Category Archives: Cell Tower

Appeal to the Government of Canada: Suspend 5G Until Proven Safe – Press Release – May 14, 2020

(click on photo to enlarge)

Twenty-Four Canadian Groups Say: Suspend 5G Until Proven Safe   Appeal to the Government of Canada “Look Before We Leap”

For Immediate Release  May 14, 2020

Ottawa:  Scientists and citizens groups from across Canada, including several from British Columbia, are launching an Urgent Appeal demanding the right to say “No” to 5G in their neighbourhoods. Twenty-four Canadian groups are banding together and calling for a national moratorium on the roll out of 5G until questions about its human health effects are resolved.

“This has nothing to do with Covid-19. All groups launching this Appeal condemn acts of violence such as burning antenna towers, said one of the organizers. “The Parliamentary Health Committee has been investigating the negative health impacts of cell phones, cell towers and Wi-Fi for over a decade. So far the only assurance that it’s safe comes from the wireless companies profiting from it, but scientists disagree.”

The Appeal is also requesting that Health Canada conduct a comprehensive and rigorous assessment of the health effects of radiofrequency radiation.

“Health Canada’s 2015 guidelines for human exposure to non-ionizing radiation (Safety Code 6) were out of date before they were published, and the review process was flawed,” said Dr. Meg Sears, PhD, Chair of Ottawa based Prevent Cancer Now, one of the signatory groups. “Hundreds of peer-reviewed, published studies show that radiofrequency (RF) radiation can cause cancers, damage sperm and DNA, impair reproduction, learning and memory, and more. We should be limiting public exposure, not increasing it.”

“We have sufficient data to classify RF radiation as a Group 1, known human carcinogen, along with, for example, asbestos and tobacco smoke,” states Dr. Anthony Miller MD, Professor Emeritus of the Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, who worked with the International Agency for Research on Cancer on the 2011 scientific review. Dr. Miller is a signatory to the appeal.

Numerous 4G and 5G microcell antennae are appearing in neighbourhoods with no prior notice; some being placed by children’s bedrooms. This blatant disregard for potential health consequences is unCanadian and unnecessary. A safer, faster, and more environmentally friendly Internet option is available — fibre optic cables connected right to the home.

Oona McOuat of Salt Spring Island says, “COVID-19 has shown us we need dependable and affordable Internet. With the government increasing connectivity funding, and the Connected Coast bringing fibre optics to 154 BC communities, now is the perfect time to connect fibre to our homes. Rural communities like Denman, Hornby and Salt Spring islands and the Slocan Valley are exploring how to create net neutral and energy efficient community-owned fibre networks. These networks may be up to 20 times faster than wireless 5G, while offering untold financial and other benefits.”

“The proponents would prefer that we hear only about the up-side – the additional billions in purported  revenues from 5G – but there is little recognition of the increased costs,” said Frank Clegg, former President of Microsoft Canada and CEO of Canadians For Safe Technology.

“Canadians deserve a full economic analysis including the unspoken increased costs to our healthcare system, which is particularly stressed right now. Also the lost productivity from adverse health effects; security and privacy breaches; increased energy consumption, damage to the environment; and risks to safety and property should be included. We are living in a different world than we were three months ago, and this is a standard cost-benefit analysis that might open the eyes of the public that is paying for it,” said Clegg.

The Appeal requests that Ottawa give local governments and their citizens proper notification and grant them a decisive say over the placement of cell towers and microcell antennas.

Visit the Appeal here: http://c4st.org/5Gappeal/

Journalism – Editorial Code, Ethics, Standards

NNC National NewsMedia Council – https://mediacouncil.ca/about-us-ethics-journalism/standards/

RTDNA Canada Radio Television Digital News Association – http://rtdnacanada.com/rtdna-code-of-journalistic-ethics-2016/

The Canadian Association of Journalists – https://caj.ca/Ethics

The Canadian Press – https://www.thecanadianpress.com/about/our-team-values/

The Globe and Mail – https://www.theglobeandmail.com/about/editorial-code/

The industry is pulling out the stops attacking MP Ron McKinnon for sponsoring the cell tower petition [https://petitions.ourcommons.ca/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-2424] (please sign before May 26/20). It seems they are getting nervous and I believe it is due to the resistance building for 5G.

I hope that many of you will consider lending your support to Mr. McKinnon. Industry must not be allowed to mute any dissent or attempts to alert the public to the evidence that they and the various health authorities have hidden for decades.  Like Tri-City and Press Progress, Globe and Mail has breached its own journalism standards by allowing lies and incorrect information to be published without any substantiation or response from real experts….

Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters

More Info:

https://stopsmartmetersbc.com/2020-05-10-the-globe-and-mail-pseudo-reporting/

https://stopsmartmetersbc.com/2020-05-09-letters-from-experts-re-tricity-article/

3) & 4) – https://stopsmartmetersbc.com/2020-05-08-article-is-5g-going-to-kill-us-all-in-new-republic/

3) – https://stopsmartmetersbc.com/2020-05-07-petition-re-cell-towers-mocked-by-media/

3) – http://www.stopsmartmetersbc.com/2020-05-06-olle-johansson-demands-new-exposure-guideline-in-sweden/

Thank-you Letter to MP Ron McKinnon for Sponsoring the School/Cell Tower Petition and Response Letter to Editor of Tri-City News by Dr. Magda Havas – May 08, 2020

From: “drmagdahavas” <drmagdahavas@gmail.com>
To: “Ron McKinnon” <Ron.McKinnon@parl.gc.ca>
Sent: May 8, 2020
Subject: Thank you for Sponsoring the School/Cell Tower petitionLetter to Editor below

(click on photo to enlarge)

https://petitions.ourcommons.ca/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-2424

Mr. McKinnon,

You don’t know me and I’m not in your riding but perhaps the information below will be self explanatory.

I would like to thank you for sponsoring the petition regarding cell tower buffer-zones around schools and playgrounds.  We desperately need to reduce exposure especially of children to microwave radiation.

Yesterday (May 7) you were criticized unfairly in the Tri-City News.

I sent a letter to the editor but seldom do these letters get published, especially one that criticizes a reporter for being biased.   So I thought I would send you a copy.

In the event it is NOT published I will post it on my website and circulate it broadly.

We need people who are not afraid to speak the truth and who are willing to take a stand that may not be popular.

If there is anything I can do to support you as you engage the government to follow-up on the HESA recommendations please let me know.  I testified at both the 2010 and 2015 meetings and am deeply committed to and concerned about this issue.

Thank you for your courage and your integrity.

Kind regards,

-magda

= = =

Below is what I sent to the Editor of Tri-City News….

https://stopsmartmetersbc.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Response-Letter-to-Editor-of-Tri-City-News-by-Dr.-Magda-Havas-May-08-2020.pdf

Response by Dr. Anthony Miller and Frank Clegg to Tri-City News Editor re “Coquitlam-PoCo MP sponsors petition that says cell towers could hurt children, trigger cancer Article – May 08, 2020

May 08, 2020

Mr. Richard Dal Monte, EditorTri-City News                                              1680 Broadway Street, Unit 118, Port Coquitlam, B.C. V3C 2M

Sent via email: <newsroom@tricitynews.com>

Subject: Need for a balanced report versus the Tri-City News report Coquitlam-PoCo MP sponsors petition that says cell towers could hurt children, trigger cancer

Dear Mr. Dal Monte:

We believe the article May 7th, Coquitlam-PoCo MP sponsors petition that says cell towers could hurt children, trigger cancer does not represent all the facts on this important issue. We request that you review the material we present here on 5G and pre-5G radiation, and subsequently write a truly balanced story….

MP McKinnon is not the first MP, or chair of the Commons standing committee on health, to present a document to the House of Commons, on behalf of constituents, expressing concern for the harmful effects from radiofrequency (RF) radiation.

In 2015, the House of Commons Standing Committee on Health (HESA) published a report entitled Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation and the Health of Canadians.3 Its 12 recommendations addressed several of the issues outlined below, and included a national awareness campaign about the harmful effects of wireless technologies and how to reduce risks. The report received all-party support and was tabled by the Conservative (2015) and Liberal (2016) majority governments. In 2010, a similar report was published.4 Both reports were tabled by the Health Committee Chair.

The May 7th report lacked balance and downplayed many aspects of the serious concerns about this technology. We would like to direct you to the article written about 5G and the burning of towers by our colleague, Dr. Devra Davis, an epidemiologist with outstanding credentials. Dr. Davis, among other notable accomplishments, helped to have lead removed from gasoline and smoking banned from planes….

