Did you know the UK government is mired in scandal and faces legal action over the 5G roll out? Since legal action was launched, the government has aimed to protect the roll out, and further the Internet of Things pertaining to all things digital. 5G is being forced upon people, for industry profits, power and state surveillance, through lobbying, legislation and policy. Without any comprehensive risk assessment, of biological and environmental, or energy consumption impacts, 5G continues to be rolled and is branded as a benefit to all. There is no evidence it is safe, and in light of that, the precautionary principle should have been invoked, globally.
Since 2017 5G was slowly emerging, and protest and resistance to it was growing, especially in 2019, but the catalyst for 5G’s infrastructure roll out would be the “pandemic/post-pandemic” years of 2020-22, while society was locked down at home and movement was restricted for all but “essential” journeys.
The issue of the 5G roll out and its health implications collided with the Pandemic hysteria. Lockdowns were leveraged to justify advancement of the roll out globally, as people were isolated and sought increased connection and sustained employment by interfacing online in unprecedented numbers and frequency.
5G’s new spectrum and speed was played as the “future proof” solution and was also played as part of “Building Back Better” in the UK, as part of Net Zero and necessary to “economic recovery”. For a technology that hasn’t been proven safe, the public relations effort to convince citizens it is and that they must want it has been extraordinary. But do the public want it?
Did you know that the majority don’t want 5G? Or that humans and organic life, like bees and bacteria, are sensitive to radio frequency radiation? 20 years ago the UK government warned citizens to take precautions because radio frequency (wireless) devices, they said, could cause cancer. The Stewart Report made it clear precaution was needed in relation to exposure, and the W.H.O. would publish similar conclusions, making radio frequency radiation (RFR) a class 2A carcinogen. However, apart from cancer, RFR is causing illness and electrohypersensitivity (EHS), resulting from the “electro smog” (the interpenetrating anthropogenic electromagnetic fields and RFR from our technologies.
Today, the government backs industry claims that denser wireless 5G networks are necessary to combat “climate change” (even though a 5G wireless “clean-energy” world requires rare metals and burgeoning Deep Sea Mining and other projects that won’t tackle e-waste but only increase it).
Evidently, these are desperate times for the wireless industry and the agencies and politicians they lobby. Industries are greenwashing all they do to desperately brand themselves as “sustainable” in line with UN Agenda 2030 goals. 5G is central to the digital agenda’s of organisations like the United Nations, World Health Organisation and World Economic Forum. In the UK the 5G infrastructure has been protected as a national security asset and laws have changed to favour an accelerated roll out.
Are we protected? The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), which isn’t independent, as likes to claim, is favoured by industry with its thermal guidelines. The organisation’s exposure guidelines are used (in the US, Australia, UK, Europe and Canada) to protect people from thermal harm from the microwave frequencies. Whether they protect everyone debatable. Such guidelines are useful to industry because they ignore the science pertaining to biological harm from radio frequency radiation. The guidelines also don’t take into account RFR exposure on the environment and ecosystems. They fall very short of any reliable risk assessment, or thorough science.
Clarity on the health, environmental and energy consumption issues surrounding 5G must prevail. This video is a very good starting point to inform yourself and do further research.
EHTrust support the statement about insect decline
Letters about nature and technology
The electrosensitive society
Detailed, referenced open letter to the UK government MPs to address the issues of consent and safety, advocating the precautionary principle: