Electromagnetic radiation could contribute to insect demise

reprinted from Courthouse News Service BERLIN (AFP) — Radiation from mobile phones could have contributed to the dramatic decline in insect populations seen in much of Europe in recent years, a German study showed Thursday.

On top of pesticides and habitat loss, increased exposure to electromagnetic radiation is “probably having a negative impact on the insect world,” according to the study presented in Stuttgart, which is yet to be peer reviewed.

The analysis of 190 scientific studies was carried out by Germany’s Nature and Biodiversity Conservation Union (NABU) together with two NGOs, one from Germany and one from Luxembourg.

Of the 83 studies deemed scientifically relevant, 72 showed that radiation had a negative effect on bees, wasps and flies.

These effects ranged from a reduced ability to navigate due to the disturbance of magnetic fields to damage to genetic material and larvae.

Mobile phone and Wi-Fi radiation in particular opens the calcium channels in certain cells, meaning they absorb more calcium ions.

This can trigger a biochemical chain reaction in insects, the study said, disrupting circadian rhythms and the immune system.

“The study shows that we must keep our eyes open in all directions when analyzing the causes of the dramatic insect decline,” said Johannes Enssle, head of NABU in the state of Baden-Wuerttemberg.

“The subject is uncomfortable for many of us because it interferes with our daily habits and there are powerful economic interests behind mobile communication technology,” Enssle said.

Peter Hensinger of the German consumer protection organization Diagnose Funk said closer attention must be paid to the possible negative effects of radiation on both animals and humans, particularly with regard to the introduction of 5G technology.

Networks equipped with 5G are expected to offer speeds 100 times faster than existing 4G networks, but the technology has been met with strong opposition from some quarters, especially among environmental campaigners.

© Agence France-Presse

Mill Valley CA blocks 5G

Bay Area city blocks 5G deployments over cancer concerns

The Bay Area may be the center of the global technology industry, but that hasn’t stopped one wealthy enclave from protecting itself from the future.

The city council of Mill Valley, a small town located just a few miles north of San Francisco, voted unanimously late last week to effectively block deployments of small-cell 5G wireless towers in the city’s residential areas.

Through an urgency ordinance, which allows the city council to immediately enact regulations that affect the health and safety of the community, the restrictions and prohibitions will be put into force immediately for all future applications to site 5G telecommunications equipment in the city. Applications for commercial districts are permitted under the passed ordinance.

The ordinance was driven by community concerns over the health effects of 5G wireless antennas. According to the city, it received 145 pieces of correspondence from citizens voicing opposition to the technology, compared to just five letters in support of it — a ratio of 29 to 1. While that may not sound like much, the city’s population is roughly 14,000, indicating that about 1% of the population had voiced an opinion on the matter.

Blocks on 5G deployments are nothing new for Marin County, where other cities including San Anselmo and Ross have passed similar ordinances designed to thwart 5G expansion efforts over health concerns.

These restrictions on small cell site deployments could complicate 5G’s upcoming nationwide rollout. While 5G standards have yet to be standardized, one model that has broad traction in the telecommunications industry is to use so-called “small cell” antennas to increase bandwidth and connection quality while reducing infrastructure and power costs. Smaller antennas are easier to install and will be loss obtrusive, reducing the concerns of urban preservationists to unsightly tower masts that have long plagued the deployment of 4G antennas in communities across the United States.

Perhaps most importantly, these small cells emit less radiation, since they are not designed to provide as wide of coverage as traditional cell sites. The telecom industry has long vociferously denied a link between antennas and health outcomes, although California’s Department of Public Health has issued warnings about potential health effects of personal cell phone antennas. Reduced radiation emissions from 5G antennas compared to 4G antennas would presumably further reduce any health effects of this technology.

Restrictions like Mill Valley’s will make it nearly impossible to deploy 5G in a timely manner. As one industry representative told me in an interview a few months ago, “It takes 18 months to get the permit to deploy, and 2 hours to install.” Multiplied by the hundreds of sites required to cover a reasonably-sized urban neighborhood, and the 5G rollout goes beyond daunting to well-near impossible.

