Savings lives and staying safe

With Covid’s spread, the resounding mantra of ministers and media is one of health protection:
saving lives and staying safe. But this great concern for our preservation jars with the reckless
dispatch of 5G, the corollary of which is described as ‘pan epidemic’ in the International Scienti c
Declaration on Electrical Hyper Sensitivity (EHS) and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS). It
spells harm not only to humans, especially children, but all living organisms - the birds that
emerged in the metropolitan reprieve, the mammals, wildlife, insects, trees and plants, that is, just
about everything alive. 5G radiation is up to 100 times stronger than its predecessors (2-4G), that
have shown multiple health harms to humans and all living organisms in thousands of studies. The
majority’s ignorance of the fact is testimony to the power of media silence. And concoction. 5G
sceptics have been successfully tarred as conspiracy theorising fools, while the hundreds of
scientists who called for a moratorium pending adequate testing go unmentioned. Industry allied
governments, regulators and the mainstream media are ignoring a huge body of scienti c evidence
dating back to the 1930’s (Schliephake 1932, Cook 1979) showing the health harms caused by
electromagnetic radiation.

The World Health Organisation (WHO) classi ed non ionising radio frequency radiation (RFR) as a
possible carcinogen in 2011. 4G runs on 700-2,700 MHz. 5G will operate at low frequency 700
MHz, high frequency 3.4-3/8 GHz, or very high frequency with MM waves, at 26 GHz RFR and
above. Biological effects at higher frequencies will overlay and augment those predicted at lower
frequencies (Kostoff 2020, Butler 2020) yet it is being released untested. It has been falsely
portrayed as safe by the mainstream media, while thousands of studies proving the opposite
languish on the hallowed shelves of governmental regulators and policy makers, all of whom have
industry ties through funding or af liation. (Hardell 2017, Alster 2015, Kushnick 2018, Starkey
2016).

The EU Commission, World Health Organisation (WHO), Federal Communications Commission

(FCC) and Public Health England (PHE), adhere to the International Commission on Non Ionizing
Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines, the bunkum of which occupies a minority viewpoint
within the scienti c community. The mainstream, rational science accepts the proven long term
non-thermal effects of RFR and electromagnetic elds (EMF) including cancers, along with short
term and heating effects. It constitutes the majority viewpoint since it is backed by 80% of studies
showing non thermal harm. Yet this view is dismissed and minimised by regulators and the
mainstream media, while credence instead is given to the ICNIRP, a private 13 member company
calling itself an international one, positively stiff with con ict of interest (Hardell 2020, Carpenter
2019), citing only industry funded studies, while denying the existence of genuine ones. Its latest
document of so called safety levels was described as fraudulent by Professor Martin Pall (Pall
2020).

There is something bipolar in the rollout of untested microwave radiation, while civil liberties are
sliced purportedly to ‘save lives’ from a virus. As Covid 19 mortality actually effects a tiny fraction
of the population, and 5G is likely to harm all, ‘safety’ measures crashing world economies do not
quite compute. Studies show that EMF impairs the immune system (Johansson 2009, El-Gohary
2017, Grigoriev 2010, Lin 2013) 5G, because it is so much stronger, is likely to increase this effect
- particularly apt in times of pandemic. The level of inadequately tested experimentation on
humans with the new Covid vaccine bears similarities to the treatment of 5G radiation. We are
guinea pigs, kept safe.

fi

fi

fi
fi
fl
fi
fi
In the U.S there are well over 4,000 5G cells up already, and with the ‘red tape’ of planning laws
sorted i.e. ripped up by the FCC in 2018, and appeals despatched in 2020, they are proliferating.

5G will power the Internet of Things (IoT) which will see smart meters, household appliances and
gadgets interactively sending and receiving signals, or the marvel of driverless cars and microscopic
computers in ‘smart dust’. In addition, 5G will be beamed down continually from satellites. Until
now, there was an option to move from phone masts, but this will be removed once satellites are in
operation. The IoT will also use wireless networks to collect and analyse data about the
environment, traffic, water, transit, lighting, waste management, security and parking. Not
forgetting each individual, down to the ne stitch.

In the home, smart meters have been promoted as the greenest, cheapest new mode of electrical
supply, when they are in fact the opposite. There are numerous reports of health problems by
residents who have had them installed. The sales initiative is streaks ahead in the U.S., where
engineers broke into homes while residents were out, installing meters without their consent. These
gems of ingenuity act as antennae in the home, and their radiation is ten times stronger than that of
mobile phones. Stop Smart Meters UK campaign group have described the radiation level as equal
to that of phone masts, found to cause cancer to residents within 200-600 metres (Ahlbom 2000,
Draper and Kroll 2005, Lin and Lee 1994, Henshaw and Reiter 2005). The smart meters operate in
a wireless connection system with neighbours’ smart meters and transmit high bursts of non-
ionizing radiation 24 hours a day. As well as the things they say it can do, and what it actually
does, the smart meter is an adept surveillance device for the utility supplier, and potential hackers.
It updates residents’ activities every fifteen minutes, rather than the quarterly bill assessment, and
can ascertain how many people are in the house, the room they are in, how much each uses and so
on. Smart meters therefore pose a real security and safety risk to home owners, as hackers can
easily find out when the house is empty, or children are at home alone.

Speaking of tracking, Nappies that alert parents’ iPhone of their dampness have been touted as
another one of the IoT’s great perks. This would entail exposing a baby to harmful levels of
radiation. Bizarrely, they are plugged in Pampers’ promo lit as ‘Lumi that tracks babies.’ It is not
just the infants’ parents who would be able to track them if they had a mind, which adds to the
product’s danger. Another novel item is a paci er with a thermometer inside which sends
information about the baby’s temperature to the parents’ iPhone, and transmits radiation inside the
baby’s head.

Recently, a monitor created to protect families from intruders, performed quite the reverse.
Customers of Google’s company, NEST, were accessed by hackers who played pornography to one
family’s three year old daughter. The ease with which hackers acquired access begs the question of
how things will be when 20 billion internet connected things are in operation. Dr Magda Havas
detailed how wi fi monitors also expose babies to microwave radiation, and its link to rising autism,
childhood cancer and erratic heart rates in infants.

Deployment

fi
fi

Like birds, rising numbers of electro sensitives ock to EMF free zones, named ‘dead spots’ by
phone companies. It is a marvel that in times of Corona, while most were under virtual house
arrest, their earnings wiped, phone companies had never been busier, rescuing all from the ‘nasty
white spots’ and ‘radio gaps.’ In April 2020, Vodafone announced it had implemented more than
1,000 Long Term Evolution (LTE) projects in the past few months for 140,000 users in 80 German
cities. This coincided with the advent of blue tit deaths rst reported in Germany, and spreading to
other species across Europe.

Data from Pro Publica shows that in early 2020, the US Cellular Telecommunications and Internet
Association (CTIA) lobbied for two laws covering 5G deployment. On March 23, 2020 the Secure
5G and beyond Act called for Congress to present a plan for accelerating 5G in ’no less than 180
days’. The Broadband Deployment Accuracy and Technological Availability Act came in,
empowering the FCC to issue permits on Broadband providers’ data collection of users. While the
UK Electronics Communications Code has distinguished itself from the European Electronic
Communications Code it is much the same, with the shared objective of making it easier and
cheaper for phone companies to install 5G.

As well as a high incidence of cancer in residents living within 300m, there are common
complaints of skin rash, cardiovascular problems, abnormal fatigue, appetite loss, memory loss,
headaches, dizziness, brain fog, depression, sleeping trouble and visual disorder. (Levitt & Lai
2010, Abdel-Rassoul 2007, Santini 2002, Navarro 2003). The Stewart Report (2000) warning
against placing masts near homes or schools was ignored. 5G demands denser installation due to
the short travel distance of mm waves - small cells must be placed on lamp posts every 100 to 300
metres, close to schools and hospitals where they will do the most harm. To allay any health
concerns by foolish hand wringers, antennae are being concealed within obtuse planning
applications, entwined in church spires and roof tops. Or beneath roads, although Vodafone are
taciturn as to the extent of that enterprise. One little anecdote is the 5G cells Camden planned for St.
Mary’s Church in West Hampstead, London, next to a Montessori nursery and a primary school, in
a joint network sharing agreement by Telefonica and Vodafone. There was no mention of 5G
antennae on the planning application’s cover, and was only discoverable by vigilant re-readers. For
the Taplow plan in Swiss Cottage, London, Telefonica applied to install a MACRO multi band base
station including 2-5G antennae, between 5-60 times stronger. The deadline was publicly extended,
then retrospectively closed on the original date, so that later objections were excluded from the
public consultation. This gave the false appearance of less objections than there were. Roughly
the same style as the ICNIRP, which simply denied the existence of studies showing health harms
(Hardell 2020). To speed deployment, the July 2020 reform has allowed existing phone masts to
upgrade to 5G without prior approval.

Objection has been curtailed by the withholding of particulars. Minor details, such as cancer, brain
damage, autism, miscarriage, DNA damage, and the like. People have simply not been informed.
Norm Alster noted that public ignorance may be the best ally of industry and the FCC. In 2015, An
online poll conducted for an EMF project asked 202 respondents to con rm or deny listed
statements. Only 1.5% of respondents believed the fact that ‘the US Congress forbids local
communities from considering health effects when deciding whether to issue zoning permits for
wireless antennae.’ (Alster 2015). If cities object or refuse installation, they can be sued. The UK

has followed suite, removing the clause of health concerns from its reformulated 2018 National
Planning Policy Framework, only allowing objections on the grounds of aesthetics. A further

fl
fi
fi

reform of July 2020 gave the aesthetics objection more of a chance - height restrictions set at 82 feet
(25m) can now be doubled to 165 ft (50mm), in a bid to propel 5G into the countryside. Blights to
the landscape in the form of ugly metal towers will litter what remains of the land’s natural beauty,
the protection of which was erased already in the 2012 National Planning Policy Framework.

Advocates have suggested that the Church of England could solve the problem of 5G installation in
the countryside, entwining its antennae in their spires. Locals can use 5G beam steering which
enables handheld devices to target radio waves by directing them at the antennae. The pitch is of
rescue for those deprived of 5G’s laurels. Rural dwellers who ‘go without’ must be redeemed. The
Protestant work ethic was sallied with a Biblical quote, for the Church may pro t both monetarily
and spiritually from enabling its parishioners to do God’s good work. As 5G is a weapon grade
entity that will only disable humans, it makes perfect sense to use it for enhanced productivity.

But 5G in church spires is only an upgrade, in many respects. In 2002, the Church of England
signed a deal with Quintel S4 to install its masts on their roofs. They were paid rent of up to
£10,000 per year per mast, and Quintel then rented the masts out to phone companies. Covert
installation on roofs of public buildings is an unknown quantity, and expediently bypasses
objections. The UK courtship may be inspired by those in the U.S and Germany, where churches
have been wooed in much the same way.

In order to utilize the higher speed, consumers need to use 5G devices. Samsung, Motorola,
Huawei, LG, One Plus and Apple have released 5G phones. With or without a 5G device, people
would still be irradiated by emissions from household gadgets, appliances and smart meters,
connected through the IoT.

Satellites
Another feather to 5G’s bow is its stupendous ubiquity. It will be beamed down via satellites that
cover the earth, adding a thicker layer to the blanket of radiation already formed by the earlier
frequencies. There is Elon Musk’s company, SpaceX’s Starlink, Amazon’s Project Kuiper, the UK
based One Web, Facebook, Google’s company, ‘Loon’, Spire Global, Boeing, Telesat, Lynk,

fi

 Roscosmos, Huawei and the Chinese state owned company, Aerospace Science and Industry Corp,
all launching thousands of satellites. China Aerospace Science-Technology are the main contractor
for the Chinese space programme, one of its subordinate entities which prepare and launch
spacecraft and also strategic and tactical missile systems. They will replicate the ground based
phased array antenna 5G system. There is even a back-up system of LEO satellite constellations
supplementing 5G ground based stations, in the event of natural disasters. Opt out is not an option.
Satellites are not biodegradable. After use, they will both damage the ozone layer and litter the
earth’s thermosphere and exosphere with debris - garnishing the great green revolution.
Overheating in large numbers will contribute to climate change. Blaming fossil fuels for climate
change is like blaming climate change for the decimation of bees and wildlife.

Like smart meters, satellites are expedient surveillance devices, and some companies investing in
them specialize in just that. Spire Global, a global data and analytics company, uses satellites to
‘collect data from beneath the earth’s surface to the edge of the atmosphere.’ Its satellites track
global data - weather, maritime and aviation patterns. Surveillance deployment is, of course,
wonderfully broad based.

Those launching their troops of 5G satellites ignored earlier research. The repercussions from a
small trial in 1998 gave fair warning. Arthur Firstenburg, journalist and former engineer, reported
that on September 23rd of that year, Motorola launched 66 Iridium satellites for an iridium cell
phone trial service of 2,000 phones. On October 1st, 1998, members of his EMF health group
interviewed 57 electromagnetic sensitives in six countries, 86% of whom became ill on the
Wednesday, 23rd September, showing symptoms of nausea, headaches, dizziness, insomnia,
nosebleeds, heart palpitations, asthma attacks, and tinnitus. Follow ups revealed that some people
suffered extreme illness for up to three weeks afterwards. There was also a 4-5% rise in the
national death rate during the two weeks of the trial in 1998.

The outcomes of the satellite trial 22 years ago would corroborate later studies showing EMF’s
disruption to bird migration. During those three months in 1998, thousands of homing pigeons lost
their way in races throughout Eastern America. More than 3,000 birds disappeared in one week.
Out of 1,800 competing in a 200 mile race from New Market, Virginia to Allentown, Pennsylvania,
roughly 1,500 vanished. Organizers were mysti ed - the situation was unprecedented. As this was
the result of a relatively small trial of cellular phone satellites, it makes perfect sense to redouble
them, at a far greater frequency.

Appeals and Consultations

In the Broadband and the Road to 5G Inquiry by the UK government, inviting submissions until
June 2020, there was no focus whatsoever on health, but instead what was needed to achieve
nationwide 5G and how to get everyone ‘keeping pace.’ Eileen O’Conner, director of the Radiation
Research Trust, submitted a letter to the UK Parliament enquiry, in which she reminded committee
members of its effects.

fi

 International scientists have been crying out for rmer regulations if not a freeze on wireless
technologies since 1998. The 1998 Vienna Resolution was followed by more than 20 resolution
papers including the Stewart Report of 2000, the Catania Resolution and the Benevento Resolution,
the Salzburg Resolution in Austria and the Freiburg Appeal in Germany, signed by 3,000 German
doctors in 2002. Not a word of this was reported by the mainstream media. Instead of reporting on
the reliable, rationalist views of scientists, doctors and teachers, whose doubts are rooted in science
and epidemiology, the media are cherry picking the most eccentric and outlandish ones. This has
produced a false dichotomy and undermined the truth. Falsely portraying all critics and objectors as
‘crackpots’ while dismissing and ridiculing the science is a consistent industry ploy.

In 2015, 240 scientists from over 40 countries submitted an EMF appeal to the United Nations, the
World Health Organization, the FCC, the EU Commission and all world leaders, expressing ‘serious
concerns’ about increasing exposure to EMF from electric/wireless devices. It pointed out that
EMF was impacting all living organisms at levels below most international and national guidelines.
The letter warned that exposure could lead to cancer risk and a host of health problems that
stretched beyond the human race to all living things. The petition was resubmitted to the U.N.
Environmental Programme in 2019. As of November, 2020, it has been signed by 252 scientists
from 43 nations.

The 5G eu.appeal was first sent to the then EU Commissioner, Vytenis Andriukaitis, in September,
2017. 260 Scientists, teachers and medical doctors from over 40 countries requested a moratorium
on 5G pending adequate investigation into effects. The appeal enumerated cancer including
leukaemia and brain glioma, miscarriage, sperm count reduction in men, hormone disruption, birth
defects (teratogenicity), apoptosis - including DNA damage, learning difficulties, cognitive
impairment in children, attention deficit and hyperactivity disorders , autism, blood-brain barrier
leakage, dementia, electromagnetic sensitivity, sleep disorders, depression, a lowering of the
immune system, parotid damage (salivary gland tumour behind the ear), and amyotrophic lateral
sclerosis. The appeal went back and forth between 2017-19, with 4 rebuttals from the director,
John Ryan, who declared the thousands of peer reviewed studies proving harm were all
inconclusive, and the only reliable ones were those stating the opposite. After the fourth negation in
October, 2019, the appeal was confirmed by 230 ‘truly independent’ scientists and physicians from
36 countries. (Hardell 2020). The 5G Space Appeal, to stop 5G on Earth and in Space has more
than 83,000 signatories from 168 countries. The most recent appeal in November, 2020, was sent by
Stop5GInternational.org addressed to the U.N. secretary.

The EU and WHO have mentioned harmonisation of EMF limits amongst other laws. As countries
homogenise to adopt the ICNIRP guidelines, independent scienti c research that does not comply
with industry is being pushed out through funding deprival. Doctors, scientists and other biological

medical experts called for stricter regulation and/or a moratorium on wireless technology in 2018.
The International Society of Doctors for the Environment (ISDE) objected to the EU 2016

Commission Action Plan ‘for timely and co-ordinated deployment of 5G networks in Europe
through a partnership between the commission, member states and industry.’ Agostino Di Ciaula,
representing the ISDE, appealed for a moratorium pending adequate testing, citing scientific
evidence of health harms. An appeal was also made to Nordic Prime ministers on March 29, 2019.
The only reply was from the Swedish government, saying they rely on Swedish Radiation Safety
Authority SSM and there were no risks. But the SSM relies on the ICNIRP. In August, 2019, the

fi

fi

 FCC published a news release stating that it would not change its 23 year old radiation guidelines.
Submissions were invited until November, 2019. Between June 25, 2012 and November 1st, 2019,
(lastly revised, October 2019), it received more than 1200 submissions, many including multiple
documents. When the FCC dismissed these studies and went ahead, they were issued with legal
proceedings by the Environmental Health Trust with Children’s Health Defence, who won a
landmark victory on 13th August, 2021.

The most recent appeal was an open letter addressed to Michelle Bachelat, UN Commissioner for
Human Rights, in November, 2020. It is increasingly clear that consultations are more or less
cosmetic, conclusions are foregone and the population's health is negligible.

The fact that these studies are being ignored or denied now is not surprising in light of the fact that
Western regulators, policy makers and the military have had full knowledge of EMF’s harms since
the early 60’s. In a 2009 presentation by Andrew Michrowski at the Toronto Whole Life Expo, he
pointed out that today’s wireless devices had progressed from technology begun in the 1940’s.

‘It is not generally appreciated that the advanced nature of wireless gadgets being currently marketed is
founded on devices that have been around since the 1940s. … Precise, quality, straightforward medical and
scienti c research since the 1950s details radio frequency and microwave effects – without in uence of
stocks, PR and lawyers. By the 1970s, electromagnetic, electrochemical, cascade effect equations were well
de ned for tissues, cells, intracellular & extracellular uids and macromolecular effects on living systems…
Analysis of 1950-1974 mortality of 40,000 Korean War veterans shows that microwave exposure effect is
cumulative - it affects all deaths … doubling to tripling cancers of eye, brain and central nervous system,
lymphatic and haematopoietic (platelet-forming) and digestive systems. This means that even ‘weak’ and
short exposures from wireless systems accumulate over the years and decades to engender serious disease.’

MM waves were rst developed secretly for military use by several nations, in the form of radar,
before and during WWII. Between 1940-1960, research was conducted on the effects of radiation
on radar workers and other military personnel who presented with symptoms including cataracts,
microwave hearing effect and electro magnetic sensitivity, a condition which spread in the early
90’s with the advent of EMF. A collection of 2,300 studies carried out by U.S. Naval and Aircraft
was assimilated in 1971. Many of these showed biological effects of non thermal radiation. Also,
in 1960 the U.S. Department of Defence tested the impact of EMR on animals and humans, in a
study named Operation Pandora. This was carried out after Soviet targeting of American Embassy
personnel between 1960-1979 with electromagnetic waves 500x weaker than U.S limits of 10mW/
cm2 (Martinez 2019). It was suspected that the American Ambassador and two embassy
employees’ death from leukaemia was a direct result. In April 1976 the then Secretary of State,
Henry Kissinger, sent a telegram to the U.S. Embassy in Moscow which summarised the
conclusions of the study of the Moscow signal.

Subject: Radiation and UHF and Electromagnetic Dangers 1.

On April 6, AFSA president John Hemenway submitted the following report to AFSA's governing board:

'Beginning in 1960 the Soviet Union directed the high frequency beams of radiation at the U.S. Embassy in
Moscow which were calculated not to pick up intelligence but cause physiological effects on personnel. The
effects the Soviets calculated to achieve in the personnel serving (at least as early as 1960) included (A)
Malaise (B) Irritability, (C) Extreme fatigue. At this time the Soviets believed that the induced effects were
temporary. Subsequently, it has been veri ed that the effects are not temporary. De nitely tied to such
radiation and the UHF/VHF electromagnetic waves are: (A) Cataracts, (B) Blood changes that induce heart
attacks, (C) Malignancies, (D) Circulatory problems, and (E) Permanent deterioration of the nervous
system. In most cases the after-effects do not become evident until long after exposure - a decade or more.’
fi
fi
fi
fi

fl

fi

fl

 The Department of Defence studies were published between 1972-1976.

The nal section of the document states:
‘If the more advanced nations of the West are strict in the enforcement of exposure standard there
could be unfavourable effects on industrial output - industrial output is pro t - and military
function.’ A level of radiation for NATO countries would therefore be set for maximum yield,
rather than safety.

Microwave beams were later aimed at U.S. embassy staff in January, 2018 by the Cubans, allied
with Russia. This was followed by the Chinese in the same year. A retrospective study (Swanson
2018) was conducted as a result of the events in Cuba and China. James Linn of the University of
Illinois, leading investigator of the microwave hearing effect (also known as psychotronics or the
microwave auditory effect), said the diplomats could have suffered brain injury by microwave
beams. They experienced not only noises but headaches, eyesight impairment, sleep disturbance,
sudden depression, vertigo and nausea. From this research evolved a further in depth study (Verma
2019), released in February, 2021. Of the 44 personnel studied, it showed significant decrease in
the brain’s white matter, changes in regional grey and white matter and significant decrease in
functional and tissue connectivity - consistent with brain injury. Changes in white and grey brain
matter were also found in studies of computer game addiction in the young (Lin 2012), which
indicates that electrical magnetic radiation is the contributory factor, rather than the act of gaming
itself. Abnormalities in white and grey brain matter are also present in autistic children.
(Anagnostou, Taylor 2011).

