1) More and more people are having their lives changed dramatically because of exposure to EMF. And there is no “cure”, except to get away from it. This is becoming harder and harder as industry is allowed to follow its agenda of having a transmitter on every pole and a Wi-Fi modem in every home. Fibre is the best option and once the only concerns I’ve found so far are addressed (these being the access to 911 service — the copper line could be kept and fiber used for everything but phone — and the ONT which increases Dirty Electricity on the home wiring. Perhaps with all the other wireless emissions eliminated, the ONT’s DE might not be that big a deal.)
Interview With Solveig on Electrosensitivity, Wireless Radiation and Hope
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imhLJqkd530 (44:56 min.)
2) Some very interesting articles in Katie Singer’s newsletter. I found one especially interesting: The Atlantic’s “How Animals Perceive the World”.
Our Web of Inconvenient Truths – June 2022 newsletter from Katie Singer
3) A study published earlier this year (https://academic.oup.com/jnci/article/114/5/704/6554484), which reported that there is no connection between cell phone use and brain cancers, is criticized for its methodology. This type of study will be used by the industry to mislead customers and agencies, like ICNIRP and Health Canada, can use it to justify exposure limits.
JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE PUBLISHES EXPERT LETTER QUESTIONING OXFORD REPORT OF NO BRAIN CANCER FROM CELL PHONES
“The Journal of the National Cancer Institute has published a letter from distinguished experts disputing the Oxford “million women” study claiming no link between cell phone use and brain cancer. The new letter lays out why the Oxford report was deeply flawed. The authors note that substantial credible research links cell phone radiofrequency radiation to cancer and the experts recommend reducing exposures in alignment with numerous governments…
Dr. Birnbaum and other experts point out that the Oxford study of post-menopausal women provides false safety assurances and is “fatally flawed and designed in a way that cannot evaluate cell phone cancer risk.”…
“Studies that rely on outdated data are dangerous in the fact they don’t consider how people use cell phones today. Many of today’s users are on the cell phone hours a day and what is termed as ‘heavy use’ in 2011 is low use today,” said Davis who is also president of Environmental Health Trust and Fellow of the American College of Epidemiology. “When this study was originally started, some were still using flip phones.””
4) The “good news” article in last night’s update pertained to a woman in the UK.
Press release June 15, 2022: 59 year old social worker wins ‘early ill health retirement’ for disabling ‘Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS)
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“A little knowledge that acts is worth infinitely more than much knowledge that is idle.” Khalil Gibran