While health concerns have bubbled in various municipalities, those concerns are not shared globally. China, through companies like Huawei, is investing billions of dollars to design and build 5G infrastructure, in hopes of stealing the industry crown from the United States, which is the market leader in 4G technologies.

Those competitive concerns have increasingly been a priority at the FCC, where chairman Ajit Pai  and his fellow Republican commissioners have pushed hard to overcome local concerns around health and historical preservation. The commission voted earlier this year on new siting rules that would accelerate 5G adoption.

Mill Valley’s ordinance is designed to frustrate those efforts, while remaining within the letter of federal law, which preempts local ordinances. Mill Valley’s mayor has said that the city will look to create a final ordinance over the next year.

What’s wrong with 5G and telecom hype?

Notes from Dr. Devra Davis and Americans For Responsible Technology during a zoom meeting 4/15/20 on 5G. (some slides from presentation below)

First, the telecom companies have been charging you different fees on your phone/telecom bill for years with the reasoning that they will use these funds to expand fiberoptic systems to reach more remote areas. Because of this they have amassed funds from customers that have not been used because they haven’t done this expansion. Now they are going to use the funds to expand 5G without your consent and using the funds that you paid into for a completely different purpose. Throughout the world telecom companies have disclaimers and warnings on wireless devices (see chart below) and have restricted frequency levels that have proven to cause harm. Even warnings from telecom companies to their shareholders have indicate that they cannot be insured for suits brought from people being harmed by these frequencies. Several telecom company executives in other countries have resigned rather than be personally liable in such a lawsuit. Do the insurers know the risks that we are not privy to?

So what’s wrong with 5G besides the fact that the infrastructure will have to be overwhelming because these frequencies are short range and therefore require hundreds or thousands or units on poles and structures vs. one cell tower?  These units will also require higher usage of electricity putting our grid system in overload. The 5G hazard is just an upgrade from the hazards we are already receiving from 3G and 4G through our cell phones, WiFi, smart meters and smart houses. The 5G frequencies were actually developed years ago as a weapon to induce pain, although if used sparingly it can actually treat chronic pain. Did you know the airports scanners are a form of 5G and are used to detect explosives?

The big hazard to the body is that the frequencies from 5G are absorbed through our skin and eyes and detrimentally effect our cells. Our sweat glands resonate with these frequencies creating dis-ease in the body. 5G affects cell growth repair so if the person is older or has some sort of immune-compromised illness they will likely be more affected*. The frequencies also disrupt the body’s ability to maintain antioxidant and glutathione levels when they are within 80 meters of the 5G unit, and also alter cell membranes, changes gene expressions and alter our cell death cycle and bacteria growth.

Japan, the USA and Canada have the highest allowable levels of RF exposure in the world. What do the other countries know that we aren’t being told? According to the Environmental Health Trust publication 5G uses frequencies from low to high band currently sub 6GHz. These have proven to cause cancer, but other risks to our health can include DNA , brain/memory, and sperm/reproductive damage, not to mention the extreme environmental risks to insects and trees.  5G is poised to be the undoing of personal freedoms, human biological sustenance, and the health of the planet. With 5G being launched agressively without need for local zoning approval during the pandemic, we all need to take our heads out of the sand and take a stand against this Orwellian technology.

For details please visit https://ehtrust.org/ and https://www.americansforresponsibletech.org/ and www.safehelpsyou.org

*could frequency clusters (like in hospitals) see more virus deaths due to lowered immunity?

Fox News alerts: cell phone radiation risk

Occasionally, the media gets it right. Tucker Carlson on iPhone testing at 5x higher than legal radiation limits: “Twenty years from now, we’re going to look at that and laugh bitterly, like one of those Camel ads with smoking doctors.”
Thanks to the advent of technology, we can access and share information through our phones at lightning speed. We use it to educate ourselves and keep updated with current events. We use it for entertainment, and we use it for work.

