5G is rated as a “high impact” emerging risk affecting property and casualty claims in more than 3 years.
“As the biological effects of EMF in general and 5G in particular are still being debated, potential claims for health impairments may come with a long latency.”
“5G – short for fifth generation – is the latest standard for cellular mobile communications. Providing ultrafast broadband connection with higher capacity and lower latency, 5G is not only heaven for your smartphone. It will enable wireless connectivity in real time for any device of the Internet of things (IoT), whether that be autonomous cars or sensor-steered factory. In doing so, it will allow decentralised seamless interconnectivity between devices.
To allow for a functional network coverage and increased capacity overall, more antennas will be needed, including acceptance of higher levels of electromagnetic radiation. In some jurisdictions, the rise of threshold values will require legal adaptation. Existing concerns regarding potential negative health effects from electromagnetic fields (EMF) are only likely to increase. An uptick in liability claims could be a potential long-term consequence.
Other concerns are focused on cyber exposures, which increase with the wider scope of 5G wireless attack surfaces. Traditionally IoT devices have poor security features. Moreover, hackers can also exploit 5G speed and volume, meaning that more data can be stolen much quicker. A large-scale breakthrough of autonomous cars and other IoT applications will mean that security features need to be enhanced at the same pace. Without, interruption and subversion of the 5G platform could trigger catastrophic, cumulative damage. …
Potential impacts:
Cyber exposures are significantly increased with 5G, as attacks become faster and higher in volume. This increases the challenge of defence.
Growing concerns of the health implications of 5G may lead to political friction and delay of implementation, and to liability claims. The introductions of 3G and 4G faced similar challenges.
Information security and national sovereignty concerns might delay implementation of 5G further, increasing uncertainty for planning authorities, investors, tech companies and insurers.
Heated international dispute over 5G contractors and potential for espionage or sabotage could affect international cooperation, and impact financial markets negatively.
As the biological effects of EMF in general and 5G in particular are still being debated, potential claims for health impairments may come with a long latency.”
Posted inUncategorized|Comments Off on May 2019 – WORLD LEADING INSURANCE COMPANY, SWISS RE CLASSIFIES 5G AS “HIGH” IMPACT EMERGING RISK IN WHITE PAPER
A couple of weeks back, I hadtweeted about my ongoing interest in 5G technology, which is all set to be introduced in a few countries by 2020. It is a technology that is making waves at the moment and is gradually winning more people over with the kind of benefits it promises. As an investor and tech enthusiast, I too was looking forward to knowing how this technology could boost the current internet usage speed.
However, I was mildly amused whenWilliam Kelley Eidem, the author of the book ‘The Doctor Who Cures Cancer’, reached out to me over mail. Eidem wished to warn me about the potential health risks associated with 5G technology, and how it wouldn’t be right for me to use my platform to promote such a dangerous technology. We had a long drawn out conversation regarding how the technology is causing damage to people and bringing about a flu epidemic. I wouldn’t lie, it sounded extremely serious. Which is why I decided to investigate the matter further.
Now Eidem says, that more people will be experiencing ‘sickness in the extreme, including cramps, vomiting, diarrhoea, strokes, fainting, skin rashes, ringing in the ears, and on and on’ because of the devastating effects of 5G technology. On digging a little deeper, I found out that many cities in the US are well on their way to roll out their new phase of 5G technology. Most recently in the city of Providence, despite community opposition to the proposals over possible health effects, the new phase is all set to launch soon.
According to Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., there hasn’t been adequate studies on the health effects of 5G technology. He primarily blames the Federal Communications Commission and the Food and Drug Administration for their lack of oversight.
He said during a committee hearing.
“We’re kind of flying blind here, as far as health and safety is concerned.” But have scientists really not delved deeper into studying the effects of this technology?
That is in fact not true. I was slightly taken aback when I came across a petition opposing 5G technology, which had the support of more than 26,000 Scientists. The petition titled ‘Wireless Radiation: Stop The 5G Network On Earth And In Space, Devastating Impacts On Health And The Environment’ was addressed to the UN, WHO, EU, Council of Europe and governments of all nations.
The abstract of that petition read:
“We the undersigned scientists, doctors, environmental organizations and citizens from (__) countries, urgently call for a halt to the deployment of the 5G (fifth generation) wireless network, including 5G from space satellites. 5G will massively increase exposure to radio frequency (RF) radiation on top of 2G, 3G, and 4G networks for telecommunications already in place. RF radiation has been proven harmful to humans and the environment. The deployment of 5G constitutes an experiment on humanity and the environment that is defined as a crime under international law.”
As it turns out, all this hue and cry and the backlash isn’t for nothing. I mean we have all known about the harmful effects of cell phone radiation, but have chosen to use them anyway. But is ignorance bliss, in this case? It seems that the negative effects of 5G technology are more profound and pronounced. The scale at which the 5G technology wave is expected to roll out can be severely detrimental to human/animal life and the ecology on planet Earth. 5G will use phased array antennas to shoot beams of radiation at cell phones which according to the evidence available today, can cause severe damage to DNA, cells and organ systems in both plants and animals.
There is significant evidence present which indicates that electromagnetic pollution is largely responsible for causing modern day diseases like cancer, heart disease and diabetes. Additionally, with the proposed 5G from space programme, an estimated 20,000 satellites are to be deployed in space to offer 5G technology. If each of these satellites ‘emit millimetre waves with an effective radiated power of up to 5 million watts from thousands of antennas arranged in a phased array’, then it will drastically alter the electromagnetic environment of Earth and set us up for inevitable doom.
It is true that I was unaware of the severe health risks, that mass adoption of 5G technology can bring about on us. But now that I know better, I shall endeavour to work in my capacity as a fellow citizen of the planet, to spread greater awareness regarding this epidemic. I agree that as an entrepreneur and tech enthusiast, I have always envisioned emerging technologies paving the way forward for the improvement of our society. But we have to sometimes pause and ask ourselves, at what cost? Lives of animals and plants seem like too steep a price to pay in the name of development.
European countries are rolling out 5G mobile communications at breakneck speed as they seek to gain a competitive edge over the US and Asia. But some scientists have raised questions about the effects of 5G mobile phone radiation on public health and are calling for a precautionary approach
By 2020, at least one major city in every state in the European Union (EU) is due to have a 5G mobile phone service in operation, and by 2025, three-quarters of the European population is expected to have 5G access.
