1) A couple of months ago a much, much longer version of this article was shared, and after comments from many, the author has revised it and made it significantly shorter. If the length discouraged you from reading it, perhaps this will appeal. Some good ideas even though it’s from a US perspective.
Taking Action Against 5G—Advice From A People’s Lobbyist
“This article explains how you can be effective in convincing legislators to oppose the ubiquitous 5G streamlining bills. My advice is based on my past experience as a lobbyist representing a statewide human rights organization, when on more than one occasion, a tiny group of us were able to win extraordinary victories against bills being strongly pushed by powerful corporate interests. I also was very involved in the 2017 successful campaign to defeat California 5G bill.”
2) Fiber optic cable’s security and unmatched speed has made it a necessary component of the 5G grid. We are encouraging having FOC to and through the home, replacing wireless technology as much as possible. But there is a darkside to FOC which we need to learn more about. FOC signals must be converted to electrical signals through converters so that data can be carried via copper lines or coaxial cables to our computers, phones, TVs, etc. As well, a similar conversion, on a larger scale, must be done at the microcell site on poles outside our homes. Apparently, the converter creates electromagnetic interference (EMI) which appears to be similar to dirty electricity (DE) created by switch mode power supplies in smeters. No doubt experts on FOC are aware of this and I will attempt to find out if it is possible to eliminate this EMI so that FOC can be used without emitting potentially harmful fields.
Is Fibre-Optic Safe? from Electromagnetic Sense Ireland
Why Do Fiber Optic Installations Increase Electrical Sensitivity? EMFAnalysis
‘The issue is that fiber optic internet service does not only use light to transmit data. The high-speed fiber optic data must be converted to electrical signals before the data can be transmitted to the home on the existing copper cable or phone line DSL. Those electrical signals, which carry our internet data, are not inherently problematic because they are in a very narrow frequency range and don’t typically radiate from the cable or phone lines.
However, there can be a significant problem with the high-speed fiber optic converters out at the street (or in the home with some newer fiber systems) that create these electrical data signals. This is because the converters are not designed with low-EMI emissions in mind. Thus, their power supplies and operation can generate high amounts of wide-spectrum EMI (electromagnetic interference).’
3) I must admit to not knowing much about Environmental Working Group, but if it is what it says it is, this group could be a powerful ally against wireless tech, including 5G.
“The Environmental Working Group is a community 30 million strong, working to protect our environmental health by changing industry standards.
We’re not just another nonprofit environmental group – we’re a nationwide community.
We’re advocates who won’t quit. We’re scientists that find solutions. We’re people trying to make the safest choices for our health. At the Environmental Working Group, we believe that you should have easy access to the information you need to make smart, healthy choices. It’s this belief that inspired our president and co-founder, Ken Cook, to create EWG.
Since 1993, we’ve worked tirelessly to protect public health. Whether it’s spotlighting harmful industry standards, speaking out against outdated government legislation or empowering consumers with breakthrough education and research, we’re in this fight. And we’re not going anywhere.”
(click on photos to enlarge)
Environmental Working Group Asks FCC to Update “its woefully outdated health standards for wireless radiation”
“A peer-reviewed study by the Environmental Working Group recommends stringent health-based exposure standards for both children and adults for radiofrequency radiation emitted from wireless devices. EWG’s children’s guideline is the first of its kind and fills a gap left by federal regulators.
The study, published in the journal Environmental Health, relies on the methodology developed by the Environmental Protection Agency to assess human health risks arising from toxic chemical exposures. EWG scientists have applied the same methods to radiofrequency radiation from wireless devices, including cellphones and tablets.”
Their study is here:
From: Jayeson Hendyrsan (name given with permission)
To: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Cc: “Patrick Weiler” <Patrick.Weiler@parl.gc.ca>, “Jordan Sturdy” <email@example.com>, “Adam Olsen MLA” <firstname.lastname@example.org>, “Bronwyn Beairsto” <email@example.com>
Sent: Friday, July 23, 2021 11:46:35 AM
Subject: Rogers Tower and Islands Trust
Dear Trust Representatives,
Please write a letter of non-concurrence for the Rogers tower. Planner Kristine Mayes’ Staff Report on this project tells us:
- A copy of the Safety Code 6 assessment referenced by the proponent has not been received.
- The proposed site is of HIGH to MEDIUM value for important natural areas in the Salt Spring Island Local Trust Area. This alone is a justifiable land use reason for opposing this commercial tower.
Let’s find a solution for CREST that separates the business interests of Rogers from the needs of emergency responders. Our current climate crisis demands that we limit our use of wireless technology and curtail all unneeded development that threatens the invaluable natural resources that sustain us.
Furthermore, I have been writing our MP”s and MLA’s and talking with TELUS and Shaw representative and executives.
There has been utter silence from politicians (Except the Salt Spring – Green MLA) and very concerning statements from my contacts in the Telecommunications Industry.
I quote a part of my last, unanswered, letter to my own MP and MLA:
“1- The horrifying rollout of untested-for-safety, 5G and wireless technology, self-policed by an industry which claims zero health and environmental effects, yet is also governed by some of the most lax and inefficient wireless laws in the world. Additionally, in front of a US Senate Committee, the 5G industry claims to have done ZERO health studies. (My talk with one TELUS “safety“ executive, Q: “How often do you work with Health Canada on your installations and monitoring ?” A: “Never.”) …
… potentially massive and ongoing carbon cost and human cost of a disposable, dangerous wireless system of communication. Think: 70,000+ satellites currently being launched into space (what is the carbon cost of one rocket launch, please, plus one rocket in ten crashing?), each with a 2-4 year life span, and the possibility of millions of “small cells” mounted on telephone poles (carbon cost please?), with a limited lifecycle, no monitoring for “leaks” (a real technical term) of safety to nearby houses and children (we have small cells directed at our local playground). What is the carbon and environmental cost of this system? What is the recycling and re-use plan for all of this? The human cost of children mining for lithium and other minerals in South America and Africa?…
As a last note on this topic, are you aware that the cloud alone has risen from an estimated 3% of global emissions to 17% in the last 10 years? What will happen with a fully wireless world with daily rocket launches to replace and repair satellites in space?…. Will you demand an immediate halt to 5G rollout, and inquiry into industry and government collusion, a full independent inquiry into health and ecological effects of the wireless industry and a full inquiry into the true carbon cost and life cycle analysis of all aspects of a totally wireless and radiated world?…”
Adhering to the Precautionary Principle, is it not right that we have a full PAUSE on all 5G related activities until industry can:
1- Prove safety through independent studies? The fact that the American 5G industry swore that they had no safety studies to a US Senate Committee would lead me to hint that there are no safety studies in Canada.
2- Demonstrate that the conceivably massive carbon cost, use of slave labour and non-recyclable toxic elements used in millions of wireless apparatus will all be handled responsibly.
Thank you, Islands Trust, for your consideration.
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“Everything is theoretically impossible, until it is done.” Robert A. Heinlein