Regarding the effects of radiation from wireless technology on children, we would like to direct you to two articles: Exposure limits: the underestimation of absorbed cell phone radiation, especially in children and Absorption of wireless radiation in the child versus adult brain and eye from cell phone conversation or virtual reality ; peer reviewed, published papers that show evidence that wireless radiation does, in fact, impact children more than adults.

The statements by Steven Salzberg, “There’s no science behind them at all. The science is very clear on that,” is false. Biologists and epidemiologists are the experts raising concerns about the harmful effects from RF radiation. Hundreds of peer-reviewed, scientific publications describe biological effects and harms with exposures far below Canada’s limits (based on heating tissue), in humans.  These studies scientifically demonstrate cause or contribution to numerous health effects including cancers, sperm damage, reproductive harms, learning and memory deficits, and neurodegenerative, cellular and genetic damage….”

https://stopsmartmetersbc.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Response-by-Dr.-Anthony-Miller-and-Frank-Clegg-to-Tri-City-News-Editor-re-Coquitlam-PoCo-MP-sponsors-petition-that-says-cell-towers-could-hurt-children-trigger-cancer-Article-May-08-2020.pdf

The Flames of Progress by Arthur Firstenberg – March 07, 2020

From: “Arthur Firstenberg” <info@cellphonetaskforce.org>
Sent: March 7, 2020
Subject: Legal update; Decline in bat populations; Help needed

www.cellphonetaskforce.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/The-Flames-of-Progress.pdf

THE FLAMES OF PROGRESS

I have been entrusted with the International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space, but I find myself bewildered — bewildered by the devastation around me; by the destruction of the cathedral of life into which I was born; by the silencing of the songs of the fifty million other species with whom I was raised; by the failure of my fellow human beings to care or to notice. How can they not miss their brothers and sisters? How can they not miss the magnificent symphony? How is it possible?

“The oceans are dying,” wrote Jacques Cousteau in 1970. “Can anyone believe it is possible,” wrote Rachel Carson in 1962, “to lay down such a barrage of poisons on the surface of the earth without making it unfit for all life?” “I have seen too much,” said microwave researcher Allan Frey in 1969, explaining why he did research on animals and not humans. “I do not feel that I can take people into these fields and expose them and in all honesty indicate to them that they are going into something safe.”

Yet here we are half a century later: there will soon be more plastics than fish in the oceans, the world uses four times more pesticides per year than in 1962, and five billion people are holding open sources of microwave radiation in their hands.

The Earth is burning, yet no firefighters come. In the face of certain catastrophe, everyone is going about their business as if everything is fine, as if by magic the synthetic fibers in our clothing and the rubber tires on our automobiles will stop becoming microplastics in the sea; as if the few insects left in the world will magically escape the pesticides that we apply to our lawns and the radiation from the cell phones into which we speak. Everyone is still going about their business as if everything is fine. Isn’t it time that we stop? And since the most immediate threat to life comes from our cell phones, isn’t it time to throw them away?

….

A worldwide organization needs to be created, whose members do not own cell phones, whose purpose is to end the use of cell phones on Earth.

For most people this seems like an impossibility, but that is because they do not remember that only 25 years ago almost no one owned a cell phone, and that young people did not get cancer, diabetes, heart attacks and strokes like they do today. And the air was full of butterflies and birds, and the streams were full of tadpoles and frogs. It is because no one has explained to them what radiation is. No one would willingly use a radioactive phone, but that is essentially what everyone is doing. Radio waves and gamma rays are only two ends of a continuous spectrum; they are essentially the same phenomenon and have the same disastrous effects on our bodies and our planet.

The train that we are on is a train to nowhere. On either side, through the windows, can be seen insects, and birds, and frogs, and if we listen we can hear them buzzing, chirping, and croaking.

Please contact me if you would like to participate in the creation of an organization that will get us off this train.

Arthur Firstenberg
P.O. Box 6216
Santa Fe, NM 87502
USA
phone: +1 505-471-0129
info@cellphonetaskforce.org
https://www.5gSpaceAppeal.org

A pdf of this [complete] newsletter is available here:  www.cellphonetaskforce.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/The-Flames-of-Progress.pdf

Honey bees on the Isle of Wight; Slovenia postpones 5G; More satellites are launched by Arthur Firstenberg – January 29, 2020

(click on photo to enlarge)

 

Please Sign – https://www.5gspaceappeal.org/

THE HONEY BEE’S PLEA

The honey bee in the banner at the top of this newsletter has been speaking to us for over one hundred and fourteen years. Its numbers ever diminishing, its message ever more urgent, it waits for a sleeping world to finally listen. “Now!” it says. “Wake up before it’s too late, there is no more time!”

On the Isle of Wight, off the southern coast of England, Giuglielmo Marconi built the world’s first permanent radio station. And the bees’ first warning to humanity was heard. “They are often to be seen crawling up grass stems, or up the supports of the hive, where they remain until they fall back to the earth from sheer weakness, and soon afterwards die,” wrote Augustus Imms of Christ’s College, Cambridge in 1906. Ninety percent of the bees had already vanished from the entire island. Unable to find a cause, he called it, simply, Isle of Wight disease. Swarms of healthy bees were imported from the mainland, but it was of no use: within a week the fresh bees were dying off by the thousands.

The description, more than a century later, is exactly the same. On November 19, 2019, a 5G antenna was placed 250 meters from Angela’s house in Melbourne, Australia. “I photographed the new mast going onto the cell tower,” she writes, “and the next day, I was in the driveway talking to our carpenter, and we saw bees dropping on the driveway then dying. I managed to film one trying to collect pollen, but it was hanging upside down and could not seem to make it to the centre of the flower, then it rolled off the petals to the ground.”

Today, two months later, their beautiful garden, full of old world trees and plants, is silent and barren. “We have no insects — none,” wrote Angela last week. “Our cumquat once laden all year has no new fruit coming. No olives on the way on our olive tree so laden last year. We dug soil yesterday — no worms either — nothing — all gone. I walked the dog late tonight, it was dark and a poor magpie was down the street under a street lamp hoping for a cricket I think. It was silent. I took birdseed back but the bird had gone — it must be hungry to be out at night.”

In the midst of plenty the bees are starving to death. In 2009, Neelima Kumar, at Panjab University in India, placed cell phones in some bee hives and turned them on for ten minutes. The concentrations of glucose, cholesterol, total carbohydrates, total lipids and total proteins rose precipitously in the bees’ blood. After just ten minutes’ exposure to a cell phone, the bees were not able to digest their food, or use the oxygen they were breathing. Their metabolism had come to a standstill.

“Wake up!” say the bees.

“Wake up!” said parents with their children who assembled last Saturday at the Church on the Roundabout in Newport on the Isle of Wight to protest plans to turn their island into a Smart Island — to bring Isle of Wight disease back to the island of its birth.

Radio waves are poison to life. They penetrate skin and bones, cell walls and mitochondria. They prevent electrons from our food from combining with the oxygen we breathe. They give us diabetes, and heart disease, and cancer. They disorient migratory birds, and they kill outright tiny forms of life that pollinate flowers and have high rates of metabolism.

In the mid-1990s, the invisible fire that Marconi had lit became a conflagration. For the first time in human history, radio waves began to be broadcast not only from tall towers scattered widely across the landscape, but from the hands of men, women and children everywhere. And in 2020 this has brought us to the brink of extinction — not just of bees, and not just of humanity, but of all life on Earth.

I asked, in a previous newsletter, “which do we want more: our phones or our planet?” There is only one sane answer. I ask all of you who are reading this newsletter to join with me in putting this world back on a path to survival by throwing away your cell phones, now, today. Not next year, and not tomorrow. Today. There is no other option. Tomorrow we can deal, if we dare, with climate change. But if we are to have time to answer that urgent call, we must first deal with this emergency. We must extinguish this fire.

I vote for life. Do you?