However, this advancement comes with a price. In the video above (and on YouTube here), Tucker Carlson talks about the health risks of using mobile phones, and why it’s crucial to raise awareness of this urgent matter.

Carlson states,

“The National Toxicology Program, a government organization, found that ‘high exposure to radiofrequency radiation used by cell phones was associated with clear evidence of tumors in rats.’

“In 2012, Italy’s Supreme Court upheld a ruling that said there was a link between a business executive’s brain tumor and his heavy use of a mobile phone.”

Phones Exceed the Legal Limits of Radiation Exposure

The main health-related criteria for a phone to be approved for sale by FCC is by ensuring the device will not exceed the maximum allowable Specific Absorption Rating (SAR). This standard, however, is much too relaxed and is not based on the existing body of science, but rather on the thermal effect only.

While the SAR rating is based on a heating effect only, thousands of studies indicate non-thermal effects, and thus conclude that the SAR limit is entirely inadequate.

But today’s phones are now proven to exceed even the SAR-based legal limit of radiation.

The Chicago Tribune tested almost a dozen of phones according to the federal guidelines at an FCC-accredited lab. According to the Tribune, iPhone 7, one of the most popular smartphones ever sold, measured over the legal limit and is more than twice the amount of what Apple has reported to the regulators from its own testing.

As mentioned by Tucker Carlson in the video, in another lawsuit against Apple and Samsung, a test in an FCC-accredited lab shows that at 0mm, iPhone 8 hits the user with 5 times more radiation than the federal exposure limit allows, while Samsung hits users up to 3 times the limit,

Poor Testing Standards and Lawsuit

The FCC allows manufacturers to test their phone’s radiofrequency radiation emissions from up to 25 millimeters away from the body.

However, when we talk to someone on the phone, we normally have it right beside our ears. And having our phones in our pockets puts it at 2mm or less away from our body, making the testing criteria inapplicable and useless.

Not to mention its “one-size-fits-all” approach that doesn’t consider children or pregnant users of these phones.

With all the screening and testing being done, keep in mind that only one phone needs to be tested before millions of phones go on sale. At the same time, manufacturers can select the testing lab.

These poor testing standards are not only inaccurate based on how people use their phones, but it also leaves too much room for inconsistency and perhaps, dishonesty, with the results reported to the FCC and the emissions of the actual phones that will be used by the consumer.

In a December 2019 class action lawsuit against Apple and Samsung stemming from the Tribune’s tests, a California judge called the FCC “dumb”, before moving the case to trial.

(NOTE: While this story was updated here, there are indications that pressure was likely applied by industry and/or their captured agencies to change the story in an attempt to deflect focus from the FCC as a culpable party, so there was perhaps more accuracy in the originally-published story.)

Phone Manufacturers Are Deceiving Us

One of the most censored subjects in the USA according to American organization Project Censored, the Phonegate Scandal revealed the general deception by phone manufacturers about the real exposure values of SAR (the unit used to measure RFR absorption rate).

With the Tribune’s tests, Apple disputed the results, stating that the tests were not done the way Apple does them, without going to the specifics of what was out of the ordinary, and did not respond to requests for clarification.

These and other obvious efforts to mask the truth from the consumers and hide the fact that we are being overexposed to harmful radiofrequency radiation is a serious matter that concerns all of us.

Sadly, there is not yet enough conversation in the country about this issue and our health and safety are being sidelined.

With 5G being deployed despite no testing that indicates it is safe, this makes the issue critically urgent.

There are far too few stories like this in our mainstream media, which is heavily influenced by advertising dollars and business arrangements with wireless companies.

With almost non-existent media attention, it’s up to us to spread the word and help make our voices louder until we are heard, and until action is taken to ensure the health and safety of our community.