The new mobile phone technology promises to bring huge economic benefits, in the form of superfast mobile services, smart cities and intelligent devices connected and controlled through the internet of things.
It’s no surprise that Europe is racing to create a smart society, with the UK government one of many aiming to expedite 5G roll-out. London alone has nine trial sites.
Network operator EE has chosen 16 cities across the country to welcome its 5G services this year. Vodafone presented the captain of Manchester City’s women’s football team performing ball tricks on stage as a hologram at its launch. And Nokia has demonstrated how robots can solve intricate tasks in collaboration using 5G.
Ofcom, the UK communications regulator, “shares the government’s ambition for the UK to become a world leader in 5G” and plans “to release different types of spectrum bands for 5G as soon as practicable”. The watchdog has committed “to ensure site access and planning are not a barrier to the deployment of 5G”.
But behind the scenes, there is an ongoing debate about whether the telecoms industry and governments are rushing to implement the society of tomorrow, without fully scrutinising the long-term health effects of the electromagnetic radiation produced by 5G.
The radiation produced by mobile phones and phone masts is non-ionising radiation, which means that it does not directly cause cell and DNA damage, through the same mechanisms as X-rays or radioactive particles.
But electromagnetic radiation in high power densities can cause damage through other mechanisms, such as thermal damage by heating the skin in much the same way that a microwave oven cooks food.
Scientists argue for more research
The Swiss Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in Society (IT’IS) is an independent, non-profit organisation that researches the safety and quality of emerging electromagnetic technologies.
The foundation’s director and co-founder, Niels Kuster, says the implementation of 5G will use much higher frequency bands than 2G, 3G or 4G to satisfy the growing demand in data rates, but this induces much higher power density in human skin.
“Health risks associated with the omnipresent radio-frequency radiation for mobile devices [must be] studied before we expose the whole population [to] ever-rising levels of the electromagnetic fields from this technology”
Ernst von Weizsäcker, scientist
His colleague, Esra Neufeld, a scientist and consultant, adds: “The current standards do not prevent thermal damage of the skin and should be corrected in the next revision of the guidelines.”
5G will operate in a range of frequencies known as the millimetre wave band. Neufeld says there are “almost no studies at the millimetre wave range which can be used [to assess] risks” that technology poses for people, and such research is urgently needed.
One of the most renowned experts on environment policy in Germany, professor Ernst von Weizsäcker, goes further, calling for the deployment of 5G to be delayed until its risks are understood.
“We do not know for sure whether the mobile data transmission technology poses health risks, but we cannot yet exclude it either,” he says.
“Thus, we must insist that the health risks associated with the omnipresent radio-frequency radiation for mobile devices are studied before we expose the whole population with ever-rising levels of the electromagnetic fields from this technology.”
International safety standards
With few exceptions, governments on several continents are supporting and promoting the upgrade of mobile telecommunications to 5G frequencies which offer faster download speeds.
Governments, including the UK, take advice on radiation limits from a German-based non-governmental organisation (NGO), the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), which has become the de facto organisation for assessing mobile safety and setting radiation exposure limits.
Eric Van Rongen, who chairs ICNIRP, tells us: “ICNIRP establishes whether health effects have been found and, on the basis of that, sets its limits. That is done with a large degree of conservatism.”
“The International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection establishes whether health effects have been found and, on the basis of that, sets its limits. That is done with a large degree of conservatism”
Eric Van Rongen, ICNIRP
While many 5G pilots are already under way, ICNIRP is reviewing its own mobile technology-related radiation advice and is expected to release revised limits later this year. ICNIRP is an independent body, which is not subjected to the same levels of scrutiny received by public organisations.
Governments are aware of health fears over new technologies. The EU Treaty and the European Commission refer to the precautionary principle, which should guide decisions to implement products or policies with unknown risks. In the 5G roll-out frenzy, most governments observe ICNIRP’s limits, which set safe exposure levels for electromagnetic radiation produced by mobile phones, phone towers and other radio emissions.
Some countries take the issue more seriously than others. France has prohibited Wi-Fi in kindergartens and restricted the use of Wi-Fi in primary schools. Cyprus has done the same. Switzerland has legally binding precautionary limits that are 10 times stricter for mobile communications installations than those of ICNIRP. Italy, Poland and Luxembourg have also set lower exposure limits than those of ICNIRP.
This cautious approach is not without problems. In Italy, for example, the country’s lower limits meant it was difficult to upgrade 3G antenna sites to 4G without reconfiguring the sites.
But this is not preventing the fast-track deployment of 5G networks across Europe….
BY CONAN MILNER, May 23, 2019Updated: May 25, 2019
(Children are particularly vulnerable to microwave sickness because of the industrial Wi-Fi networks used in schools and their smaller bodies. Symptoms include headaches, sensitivity to light, sleep and cognitive problems, and nosebleeds. Some may hear strange sounds that seem to come from inside their heads)
In 2016, U.S. officials stationed overseas started showing signs of a mysterious illness. The list of symptoms included headaches, sensitivity to light, sleep and cognitive problems, and nosebleeds. Many heard strange sounds that seemed to come from inside their heads.
Over the next two years, dozens of diplomats staying in U.S. embassies in Cuba and China all developed the same list of symptoms. Doctors summed it up as a type of brain trauma, but there’s no official answer of the cause. The lead theory is that the diplomats were the target of an unusual weapon—one that emits a directed pulse of microwave radiation.
In an interview with CBS’s “60 Minutes,” Mark Lenzi, a State Department security officer who worked in the U.S. Consulate in Guangzhou, China, said that he and his wife began to suffer after hearing strange sounds in their apartment. Lenzi seemed certain that they were the victims of an energy weapon.
“This was a directed standoff attack against my apartment,” Lenzi told “60 minutes.” “I believe it’s RF, radio frequency energy, in the microwave range.
The first scientist to suggest that microwaves were the cause of the illness was Dr. Beatrice Golomb, a professor of medicine at the University of California–San Diego, and a researcher who examines how drugs and environmental toxins harm health. When she heard about the diplomats’ symptoms, her first thought was microwave exposure.
“The profile of symptoms does not match anything else I’m familiar with,” Golomb said. “These are highly distinctive symptoms known to occur only in that setting. The likelihood that it could be anything else is very remote.”
Golomb wrote apaperoutlining her case. Before it was even submitted for publication, it caught the attention of State Department officials eager for a meaningful explanation. She wrote that one major reason why the diplomats’ illness suggests a microwave cause is theauditory symptomsthey experienced: hearing loss, tinnitus, and the presence of a chirping, ringing, hissing, or buzzing sound.
“The difference in the sound counts, in part, due to head dimensions,” Golomb said. “There were also reports that the sounds were tightly localized in space. When people moved, the sound’s source seemed to follow them. That’s not the case for stationary sound forces, but it is the case for the micro-auditory effect because the sound is actually produced in the head.”
This microwave-induced phenomenon is known as the “Frey effect” or “radio frequency hearing,” and was proven by Dr. Alan Frey in 1965 when he was working for the U.S. Navy. A 1976 U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency report described how to stimulate it: “Sounds and possibly even words which appear to be originating intracranially can be induced by signal modulation at very low average power densities.” ….
Author : Devra Davis, PhD., MPH, is Visiting Professor Medicine, The Hebrew University. An award-winning writer and scientist, she is also President of Environmental Health Trust www.ehtrust.org.
Accusations of Russia lobbying are ricocheting around the media and have now been extended through a front-page article in theNew York Times positing that scientists and consumer advocates calling to halt 5G have fallen under the spell of RT, a news network registered as a Russian foreign agent in the U.S. Could it be a coincidence that following on the heels of the NY Times story, theWall Street Journal and the UK Telegraph have echoed the same smear of guilt by association, portraying scientists who warn of the potential environmental and health damages of 5G as untethered alarmists unwittingly linked to Russian propaganda? These otherwise credible media sources ignore the substantial body of science pinpointing hazards of wireless radiation and 5G detailed in independent journalistic investigations that have appeared extensively in media throughout Europe and been covered by major networks.
William J. Broad, author of the Times’ unusually placed opinion piece, is an award-winning investigative journalist, known for searching studies of complex technical issues including matters of space exploration and national intelligence. By relegating concerns about 5G to a Russian ploy, he misses altogether the fact that the purportedly independent international authorities on which he relies that declare 5G to be safe are an exclusive club of industry-loyal scientists.China,Russia, Poland, Italy and several other European countries allow up to hundreds of times less wireless radiation into the environment from microwave antennas than does the U.S.. Moreover, while many other countries regularly monitor levels of environmental radiation, the last EPA report on the topic was released in 1986, back when a gallon of gasoline cost less than one dollar and streetcars still ran in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Environmental levels of wireless radiation in the U.S. and worldwide are growing exponentially.
The history of research on the environmental and public health impacts of radio frequency microwave radiation (“wireless radiation”) reveals some uneasy parallels with that of tobacco. In the 1950s and 1960s, scientists who showed the harmful impacts of tobacco found themselves struggling for serious attention and financial support. The validity of their views was only accepted after the toll of sickness and death had become undeniable. For health impacts from wireless radiation, a similar pattern is emerging. Each time a U.S. government agency produced positive findings, research on health impacts was de-funded. The Office of Naval Research, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, and the Environmental Protection Agency all once had vibrant research programs documenting dangers of wireless radiation. All found their programs scrapped, reflecting pressure from those who sought to suppress this work.
Russian’s 50 years of research on electromagnetic radiation since the Cold War has led to their clear understanding that this exposure does have biological effects. The Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection issued a 2011 Resolution recommending persons under 18 not use a cell phone. Further, in asserting that there is no science indicating risks of wireless radiation, Broad ignores his earlier reporting that American diplomats serving in Cuba and China have been diagnosed with brain disorders that serious scientists like Professor of Medicine, Beatrice Golomb, MD PhD, have attributed to targeted microwave radiation. He also discounts scientificreviews and studies from severalnations showing sperm damage from cellphone radiation along with the advice from the Mayo and Cleveland Clinics for men to keep phones off their bodies if they want to have healthy babies and optimal performance, as well as advice from the American Academy of Pediatrics that families should reduce wireless radiation exposures.
In response to first U.S. reports that wireless radiation damaged the DNA of rat brains in 1994, Motorola directed their public relations agency to carry out strategic efforts to “war-game” the science and dismiss and discredit both the research and researchers. Motorola once sponsored the most brilliant and productive scientists in the field of bio-electromagnetics. But, as one insider recently relayed, as industry scientists began to produce studies indicating the need to reduce radiation exposures, their work was suspended. That program no longer exists.
The autobiographical “Cell Phone Radiation — Russian Roulette” tells the story of senior telecom engineer, Robert C. Kane, who had willingly served as a guinea pig for Motorola and other companies developing new wireless technologies in the 1980s. Until he died from brain cancer in 2002, Kane sought to persuade others about the dangers, noting:
“Never in human history has there been such a practice as we now encounter with the marketing and distributing of products hostile to the human biological system by an industry with foreknowledge of those effects.”
In 2018 the U.S. gold standard National Toxicology testing Program (NTP) confirmed that wireless radiation from cell phones could cause the same malignant brain tumor that felled Kane. The FDA rejected the NTP conclusions arguing that NTP exposures were not relevant to humans, despite the fact that the agency had requested the studies and approved the specific design a decade earlier. Dr. Ronald Melnick, the senior NIH toxicologist who designed the $30 million study concluded:
“The NTP studies were conducted to test the widely-held assumption that cell phone radiofrequency radiation could not cause cancers or other adverse health effects (other than by tissue heating) because this type of radiation (non-ionizing) did not have sufficient energy to break chemical bonds. The NTP findings that cell phone radiation caused cancers in the heart and brain, DNA damage in brain cells, heart muscle disease and reduced birth weights clearly demonstrate that the assumption that non-ionizing radiation cannot cause cancer or other health effects is wrong.”
The absence of a major epidemic of brain cancer at this time should not be misconstrued as proof of safety for cell phones or other wireless technology.. The technology is too new, the expanded uses too recent, and the ways we employ phones keep changing, making it even more challenging to evaluate their impacts or for us to be able to see any evidence of major population pattern changes. It took four decades before increases in smoking produced measurable increases in lung cancers. The tremendous increase in cellphone use in infants, toddlers and young children, has led Israel, France, Belgium, India, and other high tech nations toreduce exposures in the young .
When it comes to downplaying the potential risks of wireless radiation, the telecom industry makes the tobacco industry look like rank amateurs. For years, respectable American and European scientists carried out research supported by the Tobacco Industry Research Council, at a time when there was little government sponsorship of science. Only when bodies of evidence accumulated, making the dangers of tobacco undeniable, were tobacco-funded studies brought to an end. The achievements of the tobacco industry in manipulating science led Judge Gladys Kessler to confirm a verdict of racketeering that included manipulating institutions such as the American Medical Association and National Cancer Institute — both of which at various times worked to build a safe cigarette.
