5g will split the Earth in two.

5G Wireless: A Dangerous ‘Experiment on Humanity’

Scientists, environmental groups, doctors and citizens around the world are appealing to all governments to halt telecommunications companies’ deployment of 5G (fifth generation) wireless networks, which they call “an experiment on humanity and the environment that is defined as a crime under international law.” Research has shown that wireless radiation can cause DNA damage, neuropsychiatric effects and other health problems. RT America’s Michele Greenstein joins Rick Sanchez to discuss.

Quote:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G

dear master Light,
I found this website which claims that it's safe
although I don't really believe that any amount of exposure
to microwaves or any radio waves is completely safe.
I certainly wouldn't want to be living next to a base station.
Many people will, and I fear for their health.
(I think base stations can put out about 20 watts of power although I'm not sure.)


http://www.emfexplained.info/?ID=25914#Are%20there%20safety%20limits%20for%205G%...

WHAT DO THE EXPERTS SAY ABOUT 5G AND HEALTH?


In relation to radio frequency exposures and wireless technology and health, the general conclusion from the World Health Organization (WHO) is;

“Despite extensive research, to date there is no evidence to conclude that exposure to low level electromagnetic fields is harmful to human health”
WHO - About Electromagnetic Fields – Summary of Health Effects Key Point 6

In relation to wireless networks and health, the conclusion from the WHO is:

“Considering the very low exposure levels and research results collected to date, there is no convincing scientific evidence that the weak RF signals from base stations and wireless networks cause adverse health effects.”   

Source WHO Backgrounder on base stations and wireless technologies

On mobile phone safety the World Health Organization advises:

"A large number of studies have been performed over the last two decades to assess whether mobile phones pose a potential health risk. To date, no adverse health effects have been established as being caused by mobile phone use."

“While an increased risk of brain tumors is not established, the increasing use of mobile phones and the lack of data for mobile phone use over time periods longer than 15 years warrant further research of mobile phone use and brain cancer risk. In particular, with the recent popularity of mobile phone use among younger people, and therefore a potentially longer lifetime of exposure, WHO has promoted further research on this group. Several studies investigating potential health effects in children and adolescents are underway”

WHO Fact Sheet 193 June 2014 - Electromagnetic fields and public health: mobile phones

5G may not be detrimental to your physical or mental health, but if you just shelled out $500 for a device that will soon redundant, its your wallet's health you should be worrying about. The electronic communications industry, with its planned obsolescence, makes the automotives look like kindergarten.

well this is interesting ,

Brussels Banns 5G

this is where all the banking elites and EU types hang out  ,

and so they go ahead and bann 5 G ???

what do they know that you don't ?

should we care or just watch tv and forget about it ??

https://imherald.com/2019/04/05/brussels-becomes-first-major-city-to-ban-5g-wire...

Brussels becomes first major city to ban 5G wireless connection

By Stella Byrd - April 5, 2019

Brussels has decided to not follow through with initial plans for a project of providing high-speed 5G wireless internet. The decision was made due to fears for the health of citizens, according to reports.
In July, the government concluded an agreement with three telecom operators to relax the strict radiation standards in Brussels. But according to the Region, it is now impossible to estimate the radiation from the antennas required for the service.

The statement was made by Céline Fremault, the Minister of the Government of the Brussels-Capital Region, responsible for Housing, Quality of Life, Environment and Energy. From an interview last Friday, with L’Echo:

“I cannot welcome such technology if the radiation standards, which must protect the citizen, are not respected, 5G or not. The people of Brussels are not guinea pigs whose health I can sell at a profit. We cannot leave anything to doubt.”

– Céline Fremault, Minister of the Government (Brussels-Captial Region), responsible for Housing, Quality of Life, Environment and Energy

A pilot project is not feasible with the current radiation standards ( (9 V/m, or 95 mW/m2 according to this online converter), and Fremault told Bruzz that she does not intend to make an exception.

The Brussels region has particularly strict radiation standards for telecom applications. The standard of 6 volts per metre has already led to problems in the past with providing fast mobile internet via 4G in the capital.

However, many government agencies still only consider thermal effects, instead of the cumulative body of thousands of peer-reviewed scientific studies.)

But maybe now, with Brussels heading up the European Union, and with one of the two major 5G appeals being addressed to the EU, officials there are better informed and motivated to protect themselves.

Why is the 5G connection so detrimental?

Corporate manipulation is the main reason why authorities fear this transition towards 5G. It could put us all under unprecedented surveillance and control, leading to the advancement of technology becoming less useful and more dangerous.

On another level, an even bigger issue that we need to address is whether 5G poses a major threat to all biological life or not. Unbiased opinions say that it does. And hundreds of scientists are trying everything to sound the alarm.

5G technologies are far less studied for human effects. The addition of this 5G radiation to an already complex mix of lower frequencies, will likely contribute to  negative public health outcomes – both physically and mentally. The new 5G technology utilizes high-frequency millimeter waves (MMW), which give off the same dose of radiation as airport scanners. Continuous exposure in close proximity to people’s homes and workplaces may pose serious risks.

