EMF Consultation

EMFSA is proud to announce that James Lech (BSc., BScH., HMMS, MSc.) is now part of our team. James’ skills dovetail well with the services provided by EMFSA, including research, education, training, presentations, EMF surveys, radiation remediation and measuring instruments.

James Lech: BSc., BScH., HMMS, MSc.
James received an MSc.scholarship from the South African government, contracted to model the potential effects of non-native EMF radiation on the population. For his thesis he had to acquire and demonstrate knowledge from diverse fields such as dosimetry, wave propagation physics, geospatial modelling, epidemiology, medicine, risk analysis, legal procedures, finance and informatics.
Consultation focus areas:
  • EMFIS recovery and rehabilitation
  • Disability claims
  • Policy development
  • EMF geospatial modelling
  • Medical
  • Legal procedures
  • EMF Hygiene
  • Coaching & rehabilitation: gaining control and order over your EMFIS
  • Integration into society as best as possible
  • Public talks

Durban Associate: Daniel Barbeau
Contact EMFSA Head Office 021 554 2008

(https://www.emfsa.co.za/news/submission-to-the-department-of-health-south-africa-emf-national-report-2108-2019/)

Short Letter to ICASA

TO ICASA:

Paseka Maleka
Tel : (012) 568 3455
Cell : 079 509 0702
Email : pmaleka@icasa.org.za

Dear Paseka

I refer to your recent media statements that purport that when it comes to 5G technologies, there is “no evidence that they pose any health risks”

“Communications regulator Icasa has moved to quash conspiracy theories spreading through social media that next-generation 5G networks pose a health risk to consumers “The authority confirms that type-approved electronic communications facilities provided in the country adhere to the prescribed standards and that there is no evidence that they pose any health risks” to citizens, Icasa said in a statement on Monday.

This statement is both irresponsible and misleading. The reason there is no evidence of health risks is because there has been NO TESTING! Not that it has been tested and found safe.

I call on you to retract this statement immediately and tell the truth to the public of South Africa, which is that 5G has never been tested and that at the very least the precautionary principle be used, as well as the WHO principle “health in all policies”.

We call on you therefore, as our Regulator, to halt rather than intensify the roll-out  for the “5G experimentations” until an adequate and active involvement of public institutions operating in the field of environmental health (health ministry, environmental ministry, national environmental and health agencies) will be effectively planned.

This involvement should be aimed to correctly and preliminarily perform risk analyses and environmental health monitoring plans, possibly suggesting alternative or adequate measures to reduce the level of risk in the exposed population.

 

…………………..

Signed.

 

Icasa re No damage to Health statement 08 April 2020

You can download the full letter here:  TO ICAS1 or you can simply copy and past into an email from this page.


TO ICASA:

Paseka Maleka
Tel : (012) 568 3455
Cell : 079 509 0702
Email : pmaleka@icasa.org.za

Dear Paseka

We refer to your recent media statements that purport that when it comes to 5G technologies, there is “no evidence that they pose any health risks’. As a South African citizen I find the remark that there is NO EVIDENCE that they pose any health risks MISLEADING and grossly irresponsible. The truth is not that the technology has been tested and no proven health risks found, but rather IT HAS NEVER BEEN TESTED.

“Communications regulator Icasa has moved to quash conspiracy theories spreading through social media that next-generation 5G networks pose a health risk to consumers “The authority confirms that type-approved electronic communications facilities provided in the country adhere to the prescribed standards and that there is no evidence that they pose any health risks” to citizens, Icasa said in a statement on Monday.

I say this because either ICASA is incredibly naive, or they have been captured by big business. From extensive research done on electro magnetic frequencies (EMFs) and Radio Frequencies (RF) globally, there is overwhelming evidence that it is harmful to life at the current rate which stands to reason then that an increased rate of EMF will be even more damaging.

According to the 229,547 signatories from 211 nations who signed the Global Space Appeal, (the full referenced text of which you can find here as well as Annexure 1a below), The accumulated clinical evidence of sick and injured human beings, experimental evidence of damage to DNA, cells and organ systems in a wide variety of plants and animals, and epidemiological evidence that the major diseases of modern civilization—cancer, heart disease and diabetes—are in large part caused by electromagnetic pollution, forms a literature base of well over 10,000 peer-reviewed studies.

They say further that “5G will massively increase exposure to radio frequency (RF) radiation on top of the 2G, 3G and 4G networks for telecommunications already in place. RF radiation has been proven harmful for 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.”

If the telecommunications industry’s plans for 5G come to fruition, no person, no animal, no bird, no insect and no plant on Earth will be able to avoid exposure, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, to levels of RF radiation that are tens to hundreds of times greater than what exists today, without any possibility of escape anywhere on the planet. These 5G plans threaten to provoke serious, irreversible effects on humans and permanent damage to all of the Earth’s ecosystems.

In light of the above, and the fact that in South Africa there is no RM-EMF radiation exposure protection standard, monitoring and regulations, we call for an immediate halt rather than speeding up of the roll out of 5G until such time that it has been tested and can ensure that there will be no harm done.

AS A South African citizen I call on ICASA and Government for the action outlined in Annexure 4 of this document including:

Halt the proposed roll-out of 5G technology in South Africa until proper research and testing proves that there is no harm to people, animals and/or the environment;

Conduct urgent research on the matter of the forthcoming 5G technology. While 5g will certainly have some benefits to us, the health risks sadly outweigh such benefits and

Ensure that in cases where technology has not been tested and there is doubt about it’s safety, to please ensure that the Precautionary Principle be employed.

By way of further mitigation I cite the following facts for your consideration:


5-G RELATED ILLNESSES WILL NOT BE INSURED AND END UP BEING THE RESPONSIBILITY OF GOVERNMENT

Large insurance companies are refusing to insure EMF related illnesses. Most particularly we bring to your attention that International re-insurance companies Swiss Re and Lloyd’s of London do not insure the telecoms industry against the health claim by the public as it has not been proven to be safe. Medical Insurance companies also do not cover any ailment that is proven to be caused by exposure to EMF Radiation. So, the full costs of such damage, when it is completely proven to be true beyond industries stranglehold of influence, will have to be borne by governments. It is reckless to take this risk with the health of citizens and to put the fiscus under such strain. We have to ask: What Does Lloyd’s of London Know that we don’t know?

Corporate Company Investor Warnings in Annual Reports 10k Filings Cell Phone Radiation Risks

“We may incur significant expenses defending such suits or government charges and may be required to pay amounts or otherwise change our operations in ways that could materially adversely affect our operations or financial results.”

Cell phone manufacturers and providers of their infrastructure are aware that the radiation from their products could be risky and warn their shareholders. See below excerpts from statements in their annual reports that indicate these companies are informing their shareholders that they may incur significant financial losses related to electromagnetic fields.

Insurance companies will not insure these companies for harm from the radiation from their products and networks. As Crown Castle states, “We currently do not maintain any significant insurance with respect to these matters.” These companies include: AT&T, Verizon, Crown Castle, VODAFONE, Blackberry, China Mobile, American Tower Corp, AMÉRICA MÓVIL, S.A.B. DE C.V., T-Mobile US Inc., GCI Inc, TELEFÓNICA, S.A, Soft Bank Crown Corp, Nokia, Microsoft, Telstra,

 

Could it be that the insurance companies must be reading the research findings from major publications like the BioInitiative Report on the biological effects of radio frequency and cell phone radiation. The research news is chilling.  Prolonged exposure to EMF causes cellular malfunction, the formation of free radicals which then leads to a multitude of health issues. This report was created by 29 authors from around the world, including 10 with medical degrees, 21 PhDs and 3 masters degrees. More than 100,000 people visit their site annually (http://www.bioinitiative.org).  No longer can public officials pretend EMF is harmless.
(https://smartmeternewsupdates.wordpress.com/2019/07/01/lloyds-insurers-refuse-to-cover-5g-wi-fi-illnesses/?fbclid=IwAR1zQUb68t5KBnnzRM6RtA7ju3zUmrPTVtA1pQn7ssrsmXG4hnt8t0x8Gmo)

5G HAS NOT BEEN TESTED ON HUMANS AND TESTS ON 4-G AND RELATED EMF’S PROVE THAT IT IS EXTREMELY DAMAGING TO HUMAN HEALTH
5G is completely untested for human safety, and if you want to get a picture of health concerns by clinicians and scientists in the US where their telecoms companies and the bought FCC are implementing these cell masts without the approval of society, you can search YouTube under Section637 hearings that occurred in Michigan USA in late 2018, You can see the submissions by scientists and medical clinicians to these hearings about the dangers of 5G. See Annexure 3 of this letter: International Society of Doctors for The Environment call on 5G networks in European Countries: appeal for a standstill in the respect of the precautionary principle.

IT IS A VIOLATION OF OUR RIGHTS TO A SAFE ENVIRONMENT
Nowhere in our constitution does it say that it is acceptable to harm the health of innocent citizens in the interests of growing the economy, so should people be harmed because of inaction on your part, government can arguably be held liable for not implementing the basic rights of citizens to health and a clean environment. Furthermore, our constitution protects the rights of children.  By not applying caution with regards to their EMF pollution exposure, it can be argued that their rights to health and safety are being violated too.

We enclose fiver documents in support of this call.

  • Annexure 1 – Recommendations for Establishment of a SA National RF-EMF Radiation exposure, Protection, Monitoring and Regulation policy;
  • Annexure 1b – The 5G Space Appeal
  • Annexure 2: Health Problems associated with current EMF radiation.
  • Annexure 3: Global Appeal by scientists
  • Annexure 4: Call to action by ICASA and Government

We are therefore calling upon ICASA as our telecoms watchdog to do the right thing rather than the serving of a capitalist agenda which serves to put profits before people.

Signed:

 

……………………….

Concerned Citizen


ANNEXURE 1 : ACTION RECOMMENDATION FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF A SA NATIONAL RF-EMF RADIATION EXPOSURE PROTECTION STANDARD, MONITORING AND REGULATIONS

ESTABLISHMENT OF SA NATIONAL RF-EMF RADIATION EXPOSURE PROTECTION STANDARD, MONITORING, REGULATIONS
In South Africa (SA) there is no national radiofrequency electromagnetic fields [RF-EMF] radiation exposure protection standard, statutory monitoring or regulations. Multinational High Court deliberations indicate the need for public interest EMF radiation exposure protection standards in South Africa. Domestic citizens, academics, as well as regulatory and legislative practitioners, are unable to effectively monitor and investigate EMF radiation exposure emissions from infrastructure sources, because industries refuse to provide the required data.

Industries have, since 2003, continually obstructed access to the data and the establishment of a national EMF radiation standard, citing that it would be in conflict with their strategic economic interests. The demonstration of a Public Interest Override (PIO) function is legislatively required to gain access to the required data.”

RECOMMENDATION:
“… research recommends that the identified EMF radiation exposure violations of public health undergo a Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) judicial review process to confirm the research findings. The judicial qualification of a PAIA PIO function of ‘substances released into the environment’ and ‘public safety or environmental risk’ would enable access to EMF radiation emissions data essential to future studies.”

