Health risks
Dr Pall, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences Washington State University, outlines eight pathophysiological effects caused by exposure to non-thermal levels of EMF radiation, Dr. Pall argues at length that each of these negative health effects from EMF exposures will be exacerbated by the rollout of 5G:
- Attack our nervous systems including our brains leading to widespread neurological/neuropsychiatric effects and possibly many other effects. This nervous system attack is of great concern.
- Attack our endocrine (that is hormonal) systems. In this context, the main things that make us functionally different from single celled creatures are our nervous system and our endocrine systems – even a simple planaria worm needs both of these. Thus the consequences of the disruption of these two regulatory systems is immense, such that it is a travesty to ignore these findings.
- Produce oxidative stress and free radical damage, which have central roles in essentially all chronic diseases.
- Attack the DNA of our cells, producing single strand and double strand breaks in cellular DNA and oxidized bases in our cellular DNA. These in turn produce cancer and also mutations in germ line cells which produce mutations in future generations.
- Produce elevated levels of apoptosis (programmed cell death), events especially important in causing both neurodegenerative diseases and infertility.
- Lower male and female fertility, lower sex hormones, lower libido and increased levels of spontaneous abortion and, as already stated, attack the DNA in sperm cells.
- Produce excessive intracellular calcium [Ca2+]i and excessive calcium signaling.
- Attack the cells of our bodies to cause cancer. Such attacks are thought to act via 15 different mechanisms during cancer causation.
Dr Martin Pall au National Institutes of Health
"The truth about mobile phone and wireless radiation" - Dr Devra Davis
Dr Sharon Goldberg on wireless radiation
History of electromagnetic radiation and health
‘Radiation exposure has been a concern for health researchers and policy makers beginning with radar during WWII. Yet for the most part, the public remains unaware of the growing body of independent science showing adverse health impacts from wireless radiation.
Since the 1980s, the telecommunications industry has purchased partial or majority ownership privileges in major media outlets. Some outlets previously known for their objectivity have been conspicuously silent about harms from wireless radiation, even as government and independent researchers are finding links between wireless radiation and cancer, neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s, birth defects, learning disabilities, headaches, sleep disturbances, and autoimmune disorders.
As a result, the public has, for the most part, accepted our wireless world as a convenient and often intriguing way of life, and/or the inevitable way of the future – “Can’t stop progress”. And governments’ collective silence has offered a presumption of safety.
For decades, telecom companies have lobbied their governments to pass laws favorable to industry, including some areas where citizens are even denied the right to object to cell tower placement on the basis of health.
We can’t help but ask, “Why would industry influence governments to exempt health issues for wireless facilities if radiofrequency radiation (RFR) is safe?”
And we can’t help but notice that 5G infrastructure – a quantum technological leap – is being rolled out around the world at lightning speed before undertaking a single safety study.’
5G electromagnetic radiation and safety
IPOL | Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies 12 PE 631.060 states:
‘Significant concern is emerging over the possible impact on health and safety arising from potentially much higher exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation arising from 5G. Increased exposure may result not only from the use of much higher frequencies in 5G but also from the potential for the aggregation of different signals, their dynamic nature, and the complex interference effects that may result, especially in dense urban areas.
The 5G radio emission fields are quite different to those of previous generations because of their complex beamformed transmissions in both directions – from base station to handset and for the return. Although fields are highly focused by beams, they vary rapidly with time and movement and so are unpredictable, as the signal levels and patterns interact as a closed loop system. This has yet to be mapped reliably for real situations, outside the laboratory.
While the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) issues guidelines for limiting exposure to electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields (EMF), and EU member states are subject to Council Recommendation 1999/519/EC which follows ICNIRP guidelines, the problem is that currently it is not possible to accurately simulate or measure 5G emissions in the real world.’
March 2020 ‘Effects of 5G wireless communication on human health’.
- “The European Environment Agency (EEA) has long advocated precaution concerning EMF exposure, pointing out that there were cases of failure to use the precautionary principle in the past, which have resulted in often irreversible damage to human health and environments. Appropriate, precautionary and proportionate actions taken now to avoid plausible and potentially serious threats to health from EMF are likely to be seen as prudent and wise from future perspectives.”
- Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks (SCHEER) replaced Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) because “conflict of interests, as they had professional relationships with or received funding from various telecom companies.” [a point that is relevant because PHE cites SCENIHR]
- reference to the UN appeal from EMF scientists and makes this statement following mention of a moratorium, “In this regard, some scientists consider it necessary to establish new exposure limits that take account of the new characteristics of exposure. Such limits should be based on the biological effects of EMF radiation, rather than on the energy-based specific absorption rate”.
- “Non-ionising radiation, which includes radiation from mobile phones and 5G, is perceived as harmless in general, due to its lack of potency. However, some of the above-mentioned scientists point out that, in the particular case of 5G, the issue is not the potency, but the pulse,15 the frequency to which the whole population will be exposed due to the dense network of antennas and the estimated billions of simultaneous connections. As 5G employs a very high level of pulsations, the idea behind 5G is to use higher frequencies, which allows such high levels of pulsation, in order to carry very large amounts of information per second. Studies show that pulsed EMF are in most cases more biologically active and therefore more dangerous than non-pulsed EMF. Every single wireless communication device communicates at least partially via pulsations, and the smarter the device, the more pulsations. Consequently, even though 5G can be weak in terms of power, its constant abnormal pulse radiation can have an effect. Along with the mode and duration of exposures, characteristics of the 5G signal such as pulsing seem to increase the biologic and health impacts of exposure, including DNA damage, which is considered to be a cause of cancer. DNA damage is also linked to reproductive decline and neurodegenerative diseases”
- “as 5G is an untested technology, a cautious approach would be prudent. The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Helsinki Accords and other international treaties recognise that informed consent prior to interventions that might affect human health is an essential, fundamental human right, which becomes even more controversial when considering children’s and young people’s exposure.
- Read More
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
The world’s largest technical professional organisation for the advancement of technology, warn that the consequences of 5G deployment could be ‘calamitous’:
‘Due to the extremely high density of BSs, street light access points, separate indoor BSs, relays and Massive MIMO technology employed in 5G, a person will be exposed to very high levels of PFDs, whether he is indoors or outdoors, or whether or not he is using any wireless devices in close proximity. In other words, it may be suspected that even the ambient PFD which a person is exposed to in most situations throughout the day may fall under the category of ‘Severe Concern’ according to the Building Biology Standard, ‘Far above normal’ according to the AMA standards, and may be higher than the precautionary action level recommended by the BioInitiative Guidelines. If 5G networks are deployed without careful analysis of expected exposure levels, almost all people in the area of coverage may be exposed to danger- ous levels of PFD, the outcomes of which, in the near future, may turn out to be calamitous.’