1) Many experts are now looking at the disturbing trend of young Covid-19 victims experiencing strokes and bizarre blood clotting, as per the articles in the Update of April 24 [see 1) – https://stopsmartmetersbc.com/2020-04-24-5g-iot-devices-extremely-vulnerable-to-attack/]. First is an article I shared a few months back about the overall health of the millennials being worse than their predecessors (sorry for being heavy on the science in this update).
(click on photo to enlarge)
The Health of Millennials
“According to the Blue Cross Blue Shield (BCBS) Health Index, in 2017, millennials had an average BCBS Health Index of 95.1, meaning millennials as a group were living at about 95% of their optimal health.2 However, further data analysis reveals that older millennials (age 34-36) have higher prevalence rates for nearly all of the top 10 conditions than did Generation X members when they were in the same age range (age 34-36). With younger generations facing health challenges at earlier ages than previous generations, measuring the health of millennials is critical to improving this generation’s long-term health and wellness….
To better understand and compare the health conditions impacting millennials and Gen Xers when they were the same age, four aggregate condition groups were created: behavioral health, cardiovascular, endocrine and other physical conditions. Millennials had 11% more total adverse health across these condition groupings than did Gen Xers when they were the same age. This increase was driven by a 21% increase in cardiovascular conditions and a 15% increase in endocrine conditions, including diabetes. Behavioral health conditions explain about 40% of adverse health for both millennials and Gen Xers (see Exhibit 4).”
Here are a few slides that were used in a presentation by Dr. Sharon Goldberg last Fall when she spoke about the link between EMR and strokes that were being reported among young people.
One of the slides references a study titled: “Cardiovascular Disease: Time to identify emerging environmental risk factors”. The association between exposure to RF/EMR and cardiac problems has been known for years, yet the WHO seems to have hidden important evidence from the scientific community. Out of 242 studies on the RF/EMR -oxidative stress relationship, 216 found significant effects. Yet nothing is being done and the industry, WHO, Health Canada, Dr. Bonnie Henry all continue to say there is no evidence of harm. I strongly encourage you to read this report. Kind of technical in spots but well worth the read.
“Cardiovascular Disease: Time to identify emerging environmental risk factors”.
“Despite the European Academy for Environmental Medicine (EUROPAEM)7 and the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM)8 publishing evidence linking RF-EMR to adverse health effects and calling for exposure reduction, there is widespread ignorance about the scientific evidence of radiofrequency-induced biological/health effects within the medical fraternity. This appears to be largely due to the controversial approach by the International EMF Project at the World Health Organization (WHO),4 which has ignored the calls by a large group of international electromagnetic field (EMF) scientists9 for improved exposure regulation….
In our latest review, 242 RF-EMR studies that investigated experimental endpoints related to oxidative stress (OS)16 were identified. A staggering 216 (89%) of them found significant effects related to OS, similar to a previous review….
Acute RF-EMR exposure has been shown to increase blood pressure under experimental conditions,Acute RF-EMR exposure has been shown to increase blood pressure under experimental conditions,25 while chronic exposure has been found to be associated with an increased CVD risk while chronic exposure has been found to be associated with an increased CVD risk26 as well as alteration in the diurnal rhythms of blood pressure and heart rate27 in studies investigating clinical, anthropometric, behavioural, environmental and socioeconomic parameters.”
Another report that is referenced in the slides found that of 100 studies dealing with oxidative effects of low intensity RFR, 93 found biological effects, some of which could lead to cancer, among other things. And please note the link for this document: FCC !! The agency in the US responsible for establishing RF exposure limits. I haven’t looked, but I bet it says on its website that there is no evidence of harm from RFR. See page 11 re. EHS.
Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation
“In conclusion, our analysis demonstrates that low-intensity RFR is an expressive oxidative agent for living cells with a high pathogenic potential and that the oxidative stress induced by RFR exposure should be recognized as one of the primary mechanisms of the biological activity of this kind of radiation….
Thus, it seems plausible that EHS-like conditions can be attributed at least partially to ROS overproduction in cells due to RFR exposures.” (pg. 11)
2) Barrie Trower has been involved with spreading the word about the effects of microwave radiation around the world, often traveling from the UK to various countries on his own dime because, as he told me years ago, he feels compelled to share what he learned while he participated in employing microwave radiation in his work for the UK government. There are many videos with him presenting before conferences or speaking informally.
Here is one in which he speaks about 5G to some extent. This was made 2-3 years ago.
Barrie Trower on 5G
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbOb-c1vvgM (37 min.)
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“History, in general, only informs us what bad government is.” ― Thomas Jefferson, Letters of Thomas Jefferson