As GQ reported a decade ago, the telecommunications industry uses the same PR strategies, some of the same industry consultants and scientists to promote disinformation in defense of their addictive products. Further, in 2015 a Harvard expose tracked the revolving door between the FCC and the telecom industry and concluded that the FCC is a captured agency and that “Consumer safety, health, and privacy, along with consumer wallets, have all been overlooked, sacrificed, or raided due to unchecked industry influence.”
Surprisingly for someone who has charted the work of NASA for years, Broad appears oblivious to the fact that serious scientists are raising questions about the ways that “Global 5G wireless networks threaten weather forecasts.” A recent story in the respected scientific journal Nature explains that water vapor is measured at a frequency quite close to those employed by Earth-observing satellites flying over areas of the United States. If widespread proposed 5G wireless coverage fills the airways, then satellites will not be able to detect changes in water vapor in the atmosphere key to predicting massive shifts in weather that we have been experiencing in recent years.
“This is the first time we’ve seen a threat to what I’d call the crown jewels of our frequencies — the ones that we absolutely must defend come what may,” says Stephen English, a meteorologist at the European Centre for Medium-Range Weather Forecasts in Reading, UK.
Reportedly, weather experts within the U.S. government are being muzzled. The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and NASA are currently locked in a high-stakes negotiation with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which oversees US wireless networks. When NOAA and NASA asked the FCC to protect these frequencies from interference as 5G rolls out, the FCC rebuffed the weather scientists. The sale ended on 17 April and reaped the U.S. nearly $2 billion. This week, Senators Ron Wyden of Oregon and Maria Cantwell of Washington have written the FCC urging that steps be taken to protect national security and weather science.
Could the failure to report these critical 5G issues and correct misleading information regarding health effects of wireless and 5G in the New York Times have anything to do with the their new joint venture with Verizon in 5G journalism, or the fact that the Times board of directors includes officials from Facebook, Verizon, Media Lab, and other stalwarts of the telecom industry, while Carlos Slim, head of some of the largest telecom firms in the world, has downsized and now owns just 15 percent of its stock?
It is frankly astonishing that a seasoned science journalist like Broad would rely on an outdated “factsheet” from 2014, that was prepared for the EMF Project of the World Health Organization, a group led by industry-supported scientists. Curiously, Broad cites this 5 year old World Health Organization (WHO) statement as showing that cellphones are safe, and ignores the fact that another expert group within the WHO reached an entirely different conclusion nearly a decade ago. In 2011, the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in 2011 declared that cellphone radiation was a possible human carcinogen. More recently, the IARC advisory group has called for a re-evaluation in light of the NTP and other newstudies published since 2011. Several experts nowconsider wireless radiation to be a definite human carcinogen.
Although one would not know it from the Times, the WSJ and other accounts, other nations are demanding safety information before proceeding with 5G. The health minister of Brussels recently declared that their citizens will not be guinea pigs, effectively halting 5G in Europe’s capital. Reports from Switzerland indicate that officials in Geneva, Vaud, and Neuchatel voted to halt new deployments until safety is demonstrated. Holman W. Jenkins, Jr. WSJ columnist has just pointed out that, contrary to the notion that all concerns about 5G are merely the work of clueless feckless Russian trolls, British, U.S. and Russian research on the dangers of electromagnetic fields go back thirty years.
Also missing from these recent stories is any mention of the fact that Senator Richard Blumenthal (Connecticut) and Representatives. Anna G. Eshoo and Jackie Speier (California), Thomas Suozzi (New York), and Peter A. DeFazio (Oregon) have all demanded evidence of safety from the FCC. At a March, 2019 Senate Commerce hearing where Blumenthal directly questioned officials, he criticized the government’s lack of response stating , “I believe the American people deserve to know what the health effects are…We are flying blind here on health and safety.”
Finding such a slanted report in the Times, is especially disconcerting to those who have long believed that that newspaper printed all the news that was fit to print without prejudice, and that the ‘truth is now more important than ever.’ Indeed it is the truth, and our capacity to agree on what that constitutes, that is imperiled by stories such as Broad has filed, and others are now echoing.
Devra Davis, PhD., MPH, is Visiting Professor Medicine, The Hebrew University. An award-winning writer and scientist, she is also President of Environmental Health Trust www.ehtrust.org.
“A wifi classroom is like the inside of a microwave oven set at very low power. Children are exposed to that wifi radiation six hours every school day, five days a week, and for several months during the year.” –Magda Havas Associate Professor of Environmental and Resource Studies, Trent University, Canada
Have teachers and parents been informed about the potential health risks of Electromagnetic Fields/Radiofrequency (EMF/RF) as used to power communication technology?
Why does the Government keep pushing for MORE wireless in classrooms stating that it is safe, when thousands of research studies conclude otherwise?
Have teachers unions done their research about the health risks of Wi-Fi and cellphones and are they fighting to protect the health of their adult members in the workplace?
What kind of liabilities are school boards prepared to bear, for knowingly putting children under unnecessary and involuntary exposure to an agent classified by the World Health Organisation’s (IARC Team) as a Class 2B Possible Carcinogen?
Note: In 2011 The World Health Organisation’s IARC team classified Electromagnetic/Radiofrequency/Wi-Fi as a 2B possible carcinogen (WHO IARC Monograph, Volume 102, Part 2 pg 419). This applies to the full range of radiofrequency radiation including that used for Wi-Fi, Communication Masts, iPads, Tablets, Smart Meters, Computers, 2/3/4/5G, wireless baby monitors, mobile and cordless phones etc. On 11th April 2017 they issued Press Release No. 251 showing a global increase of 13% in childhood cancer incidence over two decades. https://monographs.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/mono102.pdf
POTENTIAL ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS OF EMF/RF People have different tolerances to EMF/RF. Typical symptoms for children are headache while using a mobile phone, or “flu-like” symptoms and/or headaches a few weeks after joining a school with Wi-Fi. Other common complaints are fatigue, dizziness, nausea, vertigo, nose bleeds, irritability, tension, visual and auditory distortion, drowsiness, sleeplessness, depression, anxiety, forgetfulness, tachycardis (racing heart rate), hyperactivity, ADD, ADHD and difficulties in concentration. Those who are, or who become electro-hyper-sensitive (EHS), can go on to suffer a wider range of symptoms e.g. infertility, diabetes, cancer, Alzheimers/dementia, neurological diseases etc. EHS stems from a reaction to a toxic environment and is formerly classified as a functional impairment or disability in some countries.
The Guidelines used by the Government have been produced by The International Commission on Non- ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). These guidelines have been described as obsolete by the European Parliament – Doc: A6-0260/2008, No.23. They refer only to short-term exposure (6 minutes) and to thermal effects of Electromagnetic Fields/Radiofrequency/Wi-Fi. They do not address the issue of pregnant women or children. Thousands of research papers by world-renowned independent scientists have demonstrated that adverse health effects from this radiation can occur at levels well below the thermal level i.e. at non-thermal levels. Recently, a group of doctors and scientists in the UK produced International Guidelines on Non-Ionising Radiation that are biologically based and also based upon Europaem EMF Guidelines 2016. We ask the Government to replace the outdated irrelevant ICNIRP standards with IGNIR’S International Guidelines on Non-Ionising Radiation. More at: www.ignir.org
School in Greystones, Wicklow: WiFi was installed in 2017. The school has 500 children, 18 classrooms and has had 24 WiFi boxes installed. Each box has 2 radios (2.4Ghz + 5Ghz). The manufacturer of the boxes recommends installing 10 WiFi boxes in a school with 20 classrooms and with 600 laptops (30 laptops per classroom). The school in Greystones has a total of 30 laptops. Every one of the 18 classrooms had a Wi-Fi box installed in it. Department guidelines state that only classrooms 80sq metres or bigger should have a Wi-Fi box inside the classroom. No classroom in the school in Greystones is larger than 40sq metres. This created a situation where every child in this school sat all day in close proximity to a Wi-Fi box emitting Wi-Fi radiation on two frequencies. One parent, whose school-going children became affected by the WiFi in this school, was requested by the school’s solicitors not to take measurements of the radiation inside the school or its grounds. This is not the first occasion that schools have responded to concern by accessing legal means to prevent parents from measuring the amount of Wi-Fi radiation inside and around the schools their children attend.
Who is liable for Insurance in Schools for illness?: Extract from a grandparents letter (Feb 2018) sent to Richard Bruton TD, the then Min for Education, in relation to the new Digital Strategy ICT grant for schools: “Considering the fact that there is a surfeit of wireless electronic equipment already in use {in schools}, am I correct to suppose that much of this expenditure will be on wireless (WiFi) enabled equipment? If this is the case, and in consideration of the fact that I have school-going grandchildren, has the Department of Education arranged for insurance against the negative health effects of wireless radiation. If so, could I see a sample of any insurance policy document for any school covering this technology? If not, can you explain why such insurance has not been acquired? Could I also ask if there is any plan to ask permission from the parents of pupils to introduce wireless equipment into schools.”
Response from Ministers Office: February 2018 “Many thanks for your recent contact with the Minister for Education and Skills, Mr. Richard Bruton regarding the recently announced Digital Strategy ICT grant for schools.
Under the provisions of the Education Act 1998, the school Board of Management is the body charged with the direct governance of a school and places a responsibility on Boards of Management to manage schools for the benefit of all students and to provide an appropriate education for each student in the school utilising the resources made available by the State. The onus is on each Board of Management to ensure that all funds are used appropriately and in accordance with Department guidelines and circulars, this includes having appropriate insurance in place.”
THE INSURANCE ISSUE ‘Exclusion (32)’ is applied across the market as standard. The purpose of it is to exclude cover for illnesses caused by Electromagnetic Fields including Radiofrequency and Wi-Fi.Specialists from Emerging Risks teams at leading global reinsurance firms are warning the insurance industry that unforeseen consequences of electromagnetic fields (which includes Radiofrequency wireless radiation) could lead to a raft of claims and significant product liability losses in the next 10 years.
RISK ASSESSMENT FOR SCHOOLS, COLLEGES ETC – Dr. Sarah Starkey Risk Assessment for radiofrequency radiation exposures in pre-schools, schools, colleges, universities and places of care and residential accommodation for children and young people. Access at: https://www.wirelessriskassessment.org/relevant-documents
2003: Class Action Complaint on Wireless by Parents to Oak Park Elementary School, Illinois, USA https://www.wired.com/2003/10/parents-sue-school-over-wi-fi/ A PIONEERING ELEMENTARY school district outside Chicago has been sued for installing a wireless computer network, by parents worried that exposure to the network’s radio waves could harm their children.. .The Oak Park Elementary School District set up a wireless network to connect its schools to one another in 1995, long before such networks became wildly popular.
Electrohypersensitivity in school: a mother goes to court – Mobilfunk Newsletter September 10, 2015
A new French law prohibits Wi-Fi “in the areas dedicated to home, to rest and activities of children under three years” and requires that it be turned off in primary schools when not in use. A Montreal lawyer has filed a discrimination complaint against the Public Health Department (DSP) of Montreal and the Quebec government who refuse to give her and her three children reasonable accommodations due to their electrohypersensitivity. According to their doctor, mother and children have developed a severe intolerance to radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic fields (EMF) emitted by antennas and wireless devices such as wireless modems and routers. The mother filed her complaint with the Quebec Human Rights and Youth Rights Commission on 28 August and is also about to file proceedings in Quebec Superior Court. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/mobilfunk_newsletter/dERq-Ysjt9o
Judge throws out counts against Southboro school in Wi-Fi suit – (The Fay Case) WORCESTER, USA – A federal judge last week threw out most of the counts in a lawsuit brought by a boy and his parents who allege a Southboro private school’s wireless internet was sickening the student. U.S. District Judge Timothy S. Hillman did, however, allow in his decision last Friday one remaining count of retaliation to proceed, keeping the family’s case against the Fay School open. The plaintiff in the dispute, “G,” who is represented by his parents, “Mother” and “Father,” filed the suit against the school two years ago in U.S. District Court in Worcester, when he was 12 years old. The family alleged the school would not sufficiently change its Wi-Fi practices to accommodate G, who the suit claims was being made ill by the internet signal in his classrooms. Central to the family’s case is the existence of a condition known as Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity Syndrome , which causes symptoms like headaches and nausea when the person afflicted with the ailment is exposed to high levels of electromagnetic radiation. http://www.mysouthborough.com/2017/10/04/telegram-judge-dismisses-multiple-counts-in-fay- school-wifi-suit-charges-proceeding-on-alleged-retaliation/
Court ordered to turn off Wi-Fi at a school in Florence, Italy.
The Court of Florence (2018) has ordered the immediate shutdown of Wi-Fi in a school to protect the health of a minor. The order was issued to the school manager of the Botticelli Comprehensive Institute. They have also ordered the Government (Ministers of the Environment and Education) to launch a campaign to advise the public of the health risks from mobile and cordless phones. http://www.emfsa.co.za/ehs/court-ordered-to-turn-off-wi-fi-at-a-school-in-florence/
School wifi networks ‘could put children’s health at risk’ as grieving mum tells of daughter’s wifi ‘allergy’ https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/school-wifi-networks-could-put-12602188Mum Debra Fry told the story of how her 15-year-old daughter Jenny killed herself after developing wifi “allergy” (May 2018). A leading cancer expert has called for a ban on school wifi networks over fears they could put children’s health at risk. Dr Anthony Miller, an advisor to the World Health Organisation, says pupils could suffer long-term effects from exposure to the radio waves. He warned: “Radiation from mobile phones and other wireless devices can cause changes in DNA and induce cancer in experimental animals. “Children’s skulls are thinner and absorb much more of this radiation. We ignore this at our future peril.”
MORE ON MENTAL HEALTH AND YOUNG PEOPLE
One in five young people in Ireland are now considered to have mental health issues (Report: ‘The Mental Health of Young People in Ireland’ by the Royal College of Surgeons (2013)) https://epubs.rcsi.ie/psychrep/1/This situation seems to be reflected across the board – one example is the University of Bristol where there has been an upsurge in the number of students committing suicide. It is difficult to verify numbers but thought to be: 1 Sudden Cardiac Arrest and 13 suicides since 2016, eight of these in the past 18 months. An advanced 5G system surrounds Bristol University and is used for trial and test purposes.
Professor Martin Pall identifies 13 neuropsychiatric effects in his research, including depression and anxiety: Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread neuropsychiatric effects including depression. Professor Martin Pall. Summary: Research on “the mechanism of action of microwave EMFs, the role of the VGCCs in the brain, the impact of non-thermalEMFs on the brain, extensive epidemiological studies performed over the past 50 years, and five criteria testing for causality, all collectively show that various non-thermalmicrowave EMF exposures produce diverse neuropsychiatric effects.
August 20, 2015 Ronald M. Powell, Ph.D. Message to Public Schools about Wireless Devices:
“If wireless devices, such as Wi-Fi, are used in your schools, then the health of your staff, your teachers, and your students can be at risk. But this problem can be successfully addressed, and with benefit to all.
Background: Wireless devices transmit information using radiofrequency/microwave radiation. The international biomedical research community has been studying the impact of such radiation on biological systems for decades, but more intensely in recent years. The vast majority of the thousands of peer-reviewed research publications of this community, when funded independent of the wireless industries, are finding biological effects of concern. Further, these biological effects occur at levels of radiation far lower than earlier understood. Simply stated, a worldwide health crisis is emerging and is becoming a hallmark of the 21st Century. The international biomedical research community is trying to warn us; but, as a society, we are not yet listening. I hope that this message will help to change that.” http://safetechforschoolsmaryland.blogspot.com/2017/04/dr-ronald-powells-letter-to-maryland.html
The Research below may explain the recent rise in Sudden Adult Deaths (Sudden Cardiac Arrest), especially among young and athletic people. Many athletic pitches now have masts erected on them: Radiation from wireless technology affects the blood, the heart, and the autonomic nervous system Dr. Magda Havas Wifi in schools affects student health Students in schools with Wifi are complaining of headaches, difficulty concentrating, weakness, and heart palpitations, prompting their parents to take them to their family doctor and to their pediatric cardiologist to determine the nature of their problem. In one Ontario school district, several students complained of heart problems. A 6-year-old girl had a “musical heart”, and she experienced headaches and dizziness only at school. A 12-year-old boy had tachycardia (rapid heart rate). A 12-year-old girl experienced nausea, vomiting, no fever, insomnia, blurred vision, and tachycardia only at school. A 13-year-old boy had a pounding heart, insomnia, and headaches. His family moved to a different school district, and his symptoms disappeared. In the same area, 4 students had sudden cardiac arrests (SCA) during exercise class within a 2-year period. Two of these students were resuscitated. The annual rate for SCA among young people in Canada is approximately 7 per year; hence, 4 in a small community is unusual. According to Sinatra (13), a cardiologist, Wolff-Parkinson-White (WPW) syndrome, which is a disorder of the conduction system of the heart, is present in 1 out of 700 students. In a school district with 50,000 students, as many as 70 may have this generally undiagnosed condition. According to Sinatra (13), when students with WPW syndrome are exercising and are exposed to microwave radiation, the combined stress on the heart can lead to supraventricular tachycardia, thus creating the “perfect storm”. Fortunately, due to the Defibrillator Access Act, schools and other public buildings are installing defibrillators. What they should also be doing is trying to determine what is causing SCA and why students are complaining of headaches and heart palpitations at school. A key question that needs to be asked is, “What role does RF radiation from a school’s WiFi system and from nearby cell phone base stations play in these symptoms?” The effects of microwave radiation on the heart have been known for decades (14). In a 1969 symposium on the biological effects and health implications of microwave radiation, the authors clearly state that, “In the interest of occupational hygiene…researchers have recommended that cardiovascular abnormalities be used as screening criteria to exclude people from occupations involving radio- frequency exposures”. Perhaps students need to be screened at school to ensure that they do not have an underlying heart condition that may be exacerbated with WiFi microwave exposure. According to Drezner et al. (15), out-of-hospital SCA among young people is on the rise in the USA, although doctors do not know the reason. The increasing exposure to electrosmog may be to blame for at least part of this increase. More research is urgently needed in this area. Children are much more sensitive to environmental toxins than are adults, and as such, there should be stricter guidelines for exposure. To date, at least nine countries have issued warnings that children should limit their use of cell phones. These countries include the UK (2000), Germany (2007), France (2008), Russia (2008), India (2008), Belgium (2008), Finland (2009), the USA (2009), and Canada (2012). (All References are contained in the Article itself). https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7520958029.pdf
Wireless Health Risks: The iPAD/Tablet iPADS, tablets and wireless devices are radiofrequency/microwave transmitters. Children are said to be more vulnerable to these as their nervous systems and immune systems are developing at a rapid rate and can be profoundly affected by environmental toxins. Exposure to this radiation can impact brain maturation as noted in research studies. Parents can take steps to minimize exposure to their children such as turning the Device onto Airplane Mode with WiFi Off when not in use. More at: https://ehtrust.org/wireless-and-children-2/
Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health Professor Martin L. Pall, Washington State University, USA Most arguments that have been made that microwave frequency EMFs may bemuch more damaging to young children have centered on the much smaller skulls and skull thickness in young children, increasing the exposure of their brains to EMFs. However there are other arguments to be made. EMFs have been shown to be particularly active in producing effects on embryonic stem cells. Because such stem cells occur at much higher cell densities in children, with stem cell densities the highest in the fetus and decreasing with increasing age, impacts on young children are likely to be much higher than in adults. The decreased DNA repair and increased DNA damage following EMF exposure strongly suggest that young children may be increasingly susceptible to cancer following such exposures. EMF action on stem cells may also cause young children to be particularly susceptible to disruption of brain development, something that may be relevant to autism causation. These are all very problematic issues and we cannot rule out the possibility that there are other problematic issues as well. Redmayne and Johansson (2015) reviewed the literature showing that there are age-related effects, such that young people are more sensitive to EMF effects. It follows from these various findings that the placement of Wi-Fi into schools around the country may well be a high level threat to the health of our children as well being a threat to teachers and any very sensitive fetuses teachers may be carrying, as well. More info and all References at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935118300355
Parents for Safe Technology
“EMF/RFR from wifi and cell towers can exert a disorganizing effect on the ability to learn and remember, and can also be destabilizing to immune and metabolic function. This will make it harder for some children to learn, particularly those who are already having problems in the first place.” -Dr. Martha Herbert, Harvard pediatric neurologist. More at: http://www.parentsforsafetechnology.org/school.html
EUROPE: E.U. Parliamentary Assembly: Recommendation 1863 (2009) – Environment and health: better prevention of environment-related health hazards 2. “Since embryos, foetuses, neonates and children are even more sensitive to environmental factors than adults, the Assembly alerts all governments … to the need to protect or restore a healthy environment and thus guarantee the future of our children and future generations.” http://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-EN.asp?fileid=17720&lang=en European Directive 2013/35/EU – Electromagnetic Fields – “On the minimum health and safety requirements regarding the exposure of workers to the risks arising from physical agents (electromagnetic fields”): Article 2 (b) (ii) non-thermal effects – such as stimulation of muscles, nerves or sensory organs. These effects might have a detrimental effect on the mental and physical health of exposed workers. …
Article 8 – Health Surveillance: (1) With the objective of the prevention and the early diagnosis of any adverse health effects due to exposure to electromagnetic fields, appropriate health surveillance shall be carried out … . (2) If any undesired or unexpected health effect is reported by a worker … the employer shall ensure that appropriate medical examinations … is provided … any costs arising shall not be borne by the worker.” https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:179:0001:0021:EN:PDF This Directive transposed into the Irish Statute Book – Ref: S.I. No. 337 of 2016http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2016/si/337/made/en/pdf
In this resolution the Assembly recommends that member states: “8.1.1. take all reasonable measures to reduce exposure to electromagnetic fields, especially to radiofrequencies from mobile phones, and particularly the exposure to children and young people who seem to be most at risk from head tumours. 8.3.1. (to Ministries of education, environment and health) ‘targeted information campaigns aimed at teachers, parents and children to alert them to the specific risks of early, ill-considered and prolonged use of mobiles and other devices emitting microwaves. 8.3.2. for children in general, and particularly in schools and classrooms, give preference to wired internet connections,and strictly regulate the use of mobile phones by schoolchildren on school premises.”
The Department of Education and Skills, and the Department of Health, hold responsibility for this issue regarding schools and health but the Department for Communication, Climate Action and Environment (Environmental Radiation Policy Section) hold ultimate responsibility for non-ionising radiation EMF/RF/Wi-Fi: Email: radiationpolicy@dccae.gov.ie
IF YOUR SCHOOL HAS ALREADY GOT Wi-Fi INSTALLED, PLEASE CONSIDER REDUCING EMF/RADIOFREQUENCY RADIATION AS PER EU PARLIAMENTARY RESOLUTION 1815 (8.4.3.) BY ADOPTING TWO SIMPLE PRINCIPLES – THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE (only switch on when necessary) AND THE ALARA PRINCIPLE (keep EMF as low as reasonably possible), WITH THE LONGER TERM GOAL OF INSTALLING A SAFER WIRED UP SYSTEM.
…Please don’t make the same ‘smart meter’ mistake that we made. Lots of love, Canada
As an Irish national living in Canada for the past 20 years, I was dismayed to hear that Ireland plans to roll out smart meters in 2019. Having witnessed the serious health effects of these meters in Canada, where hundreds of thousands have already been harmed (myself included), I urge you to inform yourself of the facts. Installing smart meters is not just bad news for residents, but also for the economy, social services, and the already-overburdened healthcare system. Clearly, like so many other nations worldwide, the Irish population is being kept in the dark about the proven adverse effects of the radiation from these so-called ‘smart’ meters.
Installing them is anything but smart, as they emit high levels of microwave radiation, known since the 1930s to be harmful to all forms of life and used as a military weapon since the 1950s. Since these microwaves are invisible and highly penetrative, travelling at the speed of light and instantly penetrating cement, dwellings, vehicles, stone, wood, clothing, plastic, human tissue, bone and all other forms of life, they make the perfect stealth weapon. They are the last thing you want to have flying through the air, uncontrolled, uncontainable and undeniably harmful. Regardless of what the government or ESB Network might tell you, there is overwhelming scientific evidence that this radiation causes serious health issues, [1] including cancer, and there is no way to collectively measure or control the emissions from a multitude of overlapping sources.
The radiation from smart meters is designed to travel for many kilometres in every direction, saturating your living space and natural environment with intermittent bursts of strong microwaves, around the clock. Given their almost immediate impact on the blood, these microwaves can affect every system, organ and cell of the body, agitating the nervous system, stimulating tissue, promoting cellular leakage of calcium, damaging the blood–brain barrier that protects our brains, and causing a multitude of conditions and illnesses that often go undiagnosed or attributed to other things, due to the widespread lack of awareness about their effects.
