Denial of 5G health risks ignores studies

Readers' Letters | Published:

IN HER letter on the benefits of 5G, Deputy Dudley-Owen seeks to reassure us that mast radiation levels would be held to the strict standards of the independent advisory body, ICNIRP. She says that ‘significant international research (shows) that the weight of evidence is that there is no.. health risk from mobile antennas.’ The claim that radiation from masts and phones probably poses no risk to health is a bold one to make. Only last year saw the conclusion of a 10- year-long, $25 million, peer-reviewed research program into the health effects of mast and phone radiation. The study was carried out by the National Toxicology Program (NTP), a prestigious US government inter-agency program run by the US Department of Health and Human Services. It concluded that there is ‘clear evidence’ linking phone radiation to cancer in rats, thus joining thousands of other papers in confirming that such radiation does affect biological life.

The NTP study also found that animals exposed in their lifetimes to the same amount of radiation that a human might receive in theirs, gave birth to smaller babies with more defects in their hearts. Other research has noted, for instance, that mast radiation probably reduces fertility in bees. As might be expected, the telecoms industry takes the line that mobile phone radiation poses virtually no risk to health. ICNIRP (Guernsey’s chosen guideline of radiation limits) also follows this line, because it rigidly adheres to the fallacy that the only possible biological effects of electromagnetic radiation is heating. To the dismay of many scientists, neither the new NTP findings nor the World Health Organisation’s categorisation of such radiation as a ‘possible’ human carcinogen, has been able to shift ICNIRP’s position. Investigators claim to have found that senior ICNIRP members have conflicts of interest with the telecoms industry.

The most ironic of Deputy Dudley-Owen’s claims is that 5G will put the community first. Let me stick my neck out and state that adopting 5G could only bring harm to true community; only increase stress, depression and ill health. Any close student of reality knows that a community can only be as healthy as its medium, and both the internet and wireless connectivity are unhealthy media. It was suggested that 5G could be of benefit to health care, education, traffic management and business. However, given the capabilities of 5G, it is far from obvious what these benefits could be.

5G’s fast speeds and very fast response time (latency) are ideal for real-time wireless technologies which use, for instance, artificial intelligence (AI) and virtual reality. Think AI driverless cars, AI drones, robotic remote surgery and mobile gaming. But given that these are niche usages, the question remains as to why 5G is necessary and how an island-wide implementation of 5G could be justified, given the health risks, and that wired broadband is more than adequate for almost all home and business needs, and that fibre-optics could be developed to give much faster landline speeds. The Committee on Economic Development must eventually answer these questions.

Neither is the adoption of 5G a mere upgrade of 4G. If 5G’s capacity for a thousand times more simultaneous connections than 4G seems excessive, this is because 5G is only really understandable as part of the globalist technophile dream called the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’. This will be a ‘communication economy’ in which everything and everyone is to be digitally connected and surveillable, and 5G is key to it. In the so-called ‘internet of things’, millions of everyday gadgets from fridges and radios to light switches, vehicles and people, are to be connected wirelessly to the internet. Society will eventually be left significantly more enmeshed with the digital world and reliant on AI technology, to the detriment of our humanity and all life generally. Radiation levels will increase dramatically.

This is not a conspiracy theory, but a tech-utopian future that has been planned and is happening right now.

Four major companies have collective plans to launch twenty thousand 5G satellites into orbit, eleven times more than the current number of orbiting satellites. SpaceX already has permission to launch 4,425 into low Earth orbit. All will focus intense beams of 5G radiation onto the Earth.

In Guernsey, full 5G coverage would most likely necessitate the proliferation on our streets of many ‘small cell’ base station transmitters, of about the size of large home stereo speakers but possibly also requiring power boxes (search ‘Wall of shame small cells’). Small ‘smart pole’ 5G transmitters might also appear on street lamps. Given that this will be in addition to present 4G transmitters, Deputy Dudley-Owen’s reassurance that 5G transmitters will be ‘smaller than ever’, and use less power, is of little consolation.

The spin and outright denial of the safety issue is all part of the fear, lies and vast sums of money invested to get us to quiescently accept 5G (no suggestion that Deputy Dudley Owen is party). I would encourage everyone to research the matter for themselves, and urge States members to represent the interests of true community.



Top Stories


More from the Guernsey Press


UK & International News