1) Environmental Health Trust (thanks, Theodora) has made a wonderful 2 page flyer that she hopes we will share widely with information about 5G.
This is a great piece to share at meetings, to hand out widely to educate people about some of the major problems in addition to health effects.
Climate Change, 5G & the Internet of Things
“We must consider the environmental footprint of the digital ecosystem. “Behind each byte we have mining and metal processing, oil extraction and petrochemicals, manufacturing and intermediate transports, public works (to bury the cables) and power generation with coal and gas. As a result, the carbon footprint of the global digital system is already 4% of global greenhouse gas emissions, and its energy consumption rises by 9% per year.” — Jean-Marc Jancovici, President of The Shift Project, member of the French High Climate Council
“70.2 million “small cell” tower bases to be installed by 2025 500 billion devices are expected to be connected to the Internet by 2030, 8.9 billion mobile phone subscriptions worldwide by 2024, 60% increase per year in production of wireless peripherals (Wi-Fi/Bluetooth speakers, appliances, wearables), 700% increase in mobile data traffic globally projected between 2017 and 2022.”
“Research finds bees and pollinators absorb between 3% to 370% more of the higher frequencies of 5G, leading the scientists to warn, “This could lead to changes in insect behaviour, physiology, and morphology over time….”
2) Shared by Dr. Don Maisch an article by Dr. Mary Redmayne, an epidemiologist and researcher of health effects related to wireless devices. The industry and many governments are trying to make 5G sound safe, despite there being no evidence supporting such insinuations. Many countries, like the US and Canada, based their exposure guidelines on ICNIRP’s which are based on thermal effects only.
5G confusion – clarification one step at a time
“Today, I will address just one recent statement from our Ministry of Health: “exposures to 5G signals are similar to, or lower than, those from existing cellsites, and (are) small fractions of the public limit in the standard”.
The statement is misleading, and the topic is complex. Let me explain. The last part of the MoH statement claims that measured 5G exposures “[are] small fractions of the public limit in the standard [2772.1-1999].” This assumes the standard provides safety. Actually, it only seeks “minimal levels of radio-frequency absorption” and to minimise the chance of burns and shocks over short periods.”
3) Environmental Health Trust partnered with Children’s Health Defense in filing the lawsuit against the FCC. The lawsuit, if successful, would set a major precedent that would benefit us immensely.
(click on photo to enlarge)
TR Daily News: FCC Ignored Health Impacts of Inadequate RadioFrequency (RF) Radiation Limits
“In 2019, telecom executives gave congressional testimony that they have NO scientific evidence that it’s safe. Congressional members have formally addressed the FCC about 5G. Municipal governments have filed lawsuits against the FCC regarding 5G deployment. State representatives in Hawaii introduced a bill to ban 5G until studies show that it’s safe. Municipalities have passed resolutions to ban installation until studies prove it’s safe (see 1, 2, 3, 4. 5) and also passed ordinances to limit and/or control installation.
Lawsuits have been filed against the FCC for NOT protecting Americans from unsafe levels of radiation (see 1, 2) and 5G deployment (see 1, 2, 3). Last week Environmental Health Trust and Children’s Health Defense jointly filed a brief with their lawsuit against the FCC.
Thanks to Environmental Health Trust for republishing an article from TR Daily news about lawsuit and the recently filed brief.
The complete article by TR Daily News is available at:
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.” Winston Churchill