laboratory rat’s behavior. The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RFR as "possibly carcinogenic to humans" in 2011. Last year, a $30 million study conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) found “clear evidence” that two years of exposure to cell phone RFR increased cancer in male rats and damaged DNA in rats and mice of both sexes. The Ramazzini Institute in Italy replicated the key finding of the NTP using a different carrier frequency and much weaker exposure to cell phone radiation over the life of the rats."

    "...Based upon the research published since 2011, including human and animal studies and mechanistic data, the IARC has recently prioritized RFR to be reviewed again in the next five years. Since many EMF scientists believe we now have sufficient evidence to consider RFR as either a probable or known human carcinogen, the IARC will likely upgrade the carcinogenic potential of RFR in the near future. Nonetheless, without conducting a formal risk assessment or a systematic review of the research on RFR health effects, the FDA recently reaffirmed the FCC’s 1996 exposure limits in a letter to the FCC, stating that the agency had “concluded that no changes to the current standards are warranted at this time,” and that “NTP’s experimental findings should not be applied to human cell phone usage.” The letter stated that “the available scientific evidence to date does not support adverse health effects in humans due to exposures at or under the current limits.”

    "...Millimeter waves are mostly absorbed within a few millimeters of human skin and in the surface layers of the cornea. Short-term exposure can have adverse physiological effects in the peripheral nervous system, the immune system and the cardiovascular system. The research suggests that long-term exposure may pose health risks to the skin (e.g., melanoma), the eyes (e.g., ocular melanoma) and the testes (e.g., sterility). Since 5G is a new technology, there is no research on health effects, so we are “flying blind” to quote a U.S. senator. However, we have considerable evidence about the harmful effects of 2G and 3G. Little is known the effects of exposure to 4G, a 10-year-old technology, because governments have been remiss in funding this research. Meanwhile, we are seeing increases in certain types of head and neck tumors in tumor registries, which may be at least partially attributable to the proliferation of cell phone radiation. These increases are consistent with results from case-control studies of tumor risk in heavy cell phone users."

    "...5G will not replace 4G; it will accompany 4G for the near future and possibly over the long term. If there are synergistic effects from simultaneous exposures to multiple types of RFR, our overall risk of harm from RFR may increase substantially. Cancer is not the only risk as there is considerable evidence that RFR causes neurological disorders and reproductive harm, likely due to oxidative stress. As a society, should we invest hundreds of billions of dollars deploying 5G, a cellular technology that requires the installation of 800,000 or more new cell antenna sites in the U.S. close to where we live, work and play? Instead, we should support the recommendations of the 250 scientists and medical doctors who signed the 5G Appeal that calls for an immediate moratorium on the deployment of 5G and demand that our government fund the research needed to adopt biologically based exposure limits that protect our health and safety."
     
  2. Sativa

    Sativa Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2018
    Messages:
    400
    Gender:
    Male
    This is ideal. One wonders how the aluminium molecules contained within the bodies of gov workers will react to intensified microwave radiation ... fire? I bet the aluminium will increase in temperature (potentially igniting) and directly damage surrounding tissue. This might further deteriorate their cognitive potential, resulting in even more stupidity etc.

    In the England capital, London, a notable media-covered fire occurred at 'Grenfell Tower', which was built with aluminium 'insulation' within the outer layers. Naturally, there are many 5G transmitters in the vicinity, some only meters away from the tower... The fire must have been like a serious furnace...
    Imagine wrapping a sausage in aluminium foil, then running it in the microwave for an hour.

    (PS. they blamed the firefights for not doing their job properly, when the Aluminium itself was likely the key 'ignitory' element, alongside the intense 5G microwaves...)
     
  3. lampofred

    lampofred Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2016
    Messages:
    2,807
    Gender:
    Male
    The ones who will be impacted are the lower level workers who don't know the truth and aren't the ones making the real decisions. Poor guys/girls. What does it take to get people out of vicious cycles and become more perceptive?
     
  4. achillea

    achillea Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2016
    Messages:
    736
    Gender:
    Male
  5. GorillaHead

    GorillaHead Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2018
    Messages:
    1,273
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    USA
    I love technology as much as the other guy. We dont need 5g. 4g literally does the job. This is absurd surprised no one is fighting back with any bills
     
  6. achillea

    achillea Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2016
    Messages:
    736
    Gender:
    Male
  7. miles

    miles Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2014
    Messages:
    16
    Thanks achillea. Very disturbing
     
  8. Auslander

    Auslander Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2020
    Messages:
    89
    Nothing could have been done about 3g, or 4g, nothing will be done about 5g. Money talks and money rules.

