Genuine concerns about 5G wireless telecom/WiFi seem forsaken in protest internationally, while overstatement, misunderstanding, and questionable priorities seem to dominate.
Non-technical reader, please don’t be put off by technical language here. It’s principles we’re after, and those will be made clear. The read is suitable for newbies.
Introduction: Discusses basics, such as particulars about the signals sent through the air by wireless phones, WiFi and base station antennas, including broadcast frequencies and their designations.
The very important distinction is made, traditionally and still frequently overlooked in “5G” opposition, that “5G” wireless isn’t one thing, but two – based on frequency ranges.
Priorities: Discusses questionable emphasis by activists, even scientists, when conveying the “risks” of commercial wireless systems.
Appeal for a “safe,” or “safer,” or “biologically based” radiation exposure level is ill-advised, futile – and unscientific: “Safe” is impossible to establish with laboratory studies and testing.
Most concerning may be, however, that living things need not be directly irradiated to be harmed and killed by wireless radiation.
Biological effects, All Gs: Discusses the biophysics of specific biological effects and the threat of extreme exposure variability during daily use – or no use.
The radiation isn’t ‘toxic,’ as often said. Effects concern electrical engineering and physics, not chemistry, even though chemical consequences occur.
“5G” Hysteria Review: Various assertions seen and heard since the “Stop 5G!” meme was born are evaluated for cogency/accuracy. The “Stop 5G!” Manifesto-in-Effect (5GM-E) is introduced.
5G: Specific/Potential Threats: With one possible exception, not “5G” frequencies, but new antenna systems, pose the greater threat in both 5G ranges. 5G signals possess the factors that make 2G-4G a persistent, imminently terminal threat to life – in a sense making popular “5G” opposition anticlimactic.
Past, Present, and Future of Wireless: Proof is given that harms were known internationally 2-3 decades before 2G arrived, but deliberately dismissed for nefarious reasons, including a far-reaching surveillance/control-system agenda.
The history and consequences of the context of wireless tech are discussed: Advanced technology per se.
It might be argued that if technociety will not quit all wireless systems at the consumer/use level, we should welcome 5G, since it might shorten the period of extreme agony certain to come from technociety’s long-term, unquestioning, terminally pathological, embrace of phones and WiFi.
The radio signal coming to, and emitted by, your phone or other wireless device has electric and magnetic properties – electromagnetic. “EMF” indicates electromagnetic field, which can be stationary. But the term is often used for a field in motion, or electromagnetic radiation (EMR), i.e., the telecom/WiFi signal. It’s also called radio frequency (RF).
Below is a crude representation of a radiated signal. Wavelength is the distance in meters (and fractions) between wave peaks. “Frequency” is the rate at which peaks repeat per second, designated in “Hertz” (Hz). The diagram shows one Hertz, or one cycle, per second.
The trough below the line indicates the artificial, continuous wave is polarized, meaning opposing energies – ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ – like a battery or magnet – and alternating. Of paramount importance, polarization occurs as the wave is generated. (Amplitude is intensity.)
Frequency designations are: Up to 999 cycles, Hz is used. One thousand to 999,999, it’s kilohertz KHz. One million to 999,999,999 million, megahertz MHz. For the billions, gigahertz GHz, and THz, trillions. Per second. Staggers the mind.
Frequencies allotted to mobile service providers, such as 1900 MHz (common to AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile), are called “carrier frequencies”. They carry ‘embedded,’ or encoded, content, but are not themselves the content – also of paramount importance.
Station numbers on AM/FM (KHz/MHz) radios are carrier frequencies. The tuner isolates the desired station carrier from the antenna, and a ‘demodulator’ extracts the embedded content – voice and music.
Telecom/WiFI carriers fall within the ‘microwave’ frequency range, 300 MHz – 300 GHz. Same stuff as in ovens, but different frequencies, and modified. Oven microwave is polarized, though.
Knowing what’s meant/intended by the term ‘5G,’ frequently unspecified in opposition messaging – even in field studies – is essential to meaningful discussion. Also helpful is awareness of dubious assertions informing most protest. We’ll start with the term.
3GPP. The 3rd Generation Partnership Project is a global partnership of standards organizations that develop technical protocols for phones and WiFi. In February 2017, 3GPP issued a “5G NR” (New Radio) international wireless standard/concept, specifying two frequency ranges: 5G NR bands FR1 and 5G NR bands FR2.
Quotation-marked “5G” is used here to indicate unspecified FR. If 5G appears here without quotes and without mlb or mmw, it means common to both. “Content” means all information transmitted wirelessly, from text to video.
FR1 covers traditional telecom/WiFi carriers, most below 6 GHz, including 600 MHz, 1900 MHz, and 2.4 GHz (with at least 2 new ones added to the range for 5G). Collectively, FR1 is called either ‘sub-6 GHz’ or mid-/low-band (MLB). Some tech writers differentiate between mid-band and low-band, but it’s irrelevant here. We’ll call FR1 5Gmlb for accuracy, because the actual range is defined a bit higher than 6, to 7.125 GHz.
FR2 covers “millimeter wave” (MMW), the higher-frequency range added for 5G to the original ‘stable.’ By wavelength, the MMW range is 10 millimeters to 1 mm (c. 30 GHz to c. 300 GHz). But it’s being stretched downward commercially in the US to begin at 24 GHz (even lower elsewhere).
Licensed frequencies in the US for mobile reach 47 GHz, higher for special applications (not mobile – for example, “fixed wireless” Internet). FR2 is designated 5Gmmw.
5Gmmw signals are especially susceptible to attenuation and blocking. There’s some difference of opinion on how susceptible. There’s no doubt, however, their transmission can be compromised by obstacles 5Gmlb barely ‘sees.’
Generally, the higher the frequency, the worse transmission challenge gets. Even leaves and heavy rain can be trouble for MMW (particularly within a certain range of frequencies, as discussed later). Hence, the many antenna installations for instantaneous re-direction. The noted downward stretch could be an attempt at compromise between content-carrying capacity/speed and transmission challenges.
If encountering interference, as in urban settings, MMW beams must be re-routed instantly via the antenna relay system. Signals are even bounced off buildings and other permanent objects. Otherwise, 5Gmmw fails.
Re-routing must involve milliseconds to avoid unacceptable signal delay (latency), something not good at all for autonomous vehicles (a horrible idea anyway).
WiFi still runs mostly in the traditional bands, 2.4 (2.4 – 2.495) GHz and 5 (5.170-5.835) GHz. But in April 2020, FCC opened “6 GHz” (5.925 – 7.125), unlicensed, for WiFi (“6E”), and routers are expensively around. Still basically FR1, though.
Principle: Due to key differences in 5G FR1 and 2, the range/frequency at hand must be noted. Not doing so can lead to misunderstanding, confusion and even unnecessary angst. And it’s used in ‘making cases’ in “5G” opposition.
For example, here’s an article about massive bird die-off when AT&T and USAF conducted a joint exercise. “In August 2020, an AT&T 5G antenna array at White Sands Missile Range went operational…” AT&T owns two 5G frequencies – 850 MHz (MLB) and 39 GHz (MMW). Which was used? We aren’t told.
From the article: The Department of the Interior warned in 2014 about the deadly effects of RF-EMF on birds. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/files/ntia/us_doi_comments.pdf
Research has shown that EMF frequencies affect their navigation and disorient birds. https://kompetenzinitiative.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/ki_beesbirdsandmankind_screen.pdf
2014. No 5G in sight. It seems, then, that 8/2020, nasty as it was, is part of a trend? Is blaming it all on “5G” ‘making cases’? Especially when no one knows how compromised by RF exposure, or otherwise weakened, the birds were prior to this incident (predisposition is a major factor, and goes for all living things – even humans 🙂
Moreover, incidents have been more widespread, and several factors may be involved, including wireless directly, massive fires, and loss of food sources for avian insectivores (wireless involved again). But have a look at this Nature article from 1966! High output power was used, but heating was ruled out. One general factor seems common to most threats, however: Self-involved, oblivious techno-human recklessness. This brings us to…
In any case, there should be great angst about all wireless systems, regardless of G: The greatest direct threat by far is not to humans, but to Earth’s ecosystem. From 2G-4G base stations and user devices, and the onrushing threat of satellite radiation.
Overall, environmental concern has increased more recently, but the sense for this writer is, “Where were you when life needed you?” It could already be too late. The literature is beginning to burst with studies – and alarm.
Eco/suicide tends to get a bit lost in hysteria informing “5G” opposition. Campaigners have traditionally wanted “safe” radiation or/and fiberoptic cable, aka “safe tech” — for humans.
An example in the exposure matter is a petition launched by the European Citizens’ Initiative Project, whose motto is “Stop (((5G))) – Stay Connected but Protected.” Oxymoron? More connected in that sense can mean more threatened. And ‘connection’ via technology has been replacing direct, face-to-face interaction, one essential of being human.
If the petition had been successful, European Commission and Parliament would have been pressured to enact regulations to protect health, nature, and privacy.
The expression ‘cross purposes’ may apply, however. If wireless telecom/WiFi – any G – remains in general use, there can be no health protection, as we’ll see. Privacy is also in serious question, despite assurances. And Nature is fast approaching ‘done for.’
The petition reflects a ‘fatal’ approach in wireless activism: Futile appeal to universally compromised authority for futile change. Rarely, if ever, is seen a state, national or international legislative/regulatory pie with no special-interest fingers in it.
There’s also reason to wonder if some individuals, organizations and campaigns seeking change are entirely what they seem. Today, there’s barely a site or scientist even hinting, never mind emphasizing, in effect, ‘For survival, society may need to terminate wireless systems.’
Or/and maybe people can get so fired up to champion a ‘good cause,’ they impetuously jump on a bandwagon? Especially one that ‘allows’ for what they may think they can’t live without? Try taking a phone away from someone.
“Stop Wireless!” instead of “Stop 5G!” Not a very popular idea. But threatening all life for what is mostly mobile convenience begs for disaster. You can’t ‘dance with the devil’ and come away clean. And nobody wants mobile/wireless more than the ‘security’/surveillance state, data miners, and control-system psychopaths (the very devil).
Europe has at least begun to recognize potential cost, seen in this March 2020 report from the European Parliamentary Research Service, which states, for one thing, that “5G” is much more expensive to deploy, and that to reach connectivity targets for 2025, will cost an estimated €500 billion. Typically, cost to planet/nature is omitted.
But in a roiling sea of radiation from multiple antennas of various purpose, eminently capable of ecosystem and human-health calamity with no 5Gmmw present, fretting about “5G” is like worrying about a hoisted piano that could fall, while another is well on its way to your noggin.
One great irony bearing witness to self-involved, techno-human eco/suicide is that the science called environmental health isn’t about the health of the environment, but the threat to humans from technociety’s horrendous abuse of it. Can we get over ourselves?
Real-life disaster. A local environment – the Greek island Samos – has been profoundly affected by the installation of a suspected 5G (antenna specs required to be certain), possibly including MMW. But the culprit could be MLB. A meter (range limit 8 GHz) gave intense peak readings, including one huge one, indicating 4G frequencies.
From an 8/29/22 email: Life here is getting very bad. The seas are empty, the birds are dying out, the insects are down to maybe 5% of what there used to be, and everyone’s crops were poor or failed altogether.
From a 9/5/22 email: …the speed at which insects have declined since last July (2021) is something else again. Virtually all the beetles are gone – everywhere. Much more affected than the pollinators, even. Other insects too, like grasshoppers and crickets and mantises.
The people there with whom I’m in contact are also suffering greatly. But here are the things that have affected us since those 5G panels went up everywhere last July, and they’ve been worse since 5G went live here this July .
- My husband has constant, often debilitating nausea. A shielded hat helps.
- We both have sinus problems. Mine are much worse.
- We both have trouble with cognitive issues. We forget things easily and have trouble concentrating. I often find myself going to the wrong place to do the wrong thing, not at all what I set out to do. We have trouble remembering which word we want to use, or the names of things. It is very distressing.
- Wounds don’t heal easily, and this affects our dogs, too.
- We both suffer from radiation burns, which are getting worse. They can happen anywhere, at any time. You don’t feel them, but then you look at your hand/arm/in the mirror and there they are, sometimes bleeding. I attach a picture of a recent one I got on my arm, blood and all.
- We both have a sort of tinnitus. His went away since he started wearing the shielded hat a lot. Mine went away but it’s come back, a sort of woo-woo sound like a whistling kettle in the distance.
- We both feel that the sunlight burns our skin in a way it never has before. We find being in the sun virtually unbearable, and seek shade all the time. When we go swimming we go late to a beach that is in the shade.
All these things suggest that there is more/a new type of EMR in the environment.
Could the skin lesion reflect local heat damage from “transmission bursts,” as discussed below in the Neufeld and Kuster paper in sub-section Two Special Potential 5G Threats?
I’m not certain this can be definitively investigated, or of the time frame required. This article will be updated if further specifics are found. Meanwhile, please see a masterful observational record, by the owner of that forearm, of what’s happened to the local flora and fauna since the new antenna system was installed.
The record is a truly remarkable example of intimate awareness – and love – of one’s local natural environment. Many millions more ‘Dianas’ are needed in the world: 5G Cell Towers Cause Massive Insect Decline on the Greek island of Samos. Careful attention, please, to the words of David Attenborough at the beginning. It’s what’s happenin’ folks!
As of this writing, the agony on Samos continues to worsen. Diana says contacts elsewhere are reporting similar scenarios. One in Osaka, Japan: 90% of dragonflies, bees, butterflies, spiders, and ladybirds gone. No snails since 2015. One in Thailand: beetles, flies and mosquitoes are virtually gone, sparrows and swallows aren’t breeding, geckos are starving to death. Coming one day to your neighborhood?
There’s a collection of environmental studies on EMFs in general here. (site features self-protection paraphernalia). Here’s another series of enviro-studies, with detailed information. And here, with detailed technical discussion and 379 related references (there may be some overlap in references).
BioInitiative. Following release in 2007 of the impressive compilation of EMR science papers called the BioInitiative Report (BR) — expanded 2012, updated 2014-2022 — the wireless technology ‘cautionary community,’ if you will, began to build steam. But threat to life per se somehow took a back seat to human concerns, intensifying a double existential threat to humans – directly by radiation and indirectly by maintaining/worsening threat to Nature.
Also, valuable work notwithstanding (3,800 papers!), the BR subtitle, “A rationale for biologically based exposure limits” begs two very big questions – that a safe exposure level exists, and that safety can be established with studies or/and testing. Or otherwise. See next section.
Making things worse, then, popular wisdom from scientists and product hawkers about ‘self-protection’ (exposure reduction), like shielding, tower ‘setbacks,’ turning off the WiFi at night, and so on, intensifies the double threat by encouraging use instead of “Quit.”
Self-protection is deceptive, ultimately futile, thus dangerous in the long run – or maybe a run much shorter than most people want to imagine or acknowledge – onto the slippery slope of environmental collapse. No one knows when we hit that point of no return. A bit more urgency seems to be in order.