The full model can be seen at the EMFSA website here:
[https://www.emfsa.co.za/…/constructing-emf-radiation…/]


ANNEXURE 1B THE GLOBAL SPACE APPEAL

5G Global Space Appeal

We the undersigned 229,547 signatories from 211 nations,scientists, doctors, environmental organizations and citizens 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 the 2G, 3G and 4G networks for telecommunications already in place. RF radiation has been proven harmful for 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.

Executive summary

Telecommunications companies worldwide, with the support of governments, are poised within the next two years to roll out the fifth-generation wireless network (5G). This is set to deliver what is acknowledged to be unprecedented societal change on a global scale. We will have “smart” homes, “smart” businesses, “smart” highways, “smart” cities and self-driving cars. Virtually everything we own and buy, from refrigerators and washing machines to milk cartons, hairbrushes and infants’ diapers, will contain antennas and microchips and will be connected wirelessly to the Internet. Every person on Earth will have instant access to super-high-speed, low- latency wireless communications from any point on the planet, even in rain forests, mid-ocean and the Antarctic.

What is not widely acknowledged is that this will also result in unprecedented environmental change on a global scale. The planned density of radio frequency transmitters is impossible to envisage. In addition to millions of new 5G base stations on Earth and 20,000 new satellites in space, 200 billion transmitting objects, according to estimates, will be part of the Internet of Things by 2020, and one trillion objects a few years later. Commercial 5G at lower frequencies and slower speeds was deployed in Qatar, Finland and Estonia in mid-2018. The rollout of 5G at extremely high (millimetre wave) frequencies is planned to begin at the end of 2018.

Despite widespread denial, the evidence that radio frequency (RF) radiation is harmful to life is already overwhelming. The accumulated clinical evidence of sick and injured human beings, experimental evidence of damage to DNA, cells and organ systems in a wide variety of plants and animals, and epidemiological evidence that the major diseases of modern civilization—cancer, heart disease and diabetes—are in large part caused by electromagnetic pollution, forms a literature base of well over 10,000 peer-reviewed studies.

If the telecommunications industry’s plans for 5G come to fruition, no person, no animal, no bird, no insect and no plant on Earth will be able to avoid exposure, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, to levels of RF radiation that are tens to hundreds of times greater than what exists today, without any possibility of escape anywhere on the planet. These 5G plans threaten to provoke serious, irreversible effects on humans and permanent damage to all of the Earth’s ecosystems.

Immediate measures must be taken to protect humanity and the environment, in accordance with ethical imperatives and international agreements.

Read the full referenced appeal document here.

ANNEXURE 2 – Health Problems related to current EMF

We refer you to the fact that there is a growing body of independent research that shows that microwave radiation may cause various health effects that are non-thermal in nature, including but not limited to the following related to cell phone technology we already have:-

  • Sleep disorders (as the continuous RF frequencies confuse the brain into believing that it is daylight and causes the reduction of melatonin released by the pituitary gland, which is a powerful anti-cancer antioxidant. Anecdotally, around the world, sleep disruptions are very quickly evident among those living very close to cell masts.
  • Hormone imbalances and the increase of stress hormones and weight gain
  • DNA Damage
  • Peripheral Nerve Damage
  • Leakage of calcium from cells
  • Opening of the blood brain barrier (allowing for toxins and virus’s and bacteria to enter the brain)
  • Schwannoma (cancer of the nerve sheath)
  • Acoustic Neuroma (benign cancer of the acoustic nerve that can still cause death if it grows large enough and goes into the brain stem, removal of the tumor causes facial disfigurement)
  • Electro Magnetic Sensitivity which is a debilitating illness, that is recognized as a disability in Germany and Sweden. It robs you of an ability to work, and sensitizes you to the normal radiation levels we are exposed to in cities. People have been rendered homeless because of this affliction, and the illness is brought on by living in close proximity to cell masts.
  • Mental confusion and inability to recall learnt behavior in rats. Functional changes even though structural changes were not immediately visible on scans. We need to ask what would be the effect of constant microwave radiation on our children’s ability to learn if they are saturated in wifi and cell tower radiation?

SCIENTIFIC REFERENCES

You can go onto the Environmental Health Trust website, amongst others, to view the plethora of studies concerning the health risks of EMF Radiation, as well as the different results on industry vs non-industry funded research.

Medical experts worldwide are calling for action. Dr. Cindy Russell detailed the state of science in a recent Santa Clara Medical Association article and concluded, “Do not proceed to roll out 5G technologies pending pre-market studies on health effects. 2. Reevaluate safety standards based on long term as well as short term studies on biological effects”.

Videos of Lectures and Presentation Slides from the Conference

See also 5 G Wireless Future, by Dr. Cindy Russell: WILL IT GIVE US A SMART NATION OR CONTRIBUTE TO AN UNHEALTHY ONE? Page 20-21

REFERENCES

ttps://ehtrust.org/policy/international-policy-actions-on-wireless/


ANNEXURE 3: GLOBAL APPEAL BY SCIENTISTS

International Society of Doctors for Environment – 5G Appeal

International Society of Doctors for the Environment

5G networks in European Countries: appeal for a standstill in the respect of the precautionary principle 5G_appeal

April 2018
Author: Agostino Di Ciaula
ISDE Scientific Office

The document by the European Commission “5G for Europe: An Action Plan” (September 2016) aimed to describe “an action plan for timely and coordinated deployment of 5G networks in Europe through a partnership between the Commission, Member States, and Industry”. This document was targeted to introduce early the new 5G networks by 2018 and, subsequently, to a “commercial large scale introduction by the end of 2020 at the latest”.
Following this document, several member States are planning in these months, at a national level, preliminary “5G experimentations” by private phone operators, aimed at testing the network at frequencies over 6 GHz, before the final introduction of the typical 5G frequencies (over 30 GHz, millimeter waves).

A document by the Italian Communication Authority (AGCOM, March 28, 2017) stated that “the 5G networks will serve an elevated number of devices and will connect, according to the prevalent hypothesis based on ongoing standardization developments, about 1 million devices per Km2. This device density will cause an increase of the traffic and the need to install small cells in order to allow adequate connectivity performances, with subsequent increment of the density of the installed antennas”.

In Italy, as an example, the “5G experimentation” will involve, in three different geographical areas (north, center, south), about 4 million of uninformed and unaware citizens.

The residents will be exposed, during this “experimentation” to frequencies and with a device density never employed before on a large scale. Although typical radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) exposure levels are usually below current regulatory limits in European countries 1, 2, the real health impact of the advancement and spreading in communication technology is still under debate 3. Several studies have documented the ability of RF-EMF to induce oxidative stress 4, 5 (mainly by an increased production of reactive oxygen species) 6-12, and oxidative DNA base damage 13. Of note, biological effects have also been recorded at exposure levels below the regulatory limits, leading to growing doubts about the real safety of the currently employed ICNIRP standards 14-16.

Previous evidences led the IARC in the year 2011 to classify the RF-EMF as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B). After the year 2011, more recent studies strengthen the link between RF-EMF and cancer onset 17-22 and highlighted new possible health risks mainly in terms of reproductive 23-25, neurologic 26-31 and metabolic diseases 32-35.

Furthermore, specific preliminary evidence showed the exposure to frequencies over 30GHz could alter gene expression 16, 36-39, increase the temperature of the skin 40, stimulate cell proliferation 41-43, alter the functions of cell membrane 44, 45 and neuro-muscular systems 46-52, and are able to modulate the synthesis of proteins involved in inflammatory and immunologic processes 53, with possible systemic effects.

Further studies are certainly needed in order to better and fully explore the biological effects caused by the exposure to these specific RF-EMF frequencies accompanied by high exposure density. The available evidence, however, is sufficient to justify the possibility of health effects (in particular on the more vulnerable subjects, as children and pregnant women) secondary to a technological “experimentation” conceived with commercial aims.

We believe it should be unethical to ignore the available evidence waiting a possible “a posteriori” demonstration of health damages in the presence of a present and potentially manageable risk for public health.

Thus, in the respect of the precautionary principle and of the WHO principle “health in all policies”, we believe suitable the request of a standstill for the “5G experimentations” throughout Europe until an adequate and active involvement of public institutions operating in the field of environmental health (health ministry, environmental ministry, national environmental and health agencies) will be effectively planned.

This involvement should be aimed to correctly and preliminarily perform risk analyses and environmental health monitoring plans, possibly suggesting alternative or adequate measures to reduce the level of risk in the exposed population.

5G will result in a massive increase in inescapable, involuntary exposure to wireless radiation

Ground-based 5G

In order to transmit the enormous amounts of data required for the Internet of Things (IoT), 5G technology, when fully deployed, will use millimetre waves, which are poorly transmitted through solid material. This will require every carrier to install base stations every 100 metres[1] in every urban area in the world. Unlike previous generations of wireless technology, in which a single antenna broadcasts over a wide area, 5G base stations and 5G devices will have multiple antennas arranged in “phased arrays” [2],[3] that work together to emit focused, steerable, laser-like beams that track each other.

Each 5G phone will contain dozens of tiny antennas, all working together to track and aim a narrowly focused beam at the nearest cell tower. The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has adopted rules [4] permitting the effective power of those beams to be as much as 20 watts, ten times more powerful than the levels permitted for current phones.

Each 5G base station will contain hundreds or thousands of antennas aiming multiple laser-like beams simultaneously at all cell phones and user devices in its service area. This technology is called “multiple input multiple output” or MIMO. FCC rules permit the effective radiated power of a 5G base station’s beams to be as much as 30,000 watts per 100 MHz of spectrum,[2] or equivalently 300,000 watts per GHz of spectrum, tens to hundreds of times more powerful than the levels permitted for current base stations.

Space-based 5G

At least five companies[5] are proposing to provide 5G from space from a combined 20,000 satellites in low- and medium-Earth orbit that will blanket the Earth with powerful, focused, steerable beams. Each satellite will emit millimetre waves with an effective radiated power of up to 5 million watts[6] from thousands of antennas arranged in a phased array. Although the energy reaching the ground from satellites will be less than that from ground-based antennas, it will irradiate areas of the Earth not reached by other transmitters and will be additional to ground-based 5G transmissions from billions of IoT objects. Even more importantly, the satellites will be located in the Earth’s magnetosphere, which exerts a significant influence over the electrical properties of the atmosphere. The alteration of the Earth’s electromagnetic environment may be an even greater threat to life than the radiation from ground-based antennas (see below).

Harmful effects of radio frequency radiation are already proven

Even before 5G was proposed, dozens of petitions and appeals[7] by international scientists, including the Freiburger Appeal signed by over 3,000 physicians, called for a halt to the expansion of wireless technology and a moratorium on new base stations.[8]

In 2015, 215 scientists from 41 countries communicated their alarm to the United Nations (UN) and World Health Organization (WHO).[9] They stated that “numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF [electromagnetic fields] affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines”. More than 10,000 peer-reviewed scientific studies demonstrate harm to human health from RF radiation.[10] [11] Effects include:

Effects in children include autism,[28] attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)[29][30] and asthma.[31]

Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is abundant evidence of harm to diverse plant- and wildlife[32][33] and laboratory animals, including:

Negative microbiological effects[48] have also been recorded.

The WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) concluded in 2011 that RF radiation of frequencies 30 kHz – 300 GHz are possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B).[49] However, recent evidence, including the latest studies on cell phone use and brain cancer risks, indicate that RF radiation is proven carcinogenic to humans[50] and should now be classified as a “Group 1 carcinogen” along with tobacco smoke and asbestos.

Most contemporary wireless signals are pulse-modulated. Harm is caused by both the high-frequency carrier wave and the low-frequency pulsations.[51]

The deployment of 5G satellites must be prohibited

The Earth, the ionosphere and the lower atmosphere form the global electric circuit[52] in which we live. It is well established that biological rhythms—of humans,[53][54] birds,[55] hamsters,[56] and spiders[57][58]—are controlled by the Earth’s natural electromagnetic environment and that the well-being of all organisms depends on the stability of this environment, including the electrical properties of the atmosphere.[59][60][61][62] Cherry, in a groundbreaking paper, [63] explained the importance of the Schumann resonances[64] and why ionospheric disturbances can alter blood pressure and melatonin and cause “cancer, reproductive, cardiac and neurological disease and death”.

These elements of our electromagnetic environment have already been altered by radiation from power lines. Power line harmonic radiation[65] reaches the Earth’s ionosphere and magnetosphere, where it is amplified by wave-particle interactions.[66][67] In 1985, Dr. Robert O. Becker warned that power line harmonic radiation had already changed the structure of the magnetosphere, and that the continued expansion of this effect “threatens the viability of all life on Earth”.[68] The placement of tens of thousands of satellites directly in both the ionosphere and magnetosphere, emitting modulated signals at millions of watts and millions of frequencies, is likely to alter our electromagnetic environment beyond our ability to adapt.[69]

Informal monitoring has already provided evidence indicating serious effects on humans and animals from the approximately 100 satellites that have provided 2G and 3G phone service from low orbit since 1998. Such effects cannot be understood only from consideration of the low levels of radiation on the ground. Knowledge from other relevant scientific disciplines must be taken into account, including the fields of atmospheric physics and acupuncture.[70][71][72][73] Adding 20,000 5G satellites will further pollute the global electric circuit[74][75] and could alter the Schumann resonances,[76] with which all life on Earth has evolved. The effects will be universal and may be profoundly damaging.

5G is qualitatively and quantitatively different from 4G

The idea that we will tolerate tens to hundreds of times more radiation at millimetre wavelengths is based on faulty modelling of the human body as a shell filled with a homogeneous liquid.[77][78] The assumption that millimetre waves do not penetrate beyond the skin completely ignores nerves,[79] blood vessels[80][81] and other electrically conducting structures that can carry radiation-induced currents deep into the body.[82][83][84] Another, potentially more serious error is that phased arrays are not ordinary antennas. When an ordinary electromagnetic field enters the body, it causes charges to move and currents to flow. But when extremely short electromagnetic pulses enter the body, something else happens: the moving charges themselves become little antennas that reradiate the electromagnetic field and send it deeper into the body. These reradiated waves are called Brillouin precursors.[85] They become significant when either the power or the phase of the waves changes rapidly enough.[86] 5G will probably satisfy both criteria.

In addition, shallow penetration in itself poses a unique danger to eyes and to the largest organ of the body, the skin, as well as to very small creatures. Peer-reviewed studies have recently been published, predicting thermal skin burns[87] in humans from 5G radiation and resonant absorption by insects,[88] which absorb up to 100 times as much radiation at millimetre wavelengths as they do at wavelengths presently in use. Since populations of flying insects have declined by 75-80 per cent since 1989 even in protected nature areas,[89] 5G radiation could have catastrophic effects on insect populations worldwide. A 1986 study by Om Gandhi warned that millimetre waves are strongly absorbed by the cornea of the eye, and that ordinary clothing, being of millimetre-size thickness, increases the absorption of energy by the skin by a resonance-type effect.[90] Russell (2018) reviews the known effects of millimetre waves on skin, eyes (including cataracts), heart rate, immune system and DNA.[91]

Regulators have deliberately excluded the scientific evidence of harm

Stakeholders thus far in the development of 5G have been industry and governments, while renowned international EMF scientists who have documented biological effects on humans, animals, insects and plants, and alarming effects on health and the environment in thousands of peer-reviewed studies have been excluded. The reason for the current inadequate safety guidelines is that conflicts of interest of standard-setting bodies “due to their relationships with telecommunications or electric companies undermine the impartiality that should govern the regulation of Public Exposure Standards for non-ionizing radiation”. [92] Professor Emeritus Martin L. Pall lays out the conflicts of interest in detail, and the lists of important studies that have been excluded, in his literature review. [93]

The thermal hypothesis is obsolete—new safety standards are needed

Current safety guidelines are based on the obsolete hypothesis that heating is the only harmful effect of EMFs. As Markov and Grigoriev have stated, “Today standards do not consider the real pollution of the environment with nonionizing radiation”.[94] Hundreds of scientists, including many signatories to this appeal, have proven that many different kinds of acute and chronic illnesses and injuries are caused without heating (“non-thermal effect”) from radiation levels far below international guidelines.9 Biological effects occur even at near-zero power levels. Effects that have been found at 0.02 picowatts (trillionths of a watt) per square centimetre or less include altered genetic structure in E. coli[95] and in rats,[96] altered EEG in humans,[97] growth stimulation in bean plants,[98] and stimulation of ovulation in chickens.[99]

To protect against non-thermal effects, duration of exposure must be considered. 5G will expose everyone to many more transmissions simultaneously and continuously, day and night without cessation. New safety standards are needed and should be based on cumulative exposure and not only on power levels but also on frequency, bandwidth, modulation, waveform, pulse width and other properties that are biologically important. Antennas must be confined to specific, publicly identified locations. To protect humans, antennas must be located far from where people live and work, and excluded from the public rights-of-way where people walk. To protect wildlife, they must be excluded from wilderness sanctuaries and strictly minimized in remote areas of the Earth. To protect all life, commercial communications satellites must be limited in number and prohibited in low- and medium-Earth orbits. Phased arrays must be prohibited on Earth and in space.

RF radiation has both acute and chronic effects

RF radiation has both immediate and long-term effects. Cancer and heart disease are examples of long-term effects. Alteration of heart rhythm[100] and changes in brain function (EEG)[101] are examples of immediate effects. A syndrome that was called radiowave sickness[102] in the former Soviet Union and is called electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) around the world today[103] can be either acute or chronic. Professor Dr. Karl Hecht has published a detailed history of these syndromes, compiled from a review of more than 1,500 Russian scientific papers and the clinical histories of more than 1,000 of his own patients in Germany. Objective findings include sleep disorders, abnormal blood pressure and heart rate, digestive disorders, hair loss, tinnitus and skin rash. Subjective symptoms include dizziness, nausea, headache, memory loss, inability to concentrate, fatigue, flu-like symptoms and cardiac pain. [104]

The EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 states that EHS develops when people are “continuously exposed in their daily life” to increasing levels of EMFs, and that “reduction and prevention of EMF exposure” is necessary to restore these patients to health.[105] EHS should no longer be considered a disease, but an injury by a toxic environment that affects an increasingly large portion of the population, estimated already at 100 million people worldwide,[106][107] and that may soon affect everyone[108] if the worldwide rollout of 5G is permitted.

The International Scientific Declaration on EHS and multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS), Brussels, declared in 2015 that “[i]naction is a cost to society and is not an option any more… [W]e unanimously acknowledge this serious hazard to public health… [urgently requiring] that major primary prevention measures are adopted and prioritized, to face this worldwide pan-epidemic in perspective” (emphasis added).[109]

World governments are failing in their duty of care to the populations they govern

In their haste to implement 5G and to encourage the unconstrained use of outer space, the European Union, United States and national governments worldwide are taking steps to ensure a “barrier-free” regulatory environment.[110] They are prohibiting local authorities from enforcing environmental laws,[111] and “in the interest of speedy and cost-effective deployment”, removing “unnecessary burdens… such as local planning procedures [and] the variety of specific limits on electromagnetic field (EMF) emissions and of the methods required to aggregate them”.[112]

Governments are also enacting laws to make wireless facilities a permitted use in all public rights-of-way.[113] To date, most wireless facilities have been located on private property at some distance from homes and businesses. In order for them to be spaced less than 100 metres apart as required by 5G, however, they will now be located on the sidewalk directly in front of homes and businesses and close above the heads of pedestrians, including mothers with babies.

Public notice requirements and public hearings are being eliminated. Even if there were a hearing and 100 scientific experts were to testify against 5G, laws have been passed making it illegal for local authorities to take their testimony into consideration. US law, for example, prohibits local governments from regulating wireless technology “on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency radiation”,[114] and courts have reversed regulatory decisions about cell tower placement simply because most of the public testimony was about health.[115] Insurers will not provide coverage against EMF risks,[116] and there is zero clarity as to what entity will bear legal responsibility for damage to life, limb and property arising from exposure to 5G, whether ground- or space-based.[117]

In the absence of an agreed comprehensive legal regime governing activities in outer space, legal liability for those activities is non-existent, despite the prospect of whole continents, the atmosphere and the oceans being put at risk by them.

 International agreements are being violated

Children and duty of care

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: States shall “undertake to ensure the child such protection and care as is necessary for his or her well-being” (art. 3), “ensure… the survival and development of the child” (art. 6) and “take appropriate measures to combat disease… taking into consideration the dangers and risks of environmental pollution” (art. 24(c)).

The Nuremberg Code (1947) applies to all experiments on humans, thus including the deployment of 5G with new, higher RF radiation exposure that has not been pre-market tested for safety. “The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential” (art. 1). Exposure to 5G will be involuntary. “No experiment should be conducted, where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur” (art. 5). The findings of over 10,000 scientific studies and the voices of hundreds of international organizations representing hundreds of thousands of members who have suffered disabling injury and been displaced from their homes by already-existing wireless telecommunications facilities, are “a priori reasons to believe that death or disabling injury will occur”.

Duty to inform and EMFs

The World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly (2012) of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) stated that “[t]here is a need to inform the public of the potential effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs)” and invited Member States “to adopt suitable measures in order to ensure compliance with relevant international recommendations to protect health against the adverse effect of EMF”.

The Mid-term review of the European Environment and Health Action Plan 2004-2010 (2008): “The European Parliament… [n]otes that the limits on exposure to electromagnetic fields which have been set for the general public are obsolete, … obviously take no account of developments in information and communication technologies, of the recommendations issued by the European Environment Agency or of the stricter emission standards adopted, for example, by Belgium, Italy and Austria, and do not address the issue of vulnerable groups, such as pregnant women, newborn babies and children.”

Resolution 1815 (Council of Europe, 2011): “Take all reasonable measures to reduce exposure to electromagnetic fields, especially to radio frequencies from mobile phones, and particularly the exposure to children and young people.”

Environment

The Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (1972): “The discharge of toxic substances… in such quantities or concentrations as to exceed the capacity of the environment to render them harmless, must be halted in order to ensure that serious or irreversible damage is not inflicted upon ecosystems” (principle 6).