    So what can one do? Realistically nothing. The more you stress, the more you harm yourself on top of the harm done by all this EMF. Whats the point.
     
  9. jzeno

    jzeno Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2017
    Messages:
    543
    Gender:
    Male
    @GorillaHead It's not that simple that we can say "we don't need it so let's not do it". We don't have that luxury when there are plenty of countries that would love to overtake us or destroy us. Same principle as nukes. If China gets 5g, you can bet they will use it militarily and also within their economy and that could potentially reshape the world. US as a world leader is one thing (not perfect, but lots of benefits) but imagine a world dominated by a communist dictatorship. Asking for trouble. We don't have the luxury of saying 'no thanks' at this point. The situation is more complicated than you paint it. You have to consider global economic and national security consequences of saying 'no thanks' to the latest technology. It isn't a realistic choice. We have to figure out how to make it but make it safe. Or, figure out how destructive it is and avoid it all together.

    That said, I have a lot of concerns about 5G, too. Not only health concerns, but how rapidly life would change and how quick the pace of life could potentially become among other concerns (connected everything, data, privacy concerns etc.).
     
  10. Auslander

    Auslander Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2020
    Messages:
    89
    So would having to stream porno at 1080p instead of 8K present such a devastating economical disadvantage?

    We've had all these xG technologies for how many decades now? What so revolutionary and live-changing has come out of them that we need to jump on the next xG wagon as a matter of economic survival? I mean life changing in a positive and in a substantial way.

    It's just fluff.

    Entertainment, fun, porn, lots of porn, and questionable convinience that we could easily do without are THE ONLY things that I can think of.

    So what Im saying is that youre overblowing it quite a bit.
     
  11. achillea

    achillea Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2016
    Messages:
    736
    Gender:
    Male
    5G is a weapon, a bioweapon and LED lights are antennas for 5G. One of the frequencies of the LED lights damages the ocular cells.
     
  12. achillea

    achillea Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2016
    Messages:
    736
    Gender:
    Male
    Could This Outbreak Be Connected to 5G?


    By Tom Cowan, M.D.

    Because news outlets are blanketing us with updates on the coronavirus and the CDC’s prediction that a major epidemic is inevitable, I am getting a lot of questions about my understanding of this situation. Before I share my thoughts, I want to emphasize that this is an immense, controversial and emotionally charged subject, one that demands careful thought, research and action. I have no special insight into the genesis of this situation, besides the research I can do on my own. I also want to emphasize that anyone who doesn’t take the time and effort to look into this article by Martin Pall, PhD, and the book "The Invisible Rainbow" by Arthur Firstenberg will most likely not have the full picture.*

    This article is only a brief look at what these two pioneers are telling us.

    First, as I have previously explained, every instance of "influenza" epidemic in our modern era was associated with a radical change in the electrification of the earth immediately before the outbreak. One of the most studied of these pandemics was the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic, which killed millions of people around the globe. The Spanish influenza pandemic actually started not in Spain but in the U.S. in early 1918. It was particularly associated with Naval bases and installations that were the first to install high-intensity radar.

    The use of worldwide radar signals grew exponentially, and along with this expansion, the pandemic spread rapidly around the world, even appearing in places that had no contact with infected travelers. In other words, it appeared on naval ships and ports at identical times, essentially proving that an infectious or contagious etiology was impossible.

    Also, paradoxically, the doctors at the time reported that their patients were not dying from respiratory complications, as one would expect from an infection with a respiratory virus; rather, as two physicians at the time stated:
    "We have yet to receive a report of a case in which the time of coagulation was not prolonged."

    Their patients were dying of internal hemorrhaging, bleeding into the brain and complications of the failure of the coagulation of the blood. This was a known side effect of the exposure of human blood to intense electrical exposures since at least 1779, when primitive electrical devices were first used on human subjects.

    The 1956 flu pandemic directly followed the introduction of high-intensity radar installations off the coast of Alaska, Cape Cod and New York Harbor. For the first time, the entire globe was subjected to a level of radar waves never before experienced on earth. Within months of these installations going on line, the 1956 pandemic began.

    In 1968 the "Hong Kong flu" pandemic swept the globe. This followed about eight months after the first satellites in the earth’s Van Allen radiation belt became operational. Again, doctors noticed their patients dying of acute hemorrhages rather than the respiratory complications one would expect from complications of the flu. The Van Allen belts are the protective electrical shield around the earth. Never before had humankind been so unwise as to put radiation-emitting electrical devices directly into orbit around the earth.

    It seems that whenever there is a quantum leap in the intensity of electrical exposure, many people and many other living beings die. They die quickly and they die from the well-documented changes in their blood. This pattern has repeated itself over and over again.

    This brings us to the coronavirus outbreak. As Dr. Pall has made perfectly clear, Wuhan City in China, where the outbreak started, was the initial site of the most intense rollout of 5G wireless technology on the planet. The rollout of 5G in our cities and towns across the globe also is coincident in time with the placement of thousands of radiation-emitting satellites in the ionosphere and magnetosphere. Although I’m not aware that hemorrhagic events are occurring during the current coronavirus outbreak, Dr. Pall summarizes a number of studies in which EMF radiation is a co-factor in either suppressing our immune response to viral infections, or itself makes viral infections more lethal. In either case, we are likely not dealing with a simple viral infection as much as the consequences of the intersection of a dramatic increase in our global EMF exposure, as well as a possible viral co-factor.

    If a virus is involved, then the afflicted people have sufficiently weakened immune systems that offer little defense against this virus. This is a tragic situation, one that calls us to quickly wake up to the dangers of the further intensification of the electrification of the planet. This is a planetary emergency.
    People, legitimately, are asking what they can do to help protect themselves and their families at this time. I haven’t dealt with any patients with this situation, so my answers are conjecture.

    But, the first thing I would do is eliminate every source of EMFs you can from your life. Some might want to contact a building biologist and shield their home or their bedroom; others might decide that keeping their devices on airplane mode when not in use might be the best they can do. Please, though, educate yourself about this topic.
     
  13. achillea

    achillea Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2016
    Messages:
    736
    Gender:
    Male
  14. Luann

    Luann Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2016
    Messages:
    1,347
    Gender:
    Female
    Does 5G really have less of a penetrating effect than 4G? Is there a way to keep it out of the house?
     
  15. Randle Cyclist

    Randle Cyclist Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2019
    Messages:
    118
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Rancher
    Location:
    The Lone Star State
    I've been on the fence regarding the dangers of 5g. I even have a 5g phone though the nearest antenna is an hour drive away. However, I plan on ditching the phone asap after what my mom experienced.

    About a month ago she upgraded to the latest Samsung galaxy which is 5g capable. She lives in an area that has fully implemented 5g already. Within three weeks of using the phone, she lost a serious patch of hair which was discovered by her hair dresser.

    In fact, she had visited her hair dresser to have her roots colored a week prior to upgrading to the phone. She went again a month later for the same hair treatment when her stylist discovered the huge missing patch. Needless to say, it freaked out both the stylist and my mom.

    It certainly isn't stress, thyroid, or androgen induced alopecia as she has quarterly blood tests and everything is always in range. The missing patch aligns quite well with the location of the phone's upper antennae. She said that area was itchy and hot to the touch, indicating inflammation. She intuitively stopped using the phone immediately, as it's the only thing in her life that had changed since her previous stylist appointment. Since then her hair has begun to regrow. I've attached pictures of the damage.

    She had one doctor confirm it was a radiation burn while her dermatologist was very reluctant to say as much, given the potential implications. Her carrier fortunately gave her a full refund and admitted that she wasn't the first person that this has happened to.

    I came across a few articles mentioning that Corona patients often have alopecia. Naturally, the articles place the blame on the virus. However, I am convinced that this and many of the symptoms people experience are a result of 5g radiation.IMG-20201030-WA0001.jpgIMG-20201030-WA0002.jpg
     
  16. RealNeat

    RealNeat Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2019
    Messages:
    697
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Minnesota
    That article got called out and some dude tried to call him a quack and debunk it, it was hilarious, ad hominem attacks to be expected. You can find it in Scientific American as it's one of the first to come up on google. Go figure.

    please know that aluminum bug screen is a really cheap and easy way to built a faraday cage. There are tons of tutorials online. Make a big wood frame over your bed and staple the screen in an overlapping fashion. You can even make a door.

    extreme times call for extreme measures.
    Watch there will be a full transition to plastic only bug screen.
     
Loading...