A growing number of people do have unpleasant to debilitating overt symptoms called EHS, or ‘electrohypersensitivity’ (also EMS, electromagnetic sensitivity, microwave syndrome, EMF syndrome, and microwave sickness). Paraphernalia can help them function. Protective measures are no general prophylactic, however, as sometimes implied. They can be expensive, and one must be wary of shielding.
Principle: Even if EHS symptoms abate or cease due to exposure reduction, harm (biological effects) never stops under any exposure level. So ‘OES’ – overt electrosensitivity – might be a more accurate term, signifying the fundamental EM sensitivity of all life?
A word on Shungite, a mineral becoming the ‘rage’ for EMF protection. Science on it is scarce to say the least. Even proponents and ‘believers,’ however, say it’s not complete protection, but will ‘reduce exposure’ and harm. So, beware.
Also, the mineral is found mainly in Russia, which means, for one thing, the area could become a target for plunder. Nor am I sure, even though it may interfere with radiation, that a pendant on a necklace will have the desired effect for the entire body.
Most concerning may be that living things need not be irradiated directly at all to be harmed and killed by radiating technology. This pertains to life’s connection to, or oneness with, the planet’s energy envelope.
A quote from Amphibians In the Mine, a 3/27/23 newsletter by Arthur Firstenberg:
What is completely neglected in the sciences of biology, medicine and ecology, is our electrical connection to earth and sky. As I discuss in chapter 9 of my book, The Invisible Rainbow, we are all part of the global electrical circuit that courses through the sky above us, flows down to earth on atmospheric ions and raindrops … healthy, vigorous young adults and pregnant women died in the largest numbers in the 1918 flu, caused not by a virus but by the use of enormously powerful VLF radio stations by the United States … The same thing happened in 1889 (introduction of AC electricity), 1957 (first construction of civil defense radars), and 1968 (first constellation of military satellites).
In each case—in 1889, 1918, 1957, and 1968—the electrical envelope of the earth, to which we are all attached by invisible strings, was suddenly and profoundly disturbed. Those for whom this attachment was strongest, whose roots were most vital, whose life’s rhythms were tuned most closely to the accustomed pulsations of our planet — in other words, vigorous, healthy young adults, and pregnant women — those were the individuals who most suffered and died. Like an orchestra whose conductor has suddenly gone mad, their organs, their living instruments, no longer knew how to play.
Salamanders, toads and frogs have more vitality than other forms of life. The density of their strings — their meridians — that connect them to earth and sky is greater. It is why they rarely (and salamanders never) get cancer: both their external and internal communication systems are too strong for their cells to escape control. It is why frogs can partially regenerate lost limbs, and salamanders can regenerate them completely. It is why salamanders can even regenerate their heart — and do it within hours — if half of it is cut out — an astounding fact discovered by Dr. Robert O. Becker and written about in chapter 10 of his classic book, The Body Electric [my link – pt].
It’s also why amphibians are dying out. Animals with such a strong connection to Earth’s orchestra — who are so attuned to it that they have survived for 365 million years — cannot withstand … the chaos that we have injected into the living circuitry with our radio and TV stations, our radar facilities, our cell phones and cell towers, and our satellites.
… in 1996, when parades of cell towers were marching from coast to coast in the United States, and at tourist destinations, mutant frogs were turning up by the thousands in pristine lakes, streams and forests in at least 32 states. Their deformed legs, extra legs, missing legs, missing eyes, misplaced eyes, misshapen tails, and whole-body deformities frightened school children…
Photo above shows part of the Monteverde Cloud Forest Biological Preserve in Costa Rica, mentioned in the Amphibian article. Is there better testament to oblivious techno-idiocy normalized, and psychopath exploitation of a form of collective mental illness?
Finally, popular “5G” opposition has thus far focused on ground installations, mostly human consequences. Maybe it should be switched to exclusive focus on planetary massacre via satellite? Mad Elon’s satellite/frequency debacle, Starlink, is joined by numerous corporates assaults.
Direct Biological Effects, All Gs
There are two key issues involved in the safety-level question. 1) Scientifically speaking, power level alone (relative to a frequency range), is an entirely inadequate measure by which to establish ‘safe.’ 1A) Corollary: including all critical radiation characteristics in the measure becomes forbiddingly complex.
2) The ‘kicker.’ Several indeterminable, unpredictable, uncontrollable, rapidly changing variables inherent in real-life use (in the ‘field’), but necessarily absent in controlled environments – studies and testing – make it impossible to establish ‘safe’ — for all life forever.
Discussing the above two issues and making the ‘impossible’ case: Giving Life the Electric Chair — The Plain Physics & Biophysics of Phone & WiFi Radiation. In plain language for all, and with science references, it shows that subtle biological effects leading to overt symptomologies are caused by polarization inherent in all carrier frequencies, acting through variations called pulsing and modulation (puls/mod – all together, PPM).
Pulsing is about signal modification for best transmission; modulation is for adding content to the carrier, as noted. Puls/mod runs in the extremely-low-frequency (ELF) range (3-3,000) Hz, and is 100 Hz and below in all digital wireless iterations – 2G and up.
Principle: PPM radiation disrupts regulatory and metabolic biological elements by literally ‘oscillating’ (shaking) them. Bio/physics reveals that this creates new disruptive fields, which then manifest at some point as overt illness.
We’ll see later that a similar effect – additional, disruptive EM fields – not directly related to PPM could happen in 5Gmmw.
Biological effects occur with any exposure, whether corresponding symptoms have appeared yet or not. And they’re cumulative over time. As we’ll see later, the distinction between biological effects and symptoms of illness is critical.
Also important is that the radiation isn’t “toxic,” as often suggested. ‘Toxic’ applies to substances – chemistry. Biological effects involve electrical engineering and physics/biophysics. The effect is akin to static in your AM/FM radio, which can come from an unshielded or improperly shielded external source – an electric motor, for example. It’s called RadioFrequency Interference – RFI.
Since no charged or polar element in any biological fluid, cell, tissue, organ or system exposed to radiation can ‘escape,’ illness potential is quite impressive. Electric Chair, provides a long list of pathologies from 2G-4G found in the literature. And that’s in controlled conditions, not the real world of massive, unpredictable EM chaos.
Menacing situation. In general, cause/effect between the known/common radiation-caused symptomologies revealed in the literature, on one hand, and society’s hefty and escalating disease statistics, on the other, is not generally being recognized. It’s virtually certain that the contribution of wireless telecom/WiFi to common (and even uncommon) illness – directly and indirectly – is huge. This goes double for ecosystem illness. A dangerous false sense of security is being conveyed.
Even if aware (most aren’t), doctors generally have no way of identifying biological effects and relating them to pathology. People may think their illness is ‘usual,’ go to the doc for a pill or whatever, and toss it off. Physicians may treat symptoms, but the only ‘cure’ is zero radiation.
Again, it’s crucial to keep in mind that even if overt symptoms abate or cease due to exposure reduction, harm never stops under any exposure level.
Electromagnetism is the foundation of life.
In general, if you see/hear that FCC safety standards are “outdated,” be wary. It’s irresponsible rhetoric for effect. How can a standard that was never ‘dated’ — valid/good for anything but ruthless deception in the first place — be outdated? There’s an exception, in that 5G antenna technology itself, as opposed to frequencies, hasn’t been properly tested for safety. Few, if any protesters even mention it. Performance testing is a big challenge, never mind safety testing.
Ironically, no wireless technology has ever been ‘officially’ properly tested for safety. Not even ‘unofficially” (i.e., independently) – another ‘impossible.’ Be wary also, if you see/hear that anything wireless can be made “safer.” Saf-ER is not safe! Period. And implies ‘sacrifice.’
