‘5G technology is coming to Bath and surrounding villages. We are told it will be ten times faster, boost connectivity and enable us to download movies almost instantly. But is there a cost to this speed and convenience?5G will continue to use existing frequencies in the microwave range used in 4G (up to 6 GHz) while gradually adding higher frequencies up to and including millimeter waves (3-300 GHz). Millimetre waves are known to cause damage to the skin, in particular the sweat glands, as well as the eyes and nervous system. The combination of lower and higher frequencies is particularly harmful to human health.
Studies also show significant risks to wildlife including birds, insects, trees and plants. Higher frequencies will disrupt bees’ navigation and migration systems and may even heat their bodies (source: the US Environmental Health Trust www.ehtrust.org and PHIRE www.phiremedical.org).
Due to their limited range, the rollout of 5G will require thousands of small antennas and units to be installed on every street, using existing LED street lights, telegraph poles and bus stops, resulting in unprecedented levels of radio-frequency radiation exposure for the general public. Meanwhile, planning laws were changed in February, making it difficult for local authorities and communities to object to planning applications by mobile network providers wishing to place antennas on school buildings or even on the walls of people’s homes. In addition, govt White Paper shows that thousands of trees will be felled across the UK as their foliage interferes with the 5G signal.
This technology has NEVER been safety-tested, and there has been no public consultation! There is not one study in the public domain that proves that 5G is safe for our communities and our environment.
Dr Mallery-Blythe, who has lectured around the world on this issue, will cover the following:
The latest peer-reviewed scientific studies on the biological effects of non-ionising radiation (e.g. from Wi-Fi, smart meters, 4G and 5G) including significant non-thermal effects
The current guidelines from Public Health England and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation (ICNIRP) and why they are misleading
The particular risks from wireless technology to the health of vulnerable groups e.g. babies, children, pregnant women, the elderly, chronically ill and electro-sensitive
Why 5G and smart technology are not green and will NOT help us reach climate goals
The key areas of public health and environmental concern regarding the rollout of 5G technology
What we can all do to address this urgent and important issue – the role of education, insurance and litigation.’
‘Exposure to radio waves has been carefully researched and reviewed. The overall weight of evidence does not suggest devices producing exposures within current guidelines pose a risk to public health.
Public Health England (PHE) advises the Government on appropriate public health standards for protection from exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs), or radio waves. PHE’s main advice is that the guidelines of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) should be adopted and there is no convincing evidence that exposures below the ICNIRP guideline levels cause adverse health effects. ICNIRP is formally recognised as an official collaborating non-governmental organisation by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization. ICNIRP is also consulted by the European Commission. Advice from PHE includes comprehensive scientific review reports and statements on particular topics that can be viewed at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/electromagnetic-fields.
The Government continues to support research on this topic, including the ongoing Cohort Study of Mobile Phone Use and Health (COSMOS, http://www.thecosmosproject.org/) and the Study of Cognition, Adolescents and Mobile Phone studies (SCAMP, https://www.scampstudy.org/) at Imperial College London. PHE keeps the emerging evidence under review and maintains precautionary advice that recognises exposures can be much higher when mobile phones are held to the head to make voice calls than in other situations. Similar advice is not considered necessary with the lower exposures that occur from mobile phone base stations and wireless networks.
PHE’s advice is based on EMF and health evidence reviews have been prepared by scientific expert groups in the United Kingdom (UK) and around the world. The independent Advisory Group on Non-Ionising Radiation (AGNIR) published their report in the UK in 2012 and the European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR) published their report in 2015. Links to these reviews are below:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/radiofrequency-electromagnetic-fields-health-effects
https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/health/files/scientific_committees/docs/citizens_emf_en.pdf
The main conclusion from the WHO reviews is that EMF exposures below the limits recommended in the ICNIRP guidelines do not appear to have any known consequence on health.’
Richard, there will almost certainly be a huge increase in the number of radio masts in this country. Check this out: I think that you will find that this is correct.
Tony.
>
This story should be treated sceptically. It’s worth looking at this link to get some facts:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_hypersensitivity