5G and beyond

Joel M. Moskowitz writing in Scientific American: “We Have No reason to believe 5G is Safe”

Excerpt: The technology is coming, but contrary to what some people say, there could be health risksBy Joel M. Moskowitz, October 17, 2019The telecommunications industry and their experts have accused many scientists who have researched the effects of cell phone radiation of “fear mongering” over the advent of wireless technology’s 5G. Since much of our research is publicly-funded, we believe it is our ethical responsibility to inform the public about what the peer-reviewed scientific literature tells us about the health risks from wireless radiation.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.”..SNIP

TPG says community health fears stopped its 5G rollout in Australia

When it was first announced that TPG had pulled out of its planned 5G rollout, using Huawei’s equipment in Australia, it was widely assumed that this was a result of the Australian government’s ban on Huawei because of security fears (Huawei is a Chinese company with connections to the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese military) . However it now appears that TTP’s change of plans was also due to community 5G health concerns according to TPG’s chief operating executive Craig Levy testifying in the Federal Court.Note in the below article where it mentions research which is claimed to find that 5G radiation is safer than previous networks. The author should have dug deeper. The paper referred to is not research but just an 11 page justifiation why Cornell University follows the FCC limits (300 kHz to 100 GHz). Its just the old Procrustean Approach dressed up in new clothing (or putting lipstick on a pig) and is totally inadequate for a claim that 5G is safe.The ‘take home’ message for the Business Insider article is that community protest concerns over 5G are having an effect. Read on….

2 articles: 1)The Austrian (not Australian) Parliament asks for evaluation of 5G and health – do not hold your breath / 2) Canberra (Australia) Citynews on 5G deployment

From the blog of Dariusz Leszczynski Excerpt: Recently, telecompaper has informed that the Austrian parliament has commissioned a study into the health effects of 5G networks due to concerns among the public that the new generation of mobile services could pose risks from increased radiation exposure. The Advisory Council on Technology Assessment of the Austrian Parliament has decided to obtain expertise in the field and appointed a consortium of the Institute for Technology Assessment of the Austrian Academy of Sciences and the Austrian Institute of Technology to conduct a study. The research institutes already provide the parliament with scientific advice on many topics. The study is expected to be ready by January 2020, providing an overview of the latest research on the topic. The report will be published on the parliament’s website.”At first, the reader of these news might be encouraged by seeing that the Austrian Parliament addresses concerns about the potential health risks of exposures to 5G-emitted radiation. However, as always, the “devil is in the details”. Reading description of this project, available on the website of the Institute of Technology Assessment of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, provides the proverbial “bucket of cold water”. It appears that the “evaluation” will likely be nothing new but recap of the existing mantra…SNIP

In other words just more of the Procrustean Approach….

FCC Chairman Ajit Pai loses another court case as judges overturn 5G deregulation

One of Ajit Pai’s attempts to eliminate regulation of 5G deployment has been overturned by federal judges.The Federal Communications Commission last year approved an order that “exempted most small cell construction from two kinds of previously required review: historic-preservation review under the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) and environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA),” federal judges said in their decision partially overturning the order.The FCC claimed its deregulation of small cells was necessary to spur deployment of 5G wireless networks. But the commission was sued by the United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma, the Blackfeet Tribe, and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). The FCC order was of particular interest to tribal groups because it affected construction on “sites of religious and cultural importance to federally recognized Indian Tribes,” the judges noted. “The Order also effectively reduced Tribes’ role in reviewing proposed construction of macrocell towers and other wireless facilities that remain subject to cultural and environmental review.”The FCC’s opponents argued that the elimination of historic-preservation and environmental review was arbitrary and capricious, that it violated both the NHPA and NEPA, and that the changes to tribes’ role in reviewing construction was arbitrary and capricious. A three-judge panel of the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued its unanimous ruling today.Judges wrote that Pai’s order “does not justify the Commission’s determination that it was not in the public interest to require review of small cell deployments. In particular, the Commission failed to justify its confidence that small cell deployments pose little to no cognizable religious, cultural, or environmental risk, particularly given the vast number of proposed deployments and the reality that the Order will principally affect small cells that require new construction.”The FCC also failed to “adequately address possible harms of deregulation and benefits of environmental and historic-preservation review,” which means the commission’s “deregulation of small cells is thus arbitrary and capricious,” judges concluded…SNIP

Response: 5G and Wireless Risks to Public Health

Excerpt

From Health Central New ZealandDr. Pri Bandara and Dr. Julie McCredden from Oceania Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory Association (ORSAA) weigh in on a series of recent articles published on Health Central around the effects of 5G.July 25, 2019There has been a lot of hype around 5G and there is some misinformation in this information-overloaded time we live in. We contend the article by Katie Chadwick-Smith titled “Response: Claims that 5G is damaging to our health are misleading” in reply to a previous article by Dr. Tracy Chandler is riddled with false statements and is grossly misleading.Consider the following claim by Chadwick-Smith: “The link Dr Chandler provides as evidence for the relationship between cellphones and cancer is nothing more than a collection of presentations and newspaper articles based on suppositions and wishful thinking for those prone to conspiracy theories.” This seems strange considering that Dr. Chandler’s article made no such reference to cell phones and cancer specifically but instead referred to a vast collection of peer-reviewed studies on the website maintained by Dr. Joel M. Moskowitz, Director of the Center for Family and Community Health at School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley.  It appears that Chadwick-Smith did not bother to check anything before making this attempt to discredit Dr. Chandler’s article. As cell phone use and cancer is raised, the reality is far from what Chadwick-Smith claims. The scientific evidence actually shows an increased risk. For example, a review that collated data from 24 studies in a large meta-analysis which included 26,846 brain tumour cases and 50,013 healthy controls, showed a significantly higher risk for those with mobile phone use over 10 years.The Oceania Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory Association (ORSAA) is the only independent (hence without conflicts of interest) scientific organization operating in the Australia-New Zealand region investigating the health impact of RF-EMR. Our database is now the world’s largest categorized database of peer-reviewed studies in this field of scientific study which is freely available for anyone at www.orsaa.org. The scientists at ORSAA are volunteering to establish the much-needed evidence-based approach to risk assessment in this highly contentious area due to strong financial conflicts of interest competing with public safety….SNIP

Swiss magazine reports first 5G injuries in Geneva.

Published in L’illustre, Thursday 18 July 2019″

L’Illustré is a French-language weekly consumer magazine published in Lausanne, Switzerland. The circulation of L’Illustré was 76,697 copies in 2014 and its readership was 338,000 in the second half of 2014.

Excerpt

Since 5G antennas were installed near their home in the heart of Geneva, these residents of the same area suffer from various health problems. Are they victims of a technology whose dangers were not sufficiently tested? A doctor and member of parliament speaks out.Gathered in the apartment of one of the two, on the fifth floor of a building in the centre of Geneva, these residents of the same area look at each other. What they have in common is insomnia, tinnitus, headaches. And a lot of unanswered questions. The youngest, Johan Perruchoud, 29, has lived there for 11 years and is not the type to cultivate any sort of hatred of invasive technology. He is a healthy young man, active and positive, who has just returned from four years in New York and makes finely crafted videos and films for the media or for individuals, often working in his room with his computer.”Like in a microwave oven”For him and for his neighbour it all started in April. “I’ve never had a problem with Wi- Fi or any of that and never had problems sleeping – and then suddenly I had trouble falling asleep. In particular at home I felt – how can I put it? – like I was in a microwave. I didn’t feel good in the house, as if I was surrounded by ghosts.” When he looked on Facebook and on the website of the Confederation, he saw that three 5G antennas had been put into service nearby and that other people were complaining of identical problems, headaches, tiredness. “Was it psychological? I don’t know. But for the first time, although I have never had earaches while composing my music, my ears started whistling. It woke me up at night. All of this was unusual.”…SNIP