“5G” Hysteria/Looking Glass Review
[Section is long – c. 2500 words – due to the number and variety of questionable claims informing “5G” opposition. If the reader is certain of clarity on this, just scan or skip it.]
Popular opposition to commercial “5G” wireless can and does lead to distraction from the fundamental issue: Artificial, polarized, digitalized, pulsed, modulated microwave radiation. Regardless of G.
Manifesto. Quite ironic is that almost invariably, concern about the danger of “5G” refers to what’s known about the harms of 2G-4G or just RF/EMF 🙂 Thus we have a demonstration of straight-faced ’convenient rationalization’ — the Stop “5G” Manifesto-in-Effect (5GM-E): We know how dangerous, even ultimately fatal, 2G-4G are, so we better stop “5G” or we’ll be more dead.
As noted, scientifically speaking, power level alone (technically, ‘power flux density’), is an entirely inadequate measure by which to establish ‘safe’ – even without complications in the field (see Electric Chair). Additional radiation characteristics are critical. Doesn’t it seem odd, even troubling, that the scientific community persists in making appeals based on it? And to compromised authorities to boot? Not to mention a major court action against the FCC?
Fiber. The suggestion to use fiberoptic is (relatively) great, but where, for decades, has direct advice to users been: “QUIT wireless!” thereby sending a message to industry to convert? Shall we beg the mad dog not to bite us? Will the other shoe ever drop?
One can bet that most signees of the noted Euro petition, for example, are/will be wireless/smart phone users. “5G” opposition rallies have been ‘filmed’ on pre-5G phones. ‘Smart’ is Orwellian for dumb-as-hell: Phones. Or meters. Appliances/gadgets. Homes. Or, especially, cities.
Wireless and “5G”. Hysteria has even created this expression (unspecified 5G, of course), as if it’s not wireless, but some new creature from the black lagoon. There are indeed significant differences from previous Gs, but also sufficient pathological parallels to make “Stop 5G!” the same as fretting about a wildfire a mile away while your house is burning down.
So there’s yet another “be wary” when you see/hear it (either way – ‘wireless and 5G’ or ‘5G and wireless’), as here. (Interesting, the same case is cited here, and each outfit takes the main credit 🙂
Small cells are not small! The dreaded small cell is not an antenna/base station, as commonly suggested, referring to hefty installations. A fine point, really, but clarifying, and exemplifying the carelessness informing “5G” protest: A cell is the area covered by antenna radiation.
The usable reach of 4G macro installations (estimates/conditions vary) is 5-24 miles in all directions (and biologically active well beyond that). Barring major obstacles, 5Gmmw cells cover much smaller areas, 1500 feet to a mile unobstructed. Small cells are indeed small.
There’s even a claim on a quite prominent site that “small cell” is used by the industry to mean shorter cell towers 🙂 Such confusion is unfortunate, whether from unawareness or as a ploy for ‘making cases.’
Millions of antennas. We’ve also been favored with the ‘scary’ notion – also stated in testimonies to legislative committees – that “5G” will require millions of new antennas on Your Street USA, across the nation. Pure hype-steria.
There was no intention, as 5Gmmw systems were being introduced to large cities in 2019, to deploy MMW outside populous urban areas and attendant neighborhoods. Verizon CEO Hans Vestberg confirmed the limitation in April 2019.
T-Mobile (with Sprint attached) had the first nationwide 5G deployment (8/2020) at 600 MHz. They also own 2.5 GHz. And 28 & 39 GHz bands for populous customer bases.
“5G” isn’t faster! Deceptive non-argument. It’s evolving as it’s being rolled out, so there’s still potential, albeit limitation. As we’ll see below, one of the potential threats of 5Gmmw is based on content transfer rates potentially achievable as technology advances. But even if the 5Gmmw ‘prediction’ isn’t reached, but still outperforms 4G (speed is only one feature), it will be very ‘fast enough.’
Power consumption. There is legitimate complaint that “5G” consumes excessive power, usually based on FCC specifications for 5Gmmw antenna installations, which use beamforming antennas — narrow beams precisely aimed at devices (both 5G NR ranges use it, more later).
Collectively, 5Gmmw antenna enclosures do comprise an energy hog. But it’s also been claimed, ominously, that the beams are very high power. But beamforming doesn’t ipso facto result in a high-power beam.
Base station specs are set to provide potential for all antennas in a single enclosure – from 128 to more than a thousand – to operate at once; not that the output potential of each enclosure is funneled into one or a few beams.
Since there’s no intent/need with MMW to penetrate objects, but to skirt them, beams can be kept at lower output levels, moderating individual base-station power consumption – a ‘weak point’ of wireless in general, of which the industry is aware.
Distancing. This applies to all Gs. In the name of progress, we’ve got sincere, but perhaps misguided/misinformed people promoting tower ‘setbacks’ – away from homes/schools/buildings – for ‘distancing’ (not again! 🙂 to reduce exposure, while devices are being used from those structures to connect to the setback tower.
Aided and abetted by scientists, ‘educators’ and user addiction, such unawareness has led to surveys having found that homebuyers are less attracted to a property in proximity to a cell tower/antenna.
From a recent educator email warning about danger: A survey by the National Institute for Science, Law & Public Policy found that homebuyers are “less interested and would pay less” for a property located near a cell tower/antenna.
We aren’t told whether it pertains to radiation danger or just the unpleasant visual effect 🙂
It goes on: For more information, resources, and a historical timeline including the reasons … communities are stepping up to protect their residents – scan the QR code to the right using your mobile phone camera…
And “EHS” victims have been encouraged to submit testimony about their distressing experiences: Have someone record you using a phone in horizontal position…
Thus, the danger-warning email reinforces phone use/dependency, thus ownership; emphasizes tower radiation, while elsewhere advising wired devices. And wired is called “safe tech.” Whereas, if the planet’s well-being is taken into account, there’s no such thing (more later.)
But if you send any information around by email, make sure you’re connecting to a distant or set-back antenna. Maybe you’ll believe you’re saf-ER, anyway.
Principle: Any antenna to which life is exposed is too close – including life in the new tower location. Rather than the responsible thing, we’ll just protect our precious selves, increasing the double threat. Not to mention. relocating a tower is a massive, fossil-intensive operation, creating two areas of destroyed land.
“5G” the health threat. It’s disconcerting to see so many sites claiming the ‘scoop’ on “5G,” misleading readers one way or another. For example, a prominent site tells us that the insurance industry considers “5G” high risk. It refers to a 2019 publication called SONAR, from Swiss Re Institute, an annual emerging-risk report to the insurance industry.
You have to register and download to read, but most risks in the document concern such things as cyber exposures (attacks), information security, and even national sovereignty. Concerning health, a key quotation (emphasis added):
Growing concerns of the health implications of 5G [unspecified – pt] may lead to political friction and delay of implementation, and to liability claims. The introductions of 3G (c.2002) and 4G faced similar challenges.
As early as 1999, Lloyd’s of London underwriter group Stirling announced refusal to insure device manufacturers against claims under product liability. By 2003 – still 3G – it was most difficult, if not impossible, for manufacturers to acquire insurance against health claims. Typically, they informed stockholders, though not consumers! But that nasty “5G” you know… “5G health threat” =s 5GM-E?
The June 2013 edition of Swiss Re SONAR concluded that “Unforeseen Consequences of Electromagnetic Fields” rank “High,” accompanied by “Nanotechnology.” They ranked above such “Medium” risks as “Toxic Substances” and, of all things, Emerging Infectious Diseases.
Given many decades of easily accessed incriminating EMF/wireless-tech research, might “Unforeseen Consequences…” have been: “Unsought, Ignored, Dismissed, therefore ‘Unforeseen’ Consequences…”?
And we even get the occasional screamer, like this page, telling us “5G” is …an electromagnetic energy that’s hard to see and runs at higher speeds… I guess we can agree, “invisible” makes it a bit hard to see 🙂
One can continue discussing ‘case-making’ folly. It seems overall as if there’s as much, if not more, misinformation than fact. As of this writing, for example, there’s a petition to boycott “5G” phones. 5GM-E? What of the dire threat of 2G-4G and the urgent need to quit? Please see my comment here.
Resonance. There may be legitimate claims of MMW carrier-frequency resonance with organisms, especially with insects. Absorption (computer-model study) can be a factor in insect heating. MMW resonance may also be a factor in humans, especially in the skin. The research, however, seems to assume the continuous cell saturation of traditional antenna systems.
Speed again. There is a scenario where MMW can create deeper effects in organisms, but not involving resonance or absorption. Critical to the discussion below in Potential Threats… is that the mad-dog content-transfer techurbators are barking up the speed-bone tree, and an effect dependent on content transfer rate involves carrier frequency. If desired speed can’t be had with 5Gmmw, they’ll go to 6G, which is now in development. They’ll go to it anyway.
Not tested for safety! Based on frequency, the gripe that “5G” hasn’t been tested (by industry) for safety is invalid for three reasons: 1) It’s not the industry’s job; 2) The most recent ANSI/IEEE C95.1-2019 guideline covers 0 to 300 GHz (includes all 5G frequencies); 3) Below heating level, PPM is the main culprit, and never out of the picture even though there are certain MMW carrier-frequency concerns. The safety-testing complaint should apply to the entire telecom/WiFi frequency range.
Grand irony: All pre-5 Gs have been independently tested – for decades – found to be extremely harmful, and yet are widely embraced – even by most “5G” opposers, as far as I’ve seen. If only hypocrisy stunk like you-know-what 🙂 Could be the “more dead” rationale?
Or, we just wish to know precisely how we’re killing life, and then it will be OK, as it is with 2G-4G? Wait! It must be the “densification” issue. Well, I won’t touch that one…
Why isn’t the call, “Stop All Gs until (properly) safety tested!”? Or, “No G was ever (properly) safety tested!” Might we simply speak the whole truth for a change? It’s the only thing that hasn’t been tried yet.
Since the hue and cry about “5G” frequency danger doesn’t rule out PPM, there’s no practical need to be concerned about it. If you have concern, just QUIT — any G. Widespread, that will stop 5. Using any supports all. ‘Stop 5, dance with 4’ = recipe for extinction.
“5G” is a weapon! The most commonly used MMW frequencies in the US are from about 24 to 40 or so GHz, although as noted, as high as 47 GHz is currently licensed. Early in the growing “5G” hysteria, tech news spoke of up to 90 GHz (not for mobile).
90 GHz – shades of the military’s microwave Active Denial System (ADS), a ‘non-lethal’ crowd control/dispersal weapon operating at 95 GHz. “5G” opposers – even some scientists – jumped on this as proof that, “5G is a weapon!”
Downplayed/ignored was that both bands were way above mobile or broadband frequencies at the time. And ADS power levels were/are dimensions beyond mobile telecom and wireless Internet.
But if one wants to talk weapon, the entire frequency range of wireless telecom/WiFi is a multi-weapon: Ecocide, illness/slow-genocide, and surveillance/control/enslavement (the primary reason for its implementation). We might do well to keep these issues uppermost in mind. And not fool ourselves it’s progress – on any score – if we “Stop 5G!”
Sweat-duct antennas. There’s been a claim that sweat ducts are MMW wave antennas. It’s theoretical, a bit controversial, and apparently confined to frequencies within the range called “sub-Terahertz” (90 to 275 GHz – a bit of techno-madness mostly experimental now).
But in 2019, “5G” hysteriacs jumped all over this study – 5/2018, frequency range 75-110 GHz, based on possible future developments – as if it was an immediate threat. Making cases?
Skin and eyes. There’s warning that “5G” affects skin and eyes. Importantly, we’re not seeing a ‘wave’ of such symptoms in cities where 5Gmmw broadband and especially mobile, are deployed. One factor may be that 5Gmmw mobile hasn’t become sufficiently widespread.
Again, MMW won’t be widely deployed, on the ground, outside major urban areas and their neighborhoods, where “fixed wireless” broadband Internet significantly reduces chance of human contact compared to mobile.
For example, the upper left section of the picture in this article shows Verizon’s wireless internet (28 or 39 GHz) being brought into the home by wire from an outside receiver. The beam will not hit the house. As noted, If meeting an obstacle, it would be re-routed instantly.
Another factor, even clothing and eye/sunglasses could protect anywhere from partially to completely. Who knows, the tinfoil hat could come into its own 🙂
Harm when “5G” was turned on. This includes warnings about health effects especially of the sensitivity/syndrome variety. Important questions arise, however, which will be addressed later.
Insect killer. This YouTube video was found in an article claiming “5G” is the worst insect killer of all wireless tech. It’s quite the mixture of sense and nonsense, repeating some of the foibles noted herein, not to mention containing a traitorous genuflect to wireless (5:35).
The idea that direct “5G” radiation is going to make it far worse on insects is questionable, because, as noted, MMW (on the ground) will be used mainly in large/populous urban environments, where insects are already on the run, if not absent. And in the US, widespread 5G will rely heavily on MLB, especially 6 GHz (the needs of the coming global control system are something else again).
No doubt insects have drastically declined globally, but where telecom/Wifi is involved, it’s certainly due to MLB radiation. So 5GM-E raises its woeful head once again. The present article should equip the reader to see through, and distinguish wheat from chaff in general.
Given the irrefutable fact that governmental and international agencies lie about the safety of telecom/WiFi radiation, however, should the possibility be acknowledged that misinformation exists about how any G operates, or could operate? With so many antennas in our midst, and microwave mind control a reality – here and here, does an unsettling question exist?
The dumb-as-hell phone is already, and is becoming more each day, a remote control for people, like we have for the TV. It’s already central to NATO’s/Western militaries’ new battlefield: Your brain (search page for ‘cell phone’).
If you ‘just can’t live without it,’ you might need to check yourself – a heroin addict’s got nothing on you. This deadly drug’s legal, relentlessly pushed, and being made more ‘indispensable’ by the hour. Wireless Anonymous, anyone?
5G: Specific/Potential Threats
Disclaimer. Three qualifications for this section: 1) 5G signal transmission technology is enormously complex. For a taste, just scan down this page. See menu at left. Here’s another. It’s the Rube Goldberg machine of communications 🙂 Simplification is needed in describing it.
2) Technology moves so rapidly, what’s true ‘today’ could change, even drastically, ‘tomorrow.’
For example, satellite projects originally appeared to be for broadband Internet. But an ‘alliance’ recently occurred between T-Mobile and Starlink to connect 5Gmlb phones to satellites (the madness never stops) at 1900 MHz. 4G.
The satellite “goal” is to …cover remote areas … some villages, deserts, mountains and remote areas, with an objective to cover the dead zones. Wrong verb there? Should it be (eventually) “to create” dead zones – environmentally speaking?
3) information can conflict from one site or report to another, compounded by the annoying habit of not dating articles.
A momentous development adopted in 5G is an antenna system called Multiple Input Multiple Output – MIMO (my-mo). In other words, an array handling several signals at once. It’s been used for a long time internationally in MLB applications.