Further research into weaponised uses of 5G mm waves have been planned, and in November 2020,
the Pentagon announced a $6million 5G weaponry experimentation ‘to aid lethality’.

MM waves were also used by U.S. military in crowd dispersal guns called Active Denial Systems
(ADS), to good effect. The Department of Defence developed an RF-EMR crowd control weapon
(ADS) which fires high powered beams of 95GHz waves at people, essentially a mm wavelength
weapon - identical to those used for 5G. Short periods of exposure cause intense skin burning.
Research commissioned by the U.S. army found it was this burning sensation that caused people to
flee. The skin and eyes are the most vulnerable to laser radiation of 5G mm waves, which, if
prolonged, can cause blinding. The internal e-mail within the U.S. army document, obtained by
Donald Friedman under the freedom of information act in 2006, shows the ‘target could be
incapacitated within 15-30 minutes’ of exposure.

In 1968, physicians and scientists called on the U.S. government to produce a paper on the effects
of electromagnetic elds. Accordingly, the U.S. Of ce of Telecommunications Policy assigned
expert contributors to the Program for Control of Electromagnetic Pollution of the Environment,
released in December 1971. This report showed the environmental risks posed by electromagnetic
frequency, but immediately disappeared from public view. It was so well concealed that other
researchers of EMF had no knowledge of it, until Paul Brodeur apparently accessed it and cited
extracts in his book (Brodeur 1977).

In 1970, NASA published a monograph transposing Russian studies of non thermal radiation
impacts on the cardiovascular system, central nervous system, digestive system, blood system and
the immune system (Petrov 1970). NASA followed with a report including studies of EMF impacts
to the nervous and cardio vascular systems of workers, the human circadian rhythm, leukaemia in

fi

fi

fi

fi

 children living near power lines, and further studies on exposed workers suffering from headaches,
lowering of ECG, sleep disturbance, memory loss, lowering of sperm count and decreased body
weight. (Raines 1981).

In October, 1973 a Warsaw symposium was attended by the WHO, with 60 researchers in the eld
of biological effects of electro magnetic frequency on humans. It resulted in a 350 page document
cataloguing health harms by EMF. The WHO have plainly known of RF EMF health harms since
then, which it intentionally concealed, while actively promoting it. In the same year of 1973, the
National Research Council of Canada Control Systems Laboratory specified 22 non-thermal effects
on biosystems, with a flow chart. (Tanner 1973) This is now only viewable on the P.A.C.E EMR
website, having otherwise evaporated online.

In 1996 four German doctors conducted a review (german-report-on-878-Russian-EMF-health-

studies) of 878 Russian electro magnetic health studies made between 1960-1997, commissioned
by the Federal Agency of Telecommunications in Germany. Unlike U.S industry funded studies
which drew the conclusions of no harm by examining only short term effects of no longer than 2
years, the Russian studies looked at long term effects of up to ten years, establishing that long term
exposure is key in the demonstration of serious adverse health effects, while overall weakening of
the immune system through time is another. Exposure limits in Russian and other Eastern block
countries were lower by 3 orders magnitude and all studies at these weaker levels evinced serious
health effects in Russian personnel. The German government behaved in much the same way as the
WHO and the U.S. government, shelving and concealing this seismic document from the people it
would devastate. U.S. scientists knew nothing of this research until it was released in 1996, just as
they had not known of the 1971 research commissioned by the U.S. Office of Telecommunications
Policy.

In his accompanying article, ’Health - a basic human right,’ Dr. Karl Hecht reminds those in
political power of their of cial oath ‘which binds them to dedicate their efforts to the well-being of
the people and the constitution of the democratic state of law, and that ‘restricting scienti c truth
was part of the totalitarian atrocities having occurred in two German dictatorships not that long
ago.’

He goes on.

‘In the policy areas of technology, economy, and health, a nancially healthy industry has
succeeded in gaining government support for securing a future of distorting the truth in supposedly
democratic times. We can only hope that ordinary citizens will wake up and realise the extent of the
deception of the current telecommunications policy and how this deception was produced by
industry and government lobbyists.’

It is clear that governments, regulators and the military were fully informed of non thermal
radiation’s health impacts by 1960. According to physicist, Barry Trower, cell phones were used by
the military in 1965, who, with the U.S., Canada, some NATO countries, Australia and New
Zealand, saw the great monetary potential, and planned to bring them to the public. In his 2020
lecture, he stated they knew cell phones would not be allowed under the safety limits then, and so
they sought one that could never be challenged. In 1965 they adopted the 1953 thermal level

fi

fi
fi
fi

 advocated by Professor L.P. Schwan, a teacher of biomedical engineering, who decreed that if
tissue does not heat up to a certain temperature by six minutes then the body would be safe for a life
time’s exposure. (Barnes, Greenebaum 2020) This has been proven inaccurate by countless studies
and epidemiological evidence. Yet it is what the ICNIRP stands by today.

The quantity, quality and time span of these studies, highlight the complete fallacy of their
‘inconclusiveness’, that the media and regulators keep repeating. As Lennart Hardell wrote,

‘The ICNIRP points out an important scienti c problem: How incorrect data can achieve lives of
their own and gain respectability and credence with inappropriate repetition. Corrections and
clari cations seem to have a dif cult time to counteract any possible errors, which is to the
disadvantage of both good science and public health. Of note, President Franklin D. Roosevelt
stated that ‘Repetition does not transform a lie into a truth.’

Professor Henry Lai, bio-engineer at the University of Washington, led studies showing EMF
effects and was attacked by industry when he published in 1995. At the time, in a leaked e-mail,
Motorola wrote that it planned to ‘war-game’ and undermine his research. In a later analysis
of 326 studies on cell phone radiation from 1990-2006, Lai showed that 56% showed biological
effects and 44% did not, but 73% of independently funded studies did nd an effects, while 27% of
industry funded studies found no effect. The 2006 study was replicated in 2007 with the same
results (Huss 2007).

Cover
While governments bar objections to 5G on health grounds, Lloyds of London, and as of May,
2019, Swiss Re, would not insure against potential health or environmental damage from telecoms
systems, especially 5G, declaring it unsafe. Lloyd’s November 2010 Risk Assessment Team’s
Report compares wireless technologies with asbestos. In a similar vein to the treatment of 2-5G
now, the earlier research on asbestos was deemed ‘inconclusive.’ Swiss Re consider 5G to be a
‘huge business risk,’ noting that:

1. Cybersecurity threats are enhanced through defence of twice the number of antennas a 5G system
requires.
2. Arguing over information security, net sovereignty and larger risk of espionage or sabotage could
damage international co-operation and negatively impact nancial markets.’

In Telecoms companies’ information to shareholders, it warns of prospective loss of share value

because of future legal action.
fi

fi

fi
fi

fi

 5G and US weather forecast/military system interference

RF/EMF at 2-4G radiation disrupts the earth’s natural magnetic elds, which has panoramic
repercussions for wildlife, international security, and weather predictions. Yet the FCC auctioned
the 24G spectrum band for 5G over the objections of scientists from the National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
(NASA), the American Meteorological Society (AMS) and even the Aerospace Industries
Association (AIA) who warned that 5G interference could set U.S. weather forecasting back to
somewhere around 1980. In 2020, the FCC approved a new 5G cellular network by Ligado
Networks, bypassing claims from the Department of Defence that it would interfere with Global
Positioning System (GPS) services. According to news reports in Ars Technica, FCC chairman Ajit
Pai asked fellow commissioners to approve ‘application to deploy a low-power terrestrial
nationwide network in the L band that would primarily support 5G and the Internet of Things
service.’ In a letter of Nov, 2019 to Pai, the U.S. Secretary of Defence, Mark Esper, said it was too
risky to allow, ‘as all independent and scienti cally valid testing and technical data showed the
potential for widespread disruption and degradation of GPS services, which would have signi cant
negative impact on military operations both in peace time and war.’ The FCC’s stance mirrors
precisely that of the German Government. Karl Hecht described its insistence of EMF’s safety
equivalent to aiding and abetting a crime of negligent assault and homicide. (Hecht, Brochure 6,
Effects of wireless communications technologies, 1996).

FAKE NEWS
The tech and telecoms industry mission is to discredit scienti c truth, in much the same way as the
tobacco industry did in the seventies and eighties, or the chemicals industry later, (McGarity and
Wagner 2012; Michaels 2008, 2020). ‘Through lobbyists, law firms, consulting scientists, targeted
scientific research funding and co-opting of NGO’s such as the ICNIRP, health risks and scientific
findings are dismantled.’ The current campaign has eclipsed its predecessor. Indeed, it is streaming
ahead.

A methodical smear of all who doubt the safety of 5G or, for that matter, vaccination is the mean.
The mainstream have published nothing but twisted tales of 5G conspiracy theorists, while
promoting 5G, GM crops, A.I. and allopathic medicine along with inadequately tested vaccination.
Regular pot shots are also levelled at natural health and wellness. Instead of reporting on the
reliable, rationalist views of scientists, doctors and teachers, whose doubts are rooted in science and
epidemiology, the media are cherry picking the most eccentric and outlandish ones. This has
produced a false dichotomy and undermined the truth.

fi

fi
fi

fi
 Peer reviewed studies showing harms of EMF and also vaccination presented by those without
nancial interest, are being remedied post haste - quite simply removed from Pub Med, (funded by
the Gates Foundation). We fools must leave it to ‘responsible journalism’ one columnist sniffed, in
an article airily citing studies that did not exist, and denying those that did. Posts about Covid 19
that do not comply with the mainstream narrative are immediately censored and taken down. A
Guardian article making false claims about the science backed, infallible safety of 5G, was cited by
Labour leader, Keir Starmer’s assistant, to assuage concerns of petitioning constituents. This article
was also cited by the Radiation Research Trust in a letter of complaint to the Government, objecting
to the article’s quantum levels of dishonesty and misinformation. In March, 2020 OFCOM’s new
Covid guidelines censored those con icting with the mainstream narrative. In December 2020,
OFCOM’s CEO, Melanie Dawes, gave an interview on BBC Radio 4’s Media show, on protecting
the UK media from tech. But the enfolded drive to ‘ban digital hate’ skulks beneath a full scale
crackdown on dissenters. Facebook, Twitter and U Tube had not done enough to stop ‘fake’ news.
What might Facebook and Twitter, already an enemy of free speech, be required to bowdlerise
next? The peaceful 2020-21 anti lockdown protests in London numbering 100,000 to 1 million,
were ignored by the mainstream media, (bar the engineered March 2021 scuffle). When a tiny
gaggle of protesters followed and heckled BBC journalist, Nicholas Watt, on 14 June 2021 it was
seized upon, with calls to crack down on these hooligans abusing faithful servants of the state. ‘The
media must be able to report the facts without fear or favour - they are the lifeblood of our
democracy,’ tweeted the prime minister. Shortly after came a BBC news piece showing young
drunks mocking a politician on his way to work, as if this were representative of the entire flock
who must be stopped. These outrages wholly justified the police bill roll out, snagged by fussy
human rights groups in March. A consultation ‘for better understanding’, banning the democratic
right to protest has been rushed through, and all is primed.

The New York Times has published several pieces promoting 5G and undermining sceptics. It is
partnered with Verizon on a 5G project. One of its biggest shareholders is Carlos Sim, owner of
17% of newspaper commodities, and a Telecoms company supplying Latin America.

The 5G con that could make you sick, (BBC Radio 4, June 16 2020) was an exemplary piece of
fake news propaganda for and on behalf of the telecommunications industry. The standard
technique of industry funded ‘debunkers’ is to unearth a few oddballs to represent the entire
movement, while ignoring the hundreds of reputable scientists, physicians, engineers and teachers
calling for a moratorium. One UFO enthusiast selling a dubious bauble was spotlit, and later
reported by the BBC to the Trading Standards Commission, who rightly decreed it a scam.
Therefore, the whole campaign was a scam. A slur was evenly cast on peer reviewed studies,
sewing doubt into public perception of independently funded research. They also dismissed the
AIRC’s 2011 classi cation of RF-EMF, and the Ramazzini study, which had in fact come up with
identical ndings as the U.S. Toxicology study a year earlier. There were duly snide contributions
by Dr David Grimes who seems to oblige every industry friendly spin, consistently rubbishing
ethical, reliable studies. He warned against con ict of interest in ‘dubious science’, denigrating the
majority consensus of his peers. Richly, Grimes is funded by Cancer Research and Nvidia, a
multinational tech company. Cancer Research is partnered with the Francis Crick Institute, the
Chair of which is Baron Edmund John Philip Browne, British Petroleum’s former head and now
chair of Huawei technologies UK. The BBC is a collaborator in the 5G roll out, allied with 5G
Rural First to blanket every parched corner of the nation, also 5G-XCast, a ‘5G PPP Phase II project
focused on Broadcast and Multicast Communication enablers for the fth generation of wireless
fi
fi
fi
fl
fl

fi

systems. It will also be joining with a wide range of European Telcos to close every nasty hole and
anoint each and every one of us with 5G radiation. A further project is 5G Create, a competition the
BBC is helping to organise.

In 2019 Professor Kenneth Foster wrote an article for Scientific America declaring 5G safe, to
which Moskowitz wrote a rebuttal. To this Grimes knocked out an obloquy, published a fortnight
later. Scientific American refused to publish Moskowitz’ response in which he cleared up the
detritus, leaving Grimes with the last word. Microwave News and Radiation Research backed
Moskowitz who published the story with links on his website. After his article was published in
2019, Grimes was no longer listed in Queen’s University Belfast’s directory. Also, the link to his
Oxford University page was broken.

When people begin to experience burning and painful skin sensation from upturned radiation, they
can rest assured they are all suffering from an extremely rare mental illness that convinces of pain,
when really, it isn’t at all. So said the presenter of a Radio 4 series, The Senses, Touch (9.12.20) in
which neurologist Dr Guy Leschziner described extremely rare cases of psychosomatic pain
sensation which is not real. But the programme confuses this uncommon manifestation with the
entire population, implying we should not trust our own sensations of pain. As 5G antennae
multiply, painful skin burning will be more than an ideation.

Many moderate opponents have doubtless retreated from the slur of conspiracy theorizing, abashed.
Just like Eurosceptics hid, for fear of being vili ed as xenophobic fascists. Those questioning the
safety of experimental vaccines are dubbed anti-vaxxers, incriminations in tow, with hyperbole fast
forwarding of late. Market savvies have proved time and time again that branding works. Violent
pornography upon which children model life changing rape of school girls as young as ve, is all
permitted. Teenage freshers are lured into prostitution by university professors, with stands at NUS
days. And resistance to a radiation level so high it has been used as a weapon, is labeled ‘conspiracy
theorist’ and heavily censored. David Ike may be eccentric, but why was his website linking Covid
and 5G immediately taken down, while public beheadings remain on U Tube? We see how possible

it is to erase inconvenient truths from the internet. There were elements of truth in what Ike
predicted ten years ago, which is why some trust him still, but the bizarre talk of scaly reptiles and
messianic propensities derailed the rest, while earning vaccination or 5G sceptics the caption of
‘lizard people’. Yet censors did not act with such razor ef ciency on violent porn sites available for
children to see. Porn advocates whip out the yellow card of censorship’s slippery slope, and there
was an uproar in 2019 when the government dared to suggest a law of age veri cation, to protect
children. We must not, on any account, curtail people’s freedom to watch sadistic, damaging,
misogynistic porn - that would be morally reprehensible. But websites like Alliance for Natural
Health, and Children’s Health Defence have been censored and blocked by Twitter and Facebook
for ‘spreading disinformation’, when they are reporting the truth. Not a squeak is made by the
indignant personal freedom crusaders on this.

Endlessly politicians and media alike point the nger at that dreadful fake news, calling arbiters of
factual truth conspiracy theorists. First coined by the CIA as a tool of deflection, it is being used to
death by politicians and media mules alike. The time has come that you’ll know an industry shill
by the number of times he shrieks ‘conspiracy!’ Of anyone who strays too close to the truth. Now
anyone calling for precaution is brandished a conspiracy theorist. The word 5G swiftly acquired cult
status, and the ease with which the public were deceived is a wake up call. Hackles have been

fi
fi

fi

fi
fi

 easily tempered to rise at the mere sound of untested '5G' or 'vaccination' - a measure of the
mainstream’s splendid clout.

Full fact and Fact checker are sourcing their so called information on behalf of government and
industry. The ‘false information’ they claim to ght is in fact anything that contradicts the
mainstream narrative. Fact Checkers is funded by Google and Facebook, speci cally to ‘debunk
viral deceptions on social media’, and Google, to support Covid 19 coverage. Full fact in the UK
are members of Poynters’s International Fact Checking Network (IFCN). Poynter’s major funders
include the Charles Koch Foundation (a multinational corporation), the National Endowment for
Democracy (CIA), the Omidyar Network (Luminate), the Open Society Foundation (George
Soros), and Google. Full Fact’s corporate members include the City of London, the BBC director of
news, James Harding, and King & Wood Mallesons, a global elite law firm. Facebook, funded by
the Gates foundation, continually censors articles that do not comply with the mainstream pro
vaccination, pro 5G narrative. Both Facebook and Google have bagged a cluster of 5G satellites.
Fact checker is also funded by the APCC, an engineering contracting fracking company. ‘Snopes’ is
another industry friendly site, masquerading as an expunger of fake news. Full Fact valiantly
debunked the same Dutch fake news article presented by Friends of the Earth about trees that hadn’t
really been chopped down to make way for 5G. Later in the same article, Full Fact stated the falsity,
presented as fact, that non ionising radiation was harmless. It is increasingly evident that much of
what the ‘debunkers’ smirch is likely to be true.

5G vandals, Nightingale hospital

In April 2020, a group of London protestors set dozens of 5G cell masts alight, one atop the
Nightingale hospital, which had been designated for Covid 19 patients. The head of BT was
justi ably angered. ’Everything about this is senseless,’ declared he. The original article from the
previous link has since been removed and replaced by a carefully scripted broadcast by Philip
Jansen, in which all against 5G were branded mindless idiots believing 5G and Covid 19 to be
linked, while ignoring ‘the very principles of science.’ How scientific is it to unleash radiation that
has not been scientifically tested? Everyone was urged to ‘come together’ to ‘stop the spread of this
harmful, dangerous information.’ The FTSE 100 telecoms giant also owns 5G. One writer scorned
the ‘conspiracies’ as ‘mere idiocy, extreme stupidity on a part of a few credulous vandals. Baseless
fear always erupt … Cranks and crackpots. They have no basis in science. It should be calmly
refuted with sound science, rational politics and responsible journalism.’ That must be the great
rationale of serving corporations and multinationals, who capture scientists, charities and legislators
alike. Those who set fire to 5G masts did the environment as well as the cause no end of harm,
activating and spreading the toxins they are protesting against. In a healthy democracy, masts
would be dismantled lawfully, as was carried out in France and Brazil. In 2011, following a ten
year study on phone cells (Dode 2011) by the Municipal Health Department in Belo Horizonte and
several universities in Brazil, an increase in cancer risk of residents within 500 metres or less from
fi

fi
fi
 cell phone masts was detected. As a result of this, almost half of the city’s antennas were legally
dismantled by order of the city prosecutor, who successfully sued several phone companies. In
February 2009, a Versailles appeal court, observing the precautionary principle, ruled cellphone
towers in Lyons must be taken down by Bouygues Telecom as they posed a health risk to nearby
residents.

It does not seem entirely sensible to place untested, weapon grade 5G antenna atop a hospital
designated for Covid patients, where it could do the greatest harm to the most vulnerable. The
NHS will not acknowledge the health risks of EMF radiation and 5G. As well as weakening of the
immune system, microwave radiation with mm waves incurs u like symptoms including a lost
sense of smell and taste, fatigue, aching bones and muscles, brain fog or headache. This could prove
confusing when people over exposed to microwave radiation present with symptoms of viral
infection. No one should be setting property alight, but nor should the NHS install cells showering
patients with carcinogenic radiation that compromises their immune system (Johansson 2009, El-
Gohary 2017, Grigoriev 2010, 2011, Li 2013) The human skin may act as antennae to mm waves,
(Neufield, Kuster 2018) enabling it to penetrate the body more deeply than the skin. A retracted
Italian study (2020) suggested that 5G enabled a virus such as Covid to be imported into the human
cell, but this has not been corroborated or followed up. To be clear, 5G microwave radiation is not a
virus, covid 19 is not 5G, and anyone who believes this is mistaken.
Professor Steve Powis, national medical director of NHS England, stood alongside Michael Gove,
condemning 5G protestors, saying he was disgusted by campaigners against 5G, who linked it to the
Corona virus. If people knew what 5G really is, they may be disgusted by the action of installing
it on top of hospitals and near schools.
But 5G will lead the revolution in healthcare - the populace will be graced with robot assisted
remote surgery, 5G smart ambulances and data-empowered paramedics. Test hospitals are opening.
In Chicago, Rush University teamed with AT&T creating a 5G Test hospital. In September, 2019,
5G smart ambulances were tested by the East of England Ambulance Service Trust (EEAST) at the

Millbrook Proving Ground. Within two months, three employees who worked in the smart
ambulances, all died by suicide. Paramedics, Christopher Gill and Richard Grimes, with 999
operator, Luke Wright, died in the same month of November. EMF is shown to cause cardiac harm,
(Bandara, Weller 2017) so it makes perfect sense to transport heart attack patients in a 5G enriched
ambulance.

fl

 EMF and Health

Industry friendly scientists have run circles around the populace with tangled twists on ionising and
non ionising radiation, declaring the latter safe (Foster 2019) when the fact remains that both can be
lethal. This was recently explained by Professor Denis Henshaw (2020). Low levels of EMF are
used as a medical treatment for a range of ailments, including bone repair, wound repair, pain
management, depression, diabetes and heart disease. Low levels stimulate the production of stress
proteins that in turn protect from anoxia (lack of oxygen) during heart attack, while higher levels
can cause it. The therapeutic benefits at short term, very low level exposure show the susceptibility
of the human body to non thermal EMF exposure (Sage 2007). Beneficial effects seen with short
term exposure wax into adverse effects long term. (Kostoff & Lau 2017). Rolling out low level
EMF with the IoT is novel, quite untried, and probably fatal for some if not many.

DNA and Reproduction

DNA damage by EMF visits all species, and birds, being the most vulnerable, are most sonorously
graced. In his review of 2016, Dr Albert Manville wrote,

 ‘There is an increasing body of published laboratory research that nds DNA damage at low
intensity exposures — well below levels of thermal heating — which may be comparable to far
eld exposures from cell antennas. This body of work would apply to all species, including
migratory birds, since DNA is DNA, whether single-strand or double helix. The rst study to nd
such effects was conducted by H. Lai and N.P. Singh in 1995 (Lai and Singh 1995). Their work has
since been replicated (e.g. Lai and Singh 1996, as well as in hundreds of other more recent
published studies), performed in at least 14 laboratories worldwide. The take-home message: low
level transmission of EMF from cell towers and other sources probably causes DNA damage. The
laboratory research ndings strongly infer this relationship. Since DNA is the primary building
block and genetic “map” for the very growth, production, replication and survival of all living
organisms, deleterious effects can be critical.’

EMF in the form of electrophoresis is employed in every molecular biology process entailing DNA
(Southern 1975), with its ability to fragment DNA utilised in lab practice. As Sandeep Tamber
explained, electrophoresis is deployed to separate DNA in gels ‘based on the fact DNA is negatively
charged and will move in response to an electrical field.’ (Tamber 2004). In a peer reviewed
publication on the NTP study in 2020, 11 scientists concluded that ‘exposure to RFR is associated
with an increase in DNA damage. (Smith-Roe et al. 2020). Some earlier studies showing DNA
damage were not made available to general viewing. The 1966 secret military ‘Project Pandora’
study of embassy staff hit by Soviets from 1960-65 showed chromosome change in 20 out of 37
exposed personnel. Russian studies dating back to the 1950’s show DNA damage at levels far
lower than those permitted in the West, but were not made public. (WHO Warsaw Symposium
1973). Cellular effects include single strand and double strand breaks in DNA, with a role in cancer
causation and human organism mutation (Tolgskaya and Gordon 1973). EMF exposure from phone
masts causes damage to DNA while blocking oxidation in germ cells (Zothansiama 2017). UVA
radiation causes DNA lesions, impaired removal of UV photoproducts from genomic DNA and
increased melanoma. (Khan 2018).

Non thermal RFR's harms to reproduction are well documented (Singh 2018, Houston 2016).
In Houston's review of 27 studies on EMF's impact on sperm mobility, 21 were found to be
detrimental, including damage to mitochondria leading to heightened ROS production. Antioxidant
supplements may buffer the effects (Houston 2016). Vieira's review of male mobile phone users
found the same with decreased sperm quality and concentration, and morphotic abnormalities,
exacerbated by longer phone use (Vieira 2013). One study after another shows decreased sperm
count and egg fertilization in humans (Altun 2018). A study of 913 pregnant women showed that
women exposed to higher levels of EMF had 2.72 times the chance of miscarriage. (Li 2017). A
case controlled study of pregnant women using mobile phones found a definitive increased risk in
spontaneous abortion (Mahmoudabadi 2015). A survey of over 30,000 women in Beijing found a
higher count of spontaneous abortion in those living within 100 ft of phone masts, but it seemed
other possibilities were tacked on - keeping pets, having decorations or a cold. (Zhou 2017). Other
research revealed children born to mothers with high exposure were 2.7x more likely to be
asthmatic (Li 2011) and 5x more likely to be obese (Li 2012).

In one animal study amongst many it promoted infertility in male rats (Kesari, Behari 2009). As
mentioned, the impact on birds is greater. R Kohli’s 2008 study at the Centre for Environment and
Vocational Studies of Punjab University, found that all 50 house sparrow eggs exposed to mobile
tower radiation for 5-30 minutes were damaged. In a study of white stork (Ciconia ciconia),
reproduction was halved in those sited within 300m of cell tower radiation (Balmori 2009).
Laboratory studies showed domestic chicken embryos exposed to extremely low levels of mobile
fi
fi

fi
fi
fi

phone radiation caused DNA damage and structural changes in chick embryos (D’Silva 2017).
There was also oxidative stress and 75% mortality (Litovitz and Di Carlo 2002). Replicated
experiments came up with the same results (Grigor’ev 2003, Xenos and Magras 2003). Many other
studies reported high mortality rate and deformation in exposed chick embryos (Ingres 2006, Saito
1990, Ubeda 1994, Siddiqui 2015, Berman 1990). Decreased survival rate was accompanied by
retarded eye development in some embryos (Zareen 2009).

Nevertheless, the American cancer society maintains that RF waves do not have enough energy to
damage DNA directly. The FCC claims DNA breaks cannot be caused by low level non thermal
radiation because it is at such a ‘low power.’ In response to this, B Levitt and H. Lai led
comments to the FCC (Docket no. 13-84, 2013).

Oxidative Stress
Amongst the host of illnesses caused by non ionising radiation is oxidative stress and reactive
oxygen species (ROS) in animal and human cells. (Schuermann and Mevissen 2021,
Belbomme 2018, Yakymenko 2016). RFR increases free radicals/ ROS, while causing a reduction
in anti oxidants. It also creates changes in levels of blood antioxidant indicators. (Kivrak 2017).
Oxidative stress implements cancer, curtailing immunity and impacting the neurological system
through exposure to environmental toxins, including RFR. (Barnes and Greenbaum 2020). It plays a
role in heart disease (Munzel 2017), and neurodegenerative syndromes such as Alzheimers (Bouji
2020). ROS production caused by EMF exposure also results in DNA damage in the brain (Alkis
2019), and infertility.

Melatonin

Melatonin, a hormone excreted from the pineal gland in all vertebrates including humans, is
critical to the healthy function of all. A study depriving rats of melatonin found increased oxidative
damage (Reiter 1999). As an antioxidant 'scavenger of free radicals,’ it reduces oxidative stress,
while melatonin treatment ameliorates genetic damage in blood and bone marrow cells exposed to
EMF (Vijayalaxmi 2007). Antioxidant vitamin E, C, ferulic acid, and melatonin have been found to
help buffer adverse low level exposure effects (Reiter 2003). Sadly, melatonin was on the banned
list of supplements by the EU Commission’s health safety concerned directives.

fi

 Studies show that RFR suppress the pineal gland's production of melatonin (Lewckzuk 2014).
Along with the increased production of amyloid beta, this has been linked to Alzheimers's disease
(Davanipour 2009), hyper-glycaemia induced diabetes leading to Alzheimer's (Nopparat 2021),
and cancer (Jardimm Perassi 2014, Tynes 1996). Entangling the Circadian system with EMF also
disrupts melatonin’s role in other physiological processes occurring in daily or seasonal rhythms,
including sleep, mood, metabolism and reproduction (Reiter 1993) as well as the regulation of the
immune and cardiovascular systems (Cardinali 1999, Simko 2013). Melatonin depletion may have
contributed to depression and sleeping problems, on the rise since March, 2020 with stretched
periods online.

Cancer

Residential illness

Since the early 90’s, it has become increasingly evident that people living near phone masts contract
cancer over time - between 5-10 years. One study showed that over a period of 5 years,
(1999-2004) the relative risk of getting cancer had trebled for people living up to 400 meters from
cell phone towers, compared to residents of Naila, outside the area. In addition, people living
within 400 metres tended to get cancer at a younger age. (Egar 2004). Epidemiological studies show
a rise in cancers of the central nervous system (CNS) for those living near phone masts. (Feychting,
Ahlbom 1995, Goldsmith 1997). Full Fact, however, are better informed. In July 2019, they nobly
alerted the public to the fake news that mobile phone base stations pose a radiation risk.

Professor Dennis Henshaw asserted the link between melatonin depletion by high voltage power
lines and leukaemia in children living within 600 feet. 'Low frequency magnetic elds can suppress
production of melatonin, which, in pregnant women, will deprive the foetal brain of the protective
hormone (Henshaw, Reiter 2005). The unborn child may therefore be more susceptible to cancer.
Henshaw raised objections to the AGNIR's 2006 report, which downplayed the link. In one study
melatonin treatment successfully reduced cancer tumours. (Jardimm Perassi 2014). Also, a
Norwegian study found a higher incidence of breast cancer in exposed radio telegraph workers
(Tynes 1996), linked to the decreased production of melatonin.

Childhood leukaemia was rst associated with residential exposure to electro magnetic elds in the
1960’s, when Nancy Wertheimer researched the number of childhood leukaemia sufferers in
Denver’s city area and found children with leukaemia were twice as likely to live near high voltage

fi

fi
fi

 power lines. This was followed with a groundbreaking study in 1979 (Wertheimer & Leeper 1979)
which found a 50% rise in children who lived within 200 feet of masts. At the same time as
Wertheimer’s research, there was a study on the mortality of a group of Korean War veterans who
had been trained on military radars in the 1950’s. Both studies found evidence of increased risks.
(Robinette 1980). Following this came a spate of epidemiological studies, deemed lacking in solid
evidence until Ahlbom’s pooled analysis, (Ahlbom 2000), mirrored by another that year, with the
same results (Greenland 2000). Both demonstrated a mounting risk with increasing power-
frequency at 50Hz/60Hz. These two studies contributed to the WHO’s IARC 2011 conclusion that
power frequency magnetic fields are a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B). Yet the following
month, the WHO International EMF program backtracked, stating that ‘in spite of the large number
of data base, some uncertainty remains as to whether magnetic field exposure or some other factors
might have accounted for the leukaemia incidence.’ The 2011 WHO 263 fact sheet is not viewable
online. The Bioinitiative response to it is.

Industry has a eld day with epidemiological studies, easy prey to uncertainty, and they have eked
mileage from doubt. Cindy Russell pointed out the impending epidemiological problem with 5G’s
omnipresence, as the unexposed control group will be erased. Contributing to uncertainty is
synergistic toxic exposure and ‘other common health risk behaviours.’ (Russell 2014). Incidentally,
the untested vaccination is also prodigiously free of a control group, but it's more important to stay
safe.

Ahlbom’s pooled study of 2000 was replicated by Gerald Draper and Mary Kroll ve years later
(Draper 2005). They looked at records of 29,081 children with cancer, including 9,700 with
leukaemia aged 0-14 in England and Wales between 1962-95, concluding there was a greater risk of
leukaemia in children living within 200m. Because it was residential exposure that was under
investigation, studies were epidemiological, rather than laboratory based. Due to the small fraction
of homes with high exposure levels, the studies were discounted, but of the very low number (4%)
of children exposed to power frequencies (at 600m), a large percentage developed leukaemia. Of
the many studies done, the consistent finding was that children were more likely to get leukaemia if
they lived within 200-600m of power lines. (Theriault and Li 1997, Michelozzi 2002, Dockerty
1998; Li 1998, Green 1999, Feychting, Ahlbom 1995, Maskarinec 1994). However, for every
positive study, there has been one to confound it.

In 2014, Children with Cancer UK reported that scientists at Childhood Cancer Research Group,
Oxford University, found that with included data of Scotland’s cases, the risk decreased after the
1980's (Bunch 2014). This information does not comply with the cohort of studies made between
the 1980’s and the present, which maintain a consistent doubling of the risk of childhood leukaemia
with exposure to EMF associated with electricity above 0.3/0.4 microtesla. The then government
funded CCRG downplayed evidence of radiation risks from powerlines. Chris Busby noted the
study’s aws. But he attributed the cause of leukaemia to ionising radiation from nuclear bomb test
fall out. He was then scientific secretary of the EU Commission which only recognises the harms
of ionising radiation.

In 2018, Professor Mel Greaves’s review on acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALL) at the Institute
of Cancer Research was hailed by Science Daily as groundbreaking. It also neatly ruled out any
factor other than the ones it tendered. (Greaves 2018). Greaves proposed that ALL was caused by a

fl
fi

fi

 two step process of genetic mutation and exposure to infection, treatable by ‘priming’ the immune
system in infancy. He suggested the child’s immune system was weakened by lack of early life
microbial exposure, a symptom of modern hygiene - producing ‘strong evidence’ that ALL could be
brought on by a flu virus. He described non ionising radiation, electricity cables and
electromagnetic waves as ‘lacking in robust evidence’ or ‘biological plausibility,’ having cited only
ionising radiation as the hitherto accepted causal agent for ALL. The practice of ignoring or
denying the science that doesn’t suit is apparently standard in the new one way system. How
would you ‘prime the immune system’ that is weakened by rising, untested levels of radiation?
Well, the first thing, of course, is to refute or deny the existence of studies that show radiation
damages the immune system. The research was ‘largely funded’ by the charities Bloodwise and
The Kay Kendall Leukaemia Fund, which shares its scientists with the Wellcome Trust, partnered in
turn with the Gates Foundation, AstraZenica, GlaxoSmithKline and Roche.

As well as cancer, adverse neurological behavioural problems were found in adult residents living
within 300m of phone masts (Santini 2002). A review of 100 studies found several acquiescent to
symptoms of nausea, headache, dizziness, irritability, discomfort, nervousness, depression,
increased risk of suicide, skin rashes, sleep disturbance, memory loss and lowering of libido, which
Levitt and Lai noted as symptomatic of microwave sickness (Levitt and Lai 2010).

The Head

The brain has been severely impacted by EMF exposure from mobile phones or phone masts.
Research includes brain injury (Swanson 2018, Verma 2019), brain cancer (Patel 2019, Philips and
Henshaw 2018), blood brain barrier damage (Frey 1975; Persson 1997; Eberhardt 2008), depression
(Wijangaarden 2000, Beale 1997), memory loss (Gomez-Perretta 2013, Santini 2002), impaired
learning and cognitive functioning (Johansson 2014, Meo 2018, Grigoriev 2011) and early dementia
(Sobel 1995, Hallberg & Johansson 2005, Hallberg 2015). Studies show long term exposure to
magnetic fields increases the production of amyloid beta, which heightens the risk of Alzheimer’s
disease. A long term study spanning 30 years found a marked rise in Alzheimer's Disease for EMF
exposed workers (Roosli 2007).). Evidence is also accumulating of prenatal exposure leading to
autism and hyperactivity by school entrance age (Divan 2008, 2012, Kane 2004, Posar 2014,
Guxens 2013, Hallmayer 2011).

Brain cancer
Governments and councils who uphold the ICNIRP’s decree of inconclusive/non existent studies to
ban objection on health grounds have overlooked Italian courts. In early December, 2019, a Turin
Court of Appeal confirmed that brain cancer was caused by a mobile phone, deeming the ICNIRP
unreliable due to overwhelming evidence of conflict of interest. This was the sixth court to find the
same acoustic neuroma tumour, which is on the hearing nerve, was caused by mobile phone use.
Electromagnetic Sense Ireland, a health advocacy website that rst reported on the Turin case, was
banned by Facebook and Twitter in 2020. It was only reporting the truth. Welcome to our brave
new media.

fi

 Signi cantly, the 3 countries with greatest mobile phone use have the highest brain cancer rate.
Primary brain and CNS tumours are referred to collectively, which can obscure the fact that 90% of
CNS tumours occur in the brain: glioblastoma multiform (GBM) and gliomas. According to the
Global Burden of Disease study (Lancet 2019), CNS cancer rose by 17.3% globally between
1990-2016, with the highest incidence cases in China, USA and India. China is now the largest
smart phone consumer, India comes second and the U.S.A third.

A Lancet article of 2017 reported that a population-based registry study showed a global increase of
13% in childhood cancer, between 2001-2010. (Steliarova-Foucher 2017). Leukaemia is recorded
as the most prevalent, particularly for ages 2-5, followed by CNS tumours and lymphomas. In 2017
CNS was reported to occur in 4% of children with leukaemia (Hanmantgad, Khakoo 2017).
Treatment with cranial irradiation resulted in impaired memory and cognition into adulthood,
strokes, seizures, and secondary CNS malignancies. Acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (ALS)
constitutes 75% of leukaemia cases.

The last Cancer Research report of 2017 records a world age standardised (AS) 15% rise in UK
child cancer between 1993-1995 and 2015-2017, with 400 UK children annually diagnosed with
brain, CNS or intracranial tumours. CNS tumours are the greatest cause of cancer deaths in UK

children, causing 35% of deaths (over 85 children per year). However, there are updating issues
with the data on soaring GBM, as Philips and Henshaw noted.

In the UK, the frequency of GBM brain tumours more than doubled between 1995 and 2015
(Philips, Henshaw 2018). Dr Alasdair Philips and Professor Denis Henshaw, found that non-
ionising radiation had the most supportive evidence as a possible factor in the rise of glioblastoma
diagnoses. Tumours ‘primarily are in the frontal and temporal lobe areas, by your ear and forehead,’
the area of the brain by the ear. This type of brain cancer incurs the highest count of fatalities. In
their research of cancer trends between 1998-2018, Philips and Henshaw noted the contradiction
between cancer registry data stating no rise, and clinicians they spoke to, who were telling them the
biggest rise was in aggressive brain tumours particularly GBM. The authors also discussed the rise
of these cancers at a European Commission discussion in 2011, and were advised by two leading
European epidemiologists that future general research was pointless. They then found that the U.S.
methodology of assessing statistical data was unreliable, as it was not updating the standard
population. They suggested that their own more detailed, in depth analysis which revealed the true
statistics be used globally for accurate readings of cancer data.

Cancer Research UK categorises mobile phone use and cancer amongst ‘Cancer Myths’ on its
website pages (December 2019). It claims that using a mobile phone does not increase the risk of
cancer, and non ionising radiation is too weak to cause harm, while 4G and 5G does not have
enough energy to damage DNA, which may lead to cancer.

France, Denmark, Sweden and the Netherlands have also seen a steep rise in glioblastoma tumours,
in line with the UK. But the American Cancer Society states there was only a 10% rise between
'95-2015 in the U.S. and Canada, compared to 110% rise in the UK over the same period. The
author of the ACS study, Faith Davies, did not explain why the tumours in other areas of the brain
had decreased, and glioblastomas had increased. Nor how the American Brain Tumour Association
(ABTA) found brain and CNS tumours to be the most frequent form of cancer in U.S. adolescents
fi

 aged between 15-19, between 2008-2012 (Quinn Ostram 2015). ABTA reported it was also up in
Canada, which comes fourth globally for the heaviest mobile data users. The previous review
version by the U.S Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results showed that in those aged 0-19,
cancer rose by 20% between ’75 and ’84 and 2004-2012. Maybe things suddenly and inexplicably
evened out, as Children with Cancer claimed with residential leukaemia children, which didn’t, or
the BTO claimed was the case with London’s sparrows, which wasn’t. Australia also clams no brain
tumour link with EMF, and that it did not increase between 2003-2013. The study concluding this
was led by ICNIRP chief, Rodney Croft, and ICNIRP scientific expert group member, Ken
Karapadis.

The WHO apparently changed its mind, between May 2011, when the IARC, its independently
funded, internal unit, classi ed EMF as a Class 2 possible carcinogen, and a month later in June,
2011, when the WHO fact sheet came out stating ‘to date, no adverse effects have been established
as being caused by mobile phone use.’ In May, 2011 the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of
Europe called for reduced exposure to radio frequency and electromagnetic elds, later to be
dropped. By 2018, with the most compelling scienti c research to date, the WHO dropped its
carcinogenicity classi cation completely. Miller and Hardell, amongst a growing number of
doctors, said that if the IARC were to re-evaluate its 2011 classi cation, with all of the newer
evidence, it would categorise it as Group 1, carcinogenic rather than possibly carcinogenic. But the
IARC, it seems, is independent no more. On May 27, 2021, it reneged completely on its former
appraisal, claiming no evidence of an RF radiation link to cancer. At an online conference hosted by
the German Federal Of ce of Radiation Protection (Bfs), Isabelle Deltour gave a new scienti c
statement on malignant brain tumours in Nordic countries of Denmark, Sweden, Finland and
Norway. The project was run by Joachim Schuz, with funding of €139,000 (US $160,000) by the
Bfs. Microwave News editor, Louis Slesin, remarked it was ‘tempting to call the new IARC Bfs
analysis the Revenge of the Danish Cohort Study.’

In France, glioblastomas have increased four fold between 1990-2018, according to a Public Health
France review of July, 2019. Dr. Marc Arazi, president of French EMF safety group, Phonegate
Alert, said, “Over the last 2 decades, nearly 50,000 people have been affected in France by this
extremely aggressive brain tumour, which has a very high mortality rate. It was also during this
period that mobile telephony exploded and industrialists knowingly overexposed us to the waves of
our mobile phones.’

The ACS joins the WHO, FCC the ICNIRP, PHE and the EU, all claiming the IARC’s 2011 EMF
carcinogenicity is based on inadequate evidence of other types of cancer and limited evidence of
increase in cell phone use. It cites the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) report, last updated
in 2020, which based its conclusions on studies such as the industry funded, awed Danish Cohort
study (2001). The FDA has forgotten its earlier decree, obtained by Microwave News using the
Freedom of Information Act, that EMF is indeed carcinogenic. The FDA, along with the usual
policy makers and regulators has also managed to discount the Ramazzini and NTP Studies, both of
which presented evidence of cancer caused by mobile phones. The Italian Ramazzini study (2018)
found heart tumours in male Sprague Dawley rats, and brain and heart tumours in female Sprague
Dawley rats exposed to mobile phones, which matched the results of the NTP study (2018).

Amongst many appeals, the Freiberg Appeal (2002, 2012) signed by more than 1,000 German
physicians stated ‘children below the age of 8 should not use cell phones and cordless phones,
children and adolescents between the ages of 8 and 16 should also not use cell phones or only use
them in the case of an emergency. Yet the FDA continues to insist that cell phones are quite safe for

fi
fi
fi

fi
fi
fi
fl

fi

 children, stating that ‘current scientific evidence does not show a danger to any users of cell phones
from radio frequency energy, including children and teenagers.’ The regulators listed by the FDA to
back its claims unite in error. Included is the National Cancer Institute, saying ‘There is currently
no consistent evidence that non ionising radiation increases cancer risk in humans. The only
consistent biological effect of radio frequency radiation in humans is heating.’ We can all rest
assured, the institute responsible for healing children and adults of cancer happily endorses products
that will give them cancer.

Following the 1993 conclusions of its own scientists that RF-EMF was carcinogenic, the FDA went
on to approve the use of low level RF-EMF to treat brain cancer as an alternative to chemotherapy
in 2014 for, as mentioned, it has remedial potential in small doses. Novacure announced Optune as
the new name for NovoTTF-100A system, devised for the treatment of adults over 22 years with
recurrent GBM tumours.

