New York State Senator Introduces Bill To Study The Health & Environmental Impact of 5G Technology
In Brief
- The Facts:Senator Anna Kaplan of New York has introduced a bill to study the health and environmental impacts associated with exposure to 5G wireless radiation frequencies.
- Reflect On:Why are these technologies
rolling out when so many scientists, doctors and peer-reviewed
publications calling for the need for more study and safety testing
before the rollout of these
technologies.
Senator
Anna Kaplan of New York introduced a bill on March 3rd, 2020 to study
the health and environmental impacts associated with exposure to 5G
wireless radiation frequencies. This has just come to our attention now.
The bill calls upon the Department of Health and the Department of
Environmental Conservation, in cooperation with the Office of Technology
Services, to “…jointly study and evaluate the health and environmental
impacts of the implementation of fifth generation (5G) and future
generation wireless systems technology and small cell distribution
antenna systems in the state.” Read the bill here
and encourage your state representatives to establish a commission to
study the health and environmental effects of 5G today! All you have to
do is send them this sample bill!
advertisement - learn more
There are many initiatives that are
currently taking place, despite the fact that they’re receiving no
mainstream media attention. For example, in the state of New Hampshire a
5G Bill HB 522 asks, “Why
have 1,000s of peer-reviewed studies, including the recently published
U.S. Toxicology Program 16-year $30 million study, that are showing a
wide range of statistically significant DNA damage, brain and heart
tumors, infertility, and so many other ailments, being ignored by the
Federal Communication Commission (FCC)?” and, “Why have more than 220 of
the worlds leading scientists signed an appeal to the WHO and the
United Nations to protect public health from wireless radiation and
nothing has been done?”
It’s great to see such initiatives
started, as with any new technology, it can only benefit everybody if
appropriate safety testing is conducted. Therefore there really should
be no resistance against it. In Nigeria, for example, the government
has not issued any licence for the deployment of the 5G network
following growing concerns over the potential health
implications. Minister of Communications and Digital Economy, Dr Isa Ali
Ibrahim stated that the government would always take the welfare,
health and security of the public into account while considering the
deployment of any technology. This should be the approach of all
governments.
His statement reads
that a “3-month study trial commenced on the 25th of November, 2019 in
order to critically review and study the health and security
implications of deploying 5G in Nigeria. As part of the study trial
process, I directed the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) to
ensure that a team of experts, security agencies and other stakeholders
fully participate in the trial process and my office also invited these
agencies to participate in the trial.” The trial process has since been
concluded and the study and reporting process is currently ongoing.
Government will not act on the speculations only, but rather we will take an informed decision on 5G after due consultation with experts and the public. I have also directed the NCC to engage citizens on any questions or concerns they may have regarding 5G. – Ibrahim
It’s going to be interesting to see what they’ve discovered.
advertisement - learn more
5G has also been halted in Slovenia, here is an official statement from their government. According to Minister Rudi Medved,
“I’m aware we won’t find a conclusive answer, as there hasn’t been one globally. 5G technology hasn’t been established in practice to an extent that studies could produce results based on which we could say conclusively that 5G is completely harmless.”
That being said, he did say that that 5G
was definitely a technology of the future and that it would be
unacceptable for Slovenia to remain an “isolated island” without the
technology. Medved criticized the management of the Agency for
Communication Networks and Services (AKOS), for not giving sufficient
attention to G5’s potential impact on health.
France passed a law in
2015 banning WiFi from all nursery schools. In addition to that, the
law states that Wi-Fi must be turned off in all elementary schools when
it’s not in use. A wired connection, if possible, is preferred.
Namibia’s atomic energy review states quite
clearly that current so called “safety” standards don’t protect
citizens from long term health effects, and that the guidelines
governing their use do not guarantee adequate protection against the
effects of long term exposure.
This list of concerns is quite long, and real. As you can see.
Confusion & More Science
With the number of “conspiracy theories”
that are floating around regarding 5g technology growing, it’s
important to stick to the facts, the science, and the doctors and
scientists who have been urging federal health regulatory agencies to
conduct appropriate safety testing before the rollout of this type of
technology and providing evidence as to why this needs to be done.
Despite this fact, the roll out of 5G technology has already begun.