New with 5G, however, is “massive” MIMO (MM), many antenna elements (as noted, from 128 to more than 1,000), handling a huge number of signals at once. Technically, it’s called a phased array. It provides for beamforming, and while most 5G hysteria has focused on frequencies, antenna/transmission technology shows far more potential for trouble. And again, PPM is always with us.
Beamforming is extremely tech-sticky. Early on in 5G tech info, the message was that a phone had to call for service before a base station antenna activated. Things have apparently changed dramatically. There are now four types, apparently not equal in potential biological effect, called Beam Management Phases (technical).
A particularly nasty phase seems to be “beam sweeping” – the base station sends beams in multiple directions at very short specific time intervals in a range of milliseconds (thousandths of a second). Phones can home in.
A better one seems to be “beam measurement,” apparently the one where the user device calls for service before a base station emits. It’s technically safer than traditional pre-5G wireless, which saturates the cell 24/7 whether called or not — one reason why Nature is at such peril.
Principle: At least three 5G beam management phases seem to involve considerable ongoing, multi-directional radiation. Biophysical chaos.
Depending on beaming method, given the unlikelihood that flora and fauna will be calling for mobile service, 5G technology could pose less of a threat to environment and health than traditional, saturating wireless.
As noted, small cells are indispensable for MMW. But 5Gmlb can use MM from existing macro towers, or small-cell installations. It has traditional range and penetration, but shorter delay, while promising greater speed — the dream of the wireless ‘fanaddict,’ to coin a term.
Since 5G antenna systems/beamforming show threat potential apart from frequency directly, it seems that 5Gmmw could present a three-pronged threat. First is PPM – polarization and ELF puls/mod common to all Gs, usually hysteria-ignored. For example, this page notes pulsing, but doesn’t elaborate. Interesting is that “5G” opposers, frantically focusing on frequency, seem unaware that beamforming may be in use for 4G LTE.
It boggles the mind trying to imagine how this will all work in, say, a crowd of people on their phones. You could easily imagine people walking on a busy sidewalk getting hit with multiple successive beams in transit. Yet, beamformed LTE and 5Gmlb would probably comprise the greater threat than MMW.
Two Special Potential 5G Threats
Other than the surveillance/control threat, which is nothing new in principle, there are two 5G EM threats never mentioned in popular protest. They could get “5G” opposers salivating. 1) A potential heating effect above 10 GHz; and 2) If the wireless mad dogs walk their bark, a nasty one not caused directly by frequency or power, but by content-transfer speed.
1) This Neufeld and Kuster paper from 12/2018 discusses the possibility that MMW “transmission bursts” potentiate tissue damage from heat — within “safety” levels biased based on heating.
Interesting is the suggestion that harms it discusses can be solved by “revisiting existing exposure guidelines.” The paper refers to the International Council on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection – ICNIRP, an Industry mouthpiece posing as a standards organization — shades of the US FCC.
Full text is available only by purchase, but the Abstract is revealing, and we can surmise reliably about some particulars:
Extreme broadband wireless devices operating above 10 GHz may transmit content in bursts of a few milliseconds to seconds. Even though the time- and area-averaged power density values remain within the acceptable safety limits for continuous exposure, these bursts may lead to short temperature spikes in the skin of exposed people. …
The results also show that the peak-to-average ratio of 1,000 tolerated by the International Council on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection guidelines may lead to permanent tissue damage after even short exposures, highlighting the importance of revisiting existing exposure guidelines.
How well the no-heat/no-harm lie has been established and sold! Given exposed official indiscretions around tobacco, asbestos, and more (like aspartame) are we seeing repeat performance in the blind willingness of local, state and national governments and their protective agencies so obediently to have bought the official story?
One can assume that “short exposures” means “a few milliseconds to seconds.” Though it’s fairly obvious the “bursts” are a form of pulsing, it’s implied in a paper by Don Maisch, PhD, quoting from the text of the Neufeld/Kuster paper. On this page is a list of his publications. One is entitled 5G community concerns: Real or imagined? (note, clicking titles autodownloads files – can’t be read there).
Maisch quote from N/K paper (emphasis added):
The thresholds … set in current exposure guidelines (ICNIRP 1998, IEEE 2005, 2010) are intended to limit tissue heating. However, short pulses can lead to important temperature oscillations, which may be further exacerbated at high frequencies (>10 GHz, fundamental to 5G), where the shallow penetration depth leads to intense surface heating and a steep, rapid rise in temperature…
Ten GHz. Not even MMW yet. And can there be doubt the threat of peaks in MLB was known and is at least one reason FCC’s bogus power density ‘safety’ guidelines are averaged over time? ‘Good’ for 30 minutes only, by the way – and from a single device…
The Samos experience (NR range uncertain, but huge peaks in 4G) suggests it may not be felt, but is enough to harm (including “permanent tissue damage”), with symptoms perhaps not recognized for what they are — as with 2G-4G and chronic illness.
2) ‘No One’s’ Talking Brillouin Precursor. This nasty potential concern specific to 5Gmmw is for you, “5G” stoppers 🙂 — IF you’re inclined to worry more about the future than the past 30 years, each moment snowballing the ecocidal, pathological now.
Again, a key development adopted for 5G is the use of an antenna system called MIMO (“my-mo”) – Multiple Input Multiple Output. Handling several signals at once, being used for a long time in MLB applications internationally.
For 5G, however, it’s called “massive” MIMO, many antenna elements (as noted, from 128 to more than 1,000) handling a huge number of signals at once.
Principle: Beams, particularly MMW, could cause trouble under certain conditions not directly related to frequency.
The Brillouin precursor (BP) issue first arose in connection with a powerful Air Force radar system called Pave Paws at Cape Cod, MA. There are two large circular phased arrays, each radiating 580 kilowatts (!) It can detect a basketball at 12 miles, and small planes caught in the beam have blown up. (A real-world “phaser” – what next, photon torpedoes? 🙂 Definitely one of the cooler sound effects of all time, though.)
Phased arrays themselves pose the potential threat of generating the BP, an additional EM field within the body. And it has effect deeper in tissue than the MMW that creates it (of course, 2G-4G go right through, bathing your entirety).
The reader wouldn’t be blamed for dismissing BP based on the enormous power of Pave Paws, which would cook you in a nanosecond at 420 to 450 MHz. But BP isn’t power dependent. And wouldn’t you know, it’s related to pulsing.
An excellent article in the 3/4/02 issue of Microwave News (MWN – scroll down a bit) by Kurt Oughstun, PhD, professor of electrical engineering and mathematics at the University of Vermont, Burlington. He refers in an interview to a 1994 paper by a Dr. Richard Albanese, describing four potential mechanisms for BP damage to biological tissue:
…changes in the conformation of molecules, changes in the rates of chemical reactions, effects on membranes and thermal damage. In my opinion, the most serious may be the membrane effects. A single Brillouin precursor can open small channels through the cell membrane because, as it passes through the membrane, it can induce a significant change in electrostatic potential across that membrane.
The effect on cell membranes may recall for many readers the work of Martin Pall, PhD, who has claimed that telecom/WiFi radiation effect on voltage-gated calcium channels (power level below heating) is the primary/only culprit leading to pathology.
The membrane effect, however, is secondary to the fundamental oscillation of charged and polar biological elements as noted earlier and described in Electric Chair. And it seems that Pall, who has become a hero of sorts, got there by referring to the “VGCC activation mechanism” as if he discovered it.
But: Radar pulsing (technically, Pulse Repetition Frequency) is not the same as telecom/WiFi pulsing. Radar is polarized, but there’s no modulation for content and, obviously, no need for frame repetition. The outgoing signal is repeatedly interrupted to wait for an “echo” from detected objects. The radiated frequency itself is pulsed, instead of ELF frequencies ‘riding’ on a carrier.