The World Charter for Nature (1982): “Activities which are likely to cause irreversible damage to nature shall be avoided… [W]here potential adverse effects are not fully understood, the activities should not proceed” (art. 11).

The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (1992): “States have… the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction” (principle 2).

The United Nations World Summit on Sustainable Development (2002): “There is an urgent need to… create more effective national and regional policy responses to environmental threats to human health” (para. 54(k)).

The African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (2017): “The Parties shall… take all appropriate measures to prevent, mitigate and eliminate to the maximum extent possible, detrimental effects on the environment, in particular from radioactive, toxic, and other hazardous substances and wastes” (art. 13).

Health and human rights

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948): “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person” (art. 3).

The United Nations Global Strategy for Women’s, Children’s and Adolescents’ Health (2016-2030) has as objectives and targets to “transform”, by expanding enabling environments; to “survive”, by reducing maternal and newborn mortality; and to “thrive” by ensuring health and well-being and reducing pollution-related deaths and illnesses.

Space

The Outer Space Treaty (1967) requires that the use of outer space be conducted “so as to avoid [its] harmful contamination and also adverse changes in the environment of the Earth” (art. IX)

The United Nations Guidelines for The Long-Term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities (2018): “States and international intergovernmental organizations should address… risks to people, property, public health and the environment associated with the launch, in-orbit operation and re-entry of space objects” (guideline 2.2(c)).

World governments are playing dice with life on Earth

Albert Einstein famously asserted that “God does not play dice”.[118] Yet by pursuing the broadcast on Earth and from space of 5G, an unprecedented technology of millimetre waves previously used as an energy weapon in military operations and crowd control,[119] world governments are recklessly playing dice with the future of life on Earth.

To refuse to accept and apply relevant and valid scientific knowledge is ethically unacceptable. Existing research shows that 5G—and especially space-based 5G—contravenes principles enshrined in a host of international agreements.

We call upon the UN, WHO, EU, Council of Europe and governments of all nations,

(a) To take immediate measures to halt the deployment of 5G on Earth and in space in order to protect all humankind, especially the unborn, infants, children, adolescents and pregnant women, as well as the environment;

(b) To follow the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and Council of Europe Resolution 1815 by informing citizens, including teachers and physicians, about the health risks (to adults and children) from RF radiation, and why they should and how they can avoid wireless communication and base stations, particularly in or near day-care centres, schools, hospitals, homes and workplaces;

(c) To favour and implement wired telecommunications instead of wireless;

(d) To prohibit the wireless/telecommunications industry through its lobbying organizations from persuading officials to make decisions permitting further expansion of RF radiation, including ground- and space-based 5G;

(e) To appoint immediately—without industry influence—international groups of independent, truly impartial EMF and health scientists with no conflicts of interest, [120] for the purpose of establishing new international safety standards for RF radiation that are not based only on power levels, that consider cumulative exposure, and that protect against all health and environmental effects, not just thermal effects and not just effects on humans;

(f) To appoint immediately—without industry influence—international groups of scientists with expertise in EMFs, health, biology and atmospheric physics, for the purpose of developing a comprehensive regulatory framework that will ensure that the uses of outer space are safe for humans and the environment, taking into account RF radiation, rocket exhaust gases, black soot, and space debris and their impacts on ozone, [121] global warming, [122] the atmosphere and the preservation of life on Earth. Not only ground-based but also space-based technology must be sustainable [123] for adults and children, animals and plants.

Please respond to the Appeal Administrator listed below,

detailing the measures you intend to take to protect the global population against RF radiation exposure, especially 5G radiation. This appeal and your response will be publicly available on www.5gSpaceAppeal.org.

Respectfully submitted,

Arthur Firstenberg, Appeal Administrator, info@5gSpaceAppeal.org

Initial signatories

AFRICA

Lauraine Margaret Helen Vivian, PhD, Anthropology and Psychiatry; Honorary Research Associate, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark. Signatory for South Africa


ASIA

Girish Kumar, PhD, Professor, Electrical Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai, India


AUSTRALIA

Don Maisch, PhD, Independent researcher, author of ”The Procrustean Approach”, Lindisfarne, Tasmania, Australia


EUROPE

Alfonso Balmori, BSc, Master in Environmental Education, Biologist. Valladolid, Spain

Klaus Buchner, Dr. rer. nat., Professor, MEP – Member of the European Parliament, Kompetenzinitiative zum Schutz von Mensch, Umwelt und Demokratie e.V., München, Germany

Daniel Favre, Dr. phil. nat., Biologist, A.R.A. (Association Romande Alerte aux Ondes Electromagnétiques), Switzerland

Annie Sasco, MD, DrPH, SM, HDR, former Chief of Research Unit of Epidemiology for Cancer Prevention at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), Lyon; former Acting Chief, Programme for Cancer Control of the World Health Organization (WHO); former Director of Research at the Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM); France


NORTH AMERICA

Martin Pall, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences, Washington State University, residing in Portland, Oregon, USA

Kate Showers, PhD, Soil Science, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for World Environmental History, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, UK, residing in Bolton-Est, Québec, Canada


SOUTH AMERICA

Carlos Sosa, MD, University of Antioquia, Medellín, Colombia

SIGN IT (INDIVIDUAL)

SIGN IT (ORGANIZATION)

References

[1] De Grasse M. AT&T outlines 5G network architecture. RCR Wireless News, Oct. 20, 2016. https://www.rcrwireless.com/20161020/network-infrastructure/att-outlines-5g-network-architecture-tag4. Accessed July 9, 2018.

[2] Hong W, Jiang ZH, Yu C, et al. Multibeam antenna technologies for 5G wireless communications. IEEE Tr Ant Prop. 2017;65(12):6231-6249. doi: 10.1109/TAP.2017.2712819.

[3] Chou H-T. Design Methodology for the Multi-Beam Phased Array of Antennas with Relatively Arbitrary Coverage Sector. Conference paper: 2017 11th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation; Paris, France. doi: 10.23919/EuCAP.2017.7928095.

[4] 47 CFR § 30.202 — Power limits.

[5] SpaceXWorldVuBoeing, Telesat Canada, and Iridium.

[6] Federal Communications Commission. Pending Application for Satellite Space and Earth Station Authorization. Schedule S, Technical Report. Dated April 2016, filed March 1, 2017. http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=1200245. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[7] Governments and organizations that ban or warn against wireless technology. Cellular Phone Task Force website. http://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/governments-and-organizations-that-ban-or-warn-against-wireless-technology/. Accessed June 10, 2018. Continually updated.

[8] The International Doctors ́ Appeal (Freiburger Appeal). http://freiburger-appell-2012.info/en/home.php?lang=EN. Published in 2012. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[9] International appeal: scientists call for protection from non-ionizing electromagnetic field exposure. International EMF Scientist Appeal website. https://emfscientist.org/index.php/emf-scientist-appeal. Published May 11, 2015. Accessed June 10, 2018. As of March 2018, 237 EMF scientists from 41 nations had signed the Appeal.

[10] Glaser Z. Cumulated index to the bibliography of reported biological phenofmena (‘effects’) and clinical manifestations attributed to microwave and radio-frequency radiation: report, supplements (no. 1-9).BEMS newsletter (B-1 through B-464), 1971-1981. http://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Zory-Glasers-index.pdf. Accessed June 26, 2018. Report and 9 supplements issued by Naval Medical Research Institute, Bethesda, MD; Research Division, Bureau of Medicine & Surgery, Dept. of the Navy, Washington, DC; Electromagnetic Radiation Project Office, Naval Medical Research & Development Command, Bethesda, MD; Naval Surface Weapons Center, Dahlgren, VA; and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Rockville, MD. Index by Julie Moore and Associates, Riverside, CA, 1984. Lt. Zorach Glaser, PhD, catalogued 5,083 studies, books and conference reports for the US Navy through 1981.

[11] Sage C, Carpenter D., eds. Biolnitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically-Based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Radiation. Sage Associates; 2012. www.bioinitiative.org. Accessed June 10, 2018. The 1,470-page BioInitiative Report, authored by an international group of 29 experts, has reviewed more than 1,800 new studies and is continually updated.

[12] Grigoriev Y. Bioeffects of modulated electromagnetic fields in the acute experiments (results of Russian researches). Annu Russ Natl Comm Non-Ionising Radiat Protect. 2004:16-73. http://bemri.org/publications/biological-effects-of-non-ionizing-radiation/78-grigoriev-bioeffects07/file.html. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[13] Obajuluwa AO, Akinyemi AJ, Afolabi OB, et al. Exposure to radio-frequency electromagnetic waves alters acetylcholinesterase gene expression, exploratory and motor coordination-linked behaviour in male rats.Toxicol Rep. 2017;4:530-534. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221475001730063X/pdfft?md5=0af5af76124b1f89f6d23c90c5c7764f&pid=1-s2.0-S221475001730063X-main.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[14] Volkow ND, Tomasi D, Wang G-J, et al. Effects of cell phone radiofrequency signal exposure on brain glucose metabolism. JAMA. 2012;305(8):808-813. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3184892. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[15] Eghlidospour M, Ghanbari A, Mortazavi S, Azari H. Effects of radiofrequency exposure emitted from a GSM mobile phone on proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis of neural stem cells. Anat Cell Biol. 2017;50(2):115-123. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5509895. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[16] Hardell L, Carlberg C. Mobile phones, cordless phones and the risk for brain tumors. Int J Oncol.2009;35(1):5-17. https://www.spandidos-publications.com/ijo/35/1/5/download. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[17] Bandara P, Weller S. Cardiovascular disease: Time to identify emerging environmental risk factors. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2017;24(17):1819-1823. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2047487317734898. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[18] Deshmukh P et al. Cognitive impairment and neurogenotoxic effects in rats exposed to low-intensity microwave radiation. Int J Toxicol. 2015;34(3):284-290. doi: 10.1177/1091581815574348.

[19] Zothansiama, Zosangzuali M, Lalramdinpuii M, Jagetia GC. Impact of radiofrequency radiation on DNA damage and antioxidants in peripheral blood lymphocytes of humans residing in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations. Electromag Biol Med. 2017;36(3):295-305. doi: 10.1080/15368378.2017.1350584.

[20] Zwamborn A, Vossen S, van Leersum B, Ouwens M, Mäkel W. Effects of Global Communication system radio-frequency fields on Well Being and Cognitive Functions of human subjects with and without subjective complaints. TNO Report FEL-03-C148. The Hague: TNO Physics and Electronics Laboratory; 2003. http://www.milieugezondheid.be/dossiers/gsm/TNO_rapport_Nederland_sept_2003.pdf.
Accessed June 16, 2018.

[21] Havas M. When theory and observation collide: Can non-ionizing radiation cause cancer? Environ Pollut. 2017;221:501-505. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2016.10.018.

[22] Narayanan SN, Kumar RS, Potu BK, Nayak S, Mailankot M. Spatial memory performance of Wistar rats exposed to mobile phone. Clinics. 2009;64(3):231-234. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2666459. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[23] Houston BJ, Nixon B, King BV, De Iuliis GN, Aitken RJ. The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation on sperm function. Reproduction. 2016;152(6):R263-R266. http://www.reproduction-online.org/content/152/6/R263.long. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[24] Han J, Cao Z, Liu X, Zhang W, Zhang S. Effect of early pregnancy electromagnetic field exposure on embryo growth ceasing. Wei Sheng Yan Jiu. 2010;39(3):349-52 (in Chinese). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20568468.

[25] Salford LG, Brun AE, Eberhardt JL, Malmgren L, Persson BRR. Nerve cell damage in mammalian brain after exposure to microwaves from GSM mobile phones. Environ Health Perspect. 2003;111(7):881-883. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1241519/pdf/ehp0111-000881.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[26] Milham S. Evidence that dirty electricity is causing the worldwide epidemics of obesity and diabetes. Electromagn Biol Med. 2014;33(1):75-78. doi: 10.3109/15368378.2013.783853.

[27] Yakymenko I, Tsybulin O, Sidorik E, Henshel D, Kyrylenko O, Kyrylenko S. Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagn Biol Med. 2016;35(2):186-202. doi: 10.3109/15368378.2015.1043557.

[28] Herbert M, Sage C. Findings in autism (ASD) consistent with electromagnetic fields (EMF) and radiofrequency radiation (RFR). In: Sage C, Carpenter D., eds. Biolnitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically-Based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Radiation. Sec. 20. Sage Associates; 2012. http://www.bioinitiative.org/report/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/sec20_2012_Findings_in_Autism.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2018.

[29] Divan HA, Kheifets L, Obel C, Olsen J. Prenatal and postnatal exposure to cell phone use and behavioral problems in children. Epidemiology 2008;19: 523–529. http://www.wifiinschools.com/uploads/3/0/4/2/3042232/divan_08_prenatal_postnatal
_cell_phone_use.pdf
. Accessed June 29, 2018.

[30] Divan HA, Kheifets L, Obel C, Olsen J. Cell phone use and behavioural problems in young children. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2010;66(6):524-529. doi: 10.1136/jech.2010.115402. Accessed July 16, 2018.

[31] Li D-K, Chen H, Odouli R. Maternal exposure to magnetic fields during pregnancy in relation to the risk of asthma in offspring. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2011;165(10):945-950. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/1107612. Accessed June 29, 2018.

[32] Warnke U. Bees, Birds and Mankind: Destroying Nature by ‘Electrosmog.’ Competence Initiative for the Protection of Humanity, Environment and Democracy; 2009. http://www.bemri.org/publications/wildlife-and-plants/1-birds-bees-and-mankind/file.html. Accessed March 11, 2020.

[33] Balmori A. Electromagnetic pollution from phone masts. Effects on wildlife. Pathophysiology. 2009;16:191-199. doi:10.1016/j.pathophys.2009.01.007. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[34] Cammaerts MC, Johansson O. Ants can be used as bio-indicators to reveal biological effects of electromagnetic waves from some wireless apparatus. Electromagn Biol Med. 2014;33(4):282-288. doi: 10.3109/15368378.2013.817336.

[35] Broomhall M. Report detailing the exodus of species from the Mt. Nardi area of the Nightcap National Park World Heritage Area during a 15-year period (2000-2015). Report for the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/Mt-Nardi-Wildlife-Report-to-UNESCO-FINAL.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[36] Kordas D. Birds and Trees of Northern Greece: Changes since the Advent of 4G Wireless. 2017. https://einarflydal.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/kordas-birds-and-trees-of-northern-greece-2017-final.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2018.

[37] Waldmann-Selsam C, Balmori-de la Puente A, Breunig H, Balmori A. Radiofrequency radiation injures trees around mobile phone base stations. Sci Total Environ. 2016;572:554-569. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.08.045.

[38] Balmori A. Mobile phone mast effects on common frog (Rana temporaria) tadpoles: The city turned into a laboratory. Electromagn Biol Med. 2010(1-2):31-35. doi: 10.3109/15368371003685363.

[39] Margaritis LH, Manta AK, Kokkaliaris KD, et al. Drosophila oogenesis as a bio-marker responding to EMF sources. Electromagn Biol Med. 2014;33(3):165-189. doi: 10.3109/15368378.2013.800102.

[40] Kumar NR, Sangwan S, Badotra P. Exposure to cell phone radiations produces biochemical changes in worker honey bees. Toxicol Int. 2011;18(1):70-72. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3052591. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[41] Balmori A. Efectos de las radiaciones electromagnéticas de la telefonía móvil sobre los insectos.Ecosistemas. 2006;15(1):87-95. https://www.revistaecosistemas.net/index.php/ecosistemas/article/ download/520/495. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[42] Balmori A. The incidence of electromagnetic pollution on wild mammals: A new “poison” with a sloweffect on nature? Environmentalist. 2010;30(1):90-97. doi: 10.1007/s10669-009-9248-y

[43] Magras IN, Xenos TD. RF radiation-induced changes in the prenatal development of mice.Bioelectromagnetics 1997;18(6):455-461. http://collectiveactionquebec.com/uploads/8/0/9/7/80976394/exhibit_r-62_magras_mice_study.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[44] Otitoloju AA, Osunkalu VO, Oduware R, et al. Haematological effects of radiofrequency radiation from GSM base stations on four successive generations (F1 – F4) of albino mice, Mus Musculus. J Environ Occup Sci. 2012;1(1):17-22. https://www.ejmanager.com/mnstemps/62/62-1332160631.pdf?t=1532966199. Accessed July 30, 2018.

[45] Magone I. The effect of electromagnetic radiation from the Skrunda Radio Location Station on Spirodela polyrhiza (L.) Schleiden cultures. Sci Total Environ. 1996;180(1):75-80. doi: 0048-9697(95)04922-3.

[46] Nittby H, Brun A, Strömblad S, et al. Nonthermal GSM RF and ELF EMF effects upon rat BBB permeability.Environmentalist. 2011;31(2):140-148. doi: 10.1007/s10669-011-9307-z.

[47] Haggerty K. Adverse influence of radio frequency background on trembling aspen seedlings: Preliminary observations. International Journal of Forestry Research. 2010; Article ID 836278. http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/ijfr/2010/836278.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[48] Taheri M, Mortazavi SM, Moradi M, et al. Evaluation of the effect of radiofrequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi router and mobile phone simulator on the antibacterial susceptibility of pathogenic bacteria Listeria monocytogenes and Escherichia coli. Dose Response. 2017;15(1):1559325816688527. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5298474. Accessed June 18, 2018.

[49] International Agency for Research on Cancer. Non-ionizing radiation, part 2: radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. In: IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Vol 102. Lyon, France: WHO Press; 2013.  http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol102/mono102.pdf. Accessed July 2, 2018.

[50] Carlberg M, Hardell L. Evaluation of mobile phone and cordless phone use and glioma risk using the Bradford Hill viewpoints from 1965 on association and causation. Biomed Res Int. 2017:9218486. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5376454. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[51] Blackman CF. Evidence for disruption by the modulating signal. In: Sage C, Carpenter D., eds. Biolnitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically-Based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Radiation. Sec. 15. Sage Associates; 2012. http://www.bioinitiative.org/report/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/sec15_2007_Modulation_Blackman.pdf. Accessed June 19, 2018.

[52] Williams ER. The global electrical circuit: a review. Atmos Res. 2009;91(2):140-152. doi:10.1016/j.atmosres.2008.05.018.

[53] Wever R. Human circadian rhythms under the influence of weak electric fields and the different aspects of these studies. Int J Biometeorol. 1973;17(3):227-232. www.vitatec.com/docs/referenz-umgebungsstrahlung/wever-1973.pdf. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[54] Wever R. ELF-effects on human circadian rhythms. In: ELF and VLF Electromagnetic Field Effects. (Persinger M, ed.) New York: Plenum; 1974:101-144.

[55] Engels S, Schneider N-L, Lefeldt N, et al. Anthropogenic electromagnetic noise disrupts magnetic compass orientation in a migratory bird. Nature. 2014;509:353-356. doi:10.1038/nature13290.

[56] Ludwig W, Mecke R. Wirkung künstlicher Atmospherics auf Säuger. Archiv für Meteorologie, Geophysik und Bioklimatologie Serie B (Archives for Meteorology Geophysics and Bioclimatology Series B Theoretical and Applied Climatology). 1968;16(2-3):251-261. doi:10.1007/BF02243273.

[57] Morley EL, Robert D. Electric fields elicit ballooning in spiders. Current Biology. 2018;28:1-7. https://www.cell.com/current-biology/pdf/S0960-9822(18)30693-6.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2018.

[58] Weber J. Die Spinnen sind Deuter des kommenden Wetters (Spiders Are Predictors of the Coming Weather). 1800; Landshut, Germany. “The electrical material works always in the atmosphere; no seasoncan retard its action. Its effects on the weather are almost undisputed; spiders sense it, and alter theirbehaviour accordingly.”

[59] König H. Biological effects of extremely low frequency electrical phenomena in the atmosphere. J Interdiscipl Cycle Res. 2(3):317-323. www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09291017109359276. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[60] Sulman F. The Effect of Air Ionization, Electric Fields, Atmospherics, and Other Electric Phenomena On Man and Animal. American lecture series. Vol 1029. Springfield, Ill: Thomas; 1980.

[61] König HL, Krüger, AP, Lang S, Sönning, W. Biologic Effects of Environmental Electromagnetism. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1981. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4612-5859-9.

[62] Sazanova E, Sazanov A, Sergeenko N, Ionova V, Varakin Y. Influence of near earth electromagnetic resonances on human cerebrovascular system in time of heliogeophysical disturbances. Progress in Electromagnetics Research Symposium. August 2013:1661-1665.

[63] Cherry N. Schumann resonances, a plausible biophysical mechanism for the human health effects of solar/geomagnetic activity. Natural Hazards. 2002;26(3):279-331. doi:10.1023/A:1015637127504.

[64] Polk C. Schumann resonances. In Volland H, ed. CRC Handbook of Atmospherics. Vol. 1. Boca Raton, Fla: CRC Press; 1982:111-178. https://archive.org/stream/in.ernet.dli.2015.132044/2015.132044.Crc-Handbook-Of-Atmospherics-Vol-1#page/n115/mode/2up/search/polk. Accessed June 18, 2018.

[65] Park C, Helliwell R. Magnetospheric effects of power line radiation. Science. 1978;200(4343):727-730. doi:10.1126/science.200.4343.727.

[66] Bullough K, Kaiser TR, Strangeways HJ. Unintentional man-made modification effects in the magnetosphere. J Atm Terr Phys. 1985;47(12):1211-1223.

[67] Luette JP, Park CG, Helliwell RA. The control of the magnetosphere by power line radiation. J Geophys Res. 1979;84:2657-2660.

[68] Becker RO, Selden G. The Body Electric: Electromagnetism and the Foundation of Life. New York: Morrow; 1985:325-326.

[69] Firstenberg A. Planetary Emergency. Cellular Phone Task Force website. http://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/planetary-emergency. Published 2018. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[70] Becker RO. The basic biological data transmission and control system influenced by electrical forces. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1974;238:236-241. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1974.tb26793.x.

[71] Maxey ES, Beal JB. The electrophysiology of acupuncture; How terrestrial electric and magnetic fields influence air ion energy exchanges through acupuncture points. International Journal of Biometeorology. 1975;19(Supp. 1):124. doi:10.1007/BF01737335.

[72] Ćosić I, Cvetković D, Fang Q, Jovanov E, Lazoura H. Human electrophysiological signal responses to ELFSchumann resonance and artificial electromagnetic fields. FME Transactions. 2006;34:93-103. http://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/1450-8230/2006/1450-82300602093C.pdf. Accessed July 18, 2018.

[73] Cohen M, Behrenbruch C, Ćosić I. Is there a link between acupuncture meridians, earth-ionosphere resonances and cerebral activity? Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Bioelectromagnetism, Melbourne, Australia. 1998:173-174. doi: 10.1109/ICBEM.1998.666451.

[74] Chevalier G, Mori K, Oschman JL. The effect of earthing (grounding) on human physiology. European Biology and Bioelectromagnetics. January 2006:600-621. http://162.214.7.219/~earthio0/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Effects-of-Earthing-on-Human-Physiology-Part-1.pdf. Accessed June 10, 2018. “Highly significant EEG, EMG and BVP results demonstrate that restoring the natural electrical potential of the earth to the human body (earthing) rapidly affects human electrophysiological and physiological parameters. The extreme rapidity of these changes indicates a physical/bioelectrical mechanism ratherthan a biochemical change.”

[75] Firstenberg A. Earth’s Electric Envelope. In: The Invisible Rainbow: A History of Electricity and Life. Santa Fe, NM: AGB Press; 2017: 113-131.

[76] Cannon PS, Rycroft MJ. Schumann resonance frequency variations during sudden ionospheric disturbances. J Atmos Sol Terr Phys. 1982;44(2):201-206. doi:10.1016/0021-9169(82)90124-6.

[77] Technical Report. European Telecommunications Standards Institute; 2007:7. http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_tr/125900_125999/125914/07.00.00_60/
tr_125914v070000p.pdf
. Accessed June 10, 2018. “The Specific Anthropomorphic Mannequin (SAM) is used for radiated performancemeasurements [and is] filled with tissue simulating liquid.”

[78] Research on technology to evaluate compliance with RF protection guidelines. Electromagnetic Compatibility Laboratory, Tokyo. http://emc.nict.go.jp/bio/phantom/index_e.html. Accessed July 18, 2018.“SAR is measured by filling phantom liquid that has the same electrical properties as those of the human body in a container made in the shape of the human body, and scanning the inside using an SAR probe.”

[79] Becker RO, Marino AA. Electromagnetism and Life. Albany: State University of New York Press; 1982:39.“The evidence seems to be quite conclusive that there are steady DC electric currents flowing outside of the neurones proper in the entire nervous system.”

[80] Nordenström B. Biologically Closed Electric Circuits. Stockholm: Nordic Medical Publications; 1983.

[81] Nordenström B. Impact of biologically closed electric circuits (BCEC) on structure and function. Integr Physiol Behav Sci. 1992;27(4):285-303. doi:10.1007/BF02691165.

[82] Devyatkov ND, ed. Non-Thermal Effects of Millimeter Radiation. Moscow: USSR Acad. Sci.; 1981 (Russian).

[83] Devyatkov ND, Golant MB, Betskiy OV. Millimeter Waves and Their Role in the Processes of Life. (Millimetrovye volny i ikh rol’ v protsessakh zhiznedeyatel’nosti). Moscow: Radio i svyaz’ (Radio and Communication); 1991 (Russian).

[84] Betskii OV. Biological effects of low-intensity millimetre waves (Review). Journal of Biomedical Electronics. 2015(1):31-47. http://www.radiotec.ru/article/15678. Accessed July 31, 2018.

[85] Albanese R, Blaschak J, Medina R, Penn J. Ultrashort electromagnetic signals: Biophysical questions,safety issues and medical opportunities,” Aviat Space Environ Med. 1994;65(5 Supp):A116-A120. http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a282990.pdf. Accessed June 18, 2018.

[86] Pepe D, Aluigi L, Zito D. Sub-100 ps monocycle pulses for 5G UWB communications. 10th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP). 2016;1-4. doi: 10.1109/EuCAP.2016.7481123.

[87] Nasim I, Kim S. Human exposure to RF fields in 5G downlink. arXiv:1711.03683v1.https://arxiv.org/pdf/1711.03683. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[88] Thielens A, Bell D, Mortimore DB. Exposure of insects to radio-frequency electromagnetic fields from 2 to 120 GHz. Nature/Scientific Reports. 2018;8:3924. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-22271-3.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[89] Hallmann CA, Sorg M, Jongejans E. More than 75 per cent decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas. PLOS One. 2017;12(10):e0185809. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0185809&type=printable. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[90] Gandhi O, Riazi A. Absorption of millimeter waves by human beings and its biological implications. IEEE Trans Microw Theory Tech. 1986;34(2):228-235. doi:10.1109/TMTT.1986.1133316.

[91] Russell CL. 5G wireless telecommunications expansion: Public health and environmental implications. Environ Res 2018;165:484-495. https://zero5g.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/5-G-wireless-telecommunications-expansion-Public-health-and-environmental-implications-Cindy-L.-russell.pdf. Accessed November 1, 2018.

[92] Hardell L. World Health Organization, radiofrequency radiation and health—a hard nut to crack (review). Int J Oncol. 2017;51:405-413. doi:10.3892/ijo.2017.4046.

[93] Pall M. 5G: Great risk for EU, U.S. and international health: Compelling evidence for eight distinct types of great harm caused by electromagnetic field (EMF) exposures and the mechanism that causes them. European Academy for Environmental Medicine. http://www.5gappeal.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/pall_2018.pdf. Published May 2018. Accessed June 22, 2018.

[94] Markov M, Grigoriev Y. Wi-Fi technology: An uncontrolled global experiment on the health of mankind,Electromagn Biol Med. 2013;32(2):200-208. http://www.avaate.org/IMG/pdf/Wi-fi_Technology_-_An_Uncontrolled_Global_Experiment_on_the_Health_of_Mankind_-_Marko_Markov_Yuri_G._Grigoriev.pdf. Accessed June 23, 2018.

[95] Belyaev I, Alipov Y, Shcheglov V, Polunin V, Aizenberg O. Cooperative response of Escherichia coli cells to the resonance effect of millimeter waves at super low intensity. Electromagn Biol Med. 1994;13(1):53-66. doi:10.3109/15368379409030698.

[96] Belyaev I. Nonthermal biological effects of microwaves: Current knowledge, further perspective, and urgent needs. Electromagn Biol Med. 2005;24(3):375-403. doi:10.1080/15368370500381844.

[97] Bise W. Low power radio-frequency and microwave effects on human electroencephalogram and behavior. Physiol Chem Phys. 1978;10(5):387-398.

[98] Brauer I. Experimentelle Untersuchungen über die Wirkung von Meterwellen verschiedener Feldstärke auf das Teilungswachstum der Pflanzen. Chromosoma. 1950;3(1):483-509. doi:10.1007/BF00319492.

[99] Kondra P, Smith W, Hodgson G, Bragg D, Gavora J, Hamid M. Growth and reproduction of chickens subjected to microwave radiation. Can J Anim Sci. 1970;50(3):639-644. doi:10.4141/cjas70-087.

[100] Frey AH, Seifert E. Pulse modulated UHF energy illumination of the heart associated with change in heart rate. Life Sciences. 1968;7(10 Part 2):505-512. doi: 10.1016/0024-3205(68)90068-4.

[101] Mann K, Röschke J. Effects of pulsed high-frequency electromagnetic fields on human sleep.Neuropsychobiology. 1996;33(1):41-47. doi: 10.1159/000119247.

[102] Tiagin NV. Clinical aspects of exposure to microwave radiation. Moscow: Meditsina; 1971 (Russian).

[103] Belpomme D, Campagnac C, Irigaray P. Reliable disease biomarkers characterizing and identifying electrohypersensitivity and multiple chemical sensitivity as two etiopathogenic aspects of a unique pathological disorder. Rev Environ Health 2015;30(4):251–271.  https://www.jrseco.com/wp-content/uploads/Belpomme-Environmental-health-2015.pdf. Accessed June 18, 2018.

[104] Hecht K. Health Implications of Long-term Exposure to Electrosmog. Competence Initiative for the Protection of Humanity, the Environment and Democracy. 2016: 16, 42-46. https://kompetenzinitiative.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/KI_Brochure-6_K_Hecht_web.pdf. Accessed November 19, 2019.

[105] Belyaev I, Dean A, Eger H, et al. EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses. Rev Environ Health. 2016;31(3):363-397. doi:10.1515/reveh-2016-0011.

[106] Schreier N, Huss A, Röösli M. The prevalence of symptoms attributed to electromagnetic field exposure: A cross-sectional representative survey in Switzerland. Soz Praventivmed. 2006;51(4):202-209. doi:10.1007/s00038-006-5061-2. Accessed July 16, 2018.

[107] Schroeder E. Stakeholder-Perspektiven zur Novellierung der 26. BImSchV: Ergebnisse der bundesweitenTelefonumfrage im Auftrag des Bundesamtes für Strahlenschutz (Report on stakeholder perspectives onamending the 26th Federal Emission Control Ordinance: Results of the nationwide telephone survey ordered by the Federal Office for Radiation Protection). Schr/bba 04.02.26536.020. Munich, Germany. 2002 (German).  https://www.bfs.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/BfS/DE/berichte/emf/befuerchtungen.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=3. Accessed July 19, 2018.

[108] Hallberg Ö, Oberfeld G. Letter to the editor: Will we all become electrosensitive? Electromagn Biol Med.2006;25:189-191. https://www.criirem.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/03/ehs2006_hallbergoberfeld.pdf. Accessed June 22, 2018.

[109] Brussels International Scientific Declaration on Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. ECRI Institute.  http://eceri-institute.org/fichiers/ 1441982765_Statement_EN_DEFINITIF.pdf. Published 2015. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[110] Removal of barriers to entry, 47 U.S.C. § 253. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2015-title47/pdf/USCODE-2015-title47-chap5-subchapII-partII-sec253.pdf; 5G For Europe: An Action Plan. European Commission; 2016. http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=17131. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[111] Federal Register – Rules and Regulations. 47 CFR Part 1 [WT Docket No 17–79; FCC 18–30] Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment. 2018;83(86). Accessed June 10, 2018.

[112] 5G For Europe: An Action Plan. European Commission; 2016. http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=17131. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[113] PCIA – The Wireless Infrastructure Association. Model wireless telecommunications facility siting ordinance. 2012. https://wia.org/wp- content/uploads/Advocacy_Docs/PCIA_Model_Zoning_Ordinance_June_2012.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2018.

[114] Mobile services, 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(iv). https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2016-title47/pdf/USCODE-2016-title47-chap5-subchapIII-partI-sec332.pdf: “No state or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the [Federal Communications] Commission’s regulations concerning such emissions.” Courts have reversed regulatory decisions about cell tower placement simply because most of the public testimony was about health.

