Thursday, February 28, 2019

Concerns Mount Over the Roll-Out of 5G

A round-up of the latest from activist Lynne Wycherley.


Moves to roll out 5G (fifth-generation) mobile connectivity with apparently few local controls have raised serious concerns among health activists in the US. Chaired by a former telecoms-industry lawyer, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) adopted proposals that rush permits through, cut fees for the industry, and effectively permit 5G masts to be sited on public poles, structures and rights of way – including close to bedrooms. As reported in the Ecologist in 2016, scientists have warned that higher-frequency 5G may introduce risks to insects, leaves, eyes and skin, due to its pulse and energy being concentrated in surface tissue.
The US Conference of Mayors, National League of Cities, Native American tribes and other collectives have been in legal action to retain local controls. Philadelphia city council’s lawyer said controls were needed to “protect the health, safety and welfare of the city’s over 1.5 million residents and 43 million annual visitors”. Senator Richard Blumenthal, a champion for environmental causes, challenged the FCC to prove the safety of 5G: “We need to know whether [it] can cause cancer and other diseases.”
In his 90-page report for the European Commission, 5G: Great Risk for EU, US and International Health, biochemistry professor Martin Pall predicts that 5G will be “particularly dangerous”, exposing the public to dense antennae and high pulsation levels. Pall has uncovered a key mechanism of harm, cited in numerous research papers, that points to wide-ranging disease risks from our rising wireless exposure.
An ongoing appeal for a 5G moratorium in the EU, signed by over 200 scientists and doctors from 39 nations, warns that countless 5G antennas and transmitting ‘smart’ objects (the ‘Internet of Things’) will create a net “massive increase of mandatory exposure to wireless radiation”. It urges more use of wired technology. A well-referenced Stop 5G Appeal has similarly attracted the support of many doctors and posits risks to life and the ozone layer from plans to rush out 20,000 5G satellites.
In the UK, as elsewhere, 5G test-zones are proliferating with no ecological or health monitoring. Foreseeing dense pollution from “saturating coverage of WiFi and 5G”, Matt Shardlow, CEO of UK charity Buglife, warned: “Just because humans cannot see electromagnetic radiation this does not mean that animals cannot ... be significantly impacted at a neural or cellular level.”
Although compulsive video-gaming has been classified a disease by the World Health Organization, 5G is being geared up to feed giant video-files to smartphones in every feasible environment. Joel Moskowitz, director of health studies at Berkeley University, has warned that the deployment of 5G “constitutes a massive experiment on the health of all species”.
Lynne Wycherley is a Nature poet with six published collections. She has been investigating non-ionising radiation for many years. Her new book of poetry, The Testimony of the Trees, featured on the Poetry page of the March/April 2019 issue.

The Truth About Smart Meters - Josh del Sol

New Video By Josh de Sol

The 'smart' meter problems are now exposed for all to see: utility corruption, fatal fires, billing scams, unlawful surveillance and health risks from voltage transients and pulsed wireless. This previously-unreleased presentation is a deep dive into the situation and solutions. Filmed at the 2015 Building Biology conference on Bainbridge Island, Washington.


The Truth About Smart Meters

Wi-Fi in Schools: Experimenting With the Next Generation

Commercial wireless systems expose children to nation's highest radiation levels
BY CONAN MILNER, EPOCH TIMES
February 28, 2019 Updated: February 28, 2019
The internet has unleashed human knowledge. Never before has it been so easy to learn so much. Of course, it has also drowned us in distraction and created a breeding ground for trolls and misinformation, but if the internet is redeemed by anything, it is its liberation of education.
When it comes to accessing this ocean of information, we have two basic choices: wired or Wi-Fi. The vast majority of schools have embraced the wireless revolution. It’s easy to see why. Compared to wired internet, wireless is simpler, cheaper, and faster for schools to install.
Today, students are trading notebooks and textbooks for laptops, cellphones, iPads, and all manner of “smart” devices connected to a potent wireless infrastructure that lets them be used virtually anywhere on school grounds.
But that wireless web comes with a devastating downside. Doctors and scientists say that the students and teachers who attend these schools are risking their health.

Radiation Dangers

Dr. Martin Pall, Professor Emeritus of biochemistry and basic medical sciences at Washington State University made a grave case about the dangers involved in his paper, “Wi-Fi is An Important Threat to Human Health,” published in the July 2018 issue of Environmental Research.
“The placement of Wi-Fi into schools around the country may well be a high-level threat to the health of our children as well being a threat to teachers and any very sensitive fetuses teachers may be carrying, as well,” Pall writes.
Since Wi-Fi is found everywhere from private homes to public spaces, Pall’s alarming claim seems hard to fathom. And yet his evidence is compelling: 23 controlled scientific studies demonstrating numerous adverse effects to Wi-Fi radiation exposure. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg—there are dozens more studies on Wi-Fi harms which were not included in the paper.
Wireless radiation has become commonplace despite well-documented evidence of its harm, with thousands of studies going back several decades demonstrating health problems associated with exposure. Some of the strongest evidence came last year from the final report of a $30 million, 19-year study funded by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. It was conducted by the National Toxicology Program (NTP)—the federal agency tasked with testing toxins—and was designed to be the final word on whether wireless radiation was harmful. It showed clear evidence of cancer and DNA damage linked to cellphone use.

Concentrated Risk

Schools are particularly worrisome, experts say, because they are where the most intense concentration of wireless radiation is found today. The Wi-Fi systems schools have adopted are much more comprehensive than your average home or coffee shop Wi-Fi. These commercial grade systems use several routers or “access points” throughout the classroom, often in the ceiling above students’ heads. Now, add in all the radiation spewing from all the wireless devices operated by each student, and you’ll find that kids are spending up to seven hours per day in a thick soup of electro-smog.
Even worse, the people we place in this remarkably concentrated field of wireless radiation are more vulnerable to it. Compared to adults, children are smaller and have smaller and thinner skulls so the radiation penetrates more easily and gets to larger parts of the brain. Also problematic, children’s’ immune and nervous systems are still developing. Plus, kids’ cells divide at a faster rate, which increases the risk for mutations that can lead to cancer.
According to Pall, these factors make children more susceptible to the disease processes that wireless radiation has been consistently shown to cause: oxidative stress (which can lead to cancer and non-cancerous conditions, as well as DNA damage), sperm and testicular damage, neuropsychiatric effects, cell death, changes to the endocrine system, and calcium overload.

Evidence of Illness

These disease processes aren’t merely theoretical. Epidemiological studies conducted by Dr. Lennart Hardell, an oncologist at Orebro University Hospital in Sweden, showed that children exposed to this radiation are more likely to develop cancer and develop it quicker.
Other doctors and scientists say exposure is likely a significant contributing factor to the rising rates of other childhood diseases. Dr. Hugh Taylor, a professor and chair of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive sciences at Yale University, has shown that fetal exposure to wireless radiation affects neuro-development and behavior and can lead to Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)— a condition that has doubled in the past 10 years.
Harvard Medical School professor and a pediatric neurologist at Massachusetts General Hospital, Dr. Martha Herbert, makes a compelling argument that the rise in autism spectrum disorders may also be related to our rise in wireless radiation exposure.
Herbert’s 60-page report from 2012 doesn’t provide evidence of cause, but it does reveal several similarities between symptoms known to occur with wireless radiation and biological manifestations in autism, such as cellular stress, tissue damage, protein misfolding, and injury of membranes.
Herbert describes autism, not as a condition of a broken brain, but of a brain that has a hard time regulating itself. And she believes that if such a brain is caught in a cloud of wireless radiation, it is confronted with a disruptive factor, making it even harder for behavior and biology to come into balance.
While the brains of children with autism may be most vulnerable to microwave radiation, Herbert says every brain is at the mercy of its influence.
“I really am concerned about people’s brains,” Herbert said. “It’s not a joke to have this stuff getting into these three pounds of delicate, gel-crystalline structure in our heads that does this amazing stuff. It wasn’t meant for this level of exposure.”

Electromagnetic Neurology

Herbert explains that, just like our wireless devices, our brain communicates with electromagnetic signaling. In fact, as our instruments have become more sensitive, scientists have discovered that each cell in our body uses electromagnetic signaling.
Now that we live in a wireless world, where we all walk around in a field of electromagnetic radiation nearly all the time, Herbert believes there is enough scientific support to argue that this influence could be an important contributor to degrading the optimal chemical-electrical function of our bodies—thereby detuning our brains and nervous systems.
Autism was once considered strictly a genetic abnormality. But as knowledge of the condition has grown, researchers have uncovered a more complex landscape, where a host of environmental influences have shown an impact on gene expression.
This means that instead of one smoking gun tied to this fast growing condition (the latest estimate from the Centers for Disease Control is that one in every 40 children has autism, up from one in every 166 in 2005), there are likely many factors. Toxic chemicals, for example, have long been demonstrated to impact fetal brain development.
But Herbert argues that, due to electric nature of our bodies, wireless radiation may create more of a disruption than toxic chemicals.
“When you have a toxicant exposure, it can affect the brain, but it has to go through metabolic pathways that can influence the electromagnetics in order to do that,” Herbert said. “But when you have electromagnetic radiation, it’s a straight shot. It’s the same language, so it can be more instantaneous.”

Sick in Schools

Dafna Tachover is a former telecommunications officer turned lawyer whoadvocates for people harmed by wireless radiation. Her Supreme Court lawsuit in Israel led to the first limits on Wi-Fi in schools worldwide. Tachover showed evidence of 200 sick children from the Wi-Fi in just six schools.
Now in the United States, Tachover says she is contacted by several parents every week with children who have become sick from their school’s wireless system. She says the most common symptoms include headaches, increased sensitivity to noise, nose bleeds, concentration and memory problems, nausea, exhaustion, and hyperactivity.
“Unfortunately, these harms are not potential but existing, and at an epidemic scale,” Tachover said.
The acute or chronic illness that results from wireless radiation is known aselectromagnetic sensitivity. It’s the same illness the U.S. Navy dubbed “microwave sickness” when soldiers who had been working with technologies such as radar for extended periods of time displayed the same symptoms. The illness is named for the microwave frequencies that powers wireless technology. Those who contract microwave sickness can’t be in the presence of wireless radiation without painful and sometimes debilitating symptoms.
One child Tachover is working with is a 13-year-old girl from Oregon whose desk was directly under the classroom’s Wi-Fi router. After she developed microwave sickness, her parents enrolled her in a private Waldorf school, because they’re one of few schools that don’t use Wi-Fi.
In some cases, parents are forced to homeschool their children because they can’t get access to schools without Wi-Fi. In other cases, sick kids are forced to make do.
Tachover said one parent had two sons who developed microwave sickness. This mother urged her sons’ school to accommodate by hard wiring the classroom internet and even offered to pay for the accommodation, but the school refused. As a result, her children can only attend school for a few hours per week.
“When in the Wi-Fi environment they experience headaches, concentration problems, skin rashes and hyperactivity,” Tachover said.


Risk to Teachers

Microwave sickness can impact teachers who work in Wi-Fi too. Laurie Brown, a teacher in the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), says she knew nothing about the health impacts from wireless until her school installed a commercial grade Wi-Fi system in April of 2015. Today, she says the damage caused by this technology is impossible for her to ignore.
“We had Wi-Fi before, but the upgraded system now had two access points in every single classroom, adding a total of 290 access points to the school, and additional boosters to prevent any loss of connectivity,” Brown said. “All of this was for Common Core testing, and 21st-century teaching.”
Each of Brown’s students was given a wireless laptop (Chromebooks) so they could access this new system. After just two hours in the upgraded classroom, Brown started feeling several symptoms: tingling and burning in her skin, breathing problems, and a rising heart rate. Her ankles started itching and her nasal passages started to swell.
Symptoms grew worse and soon Brown could barely make it through the day. Before the new Wi-Fi system, Brown was rarely sick and had saved over 800 hours of time off for illness. After the new equipment, she was out at least two days every week.
“I just started to feel horrible,” she said. “I would go home from school feeling so lousy. I was never a headachy person, and I was getting all these headaches that were so strange.”
Brown knows of at least 10 teachers and staff members who complained of symptoms that they traced to the school’s Wi-Fi. A few retired, and at least three (including Brown) are currently suing LAUSD for workers compensation injuries.
Brown is now on disability leave, but she would rather have her old life back. Today, if someone is just using a cellphone near her, Brown’s inflammatory symptoms, as well as other sometimes debilitating symptoms, can quickly return.
“It’s overwhelming and it’s sad because it takes away from the enjoyment of life and your lifestyle,” she said. “I’m someone who is accommodating, likes to please and is easy going. I wasn’t a high maintenance person. It makes me feel uncomfortable in my own skin to feel like I’m inconveniencing others.”
For schools that are willing to make accommodations, lives have been turned around. Appeals through the American with Disabilities Act have made some schools remove the Wi-Fi routers in the classrooms where there are microwave illness sufferers, even extending the router removal to neighboring classrooms when they still exert an influence.
Teacher Sheila Reavill contracted microwave sickness but she convinced her school to hardwire their internet access and connect laptops with an adapter. There is no Wi-Fi or Bluetooth in Reavill’s class, and the children who carry cellphones shut them off when they’re in the room.
“She says she not only she feels better in the classroom, but her students are also calmer and can focus better,” Tachover said.
Experts saw dangers in school Wi-Fi upgrades even before they were installed.  In 2013, Herbert wrote a warning letter to the LAUSD, citing the thousands of papers that have accumulated over decades which document adverse health and neurological impacts of electromagnetic frequency and radiofrequency radiation (EMF/RFR).
“EMF/RFR from Wi-Fi and cell towers can exert a disorganizing effect on the ability to learn and remember, and can also be destabilizing to immune and metabolic function,” Herbert wrote. “This will make it harder for some children to learn, particularly those who are already having problems in the first place.”
The letter went viral, but the school district paid it little mind.
“You know who did react? The firefighters,” Herbert said. “They had this boondoggle going where they were putting cell towers right behind all the fire stations. So guess what? All the firefighters were getting sick.”