Oughstun describes what’s happening with radar:
In a phased array system … several individual antennas radiate pulses in a specified time sequence. Within the main beam of the radar, these pulses are typically separated by short time intervals. In the side lobes outside the main beam, however, the time intervals between the various pulses will be different and … can overlap … in such a way that they may produce an extremely rapid change in phase in the electromagnetic field.
…our research shows that if a change in phase is sufficiently rapid, a quasi-static field known as a Brillouin precursor is generated when the radiation penetrates the human body.
Principle: Here we see that pulsing can create another chaos-inducing variation in the signal (“phase shift”), in turn creating the new EM field (BP). As I was reading, though, I wondered how two such different animals – radar radiation and 5Gmmw – can both cause BP.
Later In the interview, Oughstun provides a partial answer:
As data transmission rates continue to increase, wireless communication systems will approach closer to and may, at some time in the not-too-distant future, exceed the conditions necessary to produce Brillouin precursors in living tissue.
That was 2002. We’re just a bit closer. The Maisch paper cited above gives another insight:
On April 15, 2019 this writer sent an email to Oughstun and asked if there was a possibility of Brillouin Precursors being created by 5G technology. His detailed reply, dated May 5, 2019 said, in part:
“This condition is likely not met, but again is close. A 10 Gbps (gigabits per second) content rate or higher would, however, be sufficient [to create Brillouin Precursors], and that would be worrisome.”
A “bit” is the smallest unit of computer memory, and content transfer rates are stated in gigabits – a million bits – per second. The term has been seen/heard in tech/popular slang as “gigs.”
Thus, the correlation: Phased array radar always creates the pulsing to create the rapid phase shift for the BP, but telecom radiation can do it only at transfer rates 10 Gbps and above.
FAST downloads may be coming to your neighborhood! But watch the movie as soon as possible; your leaking blood-brain barrier from 2G-4G could become problematic.
Recap to avoid potential confusion: Above 10 GHz frequency for the “burst”/heating issue; above 10 Gbps content rate for the Brillouin precursor.
An interesting academic question exists, though, whether oscillation is involved in the Brillouin effect. I say “academic” and didn’t even attempt to verify, because knowing makes no difference to just-as-sick-and-dead. Which is what the planet and we will be, as consumers continue to put their wireless ‘needs’ before the interests of life on earth.
Not that consumers can be entirely blamed, however, with an international EMF-scientist community heretofore cheering them on in 2G-4G with “reduce exposure” and futile hopes for “safe/safer” exposure limits.
Thus, if the transfer-rate mad dogs get their speed bone, given sufficient human exposure, 5G-6Gmmw (the latter, sub-THz, 92-300 GHz) should bring the biological house down in a way that can’t be denied, unlike the more insidious, yet ultimately just as fatal, pre-5G assault.
So if MLB hasn’t destroyed the ecosystem by then, wireless fanaddicts could come to see beyond the suicidal world of Smart-ness to the very urgent need to quit all wireless systems.
Principle: Stopping “5G” or boycotting “5G” phones or “protecting yourself/reducing exposure” will not save the planet, thus humans, if MLB continues. We may not even have time to stop “5G.”
Past, Present, and Future of Wireless
Electric Chair presents the most important thing about the past of wireless: Absolute proof that harms were well and widely known — international scientific community, governments, the World Health Organization, and, especially, militaries — 2-3 decades before 2G arrived.
In short, it was officially ‘confessed’ by WHO in 1981, quote: the “conservative” exposure level, “close to background,” is “not technically feasible.” A promised “reasonable risk-benefit analysis” never materialized (futile, anyway). Instead, the no-heat-no-harm bias materialized, allowing pathological carte blanche. Such ruthlessness is challenging for some to believe. But it becomes easier when the type of mentality running the show from behind the scene is known: Psychopathic.
So if one wonders whether or not saving the planet by quitting all wireless devices at the consumer/use level is sufficient motive for the ‘sacrifice,’ a two-part question might help:
- A) What kind of mentality knowingly targets Nature, the unborn and kids?
- B) Do you want to support that with your money – or in any avoidable way?
Had truth-in-labeling been required for phones, especially dumb-as-hell phones:
Life-Negative, Portable, Ecocidal, Pathological
Tracking, Surveillance, Human-Control Unit
with Wireless Telephone Capability
How many folks would have dashed out to buy one?
Instead, we were told this new ultra-convenient communications device was harmless, had unlimited potential/possibilities, would set us free, and make $billions for the almighty ‘GodConomy.’ That launched it.
Subsequently, the deliberately augmented and exploited techno-human drive for Thing-Possession Happiness, comfort, convenience and entertainment has led to extremes artificial dependency, obsession and addiction. Planet-/life-saving ‘withdrawal’ has become a challenge to say the least. Can you say ‘pigeons’?
The context of wireless tech is obviously ‘advanced technology’ per se. Though much worshiped, one thing is certain about most of that, regardless of type/benefit: Somewhere along the complex line between resource extraction and final disposal, it’s chemically and energetically altogether threatening to planet/biosphere. Wireless encompasses the entire line.
Resource extraction. Mining, for the most part. Since its mechanized expansion for meeting demands of the first Industrial Revolution, beginning mid-18th century England, driven mostly by the development of steam power, it has caused extreme devastation, rightly called ‘earth liquidation.’ A thing of beauty it was…
Look at that – five or six trees standing! Sustainable development 🙂
But might there have been something awry in the cultural psyche for people to stand for such appalling abuse of our source of life? Advanced Technology: Does Society’s Obsession Reflect a Form of Collective Mental Illness?
Fast forward, the beat-ing has become ‘advanced’ as well. With the magic materialization of the Carbon/Climate fairy tale and the push for “clean-green” energy and an all-electric, battery-driven future, liquidation is becoming exponentially more severe. Fatally so Four Ways to Spell Disaster. The putative ‘cure’ easily rivals the ‘disease,’ especially one misdiagnosed. For scientific detail on that, please see also.
Was telecom/WiFi the primary motive for unconscionably deliberate deployment of a terminally eco/suicidal technology? Unlikely. Wireless appears as a key factor in numerous articles on impending global tyranny (an ancient agenda), including multi-faceted surveillance and direct societal and individual micromanagement. Often, it’s the essential factor. Here’s a relatively benign, yet still ominous, model of what’s coming (cash still in play).
The drive to transhumanism arises with the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) Fourth Industrial Revolution (notice it tells you “how to respond”). F.I.R: …characterized by a fusion of technologies that is blurring the lines between the physical, digital, and biological spheres.
Digital. Capable of being processed by a computer. In other words, the Stepford world of perfect order via biological systems with so much digital technology integrated (including wireless devices), differentiation may eventually be lost. We’re told we must rethink what it means to be human. Meaning, embrace your conversion to cyborg.
No need for concern about wireless radiation steadily destroying human reproduction. Once that’s complete, cyborgs may come out of ‘test tubes’ and onto assembly lines – programmed to fit perfectly whatever role is assigned in the societal hive-machine. Physical/emotional intimacy? VR is looking good. Or just program it out.
Above all in the new order, no questions need be forthcoming. With nanobots integrated into human brains and connected to the cloud, there could be thought, emotion, choice and behavior control at the push of an AI button, all managed wirelessly.
Independent mind? Who needs it? Mostly a source of trouble, really. The reader may have seen a WEF drone announced the plan to integrate phones into bodies. This is actually considered progress 🙂
Critical issue revisited. Is appeal to authority, such as EMF scientist appeals and the noted Euro petition, a common-sense approach in the first place?