The EU’s current actions lampoon its 2005 statement, ’When human activities may lead to morally
unacceptable harm that is scienti cally plausible but uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or

diminish that harm.’ Its present stance also contradicts an earlier Parliament resolution of
September 4, 2008 when it declared ICNIRP guidelines ‘obsolete’ and inadequate to protect public
health.’

Blood brain barrier with low level microwaves

Allan Frey, who researched the microwave hearing effect in 1962, later expanded his EMF
research to the brain, and in 1975 found that low level microwaves, 100 times lower than today’s
cell phones, caused damage to the blood brain barrier. (Frey, Feld 1975).

This barrier is what keeps toxins, bacteria and viruses from entering the brain. It also maintains the
correct pressure for the brain, without which stroke may occur. Such a discovery would ordinarily
trigger a run of follow ups. However, there was nothing until the studies of Leif Salford were
published twelve years later in 1997, showing that radiation from cell phones is harmful to the
blood brain barrier when exposure is reduced 1,000 times, and damage actually increases when
exposure is reduced. The conclusion therefore is that SAR levels are redundant, and reducing the
power of cell phones would provide negligible results to their safety. His team showed blood brain
leakage occurred after only two minutes exposure, and that 2 hours cell phone exposure at reduced
power could damage or destroy up to 2% of the rats’ brain cells. Long term exposure caused
memory loss, and six hours genetic harms. He also found exposure effected calcium transportation
in cells (Persson, Salford 1997). A parity of damage throughout low and high level EMF intensity
was corroborated by Cindy Sage and David Carpenter, concluding “the weakest exposure level
showed the greatest effect in opening up the blood brain barrier.” (Sage, Carpenter 2008). Wifi, the
harms of which are unmitigated by lower levels, should be replaced with wired technology.

fi

 Autis

Until relatively recently, autism was a rare condition worldwide. The very rst reported case was in
1943, by Dr. Leo Kanner, psychiatrist at John Hopkins Hospital. Latest data from 2016 by the
Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) shows 1 in 54 have autistic spectrum disorder
(ASD) in the U.S. It rose 1200%-1500% over 20 years (1994-2014) and now impacts over 1% of
the population. Neurologists are warning of a ‘silent pandemic’ of neurological development
disorders, which effect 10%-15% of all births. Other research marks its rise since 1981, when the
U.S. autism rate was one in 10,000. Some experts conclude this could not be down to genetics or
better diagnosis alone, no rocket science theorem to be sure. In 2014, Autism Speaks estimated
autism costs society $126 billion per year in the U.S., a sum that had tripled since 2006. It reached
£34 billion in the U.K by 2014.

In Germany, Igor Belyaev noted a huge increase in the use of methylphenidate drugs for attention
de cit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) between the early 90’s and 2015. By 2015, Ritalin,
Medikinet and Concerta drugs came third amongst prescriptions in Germany, where demand has
soared since the early 90’s, especially for young children and adolescents, with prescriptions
increasing even more since 2000. This rise coincided with the rapid expansion of phone masts and
corresponding technologies (Belyaev 2016).

Richard Lathe noted autism’s rise in the early eighties coincided with the arrival of microwave
ovens, positing its cause by pre natal oven exposure (Lathe 2009). Did mobile phones spark the
symphony in the mid to late nineties? Further research linked pre natal and post natal exposure to
cell phones to children’s behavioural problems, including emotional and hyperactivity problems,
extending to autism. (Herbert, Sage 2013; Kane 2004; Thomas 2010, Birks 2017). Two large
Danish studies, one in 2008 of 13,000 children, replicated in 2012 with 28,745 children, showed
both pre natal and post natal cell phone exposure linked to behavioural problems presented at
school entrance, aged seven (Divan 2008, 2012). Residents living near mobile phone stations are
found to have an increased risk of neurobehavioral problems including hyperactivity
(Abdel-Rassoul 2007).

Dr Cindy Russell notes that EMF from wireless is shown to cause reactive oxygen species (ROS) in
numerous studies, and that there is ‘increasing evidence of oxidative stress and reactive oxygen
species in the pathophysiology of autism. Markers of oxidative damage to protein, oxidative
fi
m

fi

damage to DNA reduced glutathione, chronic inflammation, were found in the brain tissue of
autistic individuals compared to controls.’ She concluded that WIFI would promote autism through
‘de novo’ mutations, rather than genetics alone. (Russell 2014).

Under normal conditions, reactive oxygen species (ROS) helps to kill bacteria, serving as a
messenger in the regulation of intracellular signalling. Excess ROS is harmful, and may cause
irreversible damage to cells. With ROS and oxidative stress, glutathione stores are inundated while
mitochondria is damaged. Mitochondria is more vulnerable in autistic children.
Russell suggests that non ionising radiation is likely to act in concert with a range of toxins
including heavy metals, industrial chemicals, food additives, pesticides, plastics and endocrine
disrupters such as Bisphonal A, to cause cellular and macromolecular damage with the production
of reactive oxygen species, in ammation and genetic damage similar to that seen in autism.
Together these can cause biochemical and behavioural changes.

Tamir Aldad made the rst study demonstrating biochemical changes similar to autism in rats
exposed prenatally to cell phone radiation. Mice exposed in utero were hyperactive, with impaired
memory (Aldad 2012). Another study found symptoms of autism matched those of EMF exposure,
including oxidative stress, ‘immune aberrations, low total and glutathione levels, lower activity of
anti oxidative stress symptoms and mitochondrial dysfunction.’ (Herbert, Sage 2013).

Annio Posar cited the range of EMF related physiological effects as contributors to autism,
including parental exposure.

Autistic symptoms may be the consequence of electrophysiological oscillatory synchronisation alterations,

and EMF and radio-frequency radiation (RFR) could lead to such alterations. The hypothesised EMF/RFR
pathogenic mechanisms underlying autism include DNA damage, oxidative stress, increase of intracellular
calcium, immune system dysfunction, blood–brain barrier disruption. A recent study suggested a correlation
between occupational electromagnetic exposure of parents and ASD in their children, even if these data need
confirmation due to the young age of the children evaluated.
(Posar, Visconti 2014)

EMF is also found to activate voltage gated calcium channels, increasing the amount of intercellular
calcium in the body, and excess intercellular calcium is linked to autism. (Pall 2013).

fi
fl

 The Heart

Cardiovascular disease incurs the highest global morbidity and mortality, killing 17.9m people a
year globally, and it is rising. Studies show that higher levels of EMF radiation cause adverse
cardiovascular effects. Bandara and Weller highlighted the rising cases of cardiovascular disease
(CVD) with no foundational risk factors (e.g. high cholesterol or smoking), and reviewed 242
studies on RFR and oxidative stress (linked to CVD), finding 89% showed oxidative stress
(Bandara and Weller 2017). Other studies showed increased CVD risk in EMF exposed TV
workers (Vangelova 2006) and electricity utility workers (Savitz 1999). A U.S. army intelligence
document reporting on soviet research found exposed staff had increased cases of heart disease. As
early as 1969, in a symposium on the biological effects and health implications of microwave
radiation, the authors state, “In the interest of occupational hygiene...researchers have recommended
that cardiovascular abnormalities be used as screening criteria to exclude people from occupations
involving radio-frequency exposures.”

Zaret’s 1976 study for the WHO centred on the North Karelia community in Finland exposed to a
Soviet radar station, with a high incidence of heart attacks and cancer in residents, higher still
amongst those living closer to the radar station. While the success of the WHO’s North Kerala life
style health improvement project was heavily publicised, the EMF exposure aspect was not
mentioned. All search engines have mislaid the EMF link to North Kerala, Zaret’s study is only
mentioned in Bandara and Weller’s article, and the WHO study citing him has also been blocked
and the link to the page broken. Along with the rest of the research showing EMF harms, the WHO
did not share the results.

Later lab studies found EMF exposure promotes vascular calci cation in kidney diseased rats.
(Shuvy 2014), while the Ramazzini study (2018) showed clear evidence of heart tumours in RFR
exposed rats. Nothing if not versatile, EMF's disruption of the circadian system accelerates heart
ageing and increases the risk of heart disease. (Pyle 2018).

Although several studies indicate a possible pre natal link to autism, the damage caused by EMF
exposure in utero is not con ned to mobile phone use, or the brain. Congenital heart disease was
found in children whose mothers had been exposed during pregnancy to electrical appliances such
as microwaves, computers and induction cookers (Zhao 2020). But EMF has a strong impact on
healthy children with no prior condition. Besides structural brain changes, depression and increased
aggression (p.31), electronic gaming triggered ventricular arrhythmia in children (Lawley 2019,
Segal 1991, Gwinip 1983).

fi

fi
 In Canada, Dr Magda Havas researched wi causing heart problems in children. Sinatra, a
radiologist, found that 70 children out of a school district of 50,000, had the undiagnosed condition
of Wolff-Parkinson-White (WPW) syndrome, a disorder of the heart’s conduction system. When
children with WPW exercise, the combined stress to the heart can lead to supraventricular
tachycardia. (Havas 2013). Havas suggests it is children who should be screened at schools with
wifi, ‘to ensure they don’t have an underlying heart condition that may be exacerbated with WIFI
microwave exposure.’

Remarkably, EMF has been recon gured as a coronary palliative. The implanted cardioverter-
de brillator (ICD), the IoT’s answer to the pacemaker, detects arrhythmia and facilitates remote
monitoring by the doctor. A wireless connection runs from the device to the patient’s home rooter.

A second connects via home wi , phone line or cable to a data portal viewed by the doctor. This
scales the heights of convenience, but there are health and safety issues with regards cyber security
- the device is hackable. Jameson Rich, a wearer of the de brillator, described his experience and
the apparent indifference to patient safety by companies producing them. When Dick Cheney,
former vice president had an ICD tted in 2001, there was concern he could be hacked and remotely
assassinated by terrorists. The wireless feature was disabled, but not for any other user. The
market has increased exponentially, and these days 10,000 devices are implanted by doctors
monthly. Prescriptions also exceed necessity - a 2011 study found that 1/5 of 100,000 patients
received an ICD without ful lling the medical criteria. Many devices are faulty, and some patients
have died.

‘Dr Pawluk’, sells EMF medical products named PEMF applications. Adverse effects of EMF
exposure are described as ‘over reactions’ in the electro sensitive body. The cause of oxidative
stress is apportioned to a sudden increase in circulation, a beneficial effect of PEMF - a remarkable
inverse to non thermal EMF’s circulatory impediment (Christopher 2020). Skin rash is also put
down to sudden circulatory improvements. Nervous system pain is explained as magnetic therapy
identifying underlying medical conditions. All the standard symptoms of microwave sickness:
fatigue, insomnia, metallic taste, dizziness, brain fog, thirst, increased urination, chronic regional
pain, fibromyalgia or chronic fatigue syndrome are listed as possible reactions, but not identified for
what they are.
fi

fi
fi
fi
fi
fi
fi

 The Skin and Eyes

As early as 1947, studies were carried out showing microwave heats tissues, and physical damage
is most likely in the avascular area, i.e. skin and eyes, where the blood could not ef ciently carry off
excess heat (Hines 1947). The development of cataracts and further eye abnormalities in a cluster
of avionics staff exposed to non thermal radiation was described as ‘insidious’ and slow’ (Zaret
1977).

Over 90% of wireless frequencies in the mm and sub mm range are absorbed by the epidermis and
dermis layers of human skin. Sweat ducts in the skin’s upper layer act like helical antennas, primed
to conduct mm waves and 5G (Betzalel, Ishai 2017, 2020). Neufield and Kuster’s predictive studies
found 5G exposure could lead to permanent tissue damage. (Neufield, Kuster 2018). Agostino Di
Ciaula noted, ‘Preliminary observations showed that MMW increase skin temperature, alter gene
expression, promote cellular proliferation and synthesis of proteins linked with oxidative stress,
inflammatory and metabolic processes, could generate ocular damages and
affect neuro-muscular dynamics. Further studies are needed to better and independently explore the
health effects of RF-EMF in general and of MMW in particular.’ (Di Ciaula 2018).

In September 2020, the FCC, now facing litigation for its life-threatening ‘guidelines,’ made a
surprise proposal of shorter averaging times for signals at higher frequencies. The ICNIRP and
IEEE standards allow 25 minutes. The Mobile and Wireless Forum (MWF) swiftly moved to lobby
the FCC for prolonged exposure. Members of the MWF include Apple, Huawai and Samsung. A
formal contestation ensued between Neils Kuster and Kenneth Foster, who defended longer
averaging times. The MWF funded Foster’s research, which concluded mm waves were harmless as
they would pierce only the outer surface of the skin and eyes, so all was safe. The opposite was
proven in USSR research more than forty years ago (Zalyubovskaya 1977). In these studies, MM
waves caused damage to multiple organs and systems in rats. Short exposure leads to painful skin
burning, as demonstrated by active denial systems, so 24 hour exposure is bound to be harmless. It
was also found that video gamers with eczema who were exposed to ringing mobile phones, would
suffer a heightened allergic skin wheal response. (Kimata 2003).

fi

 Electromagnetic Sensitivity
Electro hypersensitivity (EHS) or EL-allergy, as Nordic classi cation named the condition in 2000,
rst occurred with electrical workers in the 1930’s. Since the late 80’s, with the advent of
computers, mobile phones, cell towers and wi-fi, the condition has spread. It often develops in
those who have made heavy use of mobile phones and computers at work. A 2019 UK survey
found the average of people with severe EHS who are restricted from work is 0.65% of the general
population which equates to 435,500 people in the UK . 18% of the population have moderate EL,
and 5.0 to 30% have mild reactions (Bevington 2019). Common symptoms are fatigue, sleep
disturbance, headaches, feelings of discomfort, difficulty concentrating, depression, memory loss,
visual disruptions, irritability, hearing problems, skin problems, cardiovascular problems, dizziness,
loss of appetite, movement difficulties and nausea. Magda Havas coined symptoms of EHS as
rapid ageing syndrome, since they are shared by the elderly. They are also experienced by
people living near phone masts. A study of a rat model of premature ageing found increased
oxidative stress, reduced antioxidant enzyme activity and greater DNA damage. Reactive oxygen
species and oxidative damage contributes to cognitive decline and dysfunction. Other common
symptoms of ES sufferers show cardiovascular stress, in blood clumping (rouleau formation) of red
blood cells, heart palpitations, pain or pressure in the chest accompanied by anxiety, also an
upgrading of the sympathetic nervous system coincident with the down regulation of the
parasympathetic nervous system.

Those with severe electro magnetic sensitivity have described EMF exposure as a form of torture.
This was demonstrated in the short Time magazine lm, Search for the Golden Cage, featuring
Dafna Tachover, who suffers from EL-allergy. Increasing numbers of electro sensitives have
resorted to living in isolated, electricity free chalets to escape the effects of EMF. Tachover moved
house to an area where she could live without pain, only to be confronted with a phone mast
planning application. Some have resorted to suicide. Yet the Mobile Telecommunications and
Health Research Programme (MTHR) of 2007 with its chapter on EHS (pp16-19) stated there was
‘no evidence that EHS is caused by electric magnetic fields caused by mobiles.’ (Barnes,
Greenebaum 2020). It has been portrayed as psychosomatic by some regulators and the media, and
in 2004 the WHO renamed the condition Idiopathic Environmental Intolerance attributed to
Electromagnetic Fields (IEI-EMF). This essentially means no known cause, obviating measures.
When, in 2012, Harlem Brundlet, former director general of WHO (1993-2003) divulged her E.S
sensitivity, Michael Ripocholi, founding chairman of ICNIRP and former head of WHO’s EMF
programme, was most indignant.

The International Scienti c Declaration on electrical hypersensitivity syndrome (EHS) & multiple
chemical sensitivity (MCS), Brussels, declares that:

“In view of our present scienti c knowledge, we thereby stress all national and international bodies and institutions…to
recognize EHS and MCS as true medical conditions which acting as sentinel diseases may create a major public health
concern in years to come worldwide i.e. in all the countries implementing unrestricted use of electromagnetic eld-
fi
fi
fi

fi

fi

fi

based wireless technologies and marketed chemical substances…  Inaction is a cost to society  and is not an option
anymore… we unanimously acknowledge this serious hazard to public health…that major primary prevention measures
are adopted and prioritized, to face this  worldwide pan-epidemic  in perspective”.

All indicators point to a growing population allergic to electricity. It is hard to gauge how the
increasingly digitised workforce will fare, but we have nothing to fear with the quite remarkable
advances in AI. The day can be rescued in one fell swoop.

 Diabetes

Magda Havas found EMF in uenced blood sugar levels in diabetics. (Havas 2008). Obesity’s rise
since the 80’s, generally attributed to to the growing consumption of junk food and sugars, may be
linked to EMF’s effect on blood sugar levels. Cardiff University found Type 2 Diabetes trebled in
the UK between 1991 and 2010, but the rise was 10 x that amongst under 40’s. Like heart disease,
it is rising without the known causative factors. A study of male pupils at two secondary schools,
200 m from phone base stations, found both groups of boys at a higher risk of type 2 diabetes.
(Meo 2015).

Allergies
After reuni cation, the National Jewish Medical and Research Centre in Denver reported that
Western Germans were found to suffer more allergies than Eastern Germans in spite of the fact that
industrial pollution was higher in the East. It turned out that East Germany had stricter regulations
regarding radiation. When the East then adopted West Germany’s radiation levels, the allergy
counts shifted, and it is now the same for both. In 1997, a Sidney microbiologist, Dr Peter French,
found the production of histamine nearly doubled after exposure to cell phones, and he predicted a
rise in asthma and allergies along with cell phone use. Food allergies and asthma has risen
exponentially since then. Microwaves increase immunoglobulin antibodies, responsible for causing
allergic reaction. (Dmoch and Moszczynski 1998, Moszczynski 1999, Bergier 1990, Yuan 2004,
Kimata 2003, 2005). Might EMF be a contributory factor in the rise of food allergies, as well as
asthma and hay fever? Food allergies have been increasing globally in both developing and
developed countries since 1997, especially in children, and the severity is also increasing. (World
Allergy Organisation 2013). More than 150m Europeans suffer from chronic allergic disease, and
by 2025 half of Europe could be effected with this disease. In the US, the Centre for Disease
Control and Prevention reported that food allergy in children increased by 50% between 1997 and
2011, and between 1997 and 2008 peanut and tree nut allergy more than tripled in children.

fi

fl

 Occupational Exposure

In the 1969 U.S. review Soviet studies, Janet Healer noted that as early as 1933, a Russian report of
2 workers exposed describes ‘complaints which are common to that occupation’, and reference is
made to the ‘stereotype nature’ of ailments in exposed workers (Healer 1969). The Moscow
Institute made a 10 year study of over 1,000 people exposed from months to 20 years. Common
complaints in exposed workers were neural and cardiovascular, with impacts to blood composition
and endocrine function. General consensus amongst Soviet investigators was that the central
nervous system was most effected. However, there were also reports of changes in erythrocytes and
haemoglobin concentration, cataracts at lower intensity microwave fields, with numerous studies
citing cardiovascular disturbance, and sinus arrhythmias. Cleary suggested in the interest of
occupational hygiene, that ‘cardiovascular abnormalities be used as screening criteria to exclude
people from occupations involving radio-frequency exposures.’ (Cleary 1969). This was not done. A
1967 Polish paper discussing optical safety standards for military operators of electromagnetic field
generators showed eye ailments at fields as low as 0.01 mW/cm2. (Wojskowy 1967).

Havas notes symptoms of Soviet personnel up to 90 years ago, now ascribed to ES sufferers, and
common to those living near mobile phone masts: Typical in Soviet staff was also shortness of
breath and chest pains, with sweating and hypotension. (Healer 1969). Focusing on navy and
military personnel, Glaser reviewed literature on biologic effects of microwave radiation, and
provided more than 2,000 reference in 1972. (Glaser 1972), updated in 1976. Although many of
these studies were at levels above guidelines, similar results have since been found at levels well
below guidelines. (Havas 2013).

First incidents of leukaemia in radar workers from the 1930’s onwards were unearthed by Professor
John Goldsmith using the Freedom of Information Act, in an investigation starting in 1974
(Goldsmith 2012). As well as electro magnetic sensitivity, first reported in the U.S. of WW2 radar
workers, there was microwave auditory effect. Degrave’s retrospective study of Belgian military
personnel exposed to aircraft radars between 1963-1994 found increased cases of haemolymphatic
cancers. (Degrave 2009). Medical reports of U.S. military staff catalogued by Glaser in 1972
included cataracts, damage to male reproductive organs, cardiovascular changes and psychological
problems. Amongst Glaser’s documents was one of the navy testing microwave risk. Dr Dietrich
Beishcher, a German scientist, headed a ‘guinea pig’ study in which 50 Navy personnel volunteers
were exposed to microwaves. He described it as a long term study since ‘microwave effects may
show up years afterwards - genetic damage does not show up until the next generation.’ Although
he promised in a 1972 newspaper report to make his findings public in 1973, nothing is traceable.
A Norwegian study found a higher incidence of breast cancer in exposed radio telegraph workers
(Tynes 1996), which was linked to the decreased production of melatonin. One Russian study
showed health impacts on workers exposed to electric fields of open switchboard installations of
400-500 kw. (Asanova 1966). A more recent Russian study found that EMF impaired the immune
system of telephone workers. (Dimitrova 1982). The same weakening of the immune system was
observed in workers exposed to low, medium and high levels of ELF-MF. Higher exposure
produced the greatest impact, but extremely low levels also produced a marked decrease. (Gobba
2009). Gobba noted the opinion that such changes to the immune system may promote tumour
development. In 1965, Haynal and Regli reported an approximately four-fold higher prevalence of

 a history of electrical engineering jobs in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) (Haynal
and Regli 1964). In Iran, a study found sleep problems in workers at high voltage substations.

(Barsam 2012). A substantial rise in leukaemia and brain tumours was found in exposed Swiss
railway employees (Minder, Pfluger 2001), and long term study revealed a high count of railway
workers afflicted with Alzheimer's (Roosli 2007).

