5G: Great Tech or Great Threat?

May 28, 2019

Despite lack of testing, 5G is being launched in neighborhoods nationwide. Action Alert!

Recently, Verizon announced it would launch the next generation of wireless technology in dozens of cities by the end of 2019. The technology has already launched in Chicago and Minneapolis, and the company listed twenty more cities that can expect to see 5G network rollout in the coming months, with more locations to be announced. Yet there are still a number of critical safety questions to be answered. Simply put, we do not know the human health implications of launching 5G networks on a wide scale—and what information there is gives grave reasons for concern.

5G networks will be substantially different than the 4G networks currently in use. Whereas current 4G networks use up to 6 GHz, 5G will use frequencies between 24 GHz and 100 GHz, known as millimeter-wave frequencies. These smaller waves are more easily blocked by trees, buildings, and other objects in the world, which necessitates erecting many “small cell” towers to support the network. This means that dozens of these unsightly “small cells” will be installed in your neighborhood, which will emit millimeter waves and bathe neighborhoods in
radiation.

In previous articles we’ve reviewed both the lack of safety testing on 5G networks and the evidence of negative health effects that could result from widespread use of this technology. A group of hundreds of scientists from around the world recently sent a letter to the United Nations and the World Health Organization warning of “serious concerns regarding the ubiquitous and increasing exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) generated by electric and wireless devices.” The scientists explain that EMF “affects living organisms at levels well below most international guidelines,” causing increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in free radicals, genetic damage, changes to the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, and neurological disorders.

Recall, too, that 5G networks will expose us to EMF at an unprecedented scale. As Verizon boasts on its website, the “Internet of Things” will thrive on 5G technology. The Internet of Things refers to the expanding number of devices, appliances, utilities, and other technologies that collect, transmit, and share data through the internet. Many processes that have not previously relied on the internet will start to once 5G roles out: switching light bulbs on or off with a smartphone app, driverless cars—even “smart cities” that will use wireless networks to collect and analyze data about the environment, traffic, water, transit, lighting, waste management, security, and parking. Our environment will be saturated with EMF.

The scientists’ letter did not even list all of the dangers. Millimeter wavelengths present new threats to human health: Israeli researchers found that our sweat ducts act as antennas for millimeter waves, meaning we would absorb more of this energy into our bodies. Millimeter wavelengths are also used in crowd control systems, making people caught in the high-powered millimeter wave feel like their skin is on fire.

Most disturbing of all is the lack of long-term research on exposure to millimeter waves, yet telecom companies are working with the federal government to railroad communities into adopting 5G networks. The FCC recently approved rules that limit the fees local governments can charge telecom companies for use of public utilities and property. The rules also limit cities’ ability to control the look and design of small cells.

We cannot let special interests and the federal government treat us like guinea pigs. We must demand that more research be done before telecom companies are allowed to implement 5G networks.

Action Alert! Write to Congress and the FCC to demand that more research be done on 5G before this technology rolls out. Please send your message immediately.

3 responses to “5G: Great Tech or Great Threat?”

  1. Lozz Starseed says:

    Despite lack of testing, 5G is being launched in neighborhoods nationwide. Action Alert!

    Recently, Verizon announced it would launch the next generation of wireless technology in dozens of cities by the end of 2019. The technology has already launched in Chicago and Minneapolis, and the company listed twenty more cities that can expect to see 5G network rollout in the coming months, with more locations to be announced. Yet there are still a number of critical safety questions to be answered. Simply put, we do not know the human health implications of launching 5G networks on a wide scale—and what information there is gives grave reasons for concern.

    5G networks will be substantially different than the 4G networks currently in use. Whereas current 4G networks use up to 6 GHz, 5G will use frequencies between 24 GHz and 100 GHz, known as millimeter-wave frequencies. These smaller waves are more easily blocked by trees, buildings, and other objects in the world, which necessitates erecting many “small cell” towers to support the network. This means that dozens of these unsightly “small cells” will be installed in your neighborhood, which will emit millimeter waves and bathe neighborhoods in
    radiation.
    International Appeal
    Scientists call for Protection from Non-ionizing Electromagnetic Field Exposure
    We are scientists engaged in the study of biological and health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF). Based upon peer-reviewed, published research, we have serious concerns regarding the ubiquitous and increasing exposure to EMF generated by electric and wireless devices. These include–but are not limited to–radiofrequency radiation (RFR) emitting devices, such as cellular and cordless phones and their base stations, Wi-Fi, broadcast antennas, smart meters, and baby monitors as well as electric devices and infra-structures used in the delivery of electricity that generate extremely-low frequency electromagnetic field (ELF EMF).

    Scientific basis for our common concerns

    Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.

    These findings justify our appeal to the United Nations (UN) and, all member States in the world, to encourage the World Health Organization (WHO) to exert strong leadership in fostering the development of more protective EMF guidelines, encouraging precautionary measures, and educating the public about health risks, particularly risk to children and fetal development. By not taking action, the WHO is failing to fulfill its role as the preeminent international public health agency.

    Inadequate non-ionizing EMF international guidelines

    The various agencies setting safety standards have failed to impose sufficient guidelines to protect the general public, particularly children who are more vulnerable to the effects of EMF. The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) established in 1998 the “Guidelines For Limiting Exposure To Time-Varying Electric, Magnetic, and Electromagnetic Fields (up to 300 GHz)” . These guidelines are accepted by the WHO and numerous countries around the world. The WHO is calling for all nations to adopt the ICNIRP guidelines to encourage international harmonization of standards. In 2009, the ICNIRP released a statement saying that it was reaffirming its 1998 guidelines, as in their opinion, the scientific literature published since that time “has provided no evidence of any adverse effects below the basic restrictions and does not necessitate an immediate revision of its guidance on limiting exposure to high frequency electromagnetic fields . ICNIRP continues to the present day to make these assertions, in spite of growing scientific evidence to the contrary. It is our opinion that, because the ICNIRP guidelines do not cover long-term exposure and low-intensity effects, they are insufficient to protect public health.

    The WHO adopted the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classification of extremely low frequency magnetic fields (ELF EMF) in 2002 and radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in 2011 . This classification states that EMF is a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B). Despite both IARC findings, the WHO continues to maintain that there is insufficient evidence to justify lowering these quantitative exposure limits.

    Since there is controversy about a rationale for setting standards to avoid adverse health effects, we recommend that the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) convene and fund an independent multidisciplinary committee to explore the pros and cons of alternatives to current practices that could substantially lower human exposures to RF and ELF fields. The deliberations of this group should be conducted in a transparent and impartial way. Although it is essential that industry be involved and cooperate in this process, industry should not be allowed to bias its processes or conclusions. This group should provide their analysis to the UN and the WHO to guide precautionary action.

  2. Sue Sheldon says:

    We will be microwaving our insides!

  3. Elizabeth Cunningham says:

    Please do more research before allowing 5G to public.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *