Over 4,000 people have signed the Appeal. In case you haven’t, or haven’t shared, please do: https://www.appel5gappeal.ca/
1) As we know, Telus has been pushing its “fiber optic cable” very aggressively, even threatening people with loss of service if they objected to having whatever it is they are installing in homes. There is confusion in the general public about fiber optic cable being installed by Telus, which is the backbone of the wireless 5G grid and required to provide data to the microcells, and the fiber optic networks that the Appeal is recommending.
Telus is providing info in mailings and on their website that truly misrepresents what they are doing and the service they are providing. Their “PureFibre” is not pure fiber. The last step to and into your home is wireless. Fiber optic cable to and through the home, wired to the computer, offers many times faster service, is much harder to hack, offers greater protection for personal data and, above all, is much, much safer because it doesn’t emit RF radiation.
(click on photos to enlarge)
See TELUS PureFibre plans available in your area
“Performance, speed and flexibility. No matter what kind of business you’re in, there’s a TELUS internet plan that will give you the competitive edge you need. Power your business with TELUS PureFibre™, the #1 internet technology for speed and reliability.”
What is being recommended in the Appeal, and by any experts, is fiber optic cable “through and into” your home, connected via cable to the computer, with no wireless component. This last step is vital because that is what eliminates the radiation, protects privacy, and increases the speed and efficiency of the internet access.
FAQS RE. COMMUNITY FIBER
2) Outdoor lighting that is built to hold the transmitters inside where they cannot be seen, that is advertised as providing connectivity via the internet — offering space for 4G and 5G transmitters.
Shuffle: The Smart Lighting-based Multi-Functional System to Connect People to Their Social Environment
“As it can integrate various connectivity modules, Shuffle offers a robust and fast internet connection for outdoor public areas. The bandwidth can be divided to assign a part to city operators with the other part available for the general public so people can stay connected. Designed to provide internet in outdoor spaces, the WLAN modules are suited for both cities and privately-owned facilities. Shuffle also offers telecom operators the possibility to acquire sites to deploy 4G/5G in cities.“
https://www.schreder.com/en/products/shuffle-smart-multifunctional-column (scroll down to see all features)
3) 5G Summit — next installment of interviews with a wide variety of speakers.
From: Marcus Schluschen (name given with permission)
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2020 6:28 PM
Subject: precautionary principle ignored?
Dear Dr. Henry,
As BC’s Chief Medical Health Officer, you must be aware of the Precautionary Principle, as stated in the Rio Declaration, to which Canada is a signee.
“In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent degradation.”
Unfortunately, my previous correspondence to the BC Government leaves the distinct impression that government officials are lacking this knowledge, even though Canada is obliged, through signature, to honour its commitments to the Rio Declaration.
The Rio Declaration:
Principle 15 – the Precautionary Approach
80. “Principle 15 codified for the first time at the global level the precautionary approach, which indicates that lack of scientific certainty is no reason to postpone action to avoid potentially serious or irreversible harm to the environment. Central to principal 15 is the element of anticipation, reflecting a requirement that effective environmental measures need to be based upon actions which take a long-term approach and which might anticipate changes on the basis of scientific knowledge.”
86. In 1994, the Supreme Court in Pakistan quoted principal 15, holding that it seemed reasonable to take preventive measures straight away instead of maintaining the status quo because there was no conclusive finding on the effect of electromagnetic fields on human life.
You are well aware that since 1994, things have changed dramatically in the world of EMF research, as you and your predecessor, Dr. Kendall, have received countless papers of medical research, from EMF scientists and many deeply concerned citizens, showing serious biological consequences to humans, plants, insects and animals. In light of countless papers provided to you, you are also aware that the amount of international research showing irreversible harm to life has climbed into the thousands!
I do not have to remind you of the recent, 10 year NTP and Ramazinni Studies, or the European Interphone Study, the Hardell Group Studies and the French CERENAT Study which is one of the studies referenced by the Canadian Parliament that triggered their warning that cell phones may cause serious health issues.