SLOVENIA VOTES FOR LIFE, AT LEAST FOR NOW

…. https://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/The-Honey-Bees-Plea.pdf

= = =

Please Signhttps://stopsmartmetersbc.com/international-appeal-by-professional-astronomers-safeguarding-the-astronomical-sky/

[Press release] The Court of Appeal of Turin (Italy) confirms the link between a head tumour and mobile phone use by Phonegate Alert – January 15, 2020

(click on photo to enlarge)

Published The January 15, 2020
Dear supporters,

This decision of the Court of Appeal of Turin is historic!
https://www.phonegatealert.org/en/the-court-of-appeal-of-turin-confirms-the-link-between-a-head-tumour-and-mobile-phone-use

(….This is the second Italian appeal judgment in favour of a worker after the Brescia judgment in 2010, which concluded with the confirmation of the Supreme Court in 2012, case of Marcolini v. INAIL.

In this case, the Court of Bergamo had rejected the application in first instance.

A landmark judgment that will have international repercussions

The Romeo v. INAIL case is therefore historic. It is the first in world judicial history to have had two consecutive judgments in favour of the plaintiff. It is also historic because of the principles underlying this decision and particularly because it is written about the conflicts of interest of certain experts close to the mobile phone industry.

Conflicts of interest and the role of the ICNIRP pinpointed by the Tribunal

Indeed, the Tribunal recognizes that telephone industry-funded scientists, or members of the ICNIRP, are less reliable than independent scientists: ….)

Thank you for relaying it as widely as possible.

The Phonegate Alert Team
To learn more on the same subject:

Italy: a landmark judgment requires the state to inform the population of the health risks due to mobile phones

Mobil World Congress: industrialists and public authorities urged to take into account the health effects of mobile technologies (video of Stefano Bertone)

Phonegate Alert invited to the International conference Stop 5G at the Italian Parliament

DONATE NOW

Copyright © Alerte Phonegate Tous droits réservés.
Adresse mail contact: contact@phonegatealert.org

 

 

5G Awareness Poster Banned In The UK

From https://ehtrust.org/5g-awareness-poster-banned-in-the-uk/

Also see http://emrabc.ca/?p=16429

This 5G awareness poster by Electrosensitivity UK

http://www.es-uk.info/

has been banned by the Ads Council. It is the second poster on the health impact of wireless banned by the Ads Council despite the hundreds of scientific papers provided to the Ads Council.

The ruling on the 5G poster can be found here ASA Ruling (REF: G19-1029264) 

Download a JPEG  of the 5G  Poster “How Safe is 5G”   here. 

In response to the ruling,  Electrosensitivity wrote: “The ASA requires mainstream majority science, which the poster provided. The ASA’s ruling then discounted this majority mainstream viewpoint by adopting a minority view based on unsubstantiated and non-peer-reviewed claims of the small cartel supporting the wireless industry.”

Read the Press Release and Response to the ASA Ruling of January 8 2020 by ES-UK on the Information Poster asking ‘How safe is 5G?’ which states, “The information poster’s valid question ‘How safe is 5G?’

The information poster’s question ‘How safe is 5G? ’ is not misleading or unsubstantiated. The CTIA, the wireless industry trade organisation, has a website section headed ‘Is 5G safe?’ These questions are very similar in wording.”

https://ehtrust.org/5g-awareness-poster-banned-in-the-uk/

 

 

We Have No reason to believe 5G is Safe – Joel M. Moskowitz

The technology is coming, but contrary to what some people say, there could be health risks

By Joel M. Moskowitz, October 17, 2019

The telecommunications industry and their experts have accused many scientists who have researched the effects of cell phone radiation of “fear mongering” over the advent of wireless technology’s 5G.   Since much of our research is publicly-funded, we believe it is our ethical responsibility to inform the public about what the peer-reviewed scientific literature tells us about the health risks from wireless radiation.

The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently announced through a press release that the commission will soon reaffirm the radio frequency radiation (RFR) exposure limits that the FCC adopted in the late 1990s.  These limits are based upon a behavioral change in rats exposed to microwave radiation and were designed to protect us from short-term heating risks due to RFR exposure.

Yet, since the FCC adopted these limits based largely on research from the 1980s, the preponderance of peer-reviewed research, more than 500 studies, have found harmful biologic or health effects from exposure to RFR at intensities too low to cause significant heating.

Citing this large body of research, more than 240 scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on the biologic and health effects of nonionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal, which calls for stronger exposure limits. The appeal makes the following assertions:

  • “Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include:
    • increased cancer risk,
    • cellular stress,
    • increase in harmful free radicals,
    • genetic damages,
    • structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and
    • negative impacts on general well-being in humans.

Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.”

The scientists who signed this appeal arguably constitute the majority of experts on the effects of nonionizing radiation. They have published more than 2,000 papers and letters on EMF in professional journals.

The FCC’s RFR exposure limits regulate the intensity of exposure, taking into account the frequency of the carrier waves, but ignore the signaling properties of the RFR.   Along with the patterning and duration of exposures, certain characteristics of the signal (e.g., pulsing, polarization) increase the biologic and health impacts of the exposure.  New exposure limits are needed which account for these differential effects.  Moreover, these limits should be based on a biological effect, not a change in a laboratory rat’s behavior.

The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RFR as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” in 2011.   Last year, a $30 million study conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) found “clear evidence” that two years of exposure to cell phone RFR increased cancer in male rats and damaged DNA in rats and mice of both sexes. The Ramazzini Institute in Italy replicated the key finding of the NTP using a different carrier frequency and much weaker exposure to cell phone radiation over the life of the rats.

Based upon the research published since 2011, including human and animal studies and mechanistic data, the IARC has recently prioritized RFR to be reviewed again in the next five years. Since many EMF scientists believe we now have sufficient evidence to consider RFR as either a probable or known human carcinogen, the IARC will likely upgrade the carcinogenic potential of RFR in the near future.

Nonetheless, without conducting a formal risk assessment or a systematic review of the research on RFR health effects, the FDA recently reaffirmed the FCC’s 1996 exposure limits in a letter to the FCC, stating that the agency had “concluded that no changes to the current standards are warranted at this time,” and that “NTP’s experimental findings should not be applied to human cell phone usage.” The letter stated that “the available scientific evidence to date does not support adverse health effects in humans due to exposures at or under the current limits.”

The latest cellular technology, 5G, will employ millimeter waves for the first time in addition to microwaves that have been in use for older cellular technologies, 2G through 4G. Given limited reach, 5G will require cell antennas every 100 to 200 meters, exposing many people to millimeter wave radiation.   5G also employs new technologies (e.g., active antennas capable of beam-forming; phased arrays; massive inputs and outputs, known as MIMO) which pose unique challenges for measuring exposures.

Millimeter waves are mostly absorbed within a few millimeters of human skin and in the surface layers of the cornea. Short-term exposure can have adverse physiological effects in the peripheral nervous system, the immune system and the cardiovascular system. The research suggests that long-term exposure may pose health risks to the skin (e.g., melanoma), the eyes (e.g., ocular melanoma) and the testes (e.g., sterility).

Since 5G is a new technology, there is no research on health effects, so we are “flying blind” to quote a U.S. senator. However, we have considerable evidence about the harmful effects of 2G and 3G.   Little is known about the effects of exposure to 4G, a 10-year-old technology, because governments have been remiss in funding this research. Meanwhile, we are seeing increases in certain types of head and neck tumors in tumor registries, which may be at least partially attributable to the proliferation of cell phone radiation. These increases are consistent with results from case-control studies of tumor risk in heavy cell phone users.

5G will not replace 4G; it will accompany 4G for the near future and possibly over the long term. If there are synergistic effects from simultaneous exposures to multiple types of RFR, our overall risk of harm from RFR may increase substantially.   Cancer is not the only risk as there is considerable evidence that RFR causes neurological disorders and reproductive harm, likely due to oxidative stress.

As a society, should we invest hundreds of billions of dollars deploying 5G, a cellular technology that requires the installation of 800,000 or more new cell antenna sites in the U.S. close to where we live, work and play?

Instead, we should support the recommendations of the 250 scientists and medical doctors who signed the 5G Appeal that calls for an immediate moratorium on the deployment of 5G and demand that our government fund the research needed to adopt biologically based exposure limits that protect our health and safety.

The views expressed are those of the author(s) and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)

 Joel M. Moskowitz

Joel M. Moskowitz, PhD, is director of the Center for Family and Community Health in the School of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley. He has been translating and disseminating the research on wireless radiation health effects since 2009 after he and his colleagues published a review paper that found long-term cell phone users were at greater risk of brain tumors. His Electromagnetic Radiation Safety website has had more than two million page views since 2013. He is an unpaid advisor to the International EMF Scientist Appeal and Physicians for Safe Technology.

http://bit.ly/5GSciAmJMM