In Germany, work absenteeism due to mental health disorders more than doubled between
1994-2011, along with a national rise in the consumption of anti depressants. Environmental
in uence was not investigated. (Belyaev 2016). Karl Hecht, who treated radar station soldiers of
the German Federal Armed Forces and National People’s Army (NPA) found they suffered long
term effects. They were exposed to three types of radiation: radar waves, x ray and radium, a
luminous paint. However, documented evidence of skin cancer and other types of cancer was
mostly dismissed in court proceedings. Nor would German medical authorities recognise ES as
anything other than a mental illness, referring sufferers to psychiatric clinics (Hecht 2017) . An
increased risk of leukaemia was also found in children whose parents were exposed to EMF at
work. One study found predominantly maternal impact for childhood nervous system tumours
(Liling 2018).

Nevertheless, the ACS and PHE has said there is no conclusive evidence that EMF negatively
impacted exposed personnel. The European Commission Directive 2013/35/EU lays down the
minimum requirement for workers. The UK regulation, the Control of Electronic Fields at Work
regulation 2016 may be separate, but the rules are much the same. UK Health and safety executive
guidance states there is no adverse health effects from exposure to electromagnetic radiation.
(Johnston 2010). The glaring oversight clashes somewhat with H and S’s hairsplitting over loose
wires and untidy passageways, be that as it may. In August 2021, the UK government updated its
guidance page entitled 'Mobile Phone Base Stations: Radio Waves and Health’, in which it stated
‘health effects are unlikely below international guidelines,’ meaning, of course, the health
preserving guidelines of the ICNIRP.

Wearable Devices
Wearing a mobile phone on the body incurs cancer in the local area. There are rising cases of breast
cancer in women and teenage girls who carry mobile phones in their bras. (West 2013) Also rising
is colorectal cancer in young Americans carrying mobile phones in their pockets (Virostko 2019). In
a 2017 review, The ACS reported those born in 1990 were four times as likely to develop colorectal
cancer, and twice as likely to contract colon cancer in their twenties, compared to those born in the
1950’s (Seigel 2017). Dr. De Kun Li, reproductive and perinatal epidemiologist, said, ‘When
placed in trouser pockets, the phones are in the vicinity of the rectum and distal colon and these are
the sites of the largest increase in cancer.’ There is a similar story in Canada, with rectal cancer
rates decreasing among the over fifties, and rising in young men (Brenner 2019). There are also
reported increases in Denmark, New Zealand and the UK since 2009 (Araghi 2009). Recent studies
also indicate the rise in thyroid cancer could be due to mobile phone exposure. (Asl 2019, Luo
2019). The thyroid is in the neck, close to where the phone is held during conversation.
fl

 It is not advisable to work with your laptop on your lap, as it emits radiation, although the retailer
does not inform the consumer of this tri ing detail. There have been anecdotal reports of laptop
induced meralgia parasthetica (thigh pain), including tingling burning, pain, loss of sensation or
painful sensation by laptop users.

Apple’s Fitbit watches are said to monitor sleep quality, pulse and the number of steps taken, but
expose the user to continual radiation. As EMF causes sleep and heart related problems, the Fitbit
does not seem tting. The same goes for EarPods, wireless headsets used for augmented reality
systems and wireless eyewear, exposing eyes and brain to radiation. Although the wearable
watches emit less radiation than mobile phones, Hugh Taylor, obstetrician and gynaecologist at Yale
University, said the risk was due to cumulative radiation and proximity to the body, and warned
pregnant women against wearing the watches, close to the foetus. In 2014, Fitbit’s watches were
recalled following many complaints to the Consumer Product Safety Commission about wrist
watches causing wrist rashes, blisters and burning. Fitbit said it was due to a nickel or other
chemical allergic reaction. Twitter CEO, Jack Dorsey, had no such reservations. He promoted
wearables for improving sleep.

Apple watches and tbits join a host of Amazon and Google electrical devices set to provide
wearers’ data for the U.S government’s new biomedical research agency, nominally sketched
ARPA-H or HARPA, after its military parent, DARPA. (https://www.wired.com/story/darpa-total-
informatio-awareness/). DARPA was disbanded after the 2013 Cambridge Analytica scandal, but
rears its head in the guise of healthcare. Investigating Facebook’s growing involvement in national
security and surveillance, Whitney Webb of Unlimited Hangout ( https://unlimitedhangout.com/
2021/04/investigative-reports/the-military-origins-of-facebook/) tracked its military cradle. ARPA’s
SAFE HOME section will draw data from worn devices, melding ‘national’ security’ with ‘health
security’ in order to use physical and mental health ‘warning signs’ to pre-empt disease or criminal
tendencies. It entails the Department of Justice’s pre-crime approach called ‘DEEP’, used by the
Biden administration to make pre-crime arrests. No matter that the algorithms are often inaccurate.
Meanwhile, the military is being used to pilot covid related wearables for ‘returning to work safely’,
made mandatory for some. Some may opine these devices are being used against their wearers.
Not only damaging to health, but promoted by tech companies as healing the very conditions they
incur. It transpires they will also be used as invasive surveillance and tracking devices of the
wearer.

fi
fi

fl
 Children
The purported concern for children’s safety from a virus is parodied in the hands of governments
and mainstream media that studiously ignores or ridicules warnings of a much greater danger. They
accuse those who speak the truth they have withheld, of delivering ‘misinformation.’ One occasion
of note is the First News article of 17-23rd April 2020, read by 2.2 million children, claiming 5G
was completely safe, dubbing the truth that it wasn’t a conspiracy theory and breaching the UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child, article 17 (access to information from the media). A
consortium of teachers also wrote to the government appealing against this. Eileen O’Conner,
founder of the Radiation Research Trust, published an open letter of complaint to the government.
Children are more vulnerable to the effects of EMF. (Butler 2019). They have thinner skulls, their
cells multiply at a much faster rate than adults, their smaller bones allow greater penetration, and
their brains have higher water content. Studies show that children receive 153% higher Specific
Absorption Rate (SAR) (Gandhi 1996, 2011). A five year old can absorb 60% more microwave
radiation than an adult, and the absorption of EMF into a child’s bone marrow can be up to ten
times greater (Gandhi 2012, 2015).

In spite of this, toys emitting microwave radiation are marketed to children. Because the latency
period between first exposure and diagnosis can be decades, tumours initiated in childhood may not
be diagnosed until adulthood (Morgan 2014).

Children’s mental health

Research into technology’s psychological and social impact on children and adolescents sees no
halcyon days. Depression amongst children in the UK, already the highest in Europe, has been
rising steeply since the lock down in early 2020, and children have been forced to learn online.
Electronic devices do not replace human connection, particularly important for healthy child
development. The fact that EMF exposure negatively impacts children and adolescents' mental
health (Stiglic 2019, Roser 2016, Yen 2009, Yang 2010, Augner & Hacker 2012), and sleeping
(Ostrin 2017, AAP 2013) was virtually ignored by the mainstream media until recently. Circadian
disruption by melatonin depletion can cause sleep deprival, depression, bipolar disorder and
seasonal affective disorder (SAD) (Srinivasan 2006, Brown 2010). There has been much discussion
about how to deal with children’s deteriorating mental health, but less about limiting screen time or
mobile phone use, which studies show to be causative. Soaring cases of self harm and suicide
amongst children and adolescents may be hastened by digital technology, including social media.
(Sedgewick 2019, Daine 2013, Montgomery 2013). Gaming addiction in the young is another rising
condition (Gentile 2017), causing cognitive impairment and structural changes in the brain, while
disrupting mood and motivation (Lin 2012). Gamers’ decrease in white and grey brain tissue
emulates U.S. embassy personnel targeted with microwave beams (Verma 2020). It also occurs in
the brain of those with ASD. Mild to moderate addiction is linked to self harm, depression and
suicidal thoughts (Montgomery 2013). Onscreen violence and interactive violent computer games
desensitise the developing child, contributing to shocking levels of cruelty in cyberbullying, and
manifest assault by children. The American Academy of Paediatrics cited 400 studies showing
heightened aggression in children exposed to media violence (Christakis 2016) worsened with

video games (Anderson 2010). In addition to what was once only film and TV violence, children
are now exposed to violence on multiple devices and platforms.

2018 UK Statista research found children spend about 13 hours a week TV watching, 11 hours
gaming, 14.4 hours on mobile phones and 15.3 hours on the internet, while 86% of 8-11 year old’s
own a smart phone. Ofcom’s 2019 research reported that half of ten year olds own their own smart
phone. Use of smart speakers in children aged 5-15 doubled in 2019, and 5-15 year old’s are more
likely to watch TV programmes on their phones than a TV. Given the health impacts of mobile
phones for children, this only worsens the consequences. Meanwhile, time spent playing or being
outdoors is ever decreasing. Richard Louv noted the decline in the use of national parks in the
U.S., correspondent to the increased use of computers. (Louv 2010). Research on Attention Deficit
Disorder found that a small amount of exposure to nature reduced symptoms (Faber/Taylor 2009).

Impaired learning
There is a gaping contradiction in the public catechism of doctors saving lives and children staying
safe at school, while antennae are quietly installed off site in masts, or within schools, in access
points and routers. Computers, tablets, wi and surf the web pages are used as learning tools, while
mobile phones are permitted in schools, subjecting those exposed to radiation that may destroy
their health, stunt or impair their mental faculties. A four year study of child users of mobile phones
found an increased number of phonemic perception disorders, impaired cognitive functioning and
memory, and increased fatigue. (Khorseva 2011).

Over twenty years ago, the Stewart Report (2000) advised against masts in areas of density. This
was ignored, and new high power density emissions are in operation inside buildings, exposing
children and adults to greater levels of radiation. When, in 2007, the government set up the Home
Access Programme, studies began to emerge showing biological effects of EMF that could impede
learning, but were ignored. The introduction of home computer technology sustained negative
impacts on student maths and reading test scores. ‘Further evidence suggests that providing
universal access to home computers and high-speed internet access would broaden, rather than
narrow, math and reading achievement gaps.’ (Vigdor 2014). It seems exclusive online learning for
children is disastrous for their learning and development. But that has been the case on and off since
early 2020. High exposure to RF-EMF produced by mobile phone towers nearby school buildings
was associated with delayed fine and gross motor skills, spatial working memory and attention in
school adolescents compared to students who were exposed to low RF-EMF (Meo 2019), while
digital dementia has been reported in school aged children. (Morgan 2014).

3G-4G has seriously impacted children’s health, and now they will be microwaved with radiation
that is up to 100 times stronger. This beggars belief, and it’s hardly surprising that many don’t. All
swirls in a welter of fake mainstream news and the false narrative of 5G’s safety, its deadly potential
ignored, suppressed or ridiculed. For schools are ‘set to bene t’ from 5G, with the social
enhancement of virtual classes, and VR headsets making lessons ‘more immersive.’

fi

fi

 Children’s decline in academic levels is the same in Europe and the U.S. In ‘Screen Schooled,’ two
American teachers of long standing revealed that technology’s over use had impacted pupils’
cognitive performance, which plummeted between 2008-18. Joe Clement reported ‘a signi cant
difference in the ability of kids to focus, to interact socially; to think critically, to solve problems.

They have all taken a noticeable nose dive in the past 5-10 years.’ In Stockholm, Olle Johansson,
Professor in Neuroscience at the Karolinska Institute, linked Swedish children’s plunging maths,
reading, comprehension and natural science scores with rising levels of computerised teaching
(Johansson 2014). In Sweden, which has one of the most highly computerised educational systems
in the world, students are doing slightly better in Waldorf, Montessori and Reggio schools which do
not use computers.

‘A child using a laptop to download from a wireless internet connection is exposed to the same
amount of radiation (about 1,000 µW/m2 and above) as if he/she were near a cellular base station
(50-100 meters away). There are many parents who are not aware of this. The gures are not
plucked from the air, but taken from readings in schools in Oslo by the Norwegian Post and
Telecommunications Agency. Whether it’s about base stations, wireless or cell phones, it is the
same type of radiation we are talking about (in the range of 1-2.5 GHz).’

Parents have not been informed that online learning and wi technology act to impair their
children’s learning, only actively sold on its didactic nesse. Dr Thomas Rau, medical director of
the Paracelsus Clinic, Switzerland, described exposing children in schools to radiation, known to
impair brain function and learning, as unethical and criminal. A non consent form should be a
standard hand out to all properly informed parents.

There is a tremendous abuse of children at every level by our society. Knowingly foisting
addictive, carcinogenic devices upon them, while ensuring the media does not tell the truth about it,
adds to the host of modern atrocities. Over the past twenty years, children are increasingly
subjected to violent internet porn, ensuring that girls are raped and damaged for life by their peers
from the age of four. As with unsafe levels of EMF exposure, this has not been given the kind of
media coverage it deserves. When the UK Government tried to address this with child protective
legislation in 2019 there was an outcry on the perils of censorship and adult liberty. It seems that
police and schools do little, although child rape does untold damage no matter what the age of the
perpetrator. Porn is not banned. Porn barons, foisting rape by proxy upon women and children, are
not prosecuted. Mobile phones, that cause cancer, depression and brain damage, and upon which
children watch porn, are not banned from child use. But an Irish Doctor suggesting vitamin C can
help in the treatment of Covid 19 gets heavily rapped by the Irish medical council (although
intravenous Vitamin C was successfully used as a treatment in China (http://orthomolecular.org/
resources/omns/v16n16.shtml) and also Korea, followed by treatment in the U.S. in March 2020.
The success of this treatment did not make the news. Websites reporting the truth about 5G are
blocked by Facebook and Twitter, and documentaries or interviews contradicting the mainstream
narrative are taken down from U Tube.

Silicon Valley CEO’s ban gadgets for their own children

fi
fi

fi
fi

Tech giants, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs, severely restricted or banned the use of phones, I pads and
computers for their own children while educating them at Steiner schools where computers were
banned. The precautionary principle was followed to the latter by all Silicon Valley employees
when it came to their own families. Sean Parker, an early Facebook investor, said that he and
creators of FB made it as addictive as possible on purpose. ‘God only knows what it’s doing to
children’s brains,’ he remarked. Nir Eyal, author of Hooked: How to build habit forming products,
teaches workshops on how to manipulate people into constant use of their products. He himself
went to great lengths to limit screen time for his own family (Tristan Harris, former Google
employee). Yet this news did nothing to dent the sales of Apple or Microsoft products, and they
continued to be promoted in schools. Microsoft’s education tools and apps improve learning and
creativity, empowering students of all abilities. Some apps tailor lesson plans for each student,
others improve literacy. What with the lock down and enforced online learning, children should be
academically, creatively and spiritually blooming.

Hyper in ammatory syndrome in children from March 2020

Since March 2020 children worldwide began falling ill with hyper in ammatory syndrome
symptoms associated with Kawasaki disease and Covid 19. These children presented with fever,
diarrhoea and vomiting, myocarditis, coronary aneurysm, low blood pressure, breathing dif culties,
skin rash, eye malady, swollen oral blood vessels, swollen hands and feet, with one 2 year old
suffering from arthritis in her ngers. Most studies found leukopenia (reduction in white blood
cells). A Lancet study identi ed a cluster of 8 children in S.E. England presenting with symptoms
in April 2020. (Riphagen 2020). One child developed coronary arrhythmia with refractory shock,
dying from cerebrovascular infarction.

Aggressive measures were adopted to tackle presumed Kawasaki disease in a study of four children
(Akca 2020) which resulted in one child’s death. The review showed 36 articles describing 320
children with Kawasaki symptoms associated with Covid. The PCR test was negative in 120 of the
183 patients (65%) while the serology was positive in 130 (83%) of 155 patients. However, the
PCR test has been proven unreliable, children were generally free from Covid, and being
asymptomatic was also later disproved.

Arthur Firstenberg pointed out that the children’s symptoms were akin to radiation sickness. It is
pertinent that these children had eye, bone and heart ailments as well as skin rash, all associated
with exposure to EMF and 5G mm waves.

5G and Covid 19
fl

fi
fi

fl

fi

 Studies have evinced EMF’s weakening of the immune system, leaving those exposed vulnerable to
infection (Johansson 2009, Grigoriev 2010) Rapid 5G cell installation was perfectly timed,
therefore, to keep us all particularly safe during a global pandemic. Enhancing the trend of general
public confusion, EMF incurs similar symptoms to those of the Covid virus, (loss of sense of taste
and smell, abnormal fatigue, headache, tinnitus) and could be mismatched when all are subject to
rising levels of microwave radiation (Kostoff 2020).

The vociferous demurral of politicians, media and social media regulators alike wherever the link is
suggested is hyperbolic. There is no question that Covid 19 is a virus, distinct from 5G mm waves -
con ating the two helps no one. However, resistance to the virus is not helped by the fact that 5G
promotes oxidative stress and DNA breaks, thus weakening the immune system

5G and Graphene Oxide

A recent article (What is Graphene Oxide? Carter Heavy Industries 9th July 2021) reported
researchers found graphene oxide in 90-98% of Pfizer vaccines. Graphene oxide is toxic and highly
conductive, and also incurs a lost sense of smell and taste. The particles remain un-magnetic when
in sub zero temperature but become magnetic when they reach the same temperature as that of the
human body. This explains the phenomenon of people becoming magnetic after they receive the
vaccine. Superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles have been added to accelerate delivery into
every cell - a process called magnetofection. Gaelle Leterme found that the external magnetic field
could be used to cause magnetofection which means the altering of DNA using external magnetic
fields combined with nano particles that are injected (Leterme 2019). Graphene oxide nano
particles can instruct neural networks and be activated using specific radio frequencies. Hereby
may lie the connection between Covid and 5G - not the virus, but the vaccination it justified. The
vaccination of graphene oxide is activated and spurred in magneto genetics or the use of
electromagnetic control which involves activating cells using magnetic fields. Magnetogenetics
enables researchers to control neurones with electromagnetics. Graphene oxide nano particles can
be used to insert DNA cells, altering the DNA of recipients. (Al-Deen 2014).

Wildlife and Insects

Insects and birds are the most vulnerable to 5G as they absorb far more radiation at mm
wavelengths than earlier frequencies (Thielens, Bell 2018), which independently funded science
fl

 cites as their cause of decline to date. 75% Of insects have been wiped out since 1989 (Hallman
2017) in tandem with the rise of wi-fi. There are a variety of causes given, the most popular being
climate change and crop spray, the latter of which started in earnest after WW2, forty four years
before the decline began. Large numbers of birds have been dying in mid flight since the lock
down and 5G cell installation. Avian flu is being given as the cause in Europe, and culling began in
2020 for the UK, Europe and further afield.

A more recent study stated 40% of insects were threatened with extinction (Wyckhuys 2019).
Arithmetic suggests the remainder will disappear in the 5G swathe, as would birds, the numbers of
which have been declining globally since 1970, and nosediving since the early 90’s. Humans as
well as birds are rather in need of the food insects provide, but this doesn’t seem to figure for those
keeping us all safe. It is quite possible that birds and insects will not survive this ratcheted electro
magnetic frequency, a strong contender for having dented, if not decimated the numbers of both.
Silence reigns in environmental and bird protection agencies and the media on this, inviting a kind
this world has never known.

Electromagnetic pollution is largely ignored by the mainstream and all of the covertly industry
funded green groups, but a strong contributor according to independent studies. (Kumar and Sharma
2011, Sivani and Sudarsam 2012, Cucurachi 2013, Thielens 2011, Carpenter 1971). Birds and
insects are particularly vulnerable to RF-EMF, which penetrates them at a greater depth than other
creatures, damages their reproductive capacity and disrupts their navigational acumen. (Warnke
2008, Wiltschko 2015, Southern 1975, Goldsworthy 2009).

Warnke explained the navigational reliance on the earth’s electro magnetic eld by many organisms
and creatures, disorientated by man made electro magnetic frequency.

‘All magnetic eld sensitivity in living organisms, including elasmobranch shes, is the result of a highly
evolved, nely-tuned sensory system based on single-domain, ferro-magnetic crystals. Animals that depend
on the natural electrical, magnetic, and electromagnetic elds for their orientation and navigation through
earth’s atmosphere are confused by the much stronger and constantly changing arti cial elds created by
technology and fail to navigate back to their home environments.’
(Warnke 2007).

Of insects, this has particularly impacted bees (Theilens 2011, 2018; Warnke 2007; Kumar 2011),
contributing to bee colony collapse disorder (Wellenstein 1973, Harst and Kuhn 2006, Sharma and
Kumar 2010, Sahib 2011). One study showed it severely disturbed the bee colony and set off the
swarming process (Favre 2011). There was increased aggression and reduced aversive learning in
exposed bees (Shepherd 2019). Studies on fruit flies showed mobile phone radiation at 90Mhz
decreases the reproductive capacity of insects up to 60% through DNA fragmentation and cell
death. (Panagopoulos 2004, 2007). Similar results were also found with microwave radiation at
other frequencies (Bolshakov 2002, Atli and Unlu 2006). Other studies evinced abnormal mutation
in the mealworm beetle, causing severe deformities in irradiated insect pupae. (Carpenter 1971).

After installation of a cell tower in Idaho in May, 2021, an entire beehive population in the adjacent
farm died within a month.

Low level RFR sizeably in uences the insect circadian clock. In one study it slowed down the
cockroach rhythm under dim U lights, according with results on the Drosophila circadian clock.

fi
fi

fl

fi

fi

fi
fi
fi

 ‘300x weaker RF elds also slowed down the cockroach clock in a near zero static magnetic eld,
demonstrating the internal clock of organism are sensitive to weak RF elds.’ (Bartos 2019). This
confirms the findings of Leif Salford, showing that weak electromagnetic fields are just as harmful.
It is not unreasonable to advocate the withdrawal of wifi as a preventative measure. That this
should be considered radical speaks much.

In May 2020, a study was featured in the Times newspaper intriguingly entitled ‘Insects fall prey to
diet of junk foods’. Investigating why grasshopper populations fell by nearly 1/3 over 2 decades in
the Konza Prairie, North Eastern Kansas, a study was carried out between 1996-2017 in undisturbed
habitats and in 2002-2017 where bison grazed. (Welti et al 2020) The article reported that Kasper,
leading the study, said that ‘in many regions (of the world) the cause of decline was given to be
insecticide use and habitat loss.’ Wi-fi was not mentioned. As there was no case of habitat loss or
insecticide use in the Konza Prairie, they looked at the plants, and found greenhouse gas the main
ingredient in the sugars, starches and cellulose of plants, making them less nutritious. Kasper
therefore posited that the cause for insect decline could be depleted nitrogen, phosphorous, sodium,
zinc and other nutrients in the plants due to rising CO2. He suggested re-greening was redundant,
as plants were so nutrient depleted. However, the study ignored the fact that the area is also
subjected to solar radiation. Weather data is collected by a CR10 data logger, accessed every 15
minutes via wireless internet, which monitors air temperature, relative humidity, solar radiation,
wind speed and soil temperature.

Other possibilities for sharp insect decline have been researched and postulated - it may be a variety
of factors, but electro magnetic frequency is consistently ignored or discounted by green groups,
charities, industry funded scientists and public ‘experts.’ The RSPB, Auduborn Society, Public
Health England, Wildlife Charity, Green Party, F.O.E., etc. can only seem to nd climate change
and petrochemicals responsible for all nature’s ills. Funding resources are limited - government or
industry - which fund only research endorsing EMF.

Birds
Birds are in crisis. This goes for not just rare or threatened species. Their decline began in the early
seventies, gathering pace from the early 90’s. North American and European studies have been
joined by recent research showing decreases in South Korea (Kim 2021). In one exemplar of North
America, a 2019 study found 3 billion, or 29% of birds had disappeared over the past fifty years.
The decline bears all the hallmarks of species extinction. (Rosenberg 2019).

fi

fi
fi

fi
 Birds are good biological indicators of RF-EMF due to their thinner skulls, the way their feathers
can act as dielectric receptors of microwave radiation (Bigu-del-Blanco 1975(a) & 1975b) and the
fact many species use magnetic navigation (Wiltschko and Wiltschko 2015; Mouritsen and Ritz
2005, Muheim 2006, Beason 1995, Balmori 2015, Kavokin 2014, Engels 2014), and their mobility
(Balmori 2009, Balmori and Hallberg 2007, Everaert and Bauwen 2007). In his review, Cucurachi
found 2/3 of studies showed the development of birds and insects was the most significantly
effected by RF-EMF (Cucurachi 2013). He highlighted the woeful lack of laboratory, field and
ecological research in this area, and called for greater monitoring of wifi and its effects on bird
populations as a matter of urgency. The summons enjoined Albert Manville (2016) and Alfonso
Balmori, whose field and laboratory studies showed strong evidence of harm (Balmori, 2005, 2015,
2009). Yet the relative dearth of vital studies in this area has continued. Only 3% of all research
into EMF effects is on birds (Bhattacharya 2013). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), once a hub of research into environmental impacts of EMF, was stripped of its funding by
the FDA in the mid nineties. In response to queries by the Environmental Health Trust in July
2020, it confirmed no funding with regards wireless and radio frequency research, and no
knowledge of any developed safety limits or research reviews on the impacts of wireless on birds,
bees and the environment.

Questioned about the impact of EMF on birds in December, 2020, Public Health England (PHE)
replied,

‘We are not aware of any evidence which is suf cient to show that non-ionising radiation (including
electro-magnetic elds) presents a risk of harmful effects to birds. The only reliable evidence of an
effect is the disruption of magnetic compass orientation in migratory birds, although the
consequences of this effect for wild bird populations are unknown. Rigorous and repeatable studies
on the effects of long-term exposure to non-ionising radiation are required, including studies on the
potential effects on bird populations. Resources for research are extremely limited at this time and
as an organisation we have to focus our work and resources on known threats to biodiversity, such
as climate change and habitat loss or deterioration.’

Lack of evidence and uncertainty is achieved by lack of research. In his 2016 memorandum,
Albert Manville stated,

“We need to better understand how to address these growing and poorly understood radiation
impacts to migratory birds, bees, bats, and myriad other wildlife. At present, given industry and
agency intransigence, massive amounts of money being spent to prevent addressing impacts from
non-thermal radiation — not unlike the battles over tobacco and smoking — and a lack of
significant, dedicated and reliable funding to advance independent field studies, we are left with few
options. Currently, other than to proceed using the precautionary approach and keep emissions

as low as reasonably achievable, we are at loggerheads in advancing meaningful guidelines, policies

and regulations that address non-thermal effects.”

PHE presented three reviews to ratify their position, all concurring in the fallacy of inconclusive
studies. One, a report on the EKLIPSE project (Malkemper 2018), funded by the EU, found all
studies inconclusive. The second found ‘no convincing evidence that ELF-EMF fields would have
adverse effects on human health or wildlife,’ (C.P. Cummins and D. Osborn 2002) and the third
undermined research finding links, and dismissed Balmori, blaming sparrow decline on the standard

fi

fi

 alternatives, but at least conceded that future research should be carried out. (J.T. Smith 2005).
Lastly was attached Engels’study showing EMF’s disorientating impact on migratory birds. (Engels
2014).

In the UK, the RSPB, the British Trust for Ornithology (BTO), and the Wildfowl and Wetlands
Trust have omitted RF-EMF in their list of reasons for bird decline, and all websites are free of any
such mention. All three converged to run a State of UK Birds Report between 1995-2017. The
2013 report showed that 16 species declined by 1/3 between 1995 and 2013. The RSPB’s ‘co-
operation across borders for biodiversity’ (CABB) is supported by the EU’s €43m INTERREG VA
Programme, 15% of which is funded by Northern Ireland (NI). It is led by RSPB NI with the help
of partners RSPB Scotland, Birdwatch Ireland, Butterfly Conservation, Moors of the Future and
Northern Ireland Water. All are funded by EU INTERREG EUROPE. Unlike the UK, Scotland,
Wales and Republic of Ireland, RSPB NI has not provided funding for a green recovery.
Invertebrates in Cairngorns is funded by the Scottish government and the EU Community Leader
2014-2020 Programmes. The EU has adopted ICNIRP guidelines and validates its theories. The
EU does not want to know about harms visited upon birds and insects by EMF and its substantiative
studies are industry funded. Just as every regulating body abandoned those they were assigned to
protect, so the duties of bird protection agencies and environmental groups have been been
trounced.

Loyalist EU environmental directives are amongst the RSPB’s calls for actions, such as resisting
‘attempts in Europe to weaken the Birds and Habitats Directive,’ to ‘fully implement the EU Marine
Strategy Framework Direct,’ to ‘meet commitments to the EU Water framework,’ and ‘implement
the EU regulation on invasive species.’ The BTO also details its conservation projects on its
website, including restoration of species through rearing in captivity and releasing. One project
estimates the mortality caused to migratory birds by collision with wind turbines, ignoring the chief
cause. None of these conservation initiatives address the very real crisis facing wildlife. The EU
commission, with all of its commendable green directives, is fully aware of the harms of EMF, as
the German Telecommunications research programme shows. Why invent green directives, projects
and initiatives that will have no impact on the soaring mortality rate? Birds are being decimated by
RF-EMF, they are unlikely to survive 5G.

From late May 2021, a ‘mystery illness’ struck down birds across the south, mid west and eastern
U.S. states. Wildlife managers in Washington DC, Virginia, Maryland and West Virginia reported
birds left alive were blind with crusty eyes fast shut, swollen faces and neurological problems.
They were shaking, had lost their balance, and were unable to y. These are consistent with high
levels of radiation exposure, including 5G. But other causes are being investigated. Fungus or
toxins built up in cicadas, eaten by some bird species, was suggested by an ecologist at the
Smithsonian magazine. Wildlife biologist, Laura Kerns of the Ohio division of wildlife has also

blamed infectious disease, pesticides and ‘cicada outbreaks.’ The Guardian, reporting, blamed the
weather, citing a 2007 study. Birdwatching magazine asked feeders to help researchers learn which
birds eat periodical cicadas (May 27 2021), as this was ‘surprisingly poorly documented.’

A 2002 RSPB study of disappearing sparrows’ nesting spots on roofs must not have deemed it
relevant that they were level with phone antennae. In response to queries of EMF’s impact on
wildlife, the RSPB stated,

‘At present, our scientists are not aware of any robust population-level scienti c studies that have
shown declines in bird populations that could be explained by electromagnetic radiation.  The

fl
fi

 scienti c evidence for such a threat is equivocal at best which, when combined with some of the
unsubstantiated comment on the internet, means it is dif cult for us to be certain of the facts. At a
time when the natural world is faced by so many threats that are well-proved and are having clear
national and international impacts on our bird populations, the RSPB has to prioritise where we can
make a difference.  If sound science emerges that proves a clear (and lethal) link between 5G and
large numbers of wild birds, and the signi cance of this threat outweighs other known issues we are
already campaigning on, we are prepared to review our position.  However, at this time we have no
plans to campaign against the roll-out of 5G.’

Withholding funding from science that would inevitably nd the link between EMF radiation and
bird mortality, ensures that there is none. In the mean time, birds have nothing to thank their so
called protectors for. They are dying in vast numbers, and no amount of bird feeder or pond
clearing or species reintroduction or any of the other cosmetic pieces of uselessness will dent that.
The substantial uptake of agri-environment schemes by UK farmers, and the compulsory set aside
scheme started in 1992, have made no difference to the decline. The birds are damned by radiation.
They are damned by human greed and folly. You cannot commit genocide upon a species in order to
feather your own nest without losing.

There has been a dramatic decline in urban and farm birds across the globe since the early 90’s,
with the urban sparrow’s conspicuous departure from cities, seeing 50% gone from Dublin and
Moscow and 60% from Prague and Hamburg. The house sparrow is a particularly strong indicator
of EMF effects, as most use the breeding ground of roof spaces (Wotton 2002), level with radiation
from cell antennae. A three and a half year study in Valladolid, Spain, found sparrow populations
reduced where EMF power levels were higher. (Balmori, Hallberg 2007). There were similar
findings in Belgium, where a study showed sparrow population decrease was related to EMF
strength, at 900 and 1800 MHz. (Everaert, Bauwen 2007). India, which comes second in the world
for the most rapid ascent of cell phone use, has also seen the fastest disappearance of sparrows. An
epidemiological study of phone masts’ impact on sparrows in Indian cities, found that the birds had
disappeared wherever the masts were installed. (Dongre, Verma 2009). But it was not just the
sparrow that disappeared. Of the 200 species of Chennai birds, four - the house sparrow, red
whiskered bulbul, Brahmin kite and spotted dove - have gone. India’s rich biodiversity is being
erased and its future is bleak. (Shende 2015) There were 4,000 cell towers in Chennai alone then,
many more now.

Compared to European cities, London was particularly hard hit, losing 75% of its sparrows between
’94 and 2003. Bristol, Edinburgh and Belfast had a similar tale. The UK has one of the highest
levels of RF/EMF in Europe, 20 times higher than in Spain, and is densely packed with cell towers.

In 2003, seeking an answer to the disappearance of 10 million sparrows, the British Trust of
Ornithology (BTO) enlisted Rosie Cleary leading 30,000 bird watchers to record the effects of
electromagnetic waves on the birds. It was acknowledged that the species’ departure coincided with
the advent of mobile phones, noting Balmori’s study in Spain. Cleary also mentioned EMF’s
impact on bird reproduction. The partly government funded study went on for 18 months, from
2003-2004, over two breeding seasons. This was followed by a somewhat confounding silence on
the results. It is as if this large scale epidemiological study, which undoubtedly took place, all but
evaporated. Ten years later, on September 2013, the BTO with Garden Birdwatch survey suggested
the species had stabilised since 2009 - the 80% decline reported in gardens fell to 60% in 2009, and
was the same between 2009 and 2013. Which was rather odd, as sparrows have continued to
fi

fi

fi
fi

disappear from cities all over the world. BTO seemed to share the calculus of Children with Cancer
apropos pylons and child leukaemia.

The interference of birds’ magnetic navigation is proving fatal to migrating birds. As well as
disorientation, their reflexive safeguarding is compromised: birds’ sensitivity to the
meteorologically based impulse activity in the atmosphere means that they can derive the ‘weather
code’ signals of change or approaching thunder-storms, and then fly around them (Panagopoulos,
Balmori 2017). With this impaired, mounting numbers of flocks are flying into storms. In a study
of robins exposed to electromagnetic R-F noise at a range of 2kHz-5MHz, the birds were unable to
to use their magnetic compass (Engels 2014) forecasting the kismet for migratory birds, although
this had started long before, with the advent of wifi. Several million disorientated migrating birds
of 230 species have been crashing into cell towers and dying each year, since they were erected in
the 90’s. It happens mostly at night or in fog or bad weather, when they are most reliant on the
earth’s magnetic field for navigation (Shire, Brown, Winegrad 2000). Mortality has risen with the
increasing number of towers. A review and meta analysis (Longcore, Rich and Gauthreaux 2008)
concluded avian mortality could be reduced by restricting the height of towers, avoiding guy wires
and using only red or white strobe type lights, rather than steady white lights. In 2002 the
American Bird Conservancy, Forest Conservation Council and Friends of the Earth petitioned the
FCC to issue a moratorium on the construction of new towers above 199 feet/300 meters. The
CTIA swiftly moved in with vociferous objection, and in 2006 the FCC issued an order favouring
the CTIA, refusing a moratorium on tower construction. However, there was no acknowledgment
at the time of birds’ disorientation by wifi emanating from these towers. It is birds’ sensors to the
earth’s magnetic field that help them eschew obstructions to safe passage. Thanks to the unbridled
spread of EMF, this is completely disrupted.

In 2017, three scientists were interviewed about Bird Migration, on BBC Radio 4’s In Our Time,
presented by Melvyn Bragg. On migration, the scientists placed bird’s olfactory sense, oceanic
affects and the direction of the sun as their primary influence, and it was only when Bragg prompted
Professor Tim Gilford about the earth’s magnetic field that he mentioned it briefly, describing one
aspect as ‘controversial’ before swiftly moving on. New technology has been utilised to track birds’
migratory patterns, but EMF destroys them and their migratory patterns.

Oxford University is the centre for UK’s academic centres of excellence in 5G cyber security
research, and partners with the Alan Turing institute and the PETRAS IoT hub. It runs a 5G for

Enterprise course led by Ajit Jaoker, teaching AI, IoT and virtual reality. Other teachers include
Cynthia Joachimpillai, manager at Verizon 5G London Lab, and Esmat Mirzamany, leader of
international Verizon 5G Solutions. Oxford University is funded by and allied to the tech and
pharmaceutical industries, including Astrazenica and Glaxosmith Kline. Funders include the
Wellcome Trust, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the EU. In early December, 2020 it was
awarded major European research council funding.

Since January 2020 there have been alarming incidents, worldwide, of bird flocks literally falling
dead from the sky. In addition, since March 2020, birds are dying en masse across Europe with
what has been attributed to Avian flu. The German conservation magazine NABU reported that
Blue Tits, Great Tits and other species were dying. The first cases were reported on March 11,

2020, and by April 21 there were 26,000 sick and dead birds. It was said these birds were
displaying symptoms of bird flu, which are similar to those of non thermal radiation exposure. They
were described as apathetic, with lack lustre feathering, ‘breathing problems’, eyes stuck together,
unable to eat, but with extreme thirst, after which they died. In Balmori’s study of EMF exposed
wild storks, the birds showed symptoms of weakness and illness in plumage deterioration (dull
feathers, no shine, beardless rachis), apathy, decreased egg production, aggression, and locomotion
problems, while young birds died (Balmori 2009).

Bizarrely, NABU advised garden owners to withdraw feeding stations and water sources in order to
create ‘social distancing’ for birds, until another disease was suggested. The RSPB vouched for
Trichomoniasis. By the 23rd April, the given cause was Suttonella Ornithocola which causes
pneumonia in effected birds. Reports showed this was not limited to W. Germany - there were
repeat occurrences in Belgium, Netherlands and Hungary. In the UK it struck Chaffinches and
Finches in Suffolk, Siskins and Goldfinches in Scotland and Blue Tits in Bedfordshire. Garden
Wildlife Health, who took up the story, is a collaborative project between the British Trust for
Ornithology, Zoological society for London and the RSPB.

The BTO was silent on the matter until November, when an article appeared on its website noting
that Blue Tits had gone missing from UK gardens ‘following a heatwave’. Fewer birds were seen
in UK gardens from May; 85% of gardens reported an absence of blue tits in August, and the
concluding prediction was 500,000 less blue tits over winter 2020/21. The given reason was an
early spring (2020) which saw the warmest April in over 100 years, indicating climate change.

‘Thanks to the records submitted by our dedicated Garden BirdWatchers, we are able to see the
impacts of weather events on garden birds,’ said Robert Jaques, garden birdwatch supporter
development of cer. ‘We will be watching with a keen eye over the coming months to see how
Blue Tits, and other garden species, handle the next winter.’

This is not helping birds, and will do nothing to protect them.

NABU printed a map of German areas showing the number of reported Tit deaths per 100,000
inhabitants. Scientist and journalist, Arthur Firstenburg, observed that the highest numbers of bird
deaths were along the Mosel River and in the area around Oldenburg in Lower Saxony. ‘These are
areas where Vodafone announced in a press release on April 10, 2020 that it had just expanded its

4G-LTE cell tower network.’ Vodafone said it had closed “one of the nastiest radio holes” in Lower
Saxony, and there had previously only been 2G service along the Mosel River. It carried out
more than 1,000 LTE projects in the few months leading up to April, is increasing the power of 500
existing LTE stations and upgrading 260 more stations to 4G-LTE.

In November 2020, swans were found spinning in circles, bleeding from their nostrils before dying,
in Cumbria, Worcestershire, Blackpool, Devon and the Isle of Wight. Each of these counties were
confirmed as testing grounds for 5G UK trials starting in 2018. 5G testing is now spreading further
afield. Official postmortems carried out by DEFRA have pinned a ‘highly pathogenic’ strain of
H5N8 Avian flu. Natural Health England confirms it is so. In December 2020 swans were found
dead in Hampshire, while black swans died in Dawlish, Devon. The deaths have now spread across
England from Cumbria to the South Coast and back up to Northumberland. Birds’ eyes, beak and
fi

 brain tissue are loaded with magnetite, sensitive to magnetic fields. (Mouritsen, Ritz 2005).
Bleeding from the beak is not typical of Avian flu. ‘H5N8 outbreaks’ have been reported amongst
farm chickens and turkeys in Herefordshire, Frodsham, Cheshire, Kent, Leominster, Norfolk, North
Yorkshire and Leicestershire. In each case DEFRA culled ‘affected birds.’

It is possible that birds have Avian u due to impaired immunity caused by EMF exposure; it is
equally possible they are sickening or dying from exposure to 5G pulsed radiation. DEFRA’s magic
bullet of a bird cull may be redundant. There have been reported outbreaks in Germany, Denmark
and the Netherlands since September, 2020. In the Dutch town of Pui jk, 200,000 chickens were
culled. A cull was carried out at a small poultry farm in Nordfriesland in Germany. 1,000 dead
wild birds, mainly geese and ducks, were also found on the Nordfriesland coast. The German
public broadcaster NDR suggested they were ’most likely infected with bird u,’ although no
postmortem was reported. Other cases were con rmed on farms in the German state of Schleswig-
Holstein. A huge cull was also carried out in Russia’s Western Kostroma region. If they will go
aunting the evidence of their slaughter, then the evidence must be slaughtered. Whatever you do,
don’t say 5G = bird extinction and we’re next. You could get charged with hate speech. In New
Delhi, November 2019, of cials estimated 1,000 birds fell dead around a lake in Rajasthan. Locals
said it was more like 5,000. More recently, 1200 ‘unusual’ bird mortalities have been reported
across 7 states in India. (January, 2021), put down to the popular diagnosis of bird flu. 5G,
electromagnetic radiation and the like had nothing to do with it, as the Indian government have not
yet given full permission for the roll out. 5G testing began in January 2021, and took off in April,
along with Covid 19. Festooning the carnage, a new law was passed on January 1st in the UK
permitting bird shooting without respite, including Egyptian and Canada geese, jay, duck, Sacred
Ibis, parrot and parakeet. All and everyone have the government’s blessing to walk out and shoot
as many birds as they please. It seems a frenzy of bird killing is le dernier cri.

Attributing sweeping mortality rates of birds on 4G and now 5G has been dismissed as conspiracy
theorising misinformation by Audubon, a Canadian bird magazine, which is one of the U.S big ten
green groups funded by industry. With several members of corporations on its board, Audubon
would not boycott Exxon following its 11 million gallon oil spill in Alaska that killed thousands of
birds. Audubon can join the mainstream choir, and the vigilantly truthful Fact checkers, Lead
Stories, Snopes, or Full Fact working with Facebook and Reuters, no less. It was Reuters, along
with Snopes, who descried ‘false claims’ of 5G testing when 350 dead starlings fell from park trees
in the Hague, in October, 2018. There were uncon rmed reports that a New Holland Spoor 5G
transmitter, viewable from where the birds fell, was being tested in connection with a Dutch railway

station at the time of their death. Dog owners reported their dogs vomiting as they passed, so police
fenced off the area for a time. Reuters then reported that the Antenna Bureau of the Dutch
government said there had been no testing of 5G masts at that point, bolstering their case with
Wagingen Bioveterinary Research (WUF) which carried out post mortem examination of the birds,
concluding bleeding was from the poisoned yew berries found in their stomachs. It turned out the
starlings had eaten these for years without reaction, but the theory was maintained. A further
autopsy by the national History Museum in Rotterdam found severe internal bleeding from ruptured
livers, as well as grave damage to blood vessels, heart and lungs. The researchers concluded that
the starlings must have crashed into each other, the trees and the ground with fatal velocity, due to
being panicked or disorientated. Reuters went on to ratify their hypothesis by citing Sergeant Rob
Taylor’s explanation for a similar incident in Anglesey. When those starlings fell dead along a
stretch of a road in Wales in December 2019, police claimed they crashed onto tarmac and died
avoiding the bad weather, or escaping a bird of prey. Birds must have had a quirky blip in their
fl
fi
fl
fi
fi
fi

fl

 evolutionary voyage. Until recently they were not in the habit of nosediving onto roads in order to
escape anything.

200 starlings were found dead on a road near Llywenan in Bodedern, Wales. The birds ew in a
circle before dying, and fell on the road, rather than the elds either side of it, which begs the
question of whether power lines had been installed beneath the road. A spokesman for the area said
not. The birds examined had internal bleeding, which was explained as consistent with impact.
Vodafone have a 5G test bed 41 miles from Llywenan, in the village of Llanddewi, Rhydderch and
Llandudno, ‘where connectivity can be at its worst.’ Some reckoned they were also testing in
Bodedern, which they denied. Suspicion may have been roused by the fact Vodafone was the rst
to hide many of their 5G cell antennae under man hole covers , without informing the public. In
February 2020, 100 starlings were found dead in a similar grouping along a road in Dauphin
County, Pennsylvania. The Pennsylvania Game Commission said the birds were killed by passing
cars and trucks. (Which, instinctively, the birds must have fallen beneath in mid ight). There were
electrical lines along the road, about 30 feet from the birds, as well as a cell tower sited 50-75 yards
away.