The Hardell Group Studies were released after the 2b cancer classification was made by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and is one of the studies referenced by scientists arguing that, based on new research, the 2b classification should be re-evaluated as presented as a class 2a (probably carcinogenic) or class 1 carcinogenic. Currently, there is an on going science petition that this classification must urgently be changed, especially after the alarming results of the NTP and Ramazinni Studies were released.
You are aware that these studies represent only a tiny portion of available research, proving harm to life?
In light of this overwhelming scientific evidence, can you, Dr. Henry, say with 100% certainty that there are no ill health effects from cell tower radiation, WiFi, or smart meters, that bathe our communities, schools and even hospitals in bioactive e-smog pollution, 24/7?
The science of EMF research was not part of your, nor your medical colleagues’ education, and it certainly was not part any politicians’ education, like Mr. Dix, nor their policy advisors. Therefore, it is highly inappropriate for any civil servants to claim ‘expertise’ in this field, and spreading misleading information to the public.
As you and your colleagues are not experts in EMF research, you might like to study this paper which will provide you with specific medical information, intended for treatment of patients who are adversely impacted from electro-smog pollution.
EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2015 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses
“It seems certainly necessary now to take “new exposures” like electromagnetic field (EMF) into account. Physicians are increasingly confronted with health problems from unidentified causes. Studies, empirical observations, and patient reports clearly indicate interactions between EMF exposure and health problems.”
“New wireless technologies and applications have been introduced without any certainty about their health effects, raising new challenges for medicine and society. For instance, the issue of so-called non-thermal effects and potential long-term effects of low-dose exposure were scarcely investigated prior to the introduction of these technologies. Common EMF sources include Wi-Fi access points, routers and clients, cordless and mobile phones including their base stations, Bluetooth devices, ELF magnetic fields from net currents, ELF electric fields from electric lamps and wiring close to the bed and office desk.”
“On the other hand, the emerging electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) is more and more recognized by health authorities, disability administrators and case workers, politicians, as well as courts of law. We recommend treating EHS clinically as part of the group of chronic multisystem illnesses (CMI) leading to a functional impairment (EHS), but still recognizing that the underlying cause remains the environment.”
(Remarkable results are achieved by European clinics when EMF mitigation is introduced as part of the treatment, even in chronically ill patients)
My wife suffered for 12 years from electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS), and with every rollout of new wireless technology, it got worse as our home was inundated with electro-smog from cell towers, smart meters and neighbours’ WiFi, which ramped up later to super WiFi. Her sensitivity got worse when the powerful, omnipresent, public WiFi came along. In desperation, like refugees, we moved twice, just to find a safer place to live for my wife.
In numerous letters to BC Health, I asked for help, as my wife could not visit any medical clinic due to her sensitivity to WiFi. Shockingly, all I received in response were form letters, filled with inaccurate information and false assurances of safety, by your so called ‘experts’ who, in reality, are clueless.
The system failed my wife miserably!
Do medical studies not cover the reality that the human body is an exquisite conductor of EMF’s which affects the heart, skin, brain, muscles, blood cells, etc.? Is BC Health really unaware that the human body is ‘body electric’, where every tiny electrical pulse governs the voltage gated calcium channels?
Are they still unaware that man’s ‘pulsed’ radiation is foreign to life?
Why is BC Health in bed with the telecom industry, who is poised to roll out 5G which failed to undergo long term biological testing?
Are the millions of dollars BC Health received from TELUS more important than the well being of patients?
Clearly, this deliberate lack of adherence to The Rio Declaration’s Precautionary Approach is a slap in the face of science, and international agreements made by Canada.
Dr. Henry, when honorable people like you, whose mandate is to support public health, remain silent about the dangers of electro-smog pollution, which is imposed on the public, without informed consent, then there is no hope for children in the future nor the environment.
Those who remain silent, fail to realize that they themselves, or their off springs, will become victims of their inaction sooner or later.
Please be so kind and spare me the usual form letters, from uncaring political agents like Tim Lambert, as they are no EMF experts, nor do they reflect the current scientific reality of today. I would very much appreciate the courtesy of your personal response to this letter.
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please.” Mark Twain