1) A message below from a very knowledgeable member from Toronto about Li-fi. She has raised concerns and I have asked her for any studies she might have. Of course It is important always to consider the health effects of any new technology. Every option that could be considered as an alternative to this wireless tsunami coming at us needs to be and should be thoroughly studied before it is implemented. I agree 100% that corded, non-wireless connectivity is always best. We need to promote it and use it whenever possible. But, trying to be realistic (at the risk of upsetting some) people have become accustomed to constant connectivity no matter where they are or what they’re doing.That genie is out of the bottle and we have to figure out how to provide the same convenience safely. From the little bit of info I have about Li-fi, I have to ask if this could be a safer option to 5G? I hope that studies are being done to determine if it is. If any are sent to me or if I find any, I will share.
2) Researchers at MIT have spent their time finding out how to increase your exposure to wifi signals in your own home. This sure would make gathering of data easier for IoT.
‘Smart wallpaper’ that can boost Wi-fi signal in your home by up to 10 times …!!
“‘Smart wallpaper’ that can boost WiFi signal in your home by up to ten times and allow for even smaller internet-connected devices has been developed by MIT researchers.
A team of researchers from the MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Lab, has found a way to create a surface that can reflect and enhance wireless signals.
They say this means WiFi can be added to devices that are currently too small to make it viable, or make already-connected devices ‘more elegant’.
This could allow for tiny sensors to detect indoor pollution levels, smaller smart speakers or even ‘biomedical devices’ inside the human body, according to the study’s authors.”
3) A member sent in this interview from Radio Canada International, a broadcasting station willing to allow an interview re. EMR and 5G: a 9 min interview with Dr. Anthony Miller. Just one minor “clarification” about something Dr. Miller said, implying that FM transmitters are not dangerous. FM transmitters are not safe. In fact there are many studies showing that the frequencies in the 100 MHz range are extremely biologically active. I have read many of them because there are 3 owned by Rogers across the street from my home. FM transmitters’ signals are extremely strong, they can go many miles, and the transmitters are not allowed anywhere near homes, according to former Industry Canada.
5G – In the rush to the internet of things, is human health at risk?
“Dr. Anthony Miller (MD, FRCP, FRCP (C), FFPH, FACE) is a specialist in internal medicine and Professor Emeritus of the Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto. He is among a group of concerned medical experts and individuals that the health risks of radio frequency radiation. This comes from all these mobile devices and the myriad towers we already have, and he says the health risks at present are being ignored and that these risks and concerns will only be increased with 5G.”
Please carefully consider what position you might want to take regarding so-called Li-Fi. 100% for sure, EMFs in the visible light spectrum are biologically-active. Artificially generating them and wirelessly flinging them around (visibly or invisibly) in indoor or outdoor environments would still be an unnatural density of biologically-active EMFs — i.e., not desirable and also unnecessary as there are non-wireless alternatives. << i.e., repeating and strengthening the same message we’ve always had.
Personally, even if all RF/MW wireless emissions ceased tomorrow and were replaced by Li-Fi emissions and I no longer felt impaired by the new differently EMF-polluted environment, knowing what we’ve all learned, I wouldn’t be okay with that, because maybe a different cohort of persons would be newly adversely affected/impaired, and maybe many of the same persons who were impaired by RW/MF would none the less be impaired by Li-Fi, plus surely in general flora and fauna would be suffering — again, non-wireless alternatives are available.
I’m not stupid — I do understand how Li-Fi might in specific circumstances, or at some times, be considered less of a hazard than RF/MW, but I’m begging that everyone will not push for unnaturally irradiating living things (including people) with unnatural densities of any types of biologically-active EMFs as if that would be ideal, and especially not when there are non-wireless alternatives. Please, please, please continue to prefer non-wireless connectivity, and provide cords & cables for others to use, and request cords & cables everywhere.
Electromagnetic Pollution Illnesses Canada Foundation (EPIC)
SENT FROM A CORDED DEVICE WITH ALL WIRELESS FUNCTIONS OFF
TO RESPECT ALL ENVIRONMENTS
Because wireless radiation is a pollutant I aim for zero footprint and reduce exposure.
• prefer wires • provide wires
• request wires • respect wires
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“We live in a society exquisitely dependent on science and technology, in which hardly anyone knows anything about science and technology.” Carl Sagan