*Please note: If you are not aware of the dangers of 5G and what the term “5G” means, please read my last NewsWithViews.com article before reading this one, or you may not understand the terminology in this article.
I was surprised by the amount of response to my article on June 2, 2019 about the life-threatening dangers of 5G. Since then, a lot has happened.
At the time the article was published, the Brussels, Belgium, announcement rejecting 5G had just been made. Thus, it didn’t get much coverage.
Celine Fremault, the Minister of the Government of the Brussels-Capital Region with responsibility for Housing, Quality of Life, Environment and Energy said:
“I cannot welcome such technology if the radiation standards, which must protect the citizen, are not respected, 5G or not. The people of Brussels are not guinea pigs whose health I can sell at a profit. We cannot leave anything to doubt.”
How nice it would be if our politicians didn’t view us as guinea pigs when it comes to 5G.
Belgium’s Ms. Fremault is not the only government official in the world who has stated concerns about the potential negative impact of 5G on community health. Within two weeks of my article, the (Great) State of Louisiana passed House Resolution 145 with its legislature voting 103 in favor of passage and zero opposing the measure.
Louisiana’s House Resolution 145 tells you why all citizens of this country should be concerned about federal and state governments rushing to implement a technology on which no tests for human safety have been done. It says this:
To urge and request the Department of Environmental Quality in conjunction with the Louisiana Department of Health to study the environmental and health effects of evolving fifth generation cellular network technology (5G) and report its findings to the House Committee on Natural Resources and Environment and the House Committee on Health and Welfare no later than sixty days prior to the convening of the 2020 Regular Session of the Legislature.
WHEREAS, 5G technology is intended to greatly increase device capability and connectivity but also may pose risks to the environment due to increased radio-frequency radiation exposure; and
WHEREAS, a study is necessary to examine the advantages and risks associated with 5G technology, with a focus on the environmental impact and potential related effects; and
WHEREAS, peer-reviewed studies on this topic show the potential for wide-range effects; and
WHEREAS, 5G technology requires small cellular towers to be placed a short distance apart, closer than existing towers, at telephone pole height, and will operate in conjunction with the 3G and 4G technology infrastructure; and
WHEREAS, the insurance industry may have placed exclusions in policies to exempt damage caused by this technology; and
WHEREAS, certain manufacturers provide warnings to consumers regarding the reception of devices using this technology; and
WHEREAS, input is needed from the technological and other communities as well as persons involved with developing 5G technology.”
The language of the House Resolution 145 then closes with appropriate legal language and signatures. If your legislature isn’t concerned about your health and is not discussing this important topic, perhaps you should send them a copy of the Louisiana legislation.
If the line about insurance companies excluding damage caused by technology does not convince you of the danger, you have a lot to learn about what the statement “Follow the money” means.
In my last News With Views 5G article, I pointed out the lesser health problems scientists have linked to 4G electromagnetic fields (EMFs):
According to the EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses, there are less serious but bothersome illnesses caused by human exposure to Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs). These ailments are the result of 4G, not 5G technology (which is not broadly in use yet). Since 5G technology creates much stronger EMFs than does 4G, it is apparent why governments that are concerned about the health of their citizens are not readily accepting 5G. Here is what scientists say 4G has caused:
- Sleep disturbance/insomnia,
- Brain fog/difficulty concentrating
- Depression or anxiety
- Memory loss
- Visual disruptions/light sensitivity
- Skin problems
- Heart palpitations
I added more serious 4G problems like cancer, leukemia, reproductive problems, dangers to pregnant women, and many others. My article can also be found at a blog I created to make extensive 5G information available to the public. If you prefer video to reading, this is a great but short video I posted to the blog.
If you do not get in touch with your legislators and tell them you will not tolerate being used as a guinea pig, expect them to take the big bucks from lobbyists who represent high tech and cell phone companies and go merrily on their political way – unfortunately they may find out about the dangers when a family member gets critically ill five years from now.
The emails I received from my last 5G article were interesting. Almost all were positive and thanked me for the information. The only negatives fell in two categories: 1) a correction; and, 2) high tech geniuses who view 5G as the Holy Grail and who emphatically state that it is designed to work safely
Here are the statistics provided to me by a fact-checked article about the amount of microwatts allowed to maintain public safety by governments around the world.
