Scientific American Blog Post

By on October 29, 2019

  • The Facts:A recent blog post in Scientific American explains why 5G wireless technology may not be safe for human health. There are a number of publications that show clear cause for concern, and the industry has not even conducted any safety testing.
  • Reflect On:How are technologies like this, which have clear biological effects, allowed to rollout without any appropriate safety testing?

We’ve published a lot of information and articles about 5G technology, it’s important to keep this type of information flowing and to share it regularly because mainstream media as well as the communications technology industry continue to completely ignore it. 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. But they (the mainstream) cannot ignore the health concerns for much longer, as topics like 5G wireless radiation are going viral across the world. Its implications are already creating protests, doctors are already treating patients for symptoms (here is an example from Switzerland and here is an example from Canada) and a portion of the mainstream is finally catching on. advertisement - learn more

Wireless radiation has biological effects. Period. This is no longer a subject for debate when you look at PubMed and the peer-review literature. These effects are seen in all life forms; plants, animals, insects, microbes. In humans, we have clear evidence of cancer now: there is no question We have evidence of DNA damage, cardiomyopathy, which is the precursor of congestive heart failure, neuropsychiatric effects…5G is an untested application of a technology that we know is harmful; we know it from the science. In academics, this is called human subjects research. – Dr. Sharon Goldberg,  internal medicine physician & professor. (source)

Thousands of people showed up on the Swiss house of Parliament in Bern to protest the recent rollout there, a Belgian government minister has announced that Brussels is halting its 5G plans due to health effects. Many countries already have severe restrictions and bans on 3 and 4g wireless technology.  Take France for example, they 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.

One recent example of mainstream awareness is an article published in the blog section of Scientific American titled “We Have No Reason to Believe 5G is Safe” written by Joel M. Moskowitz.

It’s great to see such a publication at least mention the health concerns of this type of technology, it shows how awareness continues to be created, after all, the frequencies utilized in crowd control weapons, ones that physically impact our biology, form the basis of the new 5G network that’s been rolling out. U.S., Russian, and Chinese defense agencies have been active in developing weapons that rely on the capability of this electromagnetic technology to create burning sensations on the skin, for crowd control.

The waves are Millimetre waves, also used by the U.S. Army in crowd dispersal guns called Active Denial Systems, these are the same waves employed by 5g technology. Here you can find a lecture from Dr. Ben-Ishai of the Department of Physics at Hebrew University. He goes through how human sweat ducts act like a number of helical antennas when exposed to these wavelengths that are put out by the devices that employ 5G technology.

But it’s not just 5g, wireless and electromagnetic radiation in general has serious biological effects. Moskowitz points out: advertisement - learn more

5G can be used by the global elite in their dystopic NWO to control humanity.

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.

Others are getting in on the activism. Frank Clegg for example, is the former President Of Microsoft Canada. He recently released an insider’s view educational video regarding the health and safety concerns of 5G and wireless technologies. You can watch that video here.  He also recently joined the board of the Environmental Health Trust, where this video comes from. There, you will find some of the latest science on 5G wireless technology and its health impacts, among other technologies as well. So if you want to see more science, that’s a great place to start.

I also like to point to people towards a fairly recent publication write up by Dr. Martin L. Pall, PhD and Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences at Washington State University, says the following in his report “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”:

“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.”

No Safety Testing

It’s no secret that our federal health regulatory agencies are completely corrupt. There are many examples of this one can pull from, be it from the FDA, FCC or CDC. One of the best would be the SPIDER papers. A group called the CDC Scientists Preserving Integrity, Diligence and Ethics in Research, or CDC SPIDER, put a list of complaints in a letter to the CDC Chief of Staff and provided a copy of the letter to the public watchdog organization U.S. Right to Know (USRTK). It’s quite revealing.

This is why it’s no surprise when Moskowitz points out that the fact that no safety studies have been conducted by the FDA.

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 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.

Despite this article, there is still backlash and mainstream articles that are encouraging us to not really be concerned.  One example also comes from a blog post by Scientific American, titled “Don’t Fall Prey To Scaremongering About 5G.”

There is clear cause for concern, so articles like this are confusing, but there is no doubt the industry will use its influence over mainstream media to sway the perception of people when it comes to 5G, just like it did when cigarettes were first introduced.

Why not just put the answers to rest by conducting more safety testing?

What Can You Do?

You could purchase some EMF protective clothing and bedding, or you could even paint your home with EMF protective paint. You can unplug your computer when not in use, turn off your cell phone, and unplug all your electronic devices before you go to sleep. You could have a wired internet connection, which is actually much faster than any wireless connection. You can live a healthy lifestyle, and you can use mind-body healing techniques to help you. Utilizing mind-body techniques, the power of consciousness and nutrition is probably the best way to stay harm free from radiation exposure. We’ve been exposed to it for a long time and it’s looking like it could be one of multiple factors contributing to several disease rates that seem to be on the rise exponentially. Do not move forward in fear, simply move forward in awareness. The world is waking up, and that’s an encouraging thought.

Years ago many actions taken by governments and corporations went unnoticed. We are no doubt making things difficult for them so let’s keep moving forward.


WHO and WHAT is behind it all ? : >


The bottom line is for the people to regain their original, moral principles, which have intentionally been watered out over the past generations by our press, TV, and other media owned by the Illuminati/Bilderberger Group, corrupting our morals by making misbehavior acceptable to our society. Only in this way shall we conquer this oncoming wave of evil.

Commentary:

Administrator

HUMAN SYNTHESIS

All articles contained in Human-Synthesis are freely available and collected from the Internet. The interpretation of the contents is left to the readers and do not necessarily represent the views of the Administrator. Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). Human-Synthesis will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. Human-Synthesis grants permission to cross-post original Human-Synthesis articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified.

The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Human-Synthesis articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites. Human-Synthesis contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.