In September 2020, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of migrating birds fell dead, apparently
emaciated, from the sky, across South Western U.S. It started in New Mexico on August 20, and
spread across four more U.S. states and 4 Mexican states. There were reports of dead owls,
warblers, hummingbirds, loons, ycatchers, woodpeckers and other species migrating south,
literally dropping dead onto the ground. It was described as unprecedented by Andrew Farnsworth,
senior researcher at the Cornell University laboratory of Ornithology. The birds had the same
symptoms as the German birds: lethargic and disorientated. No one mentioned EMF, instead a
sudden cold spot in the weather due to climate change, which caused the lack of insects for the
apparently starved insectivore birds. Those of us who remember driving 25 years ago, will recall
the windscreen being covered with dead insects, caught on the pane, and the stark contrast these
days, of none at all. Birds would only need to open their beaks on long journeys for sustenance, but
no longer. This may be a feasible contributory factor given insects’ rapid decline.

On the 5th February, 2020, 1,000 birds fell dead onto the Viale del Policlinico, a street in Rome.
Officials said the birds died when a tree collapsed due to strong wind. Again, the birds flew in a
circle before dying. Again, it is implausible that birds of all creatures should be crushed beneath a
collapsed tree, when their innate response is to fly away. In early March, 1,000 birds were found
dead in Sikeston, South East Missouri, apparently caught in a storm. Red winged black birds,

brown-headed cowbirds, grackles and European starlings fell into elds in the area. Sikeston is a
small town of 17.48 square miles, overrun with cell towers. Birds, undisturbed would normally
know to avoid a storm, and y around it. (Panagopoulos 2020 Warnke, 2008). In April 2020,
thousands of dead swallows and swifts migrating from Africa fell from the sky, and were found in
Athens, in apartment balconies, on Aegean islands, and around lakes close to the seaport of Nauplia,
the Peloponnese. Strong winds, low temperatures and rain were blamed. In the same month, on the

15th April, 200 dead ducks were found in Denmark, on the beaches of Laesø. They were later
tested for flu, which was negative. 10 woodcocks were found dead in an unusual part of St Helier,
Jersey. Mr Dryden, chairman of the Ornithology section of the Society Jersiase, said most birds
attracted to bright light would fly around it. The article was later changed, with Dryden observing
more ambient lights in the area, concluding this was the likely cause.

fl
fl
fi
fi

fl

fl

fi

 Inaction on the grounds of insuf cient evidence does not really stand up. Botanist, Mark Broomhall,
presented a 2017 report to UNESCO, detailing the disappearance of a range of species after a
phone mast was erected in the Mount Nardi area of the Nightcap National Park World Heritage
region, between 2000-2015. He ascertained “in both volume and species from 70 to 90% of the
wildlife has become rare or has disappeared from the Nightcap National Park within a radius of the
Mount Nardi tower complex. This statement can be summarised with concrete data: 3 bat species
once common have become rare or gone, 11 threatened and endangered bird species are gone, 11
migratory bird species are gone, 86 bird species are demonstrating unnatural behaviours, 66 once
common bird species are now rare or gone.” …. “With these short explanations of events we can
appreciate that the effects of this technology and its application on Mount Nardi over the last fifteen
years, affect not only the top of the life chain species but they are devastating the fabric of the
continuity of the World Heritage, causing genetic deterioration in an insidious, massive and ever
escalating scale. To truly understand what these studies reveal is to stare into the abyss.”

That same year, corresponding observations were made of bird disappearance in specific areas
wherever 4G wireless was installed. Diana Kordas, who had been birdwatching in Greece for 20
years, noted several islands once richly populated with a wide variety of birds, were deserted after
the upgrading to 4G towers. The crows and seagulls seemed to be the only remainers, presumably
more resilient. She also catalogued the damage and death wreaked on trees and plants.

As with the Konza Prairie study, citing nutrient depleted plants as the cause for insect decline when
they were in fact being irradiated by a wi mast, as with children showing symptoms of radiation
sickness since March 2020, blamed on Covid or toxic shock or Kawasaki disease, as with birds’
disappearance blamed on climate change or loss of habitat diversity or insecticide when they are
first disorientated and lost to RF-EMF frequency, now flagrantly dying as 5G cells go up, other
causes, now bird flu justifying outright slaughter, are cited. In the UK, Bird protection agencies are
funded by the EU, which prizes and protects the industries destroying wildlife. In the U.S. Bird
protection agencies are funded by and allied to industry.

Trees
The high band network that provides super-fast speed does not travel through hard surfaces,
necessitating small cell sites at every few feet, as well as the removal of trees. This may explain the
mass tree cull in Sheffield, for one, or Network Rail’s axing of 10 million trees which it started in
2018, purportedly to stop branches and leaves from falling on the tracks. It oversaw logging
during the nesting season between March and August, 2018, having promised to hold off during that
period. The website claims the tree felling was part of its ORBIS programme (Offering Rail Better
Information Service). It is conceivable that trees were felled to provide passengers with
unobstructed 5G internet service. This might not be so far fetched, in spite of vociferous denials,
since Trans Pennine Railway were trialling 5G in conjunction with Network Rail.

Besides the issue of mass tree clearing, observational and epidemiological studies show tree and
plant damage caused by EMF and mobile phone base stations. Exposure results in reduced growth
and increased infections, with functional and structural changes (Breunig 2017, Waldmann-Selsam

fi
fi

et al 2013, 2016, Balodis 1996, Haggerty 2010, Havas and Symington 2016, Halgamuge 2017,
Vian 2016). Waldmann-Selsam’s guide includes photographs documenting leaf loss and tree
deterioration over a period of two-six years, with no regeneration. An epidemiological study found
that the output of most fruit bearing trees was dramatically reduced from 100% to 5% after 2.5
years of cell tower installation in a farm facing four cell towers in Gurgaon-Delhi. (Kumar 2012).
Alfonso Balmori, who had made extensive research into the impact of lower level EMF on both
birds and trees, described the effects as ‘insidious’, a recurring term in this regard.
‘Eventually people will come to realise, but by then it may be too late’ he said, in December, 2020.

Teratogenic effects in mammals

The harms of EMF are shown to effect all living beings. Martin Pall explained it was the magnetic
element of EMF which allows it to penetrate the body deeply, with teratogenic effects. While pre
natal exposure leads to autism in humans, In Switzerland, a high percentage of cows kept near
phone masts gave birth to calves with cataracts. (Hassig 2009, 2012). Pall maintained this
disproves the industry claims that EMF is limited to the outer 1cm of the body. (Pall 2018).
Over a ten year period, stray voltage at 4c and DC resulted in a dog kennel losing more than 120
litters. Many puppies that died were deformed, as were several that survived. Dairy farms in the
area reported the cows were effected in the same way. (Marks 1995) A current was detected even
when the electrical power to the premise was shut off, as with some modern smart phones using
memory functions.

Clean and green

Precision agricultur

The studious disregard of EMF’s devastating impact on the natural world and lack of funding for
essential research, tallies with what is sweeping in. Proponents claim 5G and the IoT will transform
farming and agriculture, improving soil and crop management with remote sensing, geographic
information systems and global positioning apparatus (Gomeiro 2019). Farmers won’t need to
bother with those dirty fields, what with driverless tractors and sundry robotic wonders. The new
technologies will save food and enhance food security, with a particularly useful branch of insect
monitoring. Hiber has launched an IoT satellite network, with a focus on bees. It calls its
‘Hostabee’ a monitoring ‘solution’ aiding the maintenance of a stable climate in the hives, thereby
helping beekeepers and farmers reduce bee mortality rate. This, they say, will help farmers with the
recovery pollination needed to grow their crops. The Hiberband network transfers data from
modems and antennas on the ground directly to nano satellites and then back to the user. Maybe
they could network with Hank, the farmer in Eagle, Idaho to exchange notes. All his bees died after

5G cells were erected nearby. EMF may in fact be detrimental to dairy production - low to medium
levels decreased milk yield in exposed cows (Hillman 2013), while spurring their food intake
(Buchard 2003). With egalitarian aplomb, it also abates egg production in chickens (Kreuger 1975)
(mentioned in DNA and reproduction section). How suitable is 5G for monitoring cows when
lower levels of 4G caused miscarriage, still born calves or calves with cateracts? (Hassig 2009,
2012) As 3-4G has been shown to damage and eventually kill plants and trees, using 5G
remedially on the organisms it destroys is hard to extrapolate. Precision agriculture is likely to
contribute to the destruction of our food supply and bring on famines. Is there some ingenious
reverse logic in these remarkable new technologies way above our heads?

Co-opted Green groups

Opposition by green groups has been successfully de-railed, it seems. Both US and UK
environmental movements have been co-opted through funding by diametrically opposed
organisations. As 5G threatens mass extinction, the rst port of call, one might assume, would be
Extinction Rebellion. But all things have taken a circumambulatory turn. ER is co-founded by
Simon Bramwell, Roger Halem and Dr Gail Bradbrook, whose assistant is the climate change
lawyer, Farhana Yamin. These two are allied with industries promoting EMF. The
intergovernmental panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states that the science behind its forecast is
‘incontrovertible’. The IPCC industry have rendered climate change’s sole liability, for they can
supply the remedy. The fossil fuel industry will be replaced by their Green New Deal and the
Fourth Industrial Revolution, but the new ‘clean energy’ will be 5G. (Julian Rose, 2019).
Extinction Rebellion’s environmentalism is secondary to its Marxist agenda, a perfect political
match for the impending great global reset.

The Fourth Industrial Revolution conceived by Professor Klaus Schwab, of the World Economic
Forum, is all systems go it seems. The brave new world he envisages looks somewhat inert, but we
have nothing to fear. A.I. will be the life and soul of the party. We can have robotic birds and

chirrup recordings in every arti cial garden. And all that cumbersome paper money will be history.
Just like the birds. The Green New Deal has also been promoted by Caroline Lucas, leader of the
Green Party, which receives EU funding. Gail Bradbrook is in charge of programme development at
Citizens online as ‘digital inclusion strategy specialist, consulting with clients, EE, London Connect
and the Cabinet of ce. The Board of directors at Citizens Online include former head of Exxon
Mobil, Lord Anthony Tudor St John, ex senior consultant for Merrill-Lynch and legal counsel for
Shell, who invested the satellite and aerospace industries which will be involved in the roll out of
5G. Greta Thunberg, a vulnerable, autistic teenager no matter how her puppeteers present her, is
unknowingly pushing industry’s climate change masquerade. She is on the WEF’s panel, and
participated in discussions it hosted in Denver, Switzerland. ’Philanthropists’ have kindly donated
funds to her. In a UN document, a compendium of smart meters is presented as one solution to
climate change. Al Gore, the climate hero of the inconvenient truth, is in fact acting to divert
attention away from the impacts of 5G. In truth, digital technologies have nothing to do with
‘green’, extracting minerals from already devastated communities in Southern countries, while over
burdening energy supplies.

In April 19, 2020, BBC Radio 4’s headline news item was Sir David Attenborough’s claim that
wildlife is doing better since the lock down, with less humans about to disturb their way of life. He
fi

fi

fi

 spoke to Greta Thunberg in a new BBC programme celebrating her activism. Neither have spoken
of 5G or EMF radiation’s impact on wildlife, animals and the environment. David Attenborough
has made an invaluable contribution to public appreciation of nature, and he is a much loved
broadcaster and naturalist. Many of us have been enchanted and edi ed by his programmes. For
them to come out with a joint rhapsody of lockdown’s enforced halt to fossil fuels was a coup for
the architects. They are, doubtless with all the good will in the world, serving the false mainstream
narrative by endorsing only climate change action. EMF is decimating wildlife, 5G will destroy it,
and that it is largely the work of industry, pushing lethal products on a misinformed public. Wildlife
will not be saved by less carbon emissions if it is going to be microwaved instead. There may be
less humans in the fall out. But the natural world is equally doomed. The new green deal is
positively deadly.

The Big Green is a group term for the biggest environmental groups in the U.S - Defenders of
Wildlife, Environmental Defence Fund, Greenpeace, the National Audubon Society, World Wildlife
Fund and the National Wildlife Federation, all of which accept funding from or partner with
antithetical corporations. ' Corporate experts advise clients on ways to divide and conquer
environmental activists by nding common ground with business orientated big green groups.
Apart from the Sierra Club, these groups do not answer to their thousands of individual small
donors.'

Author and activist, Jeffrey St. Claire of CounterPunch magazine, is one of the Big Green’s leading
critics. In 2007, he said,

‘The Group of Ten (aka: Gang Green) now manifest all the intensity of an insurance cartel … National
environmental policies are now engineered by an Axis of Acronyms: EDF, NRDC, WWF: groups without
voting memberships and little responsibility to the wider environmental movement. They are the undisputed
mandarins of technotalk and lobbyist logic, who gave us the ecological oxymorons of our time: ‘pollution
credits,’ ‘re-created wetlands,’ ‘sustainable development.’ In their relativistic milieu, everything can be
traded off or dealt away. For them, the tag-end remains of the native ecosystems on our public lands are

endlessly divisible and every loss can be recast as a hard-won victory in the advertising copy of their
fundraising propaganda.’

F.O.E, Greenpeace, and various Green Parties blend with the mainstream silence on 5G. Left
leaning media and green parties speak much of climate change brought on by carbon emissions, but
not electro magnetic pollution, which is equally if not more devastating. Blake Levitt, medical
science journalist, noted that RF may cause global warming ‘through atmospheric agitation of
hydrogen molecules in the upper atmosphere and ionosphere.’ (Levitt and Morrow 2007)

When contacted about 5G’s potential environmental damage, F.O.E responded with a photoshopped
image of cut trees in Holland, spotlighting fakers, and the reassuring message that studies were
inconclusive. Like the RSPB and Wildlife/Public Health England, they said that they did not have
the funds to research 5G. Presumably their funders decide on the most pressing projects. Caroline
Lucas and the EU funded Green Party are loyal EU supporters, and remain silent on 5G. 5G
protestors were removed from outside their meeting in 2019. Notwithstanding, some Green Party
constituents were vocal in their opposition to 5G earlier on. It also stated in May, 2019 that the
planned rocket launches of 20,000 satellites by 2030 would result in more destruction than CFC’s.

fi
fi

In June, 2020, Louise Brown of F.O.E, said, ’We contacted scienti c experts to review the evidence
of potential effects of electromagnetic elds, 4G and 5G technology on trees, bees, birds and other
wildlife. There’s clear guidance from developers that any mobile phone masts should be placed
away from foliage and trees, which can interfere with signals. And while some of the online articles
about trees being cut down for 5G have come from a hoax report from Belgium, we’ll be keeping a
keen eye on any cases where trees are felled to make way for new wireless technologies.

‘FOE’s current understanding is that while there’s been some research into the effects of
electromagnetic radiation and wireless technology on bees, its impact as a major factor in bee
decline isn’t yet well established. In comparison, the negative impacts of pesticides, including the
recently banned neonicotinoid pesticides, changes in land use and intensive farming are much better
understood, which is why these are issues we campaigned on. We don’t have the funds or staff
resources to conduct our own research into 5G, so we’re not campaigning on it. At the moment our
main nature focused campaign is to ask the UK government to double tree cover in the UK, as part
of the major re-launch of our climate and nature work, given the urgency of the climate and nature
emergencies.’

My concerns are not allayed by FOE suggesting tree cutting was fake news, presenting a 2019
doctored picture of chopped trees, along with the implication of 5G conspiracy theorists. Such a
picture certainly served to confuse the fact that trees are actually being cut down to accommodate
5G ‘connectivity’. Also there is no mention of the damage EMF does to trees themselves, only to
the fact they interfere with the network. A long established environmental charity of such stature
must be cognisant of the real science. FOE’s sponsors, part and parcel of the 5G orchestra, are
hardly likely to fund research into its real impact.

Action for wildlife?

Campaigners for climate change have headlined of late, while the thousands marching against
radiation pollution or the tyrannical lock down have been conspicuously ignored by the media.
Barring tree logging is redundant if wifi and 5G is permitted.

Industry funded green groups need alternative sources of sponsorship, if they are to ful l their role.
It may be necessary to start new green groups and bird charities, that will protect wildlife, marine
life, animals and environment. As funding for genuine research disappears, the only recourse is to
raise funds independently, through charity events and possible crowdfunding. The current situation
is only quickening nature’s demise.

There is a Report a wildlife crime section on the RSPB website. At present it is aiding and abetting
the wildlife crime of the Telecoms and Technology Industry, and every regulator and policy maker
they have lobbied.

fi

fi
fi

 Con icts of interest

Fundin
According to Comparitech, the communications sector donated over $1.2 billion to members of
Congress between 1998-2018, with the biggest spend of $80m in 2018 alone. It is one of
Washington’s biggest lobbyists. The U.S 1996 Telecommunications regulation bill was dubbed ‘the
most lobbied bill in history,’ and approved masts ad in nitum - 30,000 went up in no time. (Alster
2015). With especial affront, on February 8th 2021, the FCC held a commemoration day for the
1996 Telecom Act. Joe Biden’s newly appointed chairwoman, Jessica Rosenworcel, led the
ceremony of the 25th anniversary of the day when the telecoms industry captured governments and
became their partners in self serving legislation that would destroy the lives of all. These things
triumphed, in keeping with our spiralling times. In her 1967 essay, Truth and Politics, Hannah
Arendt spoke of organised lying as opposed to political lying, ‘not the act of individuals but that of
‘gigantic interest organisations and government institutions … The relatively recent phenomenon of
mass manipulation of fact and opinion … the form of lying is dangerous not only because of its
ability to deceive the public but also because of the ability to deceive the very organisation or
institution that concocted and perpetuated the lie. In creating the ‘false image’ the liar gradually
begins to embrace it as true, that is, to indwell his own lie.’
fl
g

fi

 WHO, Facebook, Pub Med, the Guardian and the BBC, amongst others, receive funding from the
Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, amongst others. It goes without saying this is a measure of the
good will and general philanthropic bent of Mr Gates, and had nothing to do with bending anyone’s
mode or mean. By January 2020 the four big tech companies’ combined market value was $3.4
trillion, while A T&T had risen 32% in one year, to be worth $696 billion more. In August, 2020,
the FCC ‘Auction 105’ for 5G mid-band spectrum in the U.S raised $4.6 billion. In the UK,
Ofcom’s auction for 4G and future 5G raised £1,355,744,000, all paid to H.M. Treasury. The
government made £22.5 billion from the sale of the third generation licenses in 2000, followed by a
£13b auction in 2013. The total mobile phone related tax revenue in the UK alone is now over £20
billion per year. Einor Flydal, former social scientist at Telenor in Norway, observed that radiation
safety authorities are advised by ‘industry friendly’ members providing a ‘monopoly of opinion.’

In 1992 the ICNIRP was founded and chaired by Mike Repacholi, an Australian biologist and
radiation physicist. In 1996, he left that post to work at the WHO where he founded its EMF
project. In 2006, he left the WHO and started working as an industry consultant. The ICNIRP is
mostly self possessed. It self selects, its members only invited by other members (Pocket, 2019).
ICNIRP constituents have roles in the WHO, Public Health England (PHE), the International
Agency of Research on Cancer (IARC), the International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety
(ICES) of the U.S. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), and the EU’s Scientific
Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR). (Miligi 2019, Russell
2017). It is now chaired by Professor Rodney Croft, who also heads the Australian Centre for
electromagnetic bioeffects research (ACEBR) at Illawara health and medical research institute, and
publishes articles lauding 5G’s safety features. The SCENIHR is the second organization that
advises the EU. ICNIRP guidelines on RF/EMF financially impact the telecommunications
industry, for whom many ICNIRP members work as consultants. The ICNIRP’s first chairman and

other experts have also had nancial links to the military and power industry. (Hardell 2017) The
author of the ICNIRP study that the EU commission, WHO, FCC, PHE and other countries rely
upon, provided consultancy services and received funding from the telephone industry to carry out
studies. ICES minutes reveals that the ICNIRP worked with the IEEE/ICES in the construction of
new RF guidelines in March, 2020. The new guidelines ignored the latest studies providing strong
evidence of EMF’s carcinogenicity. ICNIRP members, Eric van Rongen and Martin Roosli
additionally sit on the 9 member panel of the Swedish Radiation Authority. The SRA’s 2019 Panel
Report also ignored key studies.

According to its statutes, ICNIRP’s goals are to ‘advance protection from non-ionising radiation
‘for the bene t of people and the environment,’ its oxymoronic signature tune. It does not recognise
non ionising radiation and ignored or simply denied the existence of studies showing negative
health impacts at levels below the safety limits set by the guidelines (Butler 2020, Hardell 2020).
The true level of EMF’s severity has been further under-estimated with the failure to acknowledge
pulsing and modulation of the carrier signal (Kostoff 2020, Panagopoulos 2019).
A 2006 analysis by Microwave News (Vol. 26, No.42006) reviewed papers on genotoxicity
resulting from EMF exposure, and of 85 papers produced since 1990, 43 found biological effects,
42 did not, but 32 of the 35 studies that were funded by the mobile phone industry and U.S. air
force were negative - comprising 75% negative studies. This would concur with Lin’s 2006
analysis.

fi
fi

 In 2010 Grigoriev carried out replication studies (Grigoriev 2010) confirming Russian research of
1974-1991 on immune and teratological effects of RF exposure, countering two negative replication
studies by Repacholi and Poulleter de Gannes (2009). Repacholi published an article (Repacholi
2011) discounting Grigoriev’s findings, to which Grigoriev wrote a response. (Grigoriev 2011).
Repacholi is an industry consultant, founder of the ICNIRP and the WHO’s EMF project.

Guideline

In July 2018 the ICNRP released a draft of the newly revised guidelines for limiting exposure to
time-varying electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields. In the background material to the new
ICNIRP guidelines, the IARC classi cation from 2011 of RF exposure as class 2B, ‘possibly’
carcinogenic to humans was excluded. One of the ICNIRP commission members, Martin Roosli,
was also a specialist on the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) board, (an agency
for the ICNIRP), which had classed RF exposure as a class 2B ‘possible carcinogen.’ It seems he
had a change of mind (Hardell, Nyberg 2020).

The ICNIRP’s new guidelines also cut out key independent, peer reviewed studies of health harms
by RF radiation dating back 20 years, from 2000-2020. It either dismissed or denied the existence
of scienti c studies showing harms at levels lower than the ICNIRP had stipulated safe. In spite of
cancer in exposed rats in the Ramazzini Institute animal studies, the ICNIRP concluded there was
‘no veri ed mechanism for RF radiation carcinogens.’ When scientists objected to the ICNIRP’s
dismissal of reliable, peer reviewed studies, Eric van Rongen, ICNIRP’s head, claimed that the
excluded research did not meet the organisation’s high standards. Researchers exposing EMF
harms were re-labeled dissenters, and shut out of the decision making process. The studies were

refuted, both by the EU Commission’s advisors, and in the U.S., the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC). The EU said that the ICNIRP and the SCENIHR presented ‘evidence’ that
exposure to electro-magnetic elds does not represent a health risk if set below limits recommended
by Council 1999/519/EC. They cited Professor Rodney Croft, then scienti c advisor, now ICNIRP
chief, whose article appeared on an ‘enabling 5G’ website, in which he suggested techniques to out
manoevre the ndings . He stated there was no 5G cancer risk as the levels of mm waves used for
5G (and earlier mobile technologies) are so low that the heating effect is negligible.

The appeal to update the 20 year old guidelines to take into account all the new studies showing its
dangers, fell on deaf ears. The ICNIRP stated, ‘The research considered other types of effects, such
as the potential development of cancer in the human body as a result of exposure to radio waves.’
Which is confusing, as ‘the research’ clearly did quite the opposite.

Independent scientists have consistently found faults in ICNIRP research and SCENIR reports due
to the participation of ICNIRP representatives (Starkey 2016, Belpomme 2018). Five of six core
group members of WHO drafting monographs on RF elds were linked to the ICNIRP (Hardell
2017). The chapter on RFR in the WHO’s world cancer report, 2020 was mainly written by
ICNIRP member, Martin Rooslie and Dominique Laurier of the International Radiation Protection
Association (IRPA). It is clear that agencies and regulators should not be relying on ICNIRP
guidelines (Pall 2018, Hardell and Nyberg 2020). However, it seems the German government
esteems the private NGO - it has been the main funder of the ICNIRP for the last three years. The
German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (BMU)

fi
fi
s

fi
fi
fi

fi

fi

 which is the bureaucratic parent of the Federal Office for Radiation Protection, has provided
70-80% of the ICNIRP’s annual income each year since 2017.

The WHO and EU, aligned to the telecoms industry, advocate the harmonisation of ICNIRP
exposure levels. A chart of the world exposure limits shows that most countries adopted the same
level of 450 µW (microwats), while Russia, the only country to test for long term effects, has
adopted the lower level of 10 µW, and Brussels, home of the EU Commission, is amongst the very
lowest at 2.4 µW. The rest of Belgium it ceded the higher level of 450 µW. The UK is the only
country with no statutory exposure limits, but it complies with ICNIRP guidelines, and, according
to Dr Erica Mallory Blythe its limits are set a million times too high for biological protection. In
February 2020, Telecoms regulator OFCOM declared its first safety tests on 5G base stations found
‘no identifiable risks’ since 5G technology was ‘at a fraction’ of the guidelines set by the ICNIRP.
Some scientists have pointed out that 5G would ensure ICNIRP levels are exceeded by 15%.
(Hardell & Nyberg 2020 , Kostoff 2020, Butler 2020). OFCOM follows ICNIRP’s refusal to
recognise non ionising radiation as damaging to DNA and cells.

The majority of peer reviewed research concludes that 2-4G put those exposed to RFR signals at
signi cant health risk, even at exposure levels 100,000 times lower than ICNIRP stipulates. The
European Academy for Environmental Medicine (EUROPAEM) EMF Guidelines goes further,
(Belyaev 2016) indicating a non thermal safety level of 1,000,000 to 100,000,000 times less than
ICNIRP guidelines. The Bioinitative report, shows that bio effects are clearly established to occur
with very low exposure levels to non thermal EF and RFR. Its guidelines are a long way from the
ICNIRP’s. It states, ‘A scienti c benchmark of 30 µW/m² for lowest observed effect level for RF
microwave radiation is based on mobile phone base station-level studies. Applying a ten-fold
reduction to compensate for the lack of long-term exposure (to provide a safety buffer for chronic

exposure) or for children as a sensitive subpopulation yields a 3 to 6 µW/m² RF Microwave

Radiation exposure guideline.”

The standard practice of industry and its payees is to undermine veracity and cut off funding for
researchers who do not endorse its product. Now scientists are rendered dependent on industry for
funding, as government funding for research on health has dwindled. The U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, which had 35 researchers of EMF health effects in its hey day, was divested of
funding in the mid nineties. Carl Blackman, who had worked as a scientist there, said he was
forbidden by his supervisors to study any more EMF health impacts. By 2015, 85 scientists said
there was no independent research funding in the U.S, and they were left with one option - work on
industry sponsored research or abandon the eld. (Alster 2015) This may explain why there is so
little research of EMF’s impact on birds and insects, as is so desperately needed.

Henry Lai’s preliminary research (1992) of non ionising radiation on the DNA of rats was funded
by the Of ce of Naval Research, and continued in 1995 with funding from the Wireless Technology
Research programme. The results (Lai, Singh 1995), did not sit well with the WTR. After the
article was published showing DNA effects, the head of WTR weighed in to discredit it, and also
tried, unsuccessfully, to get him sacked. By 2011 it seemed there was no longer any independent
funding available for Lai’s research, which is now largely funded by the National Institute of
Health. Om Gandhi faced the same dilemma, with his landmark study showing children absorbed
50%-80% more EMF than adults. (Gandhi 1996). Further studies were then thwarted by
withdrawal of funding, although he returned later, once (2015) replying to Kenneth Foster’s
denigration (2014) of the 1995 study.

fi
fi
fi

fi

 The WHO receives substantial funding from the EMF industry, and has endorsed the ICNIRP since
2007. 50% Of the WHO core group members drawing up the 2017 Environmental Health Criteria
monograph on radio frequency fields were or had been on the ICNIRP or the AGNIR. The wireless/
tech industry has also purchased control of the FCC, and there are strong nancial bonds between
the two (Kushneck 2018). The FCC chairman, Ajit Pai, is ex in-house lawyer for Verizon
Communications in the U.S., and his predecessor, Tom Wheeler, helped set up the wireless industry.
The 1996 levels the FCC refused to revise in November, 2019 are shown in many peer
reviewed studies too low for safety (Moskowitz 2019, Hardell and Nyberg 2020). The American
Cancer Society has modified its earlier denial of any link between RF and cancer, and now,
claiming neutrality, simply casts doubts, while citing mainly industry funded studies. Sadly, the
proof can only snowball. The term ‘insidious’ has repeatedly cropped up in scientists’ description
of EMF harms, which takes up to 10 years to manifest completely, by which time the root cause of
death can be outsourced. However, as 5G is so much more powerful, fallout should be sprightly.
Professor Kenneth Foster, an industry consultant, wrote the ACS web pages in 2015.

The FDA report based on industry funded studies of 2008-2018 ‘as well as national trends in cancer
rates’ stated, ‘based on the studies that are described in detail in this report, there is insuf cient
evidence to support a causal association between radio frequency radiation (RFR) exposure and
tumour formation. The U.S. Centre for Disease Control and Prevention (CDS) stated, ‘At this time
we do not have the science to link health problems to cell phone use. Scienti c studies are
underway to determine whether cell phone use may cause health effects.’

The British Health Protection Agency (HPA), which declared in its mission statement that it would
never deceive the public, said there was ‘no consistent evidence to date that WIFI and WLANS
adversely affect the health of the population.’ Clearly, the nation’s health comes rst. The HPA
became part of Public Health England (PHE) in 2013. It said radiation levels need to be within
limits set by the ICNIRP, and rejected calls for it to be reviewed. PHE relied on two reports by the
Advisory Group on Non Ionizing Radiation (AGNIR), published in 2012 and 2017. The
Department of Health’s Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment
(COMARE) also look to the AGNIR reports. When the AGNIR drew up its 2012 report, the
chairman was also chair of the ICNIRP on epidemiology, while 6 members of the AGNIR and three
of PHE or the Department of Health were or had been part of the ICNIRP. In the report, studies
were omitted, included in other sections but without conclusions. Evidence was dismissed and
ignored in the report’s conclusion, while it made erroneous statements drawn from inaccurate data.
Consequently, the decisions about R.F exposures in schools, hospitals, work places and private
spaces in the UK were drawn from the false conclusions of a doctored report. (Starkey 2016).
When the AGNIR published its last report in 2017, 30% of the 18 member UK committee were
ICNIRP members. In line with the EU and U.S., the 2020 guidelines, supposedly updated from
1996, remained the same.

SAR level
Many scientists consider the SARS mode of measuring levels unsuitable. Dr Andrew Marino
commented that the SAR levels were initially invented for the purpose of understanding
microwaving meat - with none to understanding mobile phones. ‘SAR works for dead muscle and

fi
fi
fi

fi

 is not applicable to live brain. This is because health hazards of mobile phones have nothing to do
with heat. So it makes no sense to say ‘I have a really great way of measuring heat’ when the
measurement of heat is irrelevant to understanding health hazards,’ he said.

Michael Bevington notes the inappropriateness of ICNIRP SAR limits, based as they are on 1970
animal studies before pulsed mobile phones. The Europa EMF guidelines also note the SAR
estimates in the ICNIRP recommendations are unsuitable, and that instead the eld intensity or
power density (PD) should be used in combination with exposure duration, in safety standards.
(Belyaev 2016). Joel Moskowitz says limits should be set according to biological effects, rather
than speci c absorption rate (SAR) which fails to foretell cancer risk in the ELF power frequency
range. A Powerwatch report on childhood leukaemia questioned the mode of basing studies on
average levels, ‘excluding what may be the most important metric, irrespective of analysis
procedure.’ ‘If magnetic elds are causative, it may be the rotating quality of the elds that is
responsible. This is rarely measured.’ L. Keifets vouched for the the mode of ‘reading measured
levels rather than peak-level exposure and maternal exposure during pregnancy.’ (Kheifets 2010).
Studying EMF’s impact on bees’ reproduction, Panagopoulos found that measuring the electric field
density rather than emitted power density gave a more accurate reading.

The reproductive capacity is much more decreased with modulated emission (50%–60%), than with non-
modulated emission (15%–20%). In addition, the power density of modulated emission is increased by about
one order of magnitude in relation to non-modulated emission. Thus, the effect is not linearly correlated with
the emitted power density, but it is better correlated with the electric eld intensity. We have chosen to refer

to the radiation in terms of power density, which can be readily measured objectively, rather than in terms of
SAR, which can never be accurately estimated, especially for small insects
(Panagopoulos 2004).

Barnes and Greeenebaum commented on RFR exposures risk relating to the frequency’s duration,
noting risk increases as exposure is prolonged through time (Barnes and Greenebaum 2020).
The FDA reaf rmed the FCC’s 1996 exposure limits in a letter, stating no change was needed,
while authorising phased arrays, active antennas capable of beam forming, massive multiple inputs
and outputs (MIMO). Moskowitz says limits should be set according to biological effects, rather
than specific absorption rate which fails to foretell cancer risk in the ELF power frequency range.

Reversal

The EU’s current actions lampoon its 2005 statement, ’When human activities may lead to morally
unacceptable harm that is scienti cally plausible but uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or
diminish that harm.’ Its present stance also contradicts an earlier Parliament resolution of
September 4, 2008 when it declared ICNIRP guidelines ‘obsolete’ and inadequate to protect public
health.’ The WHO also apparently changed its mind, between May 2011, when the IARC, its
independently funded, internal unit, classi ed EMF as a Class 2 possible carcinogen, and a month
later in June, 2011, when the WHO published its fact sheet stating ‘to date, no adverse effects have
been established as being caused by mobile phone use.’ In May, 2011 the Parliamentary Assembly
of the Council of Europe called for reduced exposure to radio frequency and electromagnetic elds,
later to be dropped. By 2018, and the corroborative NTP and Ramazzini studies, the WHO dropped
fi
s

fi

fi
fi
fi
fi

fi
fi

fi

 its carcinogenicity classi cation completely. The National institute of Health has concurred that
there are no radiation dangers.

The IARC, it seems, is independent no more. It advocated a reassessment, and on May 27, at an
online colloquium hosted by the German Federal Of ce of Radiation protection (Bfs) Isabelle
Deltour proclaimed no link between malignant brain tumours and RFR in Nordic countries,
reneging on previous cancer assessments. The IARC project is run by Joachim Schuz, and was
funded €139,000 ($160,000) by the Bfs. The Nordic brain tumour assessments were made by
Deltour and Schuz, along with Maria Feyting and Anssi Havina of Sweden and Christoffer
Johansen of Denmark. They negated the call of many doctors for EMF to be raised to probable
carcinogen (class 2A) or known carcinogen (class 1). In Delta’s presentation she omitted to
mention the rise in gliomas in at least two Nordic countries. Microwave News editor, Slesin
remarked ‘ it is tempting to call the new IARC BFs analysis the Revenge of the Danish Cohort
Study.’

Consent
It is the untested outcomes of 5G that is the most striking. Indeed, telecom reps admitted as much
when they were questioned by Senator Blumenthal in February, 2019. Zero, to be precise. The last
time humans were experimented on without their consent was Nazi Germany, and the perpetrators
were tried as war criminals. In the 5G summit of June, 2020 many speakers likened this creeping,
underhand experiment to the Nazi atrocities identi ed by the Nuremberg code - part of the
international humanitarian law stating ‘it is unethical and illegal to perform experiments on humans
without informed consent.’ Olivier Bodenmann, an EPFL electrical engineer specialising in electro
smog, and one of the founders of Stop 5G, said that governments are imposing a new technology
without taking into account the precautionary principle, and that is a agrant violation of
international law. He described it as ‘a human experimentation on non-consenting human beings.’
Dr Erica Mallory Blythe observed that the UK population has never been told of the thousands of
peer reviewed published scienti c papers showing the harmful effects of EMF. ‘It is a human rights
issue, particularly for vulnerable groups, but in essence for any individual who wishes not to be
exposed in their home, place of work or public building, and yet is being given no choice, ’ she said.
Misinformed consent has simply been procured by industry. Time and time again, the precautionary
principle has been called for, and ignored. Every street is littered with billboards exhorting us to
stay safe and save lives by staying at home, of the protection with which we are being lavished, of
our safety, precious and paramount. Every supermarket booms out the repeated recordings, urging
all to shop alone, stay alone, and keep our distance, while laws are rushed through outlawing
unvaccinated careworkers, or peaceful protest, or being in the same room/country as one’s dying
relative, streets are tted with 5G cells, mobile phones are ‘up-graded’ for high grade disease, our
household appliances are linked up through the IoT, and all are shortly to be graced with microwave
radiation from satellites to which the informed would never consent. A tting analogy comes in the
gas chambers of Auschwitz, where Jews were led without struggle to the chambers, having been
told they were going to have a nice shower.

fi
fi

fi

fi
fi
fl
fi

 Vitamin regulation

Breaching human rights to free up deadly levels of radiation clashes somewhat with the EU’s
strident crackdown on vitamin supplements and natural herbs throughout Europe since the early
90’s on the grounds of health safety, followed up in the U.S., Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
The pharmaceutical industry has been lobbying the EU with rather a lot of millions (40m in 2012
alone). EU/FDA concern about non existent health dangers of VDS skimmed over the fact that
legal drugs kill thousands annually, while VDS killed none, and herbs have been used safely for
thousands of years. It is a puzzle that the EU proposed lowering dosages of VDS to ineffectual
levels on safety grounds, while the guidelines for 2-4G, now 5G, are promoted at levels advancing
death and disease. As mentioned, melatonin treatment reduces genetic damage in blood and bone
marrow cells exposed to EMF (Vijayalaxmi 2007), and melatonin supplements are on the banned
list.

Lawsuits

There have been some legal victories, throwing the British courts into sharp relief. The latest,
greatest victory is by the Environmental Health Trust and Children’s Health Defence, who won an
appeal against the FCC on 13th August, 2021. In 2012, a report by the government accountability
office asked the FCC to update its 1996 RF energy exposure limits and mobile phone testing
requirements, which it did not do. On July 30, 2020, the Environmental Health Trust and
Children’s Health Defence filed a joint lawsuit against the FCC for its rejection of scientific
evidence of RF harms presented in December 2019, when it again refused to update its 1996 radio
frequency exposure limits.

More recently, in December 2020, a Dutch court in the Gelderland District ruled that health could
not be excluded, in a major court decision regarding cell towers.

The 2020 Turin and 2010 Brazil cases should have set a global precedent. Instead, in the UK, there
were two 5G Judicial reviews launched in 2020, one by Jessica Learmond-Criqui which in
December was refused permission to proceed by the High Court, then refused by the Court of

Appeal on 28 May 2021. Judge Cranston said health impacts could not be considered as they were
not within the remit of the consultation document. This was thanks to the handy clause banning
health objections to 5G, abiding by ICNIRP guidelines. The Judge also cited ‘lack of scientific
consensus.’ Industry funded scientists will ever ensure that. The second case is led by Michael
Mansfield QC, representing Action Against 5G, which was also refused its application to Judicial
Review on July 18, 2021. Michael Mansfield and barristers Philip Rule and Lorna Hackett then
lodged a Renewal Notice seeking permission for a hearing. Unlike Extinction Rebellion, Jessica
Learmond-Criqui and Michael Mansfield do not benefit from corporate funding, and are reliant on
crowdfunding. It is vital that these cases are heard. The High Court must be ill informed to issue
such a ruling. Many lives have been lost due to dirty electricity, and of late, the experimental

 vaccination - although we hear little of that. Countless lives may be lost to 5G microwave radiation
if it is not withdrawn.

Thanks to the campaigning of Professor Joel Moskowitz, in 2015 the City of Berkeley passed a
Right to Know law requiring electronics retailers to warn customers about cell phone dangers. Yet
the state governors refused to place additional warning for children, the most vulnerable. The
wireless industry trade group (CTIA) then responded with a federal lawsuit claiming its First
Amendment rights were being violated by being forced to circulate an opinion it said was false. It
appealed, and won. The Right to Know judgment was reversed in September, 2020 by a federal
judge, in favour of industry, to the detriment of humans, especially children

Apple and Samsung are also being taken to court over smart phone radiation emissions. In 2019,
Fegan Scott launched an investigation over radiation risk from cell phones. The research was
conducted by an independent laboratory hired by the Chicago Tribune which showed that the I
phone 7, X, 8 and 8T emit as much as twice the amount of radiation the phone’s manufacturers
claim. It also showed that the phone manufacturers intentionally hide information about radiation
output.

In November 14 2008, French courts ordered the management of RTE (Responsible for the
distribution of electricity) to pay almost €400,000 to cattle farmers for damage done to their
animals by power lines. The following year, basing its decision on the Precautionary Principle,
French courts ruled Bouygues Telecom must take down it cellphone towers in the Lyons area. The
ruling was informed by the BioInitiative report and doctors’ appeals, i.e the Appeals of Salzburg
(Austria), Freiburg and Bamberg (Germany) and Helsinki (Finland).

In October, 2020 Arthur Firstenberg and the Santa Fe Alliance for Public Health led a petition
asking the U.S. Supreme Court to rule against the 1996 Telecommunications Act. This extends
from cases mounted in December, 2018 against the City of Santa Fe, Attorney General of New
Mexico and the USA, on the grounds that the human right to live in a safe environment should
override the rulings of the Telecommunications Act. No one should have to fight to live free of
injury or death by man made environmental pollution. Yet great harm to humans is enshrined in
law.

Hardell pointed out the liability of those employed to protect citizens and the environment who
ignore warnings. He raised the EU’s very own principle that the polluter pays. If that rule were
observed, regulators would find themselves in Queer street.

Safer Alternatives
Certain measures can be taken to protect yourself at home. Wired technology is safest, and doesn’t
have radio frequency exposure (RFE). This entails always using the router wire for the internet.
Fibre optics uses light to transmit data and are said to be safer and healthier, but people with
electrical sensitivity report an increase in symptoms when it is installed in their area.
Electromagnetic interference (EMI) occurs with the conversion of electrical data from existing
copper cables. A better solution may be to stick with a provider supplying wire cables, but it looks
as if copper is being phased out. Fibre optics are being rapidly installed in roads all over the city,
and, as it transpires, will facilitate the transmission of 5G.

fi
The latest, most powerful smart phones and lap tops have higher levels of radiation, and are
therefore more harmful. The modern concept of progress is an oddity. Upgrading to a model that
is equally powerful, with safer, health preserving levels of electro magnetic frequency is progress,
surely? Ironically, the evolution of consumers is being stunted by the products they queue up and
pay through the nose for. There is scienti c knowledge of alternative frequencies which could earn
their producers just as much money, but they do not seem interested.

Conclusion
It is hard to believe that governments care about our health as much as they repeatedly emphasise,
when they suppress vital information showing harms of radiation to which all are subjected, without
any recourse to opting out. Thousands have already fallen ill and/or died as a result of non thermal
EMF exposure - with other causes identi ed. A note on peer reviewed studies cited by the EU,
FCC, WHO, PHE etc. – when the peers reviewing all serve the same industry, their verdict can’t
possibly be unanimously in favour of that industry. Where’s the arithmetic in that?

Like the tobacco industry, the telecoms industry would not fund rudimentary testing for its latest
product. That is no surprise given its track record, but that governments are of the same mind is
alarming. Their apparent insouciance about discharging a frequency of such mammoth
consequence to not only humans, but all living organisms, is breath taking. The stage managed
concern for our health from a virus is implausible, when governments are happy to use us as guinea
pigs for weapon grade, pulsed electro magnetic frequency that destroys all life, which neither
Lloyds of London or Swiss Rea would insure against. The vaccination is also experimental, its long
term effects unknown. But it has managed to kill if not seriously injure disproportionately high
numbers so far. The effects of 2-4G EMF do not kill outright, but over a period of time. However,
5G may be too strong for birds and insects to withstand for any length, and human effects are likely
to be dynamic. The public have not been informed of the harms of EMF, and they have been lied to
about the bene ts of 5G, which is indeed a Trojan horse. Fibre optics are another. There is a crime
against humanity and every other living organism going on, beneath our noses. As Hannah Arendt,
said, ‘a society that does not expose or reject organised lying is on the road to destruction.’
fi

fi
fi