As Tucker Carlson correctly says,

“Twenty years from now, we’re going to look at that and laugh bitterly, like one of those Camel ads with smoking doct

T

Boston Globe article warns cell phone health hazards Jan 2019

Many scientists say exposure to electromagnetic fields may pose a health hazard. They’re especially concerned about cellphones, because of their position close to the user’s head.

 

By Hiawatha Bray GLOBE STAFF  JANUARY 17, 2019

A California health activist says the Massachusetts Department of Public Health may be withholding information about possible health risks posed by cellphones and other wireless technologies.

Joel Moskowitz, director of the Center for Family and Community Health at the University of California Berkeley, said the state agency is refusing to release fact sheets about the health effects of electromagnetic fields, or EMF, that it began drafting two years ago.

“The higher-ups are very nervous about letting any of this information out to the public,” said Moskowitz. In California, Moskowitz fought a successful seven-year court battle to force that state to release guidelines for consumers on safe cellphone use.

Ann Scales, a spokeswoman for the Massachusetts agency, said the DPH plans to release the guidelines within six months.

Top of Form

Bottom of Form

Moskowitz and some other activists assert that exposure to EMF, the energy given off by countless modern devices, causes a variety of health problems, ranging from sleep loss to brain cancer. They say state and federal agencies have a duty to warn the public to reduce their exposure to EMF.

But both the World Health Organization and the US Centers for Disease Control and Preventionhave said that evidence of health risks from EMF is inconclusive.

Moskowitz has joined forces with Cecelia Doucette, an Ashland resident and EMF activist who persuaded her town’s school district to set limits on student exposure to Wi-Fi radio waves. Doucette said she worked with Mass. DPH officials in 2016 to develop a fact sheet showing people how to shield themselves from Wi-Fi waves, as well as electromagnetic radiation from cellphones, cell towers, and high-voltage electric power lines.

But more than two years later, the fact sheet has yet to be released. “I don’t know why,” Doucette said. “They have not given me a reason aside from the fact that it is still under review.”

Moskowitz filed a public records request for the fact sheets with the Mass. DPH, but it was denied. Public records liaison Carolyn Wagner wrote that the document in question is exempt from the state’s disclosure law because it’s still in draft form.

Scales said that until the DPH releases its guidelines, consumers can find out about safe cellphone use from the National Institutes of Health’s National Cancer Institute, which has a Web page devoted to the subject.

Many scientists agree that EMF exposure may pose a health hazard. They’re especially concerned about cellphones, because of their position so close to the user’s head, thereby increasing the brain’s exposure to the phone’s electromagnetic field.

“The evidence that prolonged use of cellphones increases the risk of brain cancer is extremely strong,” said David Carpenter, professor of environmental health sciences at the University at Albany, State University of New York.

Carpenter pointed to recent large-scale studies in the United States and Italy that found that exposure to cellphone radio waves caused brain tumors in rats, as well as earlier studies that found evidence of increased cancer rates among heavy cellphone users.

“The degree of risk is debatable,” Carpenter said. “However, that there is a risk is really pretty clear.”

Richard Clapp, professor emeritus at Boston University’s School of Public Health, agreed. He recommended that consumers use wired earbuds to make calls instead of holding the handset to their ears.

“There’s good reason for being cautious,” Clapp said. “If you don’t have to expose yourself or you can reduce your exposure, do that.”

The World Health Organization states on its website that “to date there is no evidence to conclude that exposure to low level electromagnetic fields is harmful to human health.” Yet the WHO also lists electromagnetic fields as a “possible carcinogen.”

The controversy is likely to intensify in the years ahead with the deployment of next-generation 5G wireless systems, which operate at higher frequencies than today’s cellular systems and will require a far more transmitters.

“5G is going to put an antenna every several hundred yards in cities,” Moskowitz said. “The exposure will be substantial.”

The nation’s wireless companies plan to spend billions on 5G networks, and the Trump administration considers quick deployment of the technology a matter of national security. But Markowitz and other health activists want a moratorium on 5G technology pending more research on health risks.

Hiawatha Bray can be reached at hiawatha.bray@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @GlobeTechLab.