Pushing for Change

As more people become aware of the dangers associated with wireless radiation and Wi-Fi in schools, efforts are emerging from teachers unions, parent organizations, and physician groups to address the problem.
One widely proposed solution is for schools to adopt a wired system. This would allow students to have more reliable high-speed internet access but without the microwave radiation. The cost would only be slightly higher than a wireless system.
While installing a wired system would mean a greater cost up front, it could save schools millions in the long run, as well as ensuring the health of the children who attend these schools. Tachover says that most schools are not insured for health effects related to wireless radiation because most insurance companies learned their lesson from tobacco and asbestos and have made an exclusion with regard to wireless.
Some change may come in the form of new laws. In Massachusetts, seven bills have recently taken aim at the issue of wireless technology in a handful of schools.
Deb Meyer runs the Oregon chapter of Parents Across America (PAA). She says her organization has introduced three bills into the state legislature that target children’s increasing exposure to wireless radiation.
“We aren’t against technology. We’re against unsafe use and irresponsible use,” Meyer said.
One bill allows Wi-Fi wary parents to choose an alternative for their child. The bill also calls for kids to have recess so they get a chance to move around in the physical world for some part of their day.
The second bill focuses on better public understanding of the biological impact of wireless. It requires public and private schools to distribute information about the potential health risks of wireless network technology to employees, students and parents or guardians. It would also require the state’s Health Authority to examine peer-reviewed, independently funded studies on the effects of exposure to microwave radiation in schools and similar environments, particularly exposure that results from the use of wireless network technologies. It then calls on the Health Authority to create guidelines based on this review.
The bill that Meyer believes has the best chance of passing is one which calls for something wireless manufacturers already do, but writ large. Buried deeply in your cell phone manual are tips about using your device more safely. The bill asks to have these tips more explicit with clear warning labels so that consumers take safety more seriously.
Overall, that’s the biggest challenge—getting schools, lawmakers, and the public to treat the issue with the gravity it deserves.
“Getting people to believe that what we say is real and true is really a heavy lift because they don’t want to think there is a downside to their devices,” Meyer said. “And they especially don’t want to think that giving devices to their kids is a bad thing to do.”
Herbert says another reason why people may be resistant to see this problem is that all this wireless radiation may be affecting our judgment.
“Your judgment is intrinsically off when your brain function is altered in some way. You could be missing things—missing distinctions, or being disorganized in ways you don’t realize until you come out of it. Maybe you never come out of it,” Herbert said. “Just something to contemplate as we try and look at our increasing exposure to electromagnetic waves.”

Long Island Event - 3/6/19 - The Dangers of 5G and Wireless Radiation - What Can We Do To Protect Ourselves and Our Children?

The Dangers of 5G and Wireless Radiation
                                                                      
What Can We Do to Protect Ourselves and our Children?


Date:  Wednesday, March 6, 2019

Location:  474 N. Country Rd, St. James, NY 

Time:  2:30-5:30pm

Suggested Donation:  $15
  

This two-hour presentation will be offered by Jeanice Barcelo, M.A., author of “The Dark Side of Prenatal Ultrasound and the Dangers of Non‑Ionizing Radiation.” Jeanice will cover the basics of radiation dangers and what we can do to protect ourselves and our families from this encroaching hazard. There will be approximately one hour for Q&A at the end of the presentation. 

See www.RadiationDangers.com for more info.
  

Hosted by Maria Petervary
                                     Phone:  (631) 413-4073

SEATING IS LIMITED
Please RSVP as soon as possible

Organic, gluten free food will be served

All cell phones must be turned off upon entry to this event

Wednesday, February 27, 2019

Is There A Way To Oppose 5G Rollout In Your Community? A Radiofrequency Expert Offers His Expertise


What’s the REAL deal problem with 5G anyway?
That’s the overarching question federal and state regulatory agencies apparently want to ignore, while mandatorily implementing a military-grade technology that has been weaponized for crowd control and restrictions, and has not been proven safe for humans, the environment, wildlife and the Planet, thereby pandering off to high tech microwave communications industries a technological prize, which actually winds up being a “pig in a poke” for consumers and their health!
3:50 minutes
3:38 minutes
5G is the “icing on the cake” needed to implement the ultimate in human controls, i.e., the Internet of Things, which will allow for implementation of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and creating human-computer-interfaced bots as a tradeoff [upgrade?] on the current version of Homo sapiens!
None of the Gs (generations) in microwave technology have been proven safe regarding human biology, biochemistry and neurobiology, but have been advanced at the directive of the U.S. military in its quest for military hegemony.  Factually, man-made microwaves have been used to impact neurobiology with military microwave programs as displayed in this website “Images for military microwave programs for mind control.”
There’s a possible “fried brains” construct looming in our very near future IFfederal and state regulatory agencies don’t come to their senses about rolling out a technology for which no environmental impact studies exist.  Isn’t that against the law?
As a result of all the uncertainties circling our heads—literally, consumers, municipalities and states are taking notice that something has to be done to stop what’s becoming a runaway technology freight train.
I network with many 5G researchers.  Citizen activism taking place to bridle 5G is commendable, remarkable and “growing legs.”  One place citizens are madder than a wet cat is the State of Maryland where legislative bills are offered, and rightfully opposed.
Dr. Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D., is no slouch when it comes to understanding the machinations involved in electromagnetic frequencies; therefore, he has offered his expertise to address the greatest non-nuclear threat to humans, 5G cell towers in front of one’s home.

Who is Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D.?

He is a retired U.S. Government career scientist (Ph.D. in Applied Physics from Harvard University).  During his Government career, he worked for the Executive Office of the President, the National Science Foundation, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.  He currently interacts with other scientists, with doctors, and with aware individuals worldwide about the impact of radiofrequency radiation on human health.
What is the problem?
Here is Dr. Powell’s expert opinion, which I offer readers, as a template of sorts, to use in your activism against 5G implementation in your community and state.
Dr. Powell:
5G and its small cell towers threaten public health.  Maryland representatives should OPPOSE both HB654/SB937 and HB1020/SP713.
Why is control of 5G secondary to stopping its deployment?
Control by local government of the deployment of 5G’s small cell towers is, indeed, an important goal, because local governments are closer to the people and can better reflect their wishes.  That makes HB1020/SP713 the better approach, as intended by its authors, compared to HB654/SB937 which forfeits local control entirely.
But there is an even more important goal:  STOPPING the deployment of 5G altogether.  The reason, as shown throughout this message, is that there is NO SAFE WAY to implement 5G in our communities; rather, there are only “bad ways” and “worse ways”.  So local control means that local governments can have a say in the choice among the “bad ways”.
Why are both HB654/SB937 and HB1020/SP713 fatally flawed?
Both bills reaffirm the worst aspect of Federal policy:  a prohibition against stopping all deployment.  For example, HB1020/SP713 makes statements like these:
S-703 (C) (1):  “THE APPLICABLE LOCAL LAW AND REGULATION PROVIDED IN SUBSECTION (A) OF THIS SECTION:
(1) MAY NOT GENERALLY PROHIBIT THE INSTALLATION OF ALL WIRELESS FACILITIES OR POLES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY OR ON PRIVATE PROPERTY; AND”
S-704 (C):  “THE DESIGN AND AESTHETIC REQUIREMENTS OR STANDARDS OF AN AUTHORITY MAY NOT HAVE THE EFFECT OF PROHIBITING ANY WIRELESS PROVIDER’S WIRELESS SERVICE.”
Statements like these write into Maryland law the principal provision of Federal policy that so many efforts are now trying to overturn.  For this reason, in my view, neither HB654/SB937 nor HB1020/SP713 should be made law. [CJF emphasis]
What makes Maryland a leader in MANDATING exposure to harmful radiofrequency radiation?
Wireless Smart Meters for the measurement of electricity have already been forced on virtually every home and business in Maryland.  These meters bring the source of radiation up close and personal to the residents, even to the walls against which children sleep.  They transmit pulses of radiofrequency throughout the day and the night, every day of the year.  To escape the radiation from your own meter, you must pay the electric power company a monthly Opt-Out fee, forever, for a non-radiating meter.  At last report, about 44,000 Maryland homeowners have made this choice.  But there is NO way to escape the radiation from your neighbors’ wireless meters. [CJF emphasis]
Wireless Smart Meters for the measurement of natural gas and water are either already implemented in parts of the State, or are contemplated (WSSC), and will worsen the problem already created by the Wireless Smart Meters for electricity.
WiFi is implemented widely in Maryland’s schools and bathes the children and teachers in radiofrequency radiation every school day for all their school years.  Parents who don’t want their children exposed to such radiation MUST forfeit a public school education for their children.  All this has occurred even though the Maryland Children’s Environmental Health and Protection Advisory Council, which reports to the Governor, recommended phasing WiFi out of the schools in favor of much safer wired technology.  (Wifi Radiation in Schools in Maryland, Final Report, December 13, 2016, page 8, https://phpa.health.maryland.gov/OEHFP/EH/Shared%20Documents/CEHPAC/MD_CEHPAC_SchoolWiFi_022017_final.pdf)  [CJF emphasis]
The addition of the radiation from 5G’s small cell towers, located up close and personal to Maryland residents, and operating 24 hours per day throughout the year, will complete this assault on the health of the public.
What is Maryland’s implicit policy on radiofrequency radiation?
The State’s implicit policy appears to be this:
“No resident of Maryland shall be permitted to escape 24-hour exposure to radiofrequency radiation, at ever higher levels, even though such radiation has already been shown to be harmful to human health.”
“All biomedical research from any source, including the National Institutes of Health, the World Health Organization, and the international biomedical research community more broadly, that shows that exposure to radiofrequency radiation is harmful to human health, will be categorically denied.”Why is human health so vulnerable to harm from radiofrequency radiation?

In the simplest terms, human beings are bioelectrical in nature
.  That is why electrocardiograms work when they monitor a beating heart.  And that is why electroencephalograms work when they monitor the activities in the brain.  Humans evolved in levels of radiofrequency radiation far below those produced by human technology today.  We humans are simply not designed to tolerate today’s high levels of radiofrequency radiation.
When the radiofrequency radiation from cell towers, including 5G’s small cell towers, and other wireless sources, hits the body, that radiation disrupts the bioelectrical workings of the body.  This disruption occurs at levels of radiation far below those set as the FCC’s Maximum Permitted Exposure limits.  In response, the body must fight back constantly to regain control.  This battle can lead to a wide range of symptoms.  Here is just a partial list:  sleep disruption, headaches, irritability, ringing in the ears, fatigue, loss of concentration and memory, nerve pain, dizziness, eye problems, nausea, heart palpitations, depression, and cancer.

No one is immune to harm, but vulnerability varies widely with the individual.
  That vulnerability does appear to be greatest for pregnant mothers, young children, teenagers, men of reproductive age, seniors, the disabled, and those with chronic health conditions.  A host of major medical conditions are now under study by the international biomedical research community to determine what role exposure to radiofrequency radiation may play in causing, or aggravating, them.  Examples include autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autoimmune diseases, and Alzheimer’s disease, among so many others.
The effects of radiofrequency radiation appear to be cumulative; so the longer that exposure continues, the greater the chance that an individual will be overtly affected.  Some individuals will develop a devastating condition called Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Syndrome, with a host of symptoms, including extreme pain from exposure to even very low levels of radiofrequency radiation.  Just to survive, such individuals must often leave their homes and jobs, where exposure levels were too high, and move to rare locations away from radiation sources.  Such individuals regularly contact scientists (including me), doctors, and other aware individuals for advice on what to do.
[CJF emphasis]
What is the evidence of the harm caused by radiofrequency radiation?
There are thousands of archival biomedical research papers, published in peer-reviewed journals, that have shown that radiofrequency radiation is harmful to the body in one way or another.  These have been collected and reviewed in a number of summary documents.  Here are just two examples:  (1) BioInitiative 2012, draws on about 1800 publications (https://bioinitiative.org/); (2) EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the Prevention, Diagnosis and Treatment of EMF-Related Health Problems and Illnesses, draws on 308 references(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27454111). (“EMF” stands for electromagnetic fields, a term inclusive of radiofrequency radiation.)
In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization classified radiofrequency radiation as a Group 2B Human Carcinogen (“possibly carcinogenic”), naming explicitly “wireless phone” radiation (cellular radiation), based on the increased risk for glioma.  Glioma is a malignant type of brain cancer that is usually fatal.  It most recently took the life of Senator John McCain and Beau Biden, the son of Vice President Joe Biden.  (https://www.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.pdf)
In 2018, a massive study by the National Toxicology Program at the National Institutes of Health linked cellular radiofrequency radiation (RFR) to cancer of the nerves of the heart (schwannomas), to cancer of the brain (glioma), and to multiple other health effects in test animals.  (https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/results/areas/cellphones/index.html)
In 2015 and continuing, 247 scientists from 42 nations signed an appeal to the United Nations, described below.  These scientists have “published peer-reviewed papers on the biological or health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields” (which are inclusive of radiofrequency radiation).
“Address the global public health concerns related to exposure to cell phones, power lines, electrical appliances, wireless devices, wireless utility meters and wireless infrastructure in residential homes, schools, communities and businesses.”  (https://www.emfscientist.org/)
For more information on the health effects of radiofrequency radiation, please see the website of the Environmental Health Trust, especially the Science tab.  (https://www.emfscientist.org/)
[CJF emphasis]
What are the advantages and disadvantages of 5G?
5G has some true advantages.  5G is expected to employ higher radiofrequencies than those currently in use in cellular systems in the United States.  Those higher frequencies will permit more rapid rates of data transfer compared to current WIRELESS technology.  And, as a wireless technology, 5G will support mobility.
But wired technology, especially fiber-optic technology, is superior to 5G in so many other ways.  Fiber-optic technology produces NO radiofrequency radiation, so it poses NO health hazard.  Fiber-optic technology is safer, faster, more reliable, more cyber secure, and more private than any wireless technology, including 5G.  (See https://whatis5g.info/ for a detailed description of the limitations of 5G.)
So users of wireless technology, including 5G, will have to decide if mobility ALONE is more important for their particular application than any other factor, including their own health and the health of their families and colleagues.
When listening to the hype about 5G, consider the following:

Is the hype coming more from potential providers of 5G, who hope to profit from 5G, or from potential users, who will have to pay for 5G?
Is the RUSH to implement 5G more about staking out claims to small cell sites in right-of-ways than about providing services that customers really need?
Is the RUSH to implement 5G driven by the growing awareness of the public and its representatives that radiofrequency radiation is harmful to health, and thus the providers feel that they must act quickly before resistance builds further?
What scientific studies, from impartial sources, can the providers of 5G identify that prove that 5G has NO adverse health effects on humans?  The burden of proof is on the providers.
When questioned by U.S. Senator Richard Blumenthal in a hearing before the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (February, 7, 2019), the representatives of industry could name no existing studies and none in progress.  (Story:  https://www.blumenthal.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/at-senate-commerce-hearing-blumenthal-raises-concerns-on-5g-wireless-technologys-potential-health-risks; Video:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsil3VQE5K4)  [CJF emphasis]
What should our telecommunications goals be?
Let me suggest the following:
Promote the expansion of fiber-optic technology as widely as possible, instead of degrading our environment with more harmful radiofrequency radiation, this time from 5G.
Require that the safety of 5G be proven by impartial studies before 5G can be installed in Maryland, instead of facilitating the use of Maryland residents to be the guinea pigs to test that safety.
Join forces with other state governments, and with local governments, to fight back against Federal laws and regulations that force any potentially harmful technology on the states without adequate PRIOR proof of safety.  Any technology with the potential to harm, and even take, life should not be mandated by the U.S. Government or encouraged by the states.
It will be difficult to stop 5G, but it will be easier to stop it NOW than to get it removed later after huge numbers of Maryland residents have become ill.  [CJF emphasis]

Dr. Powell generously gave me his written permission to use his information verbatim.  Plus, he tweaked the information so it could become a ‘roadmap’ for others concerned about 5G and opposing it in their community.
Thank you, Dr. Powell, for all you do to help bring EMF/RF sanity to a super-chargedtech world.
Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.
Catherine’s latest book, published October 4, 2013, is Vaccination Voodoo, What YOU Don’t Know About Vaccines, available on Amazon.com.