And 5G technology is not only bad for humans, it harms plant and animal life as well. One study found low-intensity MMW cause “peroxidase isoenzyme spectrum changes,” which damages cells.

And if things weren’t bad enough, it seems that the 5G infrastructure would also pose a threat to our planet’s atmosphere.

On the opposite team, we find the heads of the wireless industry, that haven’t done any specific studies and seem to be totally fine with admitting it.

One of the complaining voices is Dr. Martin Pall, the WSU Professor Emeritus, who’s done some research on the mechanism of how wireless radiation causes harm in our cells. He says that “Putting in tens of millions of 5G antennae without a single biological test of safety has got to be about the stupidest idea anyone has had in the history of the world”.

Also, writer and TV personality, Michael Snyder noted last month that 5G may be incredibly dangerous – as it’s “ultra high frequency and ultra high intensity. Basically the radiation that we will constantly be absorbing will be much, much, much more powerful than before, and the sources emitting the radiation will be much closer to us”.

You can also watch some of how this type of radiation might affect our well being, and maybe have a reality check on the level of greed and depravity among some leading technology behemoths.

Hundreds of Respected Scientists Sound The Alarm With MAJOR WARNING About 5G Health Effects!!!

https://emfscientist.org/index.php/emf-scientist-appeal

International EMF Scientist Appeal
Printable PDF format

Summary, PDF format

To:    His Excellency Antonio Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations;
         Honorable Dr. Tedros Adhanom, Director-General of the World Health Organization
         Honorable Joyce Msuya, Acting Executive Director of the U.N. Environment Program and Assistant Secretary-General of the U.N.;
         U.N. Member Nations



International Appeal
Scientists call for Protection from Non-ionizing Electromagnetic Field Exposure
We are scientists engaged in the study of biological and health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF). Based upon peer-reviewed, published research, we have serious concerns regarding the ubiquitous and increasing exposure to EMF generated by electric and wireless devices. These include–but are not limited to–radiofrequency radiation (RFR) emitting devices, such as cellular and cordless phones and their base stations, Wi-Fi, broadcast antennas, smart meters, and baby monitors as well as electric devices and infra-structures used in the delivery of electricity that generate extremely-low frequency electromagnetic field (ELF EMF).



Scientific basis for our common concerns

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. 

These findings justify our appeal to the United Nations (UN) and, all member States in the world, to encourage the World Health Organization (WHO) to exert strong leadership in fostering the development of more protective EMF guidelines, encouraging precautionary measures, and educating the public about health risks, particularly risk to children and fetal development.  By not taking action, the WHO is failing to fulfill its role as the preeminent international public health agency.



Inadequate non-ionizing EMF international guidelines

The various agencies setting safety standards have failed to impose sufficient guidelines to protect the general public, particularly children who are more vulnerable to the effects of EMF.  The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) established in 1998 the “Guidelines For Limiting Exposure To Time-Varying Electric, Magnetic, and Electromagnetic Fields (up to 300 GHz)” . These guidelines are accepted by the WHO and numerous countries around the world. The WHO is calling for all nations to adopt the ICNIRP guidelines to encourage international harmonization of standards. In 2009, the ICNIRP released a statement saying that it was reaffirming its 1998 guidelines, as in their opinion, the scientific literature published since that time “has provided no evidence of any adverse effects below the basic restrictions and does not necessitate an immediate revision of its guidance on limiting exposure to high frequency electromagnetic fields . ICNIRP continues to the present day to make these assertions, in spite of growing scientific evidence to the contrary. It is our opinion that, because the ICNIRP guidelines do not cover long-term exposure and low-intensity effects, they are insufficient to protect public health.

The WHO adopted the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classification of extremely low frequency magnetic fields (ELF EMF) in 2002  and radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in 2011 . This classification states that EMF is a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B).  Despite both IARC findings, the WHO continues to maintain that there is insufficient evidence to justify lowering these quantitative exposure limits.

Since there is controversy about a rationale for setting standards to avoid adverse health effects, we recommend that the United Nations Environmental Programme  (UNEP) convene and fund an independent multidisciplinary committee to explore the pros and cons of alternatives to current practices that could substantially lower human exposures to RF and ELF fields. The deliberations of this group should be conducted in a transparent and impartial way. Although it is essential that industry be involved and cooperate in this process, industry should not be allowed to bias its processes or conclusions. This group should provide their analysis to the UN and the WHO to guide precautionary action.



Collectively we also request that:

children and pregnant women be protected;
guidelines and regulatory standards be strengthened;
manufacturers be encouraged to develop safer technology;
utilities responsible for the generation, transmission, distribution, and monitoring of electricity maintain adequate power quality and ensure proper electrical wiring to minimize harmful ground current;
the public be fully informed about the potential health risks from electromagnetic energy and taught harm reduction strategies;

it_is_the_light wrote on May 27^th, 2019 at 5:02pm:


As a technician of HF radio transmitters of many years, I'm screwed.

Dear master Light,
I wouldn't be scared of 5G any more than 4G or 3G.
Unless you live right in front of a 5G tower we
are talking about only a few micro watts of electromagnetic radiation.
You probably get a lot more leaking out of your microwave oven.