The foregoing (rhetorical?) question is asked, because whenever a government body – a municipality, for example – asks questions about, or stands up against, “5G,” it’s prior dereliction, having bowed obediently to official pronouncement about wireless safety, becomes obvious.
For example, in April 2019, Geneva, Switzerland adopted a motion asking WHO to investigate “5G” (begging to be deceived again? 🙂 Geneva’s history of wireless installations is shown in an interactive map linked in Geneva Telecom Antenna Map Illustrates How the “Stop 5G!” Campaign Misleads Supporters. At time of writing, “5G NR” wasn’t included as it is now (unspecified as usual, maybe meaning both), but by progressively checking the boxes at left, starting at the bottom, one can see massive radiation saturation before NR arrived
Noted earlier, “frame repetition” (pulsing), common to all Gs, means signal modification to improve transmission. Complicating matters in “Don’t stop 4G LTE!” are subframe, multiframe, reference, and synchronization pulses. Do they have, and/or have they been tested for, biological effects? Do “5G” opposers know? Take three guesses…
Certainly in 5G beamforming, and maybe LTE, there’s another type of synchronization — signals in the KHz range added to facilitate optimal connection between user devices, particularly mobile, and base stations. This page (technical, cited earlier) has a chart showing six KHz frequencies (highly penetrating) used for “synchronization signals.” Pulsed in milliseconds.
Same old question; are these 5G “SS” biologically active – either alone or in a wave/wave or toxin interaction? No matter ultimately, though, because our old friend PPM is once again at work. And as Electric Chair explains, there’s also induced electric current (emf) in the body. Smart meter activists take note: Please see section The “Chair” in the article.
In the “5G” Hysteria… section, it was noted that people have claimed harm ‘when “5G” was turned on.’ Could one ask which 5G is in question – especially inside a home? How can a beam challenged by leaves and rain pass through glass and walls, is one question.
At least two elusive possibilities exist, confounded by variables, insufficient technical specifics in each case, and often, hysteria: 1) Foliage and water block all MMW frequencies more readily than construction materials do? 2) The distinction between FR1 and FR2 is in play?
Now, oxygen and water do absorb some MMW frequencies. Hysteria warnings exist about adverse health effects due to oxygen’s ability to absorb microwave radiation at 60 GHz.
The great chart below is from RF Cafe and said to be cobbled from an International Telecommunications Union publication (cited on the page). It includes water. Note, oxygen absorption occurs over a fairly wide range, with a major peak at 60 GHz and a lesser one at something around 125.
Science on health effects caused by such absorption, including 60 GHz, is virtually non-existent, although speculation, ‘belief’ and 5G-MIE aren’t hard to find. Questions are whether oxygen and/or water are harmed by the absorption – whether physical/chemical properties change, and if so, are changes permanent.
If there is permanent change (horrendous, since weather satellites globally constantly use water’s absorptive ability in forecasting), it would mean yet another major force for a declining atmosphere.
From Scientists for Wired Tech, a not-as-detailed chart showing something easier to ‘get’ than ‘dB’: Percent of energy absorption:
One ‘saving grace’ in any case, noted at the chart link, is that due to range limitation at the very popular (unlicensed) 60 GHz band, it’s planned only for “short-haul” applications, meaning limited potential effect on atmosphere and living things. Certainly not for mobile.
BUT – short haul includes local and wide area networks (LAN, WAN) inside buildings, and 60 GHz is in the desired range of frequencies. Thus it seems, if it becomes widely used in these networks, the health-effect answer could come from this microcosm of a much larger, ruthlessly evil field ‘experiment’.
The alleged/suspected penetration into homes (valid with 5Gmlb and beamformed LTE at low power) brings up a question for MMW some might consider a bit paranoid: What if they can just turn a 5Gmmw system on at will (already known :-), aim it wherever, and, with extreme output power, significantly increase penetration.
This global assault coddled and approved by criminalized agencies and officials who already know what they’re doing or are controlled by those who do, has taken significant toll. So it’s literally quit or perish.
Principle again: The chaos inflicted on the foundation of life by all Gs is relentless, and certainly plays a major role in eco/suicide and today’s rampant illness. EHS/‘microwave syndrome’ gets most of the press, however, while the much deeper, insidious, chronic scenario might get ‘honorable mention.’
Here’s a superb example of utter nonsense being passed off as “science” – in effect a delay tactic and posturing show of concern: A massive, elaborate, expensive project in Europe: SEAWave Project: Scientific-Based Exposure and Risk Assessment of Radiofrequency and mm-Wave Systems from children to elderly (5G and Beyond)
It aims to contribute to the scientific basis for health risk assessment of 5G and offer the means for effective health risk communication and results dissemination to all stakeholders, ranging from citizens and national regulators, to standardization bodies and the industry… Organized in 11 work packages (WP) that are interlinked.
Blah, blah, blah. Well, if that study’s being done, the question of safety just isn’t settled yet, is it. Can you say, “Whitewash”?
What seems needed most is for activists to stop whining and pointing fingers; to stop passing things off on a massively corrupt system. To throw off self-involved hypnosis and take the bull by the horns: QUIT, and vigorously advocate quitting, all Gs. Because psychopaths invented and are running the show.
How does that song go? “Got along without ya before I met ya, gonna get along without ya now’ (Teresa Brewer, 1952).
Again, given the cost noted earlier of implementing 5Gmmw, stopping the rest – that is, consumer abandonment while demanding landlines – is almost certain to crash all Gs going forward – on the ground, at least. BIG trouble could continue ‘aloft.’
I don’t see ‘quit’ happening, however, unless the individuals comprising the EMF scientist community, along with activists, reporters/journalists and all concerned, change the narrative from “safe,” “safer,” “biologically based,” “protect yourself,” “reduce exposure,” “set towers back,” and so on, to some variant of, “Quit wireless or end life on earth.”
The message must come ‘loudly,’ clearly and often. Quite concerning for this writer has been a general reluctance, to date at least, to acknowledge a ‘distant, remote, highly unlikely, virtually impossible’ possibility, never mind come clean on details of the safety level issue.
A remaining question. Would mass rejection on the ground be enough to stop Mad Elon’s (and all others’) satellite assault? Maybe, depending on timing and full understanding of the threat, leading to rejection of satellite internet and mobile telecom. And if “5G” protest could be re-focused on the space/planetary threat.
Even if techno-humanity can manage to break the hypnotic PhoneSpell, another question lingers. Can Earth withstand the many tons of already-orbiting satellite future-junk awaiting eventual oxygen-consuming, toxin-spewing descent through the atmosphere/ozone layer?
The US captured agency made noise last year concerning space junk by adding more bureaucratic inanity to the mountain of mayhem it has created via satellite permissions: A proposed no-solution-lip-service rule about “removing” spent satellites in a more timely fashion than previously.
The space junk article prattles on, never specifying, though touching on, the planet-killing threat: The ‘removal system’ is our atmosphere. But that’s just OK. Routine. No problem. It’s what we do.
The very plan is periodically to burn large toxic carcasses by the thousands forever. Can the blatant folly and absurdity of this be overstated? Can we call it suicidality normalized? The hallmark of Earth-liquidating Western so-called Civilization?
Nor are satellites the only junk. Satellite launches themselves produce it. And just a paint chip can be threatening. Except for news on the FCC’s PR spin, all articles I’ve seen on this are older; although this 55-minute video is only a year old.
Eerie is it not, that clingers to, promoters of, the Carbon/Climate Fairy Tale – especially government and official venues – have nary a peep about the satellite threat?