USA/Canada = 1000 microwatts /cm2 (same as ICNIRP 1998)
Aukland (New Zealand) = 50 microwatts /cm2
Italy, Russia, Poland, Luxembourg, Paris (France), Hungary, Bulgaria, China, Switzerland – 2.4 to 10 microwatts /cm2
Salzburg (Austria) = 0.0001 microwatts /cm2
One reader whose husband is an electrical engineer suggested the listing for Salzburg looked ridiculously low to him. It is very low but came from a credible research source. She stated an Austrian official told her:
“Austria has imposed the WHO/ICNIRP limits for the protection of the general public from radio frequency EMF without any deviation from the recommendations by the WHO, ICNIRP and EU Council.
Any claims that there are stricter limits than ICNIRP in Austria are false.
This says that the Austrian limits are the same as the US, a factor of 10 million higher than the author claims.
When I mentioned that the values were for Salzburg, not Austria, he responded:
Not so; Austria’s levels are determined solely by the federal govt. Salzburg did request a lower level, but the request was denied. Furthermore the report is incorrect by a factor of 1000 regarding the Salzburg request. Very poor scholarship.”
I have been unable to confirm this… have been unable to contact anyone in Austria. It is relatively meaningless – other than statistics should be correct and I appreciate her efforts in trying to find the exact Salzburg microwatt limits. To me, he sounds like a typically arrogant European bureaucrat. If Austria wants to be as irresponsible to its people as Canada and the U.S.A., they’re entitled.
The comments from high tech geniuses were more difficult but in their own way made clear to me why there is so much confusion and disagreement between the “high tech experts” and the medical communities about how EMFs are supposed to behave versus how they actually interact with the electromagnetic fields our Creator gave human bodies. Quite simply, high tech experts have done no safety tests to find out how the two interact. The scientific community seems pretty sure EMFs created by technology are incompatible with the human EMFs in our bodies and are making changes to our DNA. That it is having negative results and causing disease. Techies come at the problem from a totally different perspective than scientists involving human health do.
What I know for absolute certain is this:
- We are being told lies about 4G and 5G and the dangers they bring to human life… to all animal life, to vegetation, to climate, and to weather.
One man, Ron from Grants Pass, Oregon, contacted me. He repairs the huge electric advertising billboards along our highways. He informed me that radiation is being used in those signs and that before he is allowed to do repair work on them, the signs must be turned off for the workers safety. This makes perfect sense because they are putting 5G into street lights in our neighborhoods without telling us.
- The Federal Communications Commission is about as independent of high tech companies as the Federal Drug Administration is from pharmaceutical companies.
This is important because the FCC is a perfect example of bureaucrats making laws via regulation – agencies of the government are not elected by the people, do not represent the people, but are making the regulations that make it impossible for your elected city officials to determine on your behalf whether or not a tower located close to an elementary school is safe. FCC regulations tell cities and towns that they may not refuse to build a tower just because it poses dangerous health problems… ten times greater for children than adults.
One reader, Kathie, sent two really good links which I will be posting to the blog. The first link states: “This is the consensus of 29 authors from ten countries, ten holding medical degrees (MDs), 21 PhDs, and three MsC, MA or MPHs. Among the authors are three former presidents of the Bioelectromagnetics Society, and five full members of BEMS. One distinguished author is the Chair of the Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation. Another is a Senior Advisor to the European Environmental Agency.”
The second link is about “Kill Zones USA.”
- I know that very few of you will send a copy of the Louisiana Resolution to your state legislators. Better to stay uninvolved, right? Diseases caused by EMFs are the new tobacco. Because disease doesn’t show up immediately in most cases, you’ll feel safer as each year passes… until it finally gets you and then it’s too late.
You might want to read the Urgency legislation passed by an affluent community north of San Francisco, Mill Valley. It explains the difficulties caused by the FCC regarding tower installation and how the city can maintain co-location control of what else gets placed on the tower. One of the biggest problems with new towers being installed is the FCC’s regulations which require tower owners to say “yes” to those who request to use the tower to place their technology on it, too. You end up with military, police, radio stations, and, yes, 5G, being added to your tower when you didn’t intend it – and don’t want it.
You now have in your hands copies of state (Louisiana) and city (Mill Valley) legislation that can help you convince your local legislators to stop sitting on their hands, and do their jobs: Serve the public interest.
The rest is up to you.
© 2019 Marilyn Barnewall – All Rights Reserved
E-Mail Marilyn Barnewall: firstname.lastname@example.org