Scientific Research And Analysis A 2018 article published in The Lancet, one of the world’s oldest, most prestigious, and best known general medical journals, discusses the large body of research suggesting that low levels of radio frequency (RF) radiation are harmful to humans and other life forms. This article also highlights the problems with current exposure guidelines set by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers and shared by the FCC. In 2011 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the World Health Organization (WHO), classified RF radiation as a (2b) possible carcinogen. One study referenced showed a 40% increased risk for gliomas (malignant brain cancer) for heavy cell phones users (30 minutes per day, over a 10 year period). People with antennas very close to their homes, such as my family, will be exposed to significantly higher levels of radiation whenever they are home, potentially 24/7. In 2018 a group of scientists conducted a review of scientific literature released since the 2011 IARC classification and concluded that the classification should be changed from “(2b) possibly carcinogenic” to “(Group 1) carcinogenic to humans”. An in depth overview of some of the research suggesting RF radiation is harmful. This review highlights many of the observed negative health effects of low level RF radiation exposure as well as some of the proposed mechanisms for harm. A 2017 article from the International Journal of Oncology highlights the shortcomings of the WHO’s stance on RF radiation as well some of the conflicts of interest between the wireless industry and the agencies that police them. A website run by Dr. Devra Davis dedicated to “promot[ing] a healthier environment through research, education, and policy.” An excellent resource for information on RF radiation and other environmental issues. A webpage from EHTrust specifically about 5G. This page highlights a large body of research suggesting that 5G will be harmful to humans and the environment. A website run by Joel Moskowitz Director for the Center for Family and Community Health at UC Berkeley. This page contains hundreds of articles and scientific studies showing that RF radiation is harmful to humans and other life forms. The page also contains news articles and current events related to RF and EMF (electrictromagnetic fields). Moskowitz’s page on 5G. This page highlights a number of studies suggesting that 5G will be harmful. Moskowitz’s page on cell antennas. A great overview of the research showing a variety of problems caused by cell antennas. The National Toxicology Program (NTP) conducted a 10+ year study exposing rats and mice to RF radiation. Recently released results showed clear evidence for increases in cancer rates among rats exposed to RF radiation. This was considered a landmark study. One reason being it showed harm at non-thermal levels of exposure as well as a clear dose-response relationship between radiation and cancer. It was also one of the few studies to examine life-long exposure similar (in consistency, not in amount) to what someone would experience growing up next to an antenna. Scientific American released an article discussing the NTP study mentioned above. In April, NPR’s Science Friday did a segment on 5G (fifth generation wireless technology). Two researchers from the NTP study were guests. About half way into the episode they discuss the health effects of RF radiation and conclude that the 5G rollout is akin to a large scale population experiment. A recently completed large scale study by the Ramazinni Institute showed increased cancer rates in rats exposed to RF radiation. The study exposed test groups to whole body RF radiation under the FCC limits, 19 hours per day, for the duration of their lives. These conditions are very similar to what a child growing up near an antenna would experience and would be considered safe by the FCC and telecom companies. One of the conclusions of this study was to re-evaluate the IARC classification regarding the carcinogenic potential of RF radiation in humans. A recent study from the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences found an increased risk of miscarriage in mother’s exposed to RF radiation. An academic review of the scientific literature on low level RF exposure and oxidative stress. Of the 100 available peer-reviewed studies dealing with oxidative effects of low-intensity RFR, in general, 93 confirmed that RFR induces oxidative effects in biological systems. A survey evaluating the relationship between negative health effects and proximity to cell antennas. The survey clearly showed a significant increase in frequency of occurrence for individuals living near cell antennas. The researchers concluded that cell antennas should not be installed within 300m (1000 feet) of people’s homes. A graph of these finding can be found here. A 2018 study titled “The human skin as a sub-THz receiver – Does 5G pose a danger to it or not?” examined the interaction between higher frequencies of RF radiation and human skin. Researchers found that human sweat ducts act as an antenna for these higher frequencies leading to significantly greater absorption. The implications of this new interaction are completely unknown and current safety standards do not take these factors into account. As a result of these findings, the researchers stated quote “We are raising a warning flag against the unrestricted use of sub-terahertz technologies for communication, before the possible consequences for public health are explored.” An earlier study from the same group of researchers warning about the interactions between higher frequencies of RF and human skin. 231 doctors and scientists have signed the 5G appeal urging governments around the world to halt their 5G rollouts until the health effects of RF radiation have been fully studied and understood. Another, more recent appeal that can be signed by ordinary citizens. This appeal has over 100,000 signatures including hundreds of signatures from scientists, doctors, and other experts in relevant fields. This appeal highlights many of the problems 5G will bring and well as research showing exposure to RF radiation is harmful to humans and other life forms. Hundreds of scientists “express serious concerns regarding the ubiquitous and increasing exposure to non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) generated by electric and wireless devices.” Dr. Martin Blank of Columbia University announcing the EMF Scientist Appeal. A very informative website from a local opponent of 5G. This site highlights many of the technical and legal implications related to 5G. The site also suggests a number of ways to take action. The International Association of Fire Fighters has urged the FCC to adopt more protective guidelines with respect to RF radiation and has taken a stance against placing cell antennas on fire stations. This came about as a result of many firefighters experiencing negative health effects that they attributed to the cell antennas installed on their fire stations. This document also lists and cites some of the observed non-thermal effects of RF radiation. In May 2019 The Danish Institute of Public Health held a conference on 5G. The final speaker was a lawyer who declared that given the research showing that RF radiation is harmful, the implementation of 5G would constitute a violation of current human and environmental laws of the European Union (EU) and United Nations (UN). In 2013 the American Academy of Pediatrics, a group of 60,000 pediatric specialists, urged the FCC to adopt more protective RF exposure guidelines that reflect current use patterns. or Generation Zapped is a documentary examining the health effects of EMF and RF radiation and the governmental bodies that regulate this radiation. A TED Talk by a former engineer titled “Wireless Wake-up Call.” The speaker tells his story of the symptoms he experienced after a bank of wireless smart meters were installed near his home. He is now an EMF health consultant and runs the website Dr. Oz on Good Morning America discussing cell phone safety. I reference this video primarily to combat the claim that health concerns over RF radiation are nothing more than conspiracy theory nonsense. Do you think Dr. Oz or Good Morning America would seriously discuss “flat earth” or similar conspiracy theories as legitimate possibilities? I think not.

%d bloggers like this: