Side effects, complications and concerns with 5G
While the FCC and big telecom have for all practical purpose deemed 5G safe there has been much research disagreeing with that conclusion. At the forefront of this movement is Martin Pall, PHD from Washington State University. In a 90-page paper, essentially a book, he compiled peer reviewed studies questioning the safety of 5G. Probably his biggest question/concern is that there is no research showing that 5G does not harm humans, or animals or plants for that matter. And, why is the government and big telecom ignoring hundreds of studies showing possible negative side effects of current 2G, 3G, and 4G radiation? Here is a short summary of why he believes 5G is more harmful than what we already have:
Below is a letter submitted by a group of scientists to the FCC on June 9, 2017 which shows the accelerated pace of installment and the urging of this group for further study before full implementation.
To: Federal Communications Commission
Re: Comments in opposition to FCC Docket Numbers 17-79 and 15-180
Proposed FCC rulemakings, Docket #17-79, that would accelerate wireless broadband deployment by removing barriers to infrastructure investment; and, Docket #15-180 that would revise the historic preservation review process for wireless facility deployment, will result in an increase in chronic exposure conditions from nonionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) emitted by wireless sources, classified by the World Health Organization as a Class 2B human carcinogen.
FCC is urging an accelerated deployment schedule for the 5th generation wireless infrastructure, to be installed pervasively throughout the United States. This is being done without public health review of the growing body of scientific evidence that includes reports of increasing rates of cancer and neurological diseases that may be caused by exposure to EMF from wireless sources.
FCC defines 5th generation wireless as a federal public utility and seems to have no plans for environmental monitoring or enforcement to assure public health protection. Importantly, these proposed rulemakings would further preempt states’ ability to protect the U.S. population from potentially harmful exposure conditions.
Who will protect the public? Who would people turn to should they be harmed?
The International EMF Scientist Appeal is being transmitted to support these comments as evidence of growing concern among EMF experts world-wide. This Appeal is currently signed by 225 scientists in 41 nations of the world. All of them have conducted EMF studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals that reported biological and adverse health effects caused by human-made sources of EMF. The combination of these reported findings lends credibility to the Appeal’s strong recommendation for review of the current EMF exposure guidelines set by the FCC, as these guidelines are considered to be obsolete and inadequate to protect human health and the environment.
Initiated in May 2015, this Appeal stands in making an urgent call to the United Nations, and its sub-agencies, the World Health Organization, the United Nations Environment Programme, and all UN member nations, to investigate and to address what many EMF experts now call a growing global health crisis.
The Appeal emphasizes there is greater potential for harm to children and pregnant women and calls for greater health protection for those who are more vulnerable to harm, especially persons who are electrically sensitive, who are older, or who are ill.
The FCC needs to critically consider the potential impact of the 5th generation wireless infrastructure on the health and safety of the U.S. population before proceeding to deploy this infrastructure.
For further information, we refer you to the Appeal, attached, which may also be viewed at www.emfscientist.org
On behalf of Martin Blank, Magda Havas, Henry Lai, Joel Moskowitz, and Elizabeth Kelley, Advisors to the International EMF Scientist Appeal
Attachment: The International EMF Scientist Appeal
Below are links to both of these sources if you choose more knowledge. But beware, and I say this not kiddingly, once you to down this rabbit hole it is hard to come out, or at least look at the world the same.