Symptoms to watch for
The symptoms of microwave sickness include but are not limited to:
While this might seem like an improbably long list, it makes sense when you realize that microwave radiation affects the blood and can therefore affect every bodily function.
A double-whammy
I was staggered to learn that some Irish GPs consider claims of EMF-related illness to be psychiatric cases to be treated with drugs, even though the government is knowingly subjecting people to harmful radiation, without their informed consent. Given the vast body of scientific evidence (more than 25,000 independent studies [2]) relating to electromagnetic fields (EMFs), such an approach is tantamount to criminal negligence and is a clear confirmation of the government’s vested interest in sustaining the very lucrative wireless industry at all costs.
You don’t have to be a doctor, biologist or researcher to discover the truth about these harmful devices. Anyone with a high-powered microscope can put a drop of their blood on a slide and immediately see the effects. Just 15 minutes of exposure to radiation from a smart meter (or from a WiFi router, cell phone, cell tower, cordless phone or other wireless-enabled device) causes clumping and stagnation of blood cells.[3] Many other biological markers have been identified by doctors and researchers specialising in the treatment of EMF-induced illnesses around the world.[4]
Ignorance of epidemic proportions
But even if the medical and scientific data were not enough, there are now an estimated 300 million people worldwide being adversely affected by manmade EMFs—particularly radio-frequency microwave radiation from smart meters, WiFi, cell towers, cordless phones and cell phones. As a result of these technological ‘advances’, our environment now has an estimated 10 billion times more radiation than it had just 60 years ago. Our bodies are not designed for this, and we are increasingly seeing the effects. Epidemics of autism, ADD, cancer, neurological conditions, dementia, immune-system disorders, strokes, heart attacks, diabetes, depression and anxiety are sweeping the globe, rising in tandem with the proliferation of artificial electromagnetic fields.
Having had a brain tumour caused by microwave radiation, and since I can physically feel the radiation when exposed to it, I need no further convincing of the harm it can cause. Out of necessity, I have done a great deal of research, connecting with some of the top scientists, doctors, biologists and researchers around the world, as well as the many vast networks of people being affected by electromagnetic radiation, and compiling documents to raise awareness of the issue.[5] I have also worked for the World Health Organization (WHO), whose former Director-General, Dr Gro Harlem Brundtland, resigned because the microwave radiation from cell phones was making her ill. Despite Dr Brundtland’s public confirmation of the harmful effects of this radiation, however, WHO has continued to downplay and deny the dangers. This is not surprising when you realize that its EMF Project (dedicated to assessing the biological impact of radio-frequency EMFs and to taking appropriate measures to protect global health) receives funding from the very industry from which it is mean to protect us. When you realize that the project is headed by an engineer (with zero medical qualifications) who has done research for the wireless telecom industry, you begin to see why WHO has failed to acknowledge the dangers or take the appropriate action.
For the past 25 years, the industry has claimed that non-ionizing radiation is harmless and that the only radiation worth worrying about is ionizing radiation (for example, from x-rays) or radiation that has a thermal (or heating) effect. Extensive research done by Dr Martin Pall (among others) unequivocally proves this to be false.
“It’s been very clear, going back all the way to 1971 and even before that, that this wasn’t true,” says Dr Pall, PhD, researcher and Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences at Washington State University. “But we didn’t know what the mechanism was. Now, we do. […] the industry’s been trying to hoodwink everybody for decades. Now we know how it works [and] there is a wide variety of different health impacts.”[6]
Six more reasons for smartening up
It’s not just the health effects that are of concern, although that should be more than enough to dissuade any intelligent person from agreeing to this very unsmart technology. There are several other good reasons for not having smart meters anywhere near your home.
You will see an increase in your electricity bills—as has been the case in Canada and the US, with some residents reporting increases of up to 50% on their monthly bills after a smart meter was installed (even though there was no increase in their consumption). You effectively lose control over the amount of electricity coming into your home, since the meter is remotely controlled and power surges can occur on your electrical line. ‘Time of use’ billing is something that has been built into the systems and, when this is implemented, most people see increases because they must heat homes and cook during peak hours.
Your privacy and security are compromised, since the electricity company will know when you are home and when you are away, based on your remotely monitored electricity usage. The zigbee chip used in smart meters will communicate with ‘smart’ appliances throughout your home, violating your privacy by reporting on appliances and their usage, as well as increasing the levels of radiation coming into your home. As for cybersecurity, smart meters are a gateway for accidents and hacking of the grid.
Increased illness and functional impairment caused by the radiation from these meters will put an additional strain on the already over-taxed healthcare system, with more people going on sick leave, taking medication to control their symptoms, claiming disability and opting for early retirement due to health issues. The cost of all this will, of course, be borne by you, the taxpayer. Even if smart meters are not directly responsible for whatever health issue might arise (although, in many cases, they will be), microwave radiation is known to exacerbate any existing condition. If you have a stroke, for example, you are far less likely to recover fully or quickly if you are being exposed to this non-ionizing radiation.
You are being deceived and knowingly harmed by your own government—the elected officials who are meant to serve and protect you. Not only is your government failing to inform you of the scientific facts about microwave radiation, but it is also ensuring that anyone who experiences the inevitable consequences of exposure is labelled a nutcase and treated with drugs. Reckless endangerment of its own people, and drugging those who protest: is this what you want, Ireland?
Smart meters are known to catch fire and damage properties.[7] There have been many such fires in Canada, with home-owners powerless to prevent them as the electricity company refuses to allow analogue meters to be used instead and often takes no responsibility for the damage caused. Home-owners are therefore left to cover the cost of the damages to their property.
The installation of a smart meter is often the last straw for bodies that are already being subjected to non-stop microwave radiation from WiFi, cell phones, cell towers, cordless phones and other wireless devices. Already, governments have failed to inform us of the dangers associated with these other devices, and adding smart meters to the mix will push many people over the edge. Radiation accumulates in the body, with tolerance gradually decreasing as the immune system becomes less able to handle the ever-increasing load. While many may not be aware of being affected, many others will become ill following the installation of smart meters in their neighbourhood. If that happens, and if they remain unaware of the facts or how to protect themselves, they can look forward to being ridiculed and drugged by their doctors …and a lifetime of increasing debilitation and illness.
So, Ireland, what will you choose? Will you blindly follow the lead of other nations, with the same disastrous results for the health, wealth and economies of their citizens? Or will you make the truly smart decision, do your research and be the first European nation to blow the whistle on this invasive, harmful technology?
Electromagnetic Sense Ireland 