Will you ensure proper safety studies are done proving 5G radio frequencies are safe for human exposure?

HEALNC
04.21.20 10:47 AM Comment(s)

This is an open letter stating concerns about the lack of 5G safety testing. It is our hope that you will download this letter and send it to everyone you deem necessary (local officials, public health committees, county commissioners, school boards, local newspapers, medical staff, etc.) Also please consider sharing this information on your social media.


To Whom It May Concern,


I am reaching out to express my extreme concern over a lack of safety studies regarding the 5G  network rollout currently underway.  How will you ensure proper safety studies are done proving that 5G radio frequencies are safe for human exposure?

Here are 3 myths about 5G to consider:


Myth #1:  The only difference between 4G and 5G is internet speed.


This is absolutely untrue. The 5G network requires entirely new and widespread infrastructure, and it has a greater negative impact on human health (see Myth #2).


Our current 4G infrastructure is vastly less intrusive.  One 4G network base station can technically cover 31-155 miles. Whereas, the distance between 5G network base stations will be 820-984 FEET! This means a 5G base station must be placed every 6-10 houses for the network to function.  


Senator Richard Blumenthal highlighted this enormous infrastructure plan during a Senate Commerce hearing on the future of wireless 5G technology on February 7, 2019.  He stressed that "5G uses higher frequency waves that don’t travel as far and will rely on a network of hundreds of thousands, potentially millions, of small cell sites.” (video below)

Have you considered whether faster internet speeds are worth implementing this pervasive infrastructure?


Myth #2:  Non-ionizing, non-thermal radiation has no ill effects on human health.


All cell phones emit non-thermal, non-ionizing radiation, and we’ve been told this has no ill effects on human health.  Yet, in 2011 the World Health Organization classified these waves as “possibly carcinogenic to humans based on an increased risk from glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, associated with wireless phone use.” International Agency for Research on Cancer Director Christopher Wild said, "it is important that additional research be conducted into the long‐term, heavy use of mobile phones."


Additionally, Dr. Martin Pall, one of the world’s preeminent scientists on electromagnetic fields, has been sounding the alarm for years saying:


We know that EMF’s impact… all the cells of our bodies by activating some channels and when they do that they produce all kinds of effects. Those include neuropsychological and neuropsychiatric effects…reproductive effects…oxidative stress, which is involved in essentially all chronic diseases.”


He went on to say regarding the move from 4G to 5G:


I believe that the exposures we already have are producing major effects already on our health and that 5G will be vastly worse than anything we are already exposed to. (video below)

Why would you support the rollout of 5G technology when world-renowned scientists are warning of its dangers? 


Myth #3:  The FCC and FDA have set appropriate safety standards.


The International EMF Scientist Appeal, an independent group of over 225 reputable scientists who peer-review publications on electromagnetic fields, sent a letter to the FCC in 2017 stating that 5G deployment “is being done without public health review of the growing body of scientific evidence that includes reports of increasing rates of cancer and neurological diseases that may be caused by exposure to EMF from wireless sources.”  


Given the growing body of scientific evidence showing the harmful impacts constant EMF radiation has on human health, the real question is, “What studies have been done to confirm 5G is safe?”  Frank Clegg, Microsoft Canada’s former President, said in a recent video statement that he isn’t aware of a single study that shows 5G is safe. (video below)

During the Senate hearing referenced in the first video above, Senator Blumenthal directly asked Andrew Gillen, Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association Representative:


How much money has the industry committed to supporting additional independent research?  Is that independent research ongoing? Has any been completed? Where can consumers look for it, and we’re talking about the biological effects of this new technology?


Andrew Gillen’s response was, “Safety is paramount…we rely on the findings of the FDA and others as to the requirements to keep all of us safe. There are no industry-backed studies, to my knowledge, right now.”  


Senator Blumenthal then shared that he had reached out to FCC Commissioner Carr in 2018 and asked for citations of scientific studies demonstrating the safety of this 5G technology.  The Commissioner failed to provide any safety information and just “echoed” the general statements of the FDA, which says:


The FDA has urged the cell phone industry to take a number of steps including support additional research on possible biological effects of radiofrequency fields for the type of signal emitted by cell phones.  


The last words that Senator Blumenthal spoke during the hearing were:


There really is no research ongoing… we’re kind of flying blind here.


Even after this damning testimony, the Wall Street Journal reported in December of 2019, “The Federal Communications Commission has decided to allow the rollout of new 5G wireless networks without making changes to federal safety limits for cellphone-radiation exposure.”


Experts in the field continue to warn of the dangers of proceeding with the 5G rollout.  Dr. Martin Pall said it best. 


We are taking risks of the sort that no rational society can possibly take.  And we’re doing this blindly, and in my judgment, with absolute stupidity.


Please don't ignore expert warnings about 5G.

HEALNC