View that 5G has no downside is incorrect
IN Daniel Roberts’ cynical view, those opposed to 5G are irrational ‘truth vandals’, who are guilty of spreading deceptive conspiracy theories and nonsensical myths and of needlessly stirring up anxiety (Scaremongers should not stop us getting the benefits of 5G, Tuesday 1 October). It is easy for him to say this because he arbitrarily assigns all health concerns related to electromagnetic radiation (EMR) to flawed science or unscrupulous scientists. Presumably, this also applies to research like that conducted by the US government’s National Toxicity Program, which found clear evidence that rats exposed to cell phone radiation have an increased risk of two types of tumour.
His statement that no negative health effect has ever been found in relation to EMR from radar is incorrect. Recent studies have found that a very high percentage of radar workers, working with microwaves similar to 5G, suffer adverse health effects (see Adverse health effects of occupational exposure to radiofrequency radiation in airport surveillance radar operators).
His claim that EMR cannot cause DNA damage seems to be contradicted by the research Is fertility reduced among men exposed to radiofrequency fields in the Norwegian Navy?
Like Clive Duport before him, Mr Roberts limits himself to debunking the possibility that EMR could be carcinogenic, despite EMR also being suspected of causing a host of other less extreme conditions. Electrosensitivity, for instance, is a condition associated with a variety of symptoms of a nervous kind; research suggests that bees near phone masts have lowered fertility rates, and it has been claimed that animals, especially birds, disappear from locations where large 5G masts are erected. In addition, the possibility that EMR could subtly affect our nervous systems should not be overlooked.
Mr Roberts suggests that those opposed to 5G are engaged in whipping up populist support by preying upon an uninformed public’s irrational fears. Yet he himself engages in fearmongering by saying that not getting 5G will somehow make ‘victims’ of us all.
If we can stifle our initial bemusement at this claim, we can take a moment to ponder the appalling hardships to be endured by those unable to download a HD movie to their iPhone in under 90 seconds, or consider the emotions of victims forced to wait more than two seconds for their Twitter web page to load.
I have absolutely no sympathy for future ‘victims’ of 5G deprivation. I do not want to live inside the horror-world of the Internet of Things in which every conceivable object, from driverless vehicles to mattresses, refrigerators and people, are to be wirelessly connected (see Boris Johnson’s UN speech). If anyone can tell me how super fast mobile connections will benefit my life, rather than making it worse, I promise to be attentive (I don’t use a phone).
Like the IoD’s Stretch Kontelj, who insists climate change is not man-made, but is rapacious enough to want Guernsey to invest heavily in profitable infrastructure to fight it, I doubt Mr Roberts has any deeper connection to the issues beyond the economy and turning a profit. By ‘victims’, I suspect he means those deprived of benefitting economically from 5G.
There is tremendous irony in his claim that those opposed to 5G are like an irrational religious movement. The truth is that it is the tech-topians who hold an almost religious-like fervour for an ideal future society based on the ‘Internet of Things’ and powered by 5G.
For a certain kind of modern neo-liberal, 5G and the Internet of Things is a step towards an exciting new urban super society of ‘limitless opportunity’ with an almost spiritual character. Here, everyone and everything is to be harmoniously connected within the Internet of Things. Companies are to make huge profits from harvesting personal data of every conceivable kind, used to better sell us things we did not know we wanted. This is their dream.
As for radiation from 5G and future Gs, the chosen narrative will be that it is purely beneficial with no downside, rather like the new society’s unifying spiritual ether.
ANDREW LEE Address withheld.