It’s quite confusing that that a number
of publications are calling into question the rollout of 5G technology,
and thousands of publications outlining the biological unnatural sources
of EMF radiation in general have already done so yet the idea that 5G
technology could pose some type of health threat seems to continually be
ridiculed by mainstream media publications. For example, an article written in
Forbes states “Fortunately, science already tells us that 5G almost
certainly poses no danger to humans. Unless you value unfounded
conspiracies over bona fide science.”
This is quite confusing, why? Because there is a tremendous amount of “bonda fide science” that raises concerns. For example, a study published in August of 2019 in Frontiers of Public Health states:
“In some countries, notably the US, scientific evidence of the potential hazards of RFR has been largely dismissed. Findings of carcinogenicity, infertility and cell damage occurring at daily exposure levels—within current limits—indicate that existing exposure standards are not sufficiently protective of public health. Evidence of carcinogenicity alone, such as that from the NTP study, should be sufficient to recognize that current exposure limits are inadequate.”
It goes on to emphasize that:
Novel 5G technology is being rolled out in several densely populated cities, although potential chronic health or environmental impacts have not been evaluated and are not being followed. Higher frequency (shorter wavelength) radiation associated with 5G does not penetrate the body as deeply as frequencies from older technologies although its effects may be systemic (73, 74). The range and magnitude of potential impacts of 5G technologies are under-researched, although important biological outcomes have been reported with millimeter wavelength exposure. These include oxidative stress and altered gene expression, effects on skin and systemic effects such as on immune function (74). In vivo studies reporting resonance with human sweat ducts (73), acceleration of bacterial and viral replication, and other endpoints indicate the potential for novel as well as more commonly recognized biological impacts from this range of frequencies, and highlight the need for research before population-wide continuous exposures.
Even the A briefing paper by the European Parliament Think Tank “Effects of 5G wireless communication on human health” states that:
“A further consideration is the need to bring together researchers from different disciplines, in particular medicine and physics or engineering, to conduct further research into the effects of 5G. The EU’s current provisions on exposure to wireless signals, the Council Recommendation on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz), is now 20 years old, and thus does not take the specific technical characteristics of 5G into account.”
It’s quite clear that there are biological effects, but some studies point out that conclusions can’t be made. For example, a study published in The International Journal of Environmental Health titled
“5G Wireless Communication and Health Effects—A Pragmatic Review Based
on Available Studies Regarding 6 to 100 GHz” pointed out that,
The majority of studies with MMW exposures show biological responses. From this observation, however, no in-depth conclusions can be drawn regarding the biological and health effects of MMW exposures in the 6–100 GHz frequency range. The studies are very different and the total number of studies is surprisingly low. The reactions occur both in vivo and in vitro and affect all biological endpoints studied.
So if we can’t make conclusions, should
we not wait until we can? President Donald Trump has already signed into
law a pair of bills designed to boost wireless and broadband networks:
the Secure 5G and Beyond Act and the Broadband Deployment Accuracy and
Technological Availability Act. You can read more about that here.
Again, this is just one example of the
scientific publications out there that raise cause for concern. What
about the hundreds of scientists who are raising concerns. More than 200
recently petitioned the United Nations to look into this appropriately.
Are scientists like Martin L. Pall, PhD and Professor Emeritus of
Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences at Washington State University,
“conspiracy theorists?” His report titled “5G:
Great risk for EU, U.S. and International Health! Compelling Evidence
for Eight Distinct Types of Great Harm Caused by Electromagnetic
Field(EMF) Exposures and the Mechanism that Causes Them,” emphasizes that:
“Putting in tens of millions of 5G antennae without a single biological test of safety has got to be about the stupidest idea anyone has had in the history of the world.
Perhaps this conflict comes as a result of corporate influence? Paul Bischoff,
a tech journalist and privacy advocate, recently compiled data
regarding telecom’s political contributions to influence policies that
benefit their industry, it’s quite revealing.
The Takeaway
At the end of the day, it’s quite clear
that many experts in the field, and many citizens around the world have
legitimate health concerns about the implementation of 5G technology,
and even current 3 and 4G technologies. These concerns should be
independently addressed by science that is not tied to the
telecommunications industry, and adequate safety testing should be
conducted before these new technologies are implemented. It can be quite
confusing to come across information that constantly tried to drive
home the idea that it’s safe, while we have information on the other
side statin the complete opposite. This is a common theme throughout
history, we’ve seen it with pesticides like DDT, and products like
tobacco, are we seeing the same thing with 5G technology? Are we that
powerless to the point where such actions, like implementation, can be
initiated without the approval of the citizenry?

No comments:
Post a Comment