[115] Cellular Telephone Company v. Town of Oyster Bay, 166 F.3d 490, 495 (2nd Cir. 1999). https://openjurist.org/166/f3d/490/cellular-telephone-company-at-v-town-of-oyster-bay. Accessed June 10, 2018.; T-Mobile Northeast LLC v. Loudoun County Bd. of Sup’rs, 903 F.Supp.2d 385, 407 (E.D.Va. 2012). https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-4th-circuit/1662394.html. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[116] Vogel G. A Coming Storm For Wireless? TalkMarkets. July 2017. http://talkmarkets.com/content/stocks–equities/a-coming-storm-for-wireless?post=143501&page=2. Accessed September 13, 2018.

[117] Swiss Re: SONAR – New emerging risk insights. July 2014:22. http://media.swissre.com/documents/SONAR_2014.pdf. Accessed June 10, 2018. “[A]n increasing level of interconnectivity and the growing prevalence of digital steering and feedback systems also give rise to new vulnerabilities. These could involve cascading effects with multiple damages as well as long-lasting interruptions if the problems turned out to be complex and/or difficult to repair. Interconnectivity and permanent data generation give rise to concerns about data privacy, and exposure to electromagnetic fields may also increase.”

[118] Albert Einstein, letter to Max Born, Dec. 4, 1926.

[119] Active Denial Technology. Non-Lethal Weapons Program. https://jnlwp.defense.gov/Press-Room/Fact-Sheets/Article-View-Fact-sheets/Article/577989/active-denial-technology/. Published May 11, 2016. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[120] Conflicts of interest have frequently arisen in the past. For example, the EU Commission (2008/721/EC) appointed industry-supportive members for SCENIHR who submitted to the EU a misleading SCENIHR report on health risks, which gave the telecommunications industry carte blanche to irradiate EU citizens. The report is now quoted by radiation safety agencies in the EU. Another example is the US National Toxicology Program contracting with the IT’IS Foundation, which is funded by the entire telecommunications industry, to design, build and monitor the exposure facility for a two-year, 25-million-US-dollar study of cell phones. It subsequently produced a misleading report that is now quoted by industry officials in the US.

[121] Ross M, Mills M, Toohey D. Potential climate impact of black carbon emitted by rockets. Geophys Res Lett. 2010;37:L24810.  https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029/2010GL044548. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[122] Ross MN, Schaeffer PM. Radiative forcing caused by rocket engine emissions. Earth’s Future. 2014;2:177-196.  https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/2013EF000160. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[123] Callicott JB, Mumford K. Ecological sustainability as a conservation concept. Conservation Biology. 1997;11(1):32-40. https://www.sierraforestlegacy.org/Resources/Community/Sustainability/
SY_CallicottMumford1997.pdf
. Accessed June 20, 2018.


ANNEXURE 4: CALL TO ACTION

We the undersigned citizens of this county urgently request that you take the following measures to ensure our health and safety with regards to EMF exposure from cell towers, cellphones and the more intense small cell mast infrastructure and of 5G:-

  • That Government apply a precautionary principle with regards to the continued mass rollout of cell masts, as well as 5G cell masts in our country, and that in line with this precautionary principle you do the following:-
  • That Government halts the rollout of 5G which will entail the placement of small cell masts all along residential streets outside houses in South Africa, 300m or so apart! We will be bathed in EMF radiation and we will not be able to opt out of it if it is so prevalent and this is unacceptable;
  • That citizens be informed that 5G will entail the roll out of the above infrastructure as well as the fact that it has not been tested for human safety so that they can decide if they need the infrastructure based on full information rather than the downplaying by government and its agents and the hype of the cellphone industry;
  • That Government apply limits to the levels of radiation that telecoms companies emit into the air in line with countries that apply a conservative approach and not the USA where there is a revolving door between the telecoms industry and the regulatory bodies and the regulations are set to benefit industry rather than US citizens;
  • That Government require that all cellphone companies use fair labelling practices and clear warning labels are placed on cellphones to indicate that headphones should be used instead of directly holding phones to the ear, that phones should not be held close to the body in general and particularly in women’s brassieres, or be put into pockets, and that children under the age of 16 be discouraged from cellphone usage and that schools have lessons to teach about cellphone safety;
  • That mast companies do not install masts taller than 15 metres and that these masts must be placed away from houses, schools and playgrounds;
  • That private individuals not be allowed to put cell masts on their properties;
  • That communities within a 5km radius of a cell mast be properly consulted about whether they feel they need the cell mast infrastructure for better signal. It must be noted that cell mast placement should not be based on companies needs to profiteer but be based on the connectivity needs of the citizens involved, and even in that case they should be placed with safety in mind;
  • There should be a limitation on the number of masts in a given area so that certain areas are not over-saturated with EMF Radiation, and the citizens of these areas not exposed to ever increasing radiation from more cell mast infrastructure than they need in close proximity to them;
  • That a body be established, free of industry help or aid, conflict and bias, to monitor EMF emissions throughout the country, and that spot checks be done and that these results be published on a website for easy access;
  • That a website be established showing the location of all cell masts so that citizens can have ready access to that information should they require it;
  • That a body be established under the Medicines Control Council, with no links to private telecoms companies or their agents, no revolving doors between industry and the regulator, to monitor the health of people living closer to cell masts, and a public report be produced every 5 years about the health effects noted on an ongoing basis. This will have to be a long term undertaking as certain health effects such as cancer develop over a long period of time, very often over decades;
  • That all local and municipal government policies be aligned with these objectives instead of the interests of short-term profiteering
  • Finally we call for the Establishment of a SA National RF-EMF radiation Exposure Protection Standard, Monitoring and Regulations. In South Africa (SA) there is no national radiofrequency electromagnetic fields [RF-EMF] radiation exposure protection standard, statutory monitoring or regulations. Multinational High Court deliberations indicate the need for public interest EMF radiation exposure protection standards in South Africa. Domestic citizens, academics, as well as regulatory and legislative practitioners, are unable to effectively monitor and investigate EMF radiation exposure emissions from infrastructure sources, because industries refuse to provide the required data.Industries have, since 2003, continually obstructed access to the data and the establishment of a national EMF radiation standard, citing that it would be in conflict with their strategic economic interests. The demonstration of a Public Interest Override (PIO) function is legislatively required to gain access to the required data.”

The full model can be seen at the EMFSA website here:
[https://www.emfsa.co.za/…/constructing-emf-radiation…/]

Actions Taken in South Africa

On this page is a compilation of some of the actions taken against the roll-out of 5G in South Africa. This was compiled in May 2019 and remains is a work-in-progress.

————

Local Actions re Cell Phone Tower Objecting in South Africa

Templates and actions you can take to object to Cell Towers near you


Challenging the powers that be (EMRSA)

Challenging the powers that be:

Cape Town cell masts dangerously close to homes
An Appeal to Cape Town Councillors by Olga Sheean

12 December 2016

Dear Councillors:

I am writing to you from Canada, where I have spent more than a decade researching—and experiencing the effects of—the harmful microwave radiation that now pervades our global environment. As someone who has worked for WHO in Geneva (when Director General Dr Gro Harlem Brundtland resigned as cell phone radiation was making her ill), who has had a brain tumour caused by microwave radiation, who has extensively researched the science on EMR, who has connected with vast global networks of those directly affected by microwave radiation, who has interviewed some of the leading scientific experts in this field, and who has witnessed the government deception, denial and dodging of responsibility regarding this harmful radiation, I have seen and heard it all.

For those of us who have been seriously harmed by microwave radiation, it is extremely disturbing to witness our governments consistently and knowingly making the same unfounded claims (there’s no evidence of non-ionizing radiation being harmful), despite the conclusive scientific evidence to the contrary. We are being physically harmed by this radiation—and many of us (such as me) can feel it is plainly as you would feel the heat from an open fire if you were standing next to it. To claim that we are not being harmed when the harm is undeniable, as well as medically verifiable, makes no sense whatsoever. We can only conclude that our governments are uninformed, industry-biased and/or driven by some other agenda.

… click here for the full correspondence which highlights the plight of communities in Cape Town

https://olgasheean.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/Challenging-the-Towers-that-be.pdf

(The above letter taken from: http://www.emrsa.co.za/challenging-the-powers-that-be/)

———————–

The next items taken from the EMRRFSA website:

1.    Cape Times correspondence (Jul-Aug 2016)

The following letters submitted to the Cape Times between 26 Jul and 3 Aug 2016 highlight some the concerns around unconstitutional governance at the cost of environment and health, including concerns around the placement of cellphone towers in Cape Town.webadmin August 8, 2016 General: Correspondence No Comments Read more

2.    A letter by EMRRFSA to SA’s Premier of the Western Cape (Helen Zille) on the protection of people from EMR.

webadmin July 5, 2016 General: Correspondence No Comments Read more

3.    First Officially Recognized Case of the Functional Impairment Electrohypersensitivity in South Africa

Lauraine M H Vivian and Olle Johansson In January 2013, thirty year old James Lech a MIT post-graduate student became the first person to be diagnosed as suffering with electrohypersensitivity (EHS) and registered for medical disability in South Africa.

webadmin July 5, 2016 Electro Hypersensitivity, General: Correspondence No Comments Read more

——————————

This from EMRSA website

How is the public participation process failing?

Despite stated political sentiments that communities need to be involved in decisions that affect them, the experiences in many areas around Cape Town tell a different story (see examples below). For years concerned citizens, residents associations and civic organisations have lobbied the City of Cape Town and national government to address problems in local policy. The public were invited to comment on draft policies in 2011 and 2014 as the existing policy had not been updated since May 2002 (and the original technical review committee referred to in that policy had fallen away shortly afterwards).

An amended policy on the placement of masts in Cape Town was approved in 2015 where it was highlighted that most of the original infrastructure in the City had been approved as temporary departures. This action was subsequently ruled illegal both by the High Court of the Western Cape and the Supreme Appeal Court.

On 3 Sep 2016, Muna Lakhani from Earthlife Africa took the initiative to organise a meeting for concerned citizens and representatives in Heathfield, Cape Town. Below are just a few examples of flawed public participation and in many cases irregular / illegal erection of cellphone towers in Cape Town that made media news in recent months.

Aug 2016: Kommetjie residents have raised concerns over the proposed development of two cellphone masts near their homes, citing a lack of public participation and possible health implications. In a formal objection by the Kommetjie Residents’ and Ratepayers’ Association (KRRA), residents say they have not seen anything advertised and it is clear many of the residents in the proximity to the proposed cell mast location were aware of this extremely only late in the process of the application. “Some were not aware at all as registered letters had not been delivered,” their objection reads. [“Residents object to cell mast plan“]

Jul 2016: Constantia residents released a video summarising their experience of failed public participation and a battle over nearly two decades to have two cellphone towers removed and a third (still operational) ruled illegal in the High Court. Their story highlights a growing trend in government to serve the interests of big business despite the protestations by, and regardless of the effect on, the taxpaying voter. https://vimeo.com/170470262 / www.strawberrylane.co.za / http://www.emrsa.co.za/community-battle-against-cell-masts/

Jun 2016: Edgemead residents believe public participation has become a mere formality for cell tower developers who have put up two masts in the suburb before the consultation process was overAccording to Edgemead Residents’ Association chairman, Emile Coetzee, it was not the only one to go up illegally… Mr Coetzee said Warren Petterson Planning had pulled the same “stunt” in Edgemead in 2013 when the community discovered a mast built with invalid plans, as the constructed tower was higher than was stipulated on the final plan. “The problem is the City,” said Mr Coetzee. “There appears to be no consequences for building towers without approved plans.” According to Telkom spokeswoman Jacqui O’Sullivan, because the mast was less than 15m in height legally no public participation was required.  [“Fury over Edgemead cellmast”]

Jun 2016: Plumstead residents have said that there are several cellphone base stations and antennae within 200m of each other  and not all of them have the necessary approval. Twelve residents, in their objections to sub-council about the latest application said the masts were unsightly, hurt property values and threatened people’s health. However, according to resident Gwen Callanan, residents’ objections to every mast application appeared to be ignored. “They send a letter as a matter of form, it seems – and that is if you get the letter – and then they ignore you.” Johan van der Merwe, the City’s mayoral committee member for energy, environmental and spatial planning, said it appeared there were no recent refusals for cell masts in the southern suburbs in recent years. [“Residents object to ‘forest’ of cell masts“]

May 2016: Heathfield residents are calling on the City of Cape Town to demolish a free-standing telecommunication base in one of the residents’ yard in Fourth Street. The residents are claiming that they were not informed about it and there was no public participation.” Residents are signing a petition in objection to the mast and raising their concerns on how flawed the whole process was. Johan van der Merwe, Mayoral Committee Member for Energy, Environmental and Spatial Planning confirmed that they are aware of the mast and it is unauthorised… “The City cannot immediately order the demolition of the mast; we are obliged to go through a lengthy legal process.” [“Take the mast down”]

May 2016: Constantiaberg MediclinicDespite strong opposition and well-researched arguments against it, Sub-council 20 approved a request for a cell mast to be put up on the roof of Constantiaberg Mediclinic. In a statement to the sub-council, the Bergvliet Meadowridge Ratepayers Association (BMRA) said it was short sighted of the City  to let the mast go up: “The economic cost (not to mention the emotional and socio-political cost) to the City and the Province if the health risks become a reality will be 10-fold the supposed gain from promoting economic growth at all costs”. The BMRA also found it startling that the mast had gone up before approval for it had been granted…. [Hospital cellmast uproar]

Note: This mast was subsequently removed – [download id=”2300″]

Apr 2016: Croydon“The positioning of the tower is a problem – it is less that 50 meters from homes,” says a representative of the Croydon Residents’ Association. He adds no public participation process was conducted prior to the construction… Van der Rheede said because the tower was constructed within the prescribed building line no approval is needed from adjacent property owners. Croydon residents will fight against the existing cellphone tower, the residents’ spokesperson said, adding that an application for the construction of a glass factory was previously turned down. [Tower erected without proper consultation ]

—————————

A collection of letters to the Cape Times:  http://www.emrsa.co.za/cape-times-correspondence-jul-aug-2016/

————————-

City of Cape Town’s Telecommunication Mast Policy (2015): https://www.capetown.gov.za/en/Planningportal/Documents/20150817%20TMIP%20final%20approved.pdf

(Taken from: http://www.emrsa.co.za/how-is-the-public-participation-process-failing/)

——————————-

Vergesig Cape Town: Cell Tower at AGS Church, Number 5 Breda Street, Vergesig, Durbanville:

Image credit: D. Rowland, EMFSA

The Vergesig case is only one of many examples illustrating the “Illusion of Inclusion” farce. This is in regards to public participation, communities and cell tower placements. Communities are simply ignored and/or overruled.

Backgound:

The council received a substantial amount of objections to this mast. In addition a petition was circulated in the immediate area against this mast and base station leading up to the Municipal Planning Tribunal hearing. In less than six days, 202 residents signed this petition. The application for the free standing base tower was rejected by the Municipal Planning Tribunal on Tuesday April 11, 2017.

Highwave Consultants then appealed the decision of the Municipal Planning Tribunal.

MAYCO disregarded all the objections and approved the cell-tower, with the (then) Mayor de Lille personally signing approval for the tower.

Vergesig-Aurora Residents’ Association chairwoman Verne Jankielsohn said they had written to various members of the DA and the City to help with their fight, but to no avail. They had approached the Cape Party, which agreed to take on the case pro-bono.

The Cape Party (on behalf of the Vergesig-Aurora Residents’ Association) filed court papers in the Western Cape High Court late last year. The City filed opposing papers in January.

Advocate Carlo Viljoen said the Cape Party promoted the principle of direct democracy, endorsing the idea that the people of an area should make decisions regarding their lives and not a politician, and therefore decided to take on this case.

It’s clear in this instance that the will of the people was not to have a mast erected. In addition, it’s clear that there is no need for the mast, and that the erection of the mast is an illogical step by the DA, based on considerations outside the will of the people, legal considerations or need,” he said.

The case is to be heard in the Cape Town High Court in February.

First respondent: Patricia de Lille (she was the executive mayor when the tower was approved)

Second respondent: Highway Consultants (PTY) LTD

Objections included:

  • Property values decreasing
  • Ruining of the area’s rural image
  • Health concerns
  • A crèche is being operated from the church – in close proximity to the mast.
  • Alternative proposed sites were ignored
  • Residents also complained that they had not been properly consulted.
  • No need for added telecommunication services

EMFSA is very concerned that a cell tower was placed in an area where the most vulnerable in our society might be at risk. The Precautionary Principle was clearly ignored by the then Mayor Patricia de Lille and MAYCO. We note that some residents in close proximity to the tower are complaining of disrupted sleep since the tower became active.

Images  credit: D.Rowland, EMFSA

References:

  1. Verne Jankielsohn
  2. Denise Rowland
  3. EMFSA  notes on Cell Towers and the Precautionary Principle. http://www.emfsa.co.za
  4. Panel approves Vergesig tower https://www.northernnews.co.za/news/panel-approves-vergesig-tower11379050?fbclid=IwAR1taivoemTwFbZmMleBiuN4JHjJfw4XMu6_kwFFVKv7rjoSL4PEpNsDRa4
  5. Church cellphone mast soars towards heaven after planning rumpus https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2017-09-03-church-cellphone-mast-soars-towards-heaven-after-planning-rumpus/

From: https://www.emfsa.co.za/news/illusion-of-inclusion-the-farce-of-public-participation/

————————————-

Residents see red over spread of cell masts

THERE’S a look of pride on Errol Jacobs’ face as he stops his bakkie outside the neat grounds of a church in Eldorado Park. With some satisfaction, he describes how last week neighbours of the church, which is tucked on a nondescript street in Eldorado Park Extension 2, angrily chased away a team of contractors installing a new cell mast for a network provider.

Jacobs, a local pastor who lives a street away from the proposed mast, maintains that concerns about plummeting property values and the potential health impacts have been ignored. “We’ve done our homework on electromagnetic radiation from all these masts,” says the burly pastor, who uses prayers to tackle drug abuse in Eldorado Park. “Erecting these towers is like putting minefields all over the place.”

Community activist Hilton Dawson warns: “We will physically take these things down. We counted 14 cellular masts in our area. Our question is, when is it enough?”

On the other side of the city, Colleen Fandam and her neighbours feel as if they are fighting a losing battle against the erection of a 30m cell mast in the property of the neighbouring Old Apostolic Church in Craighall Park. “We really feel like we’re fighting a battle we have little hope of winning,” she says. “The church is decidedly untrustworthy, the City of Johannesburg is not interested, and the tower companies have very deep pockets.”

Both Jacobs and Fandam believe the City of Johannesburg has done little to ensure adequate public participation. “It doesn’t matter where you live – Soweto, Eldorado Park or Sandton – the council and these network providers don’t really care about properly consulting with us,” insists Jacobs. In Craighall Park, the council “has failed to respond to any requests for information.

Every adjoining neighbour as well as our ratepayers association objected. The City never confirmed receipt of our complaints,” says Fandam. But the council says there’s no legal obligation to ensure public participation for the installation of masts and its new reworked cell mast policy will not take in health or property value concerns.

Last month, city spokesperson Virgil James noted that “residents in the northern suburbs have recently voiced their unhappiness with the installation of masts citing cancer, the devaluation of property, blocking of the vista and unsightliness, even though these very same masts allow them to communicate at will.” Across Joburg, he says, community complaints routinely “follow every such erection” of cellular infrastructure. “

South Africa has one of the most advanced telecommunications networks in the world because it promotes socio-economic advancement through the use of technology, facilitated by the Electronics Communication Act. “This is where it gets rather damning: the act grants public servitudes to network licensees…

The burning question is whether there’s any statutory obligation in the current law for an applicant for a cellphone mast to embark on a public participation

(EMRSA website)

——————————-

Tuesday 8th March 2011.

The Department of Environmental Affairs

Minister of Environmental Affairs , Bamo Edith Edna Molewa

cc: The Department of Health;

 

Attention : Dr Pakishe Aaron Motsoaledi (masukm@health.gov.za)

cc: The Department of Education

Attention : Dr Bonginkosi Emmanuel Nzimande( makwetu.n@dhe.gov.za )

Ms Matsie Angelina Motshekga ( mabua.s@dbe.gov.za

By fax to: 012-3103688 and by e-mail to :  NNkotsoe@environment.gov.za with a copy to

bruna.haipel@absamail.co.za and Abritz@environment.gov.za

To the Office of the Minister of Environmental Affairs, Bamo Edith Edna Molewa.

We hereby make use of the extension granted (in terms of NOTICE 46 OF 2011) by the Minister of Environmental Affairs to offer further comment on the draft amendments to the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations published In Government Notice No. -.1103 of 2010 in Gazette No. 33841 on 10 December 2010.

As the Electromagnetic Radiation Research Foundation of South Africa , we strongly object to the removal of the EIA and public participation process for the approval and erection of cellular/broadband/wi-fi base stations and antennae on the following grounds :

HEALTH

As per Section 24 of the Constitution :

“Everyone has the right to an environment, that is not harmful to their health or wellbeing and to have the environment protected through reasonable legislative measures”

There is a burgeoning amount of scientific evidence being provided daily on the dangers and impacts of microwave radiation and other countries have noted this in the introduction of suitable laws to protect their citizens.

By 1971, the US Naval Medical Research Institute had already referenced 2300 research articles listing in excess of 120 illnesses attributed to radio frequency and non-ionising microwave radiation.

The Bioinitiative Report of 2007, where 2000 peer reviewed papers covered the biological effects of microwave/non-ionising radiation advised that WHO and ICNIRP Guidelines were not sufficient and not protecting one’s health.

The papers highlighted effects on gene and protein expression, DNA breaks, genotoxic effects, stress response, effects on neurology and behaviour, brain tumours and acoustic neuromas,

childhood cancers such as leukaemia, reduced melatonin production, Alzheimers, skin disorders, strokes, weakened immune system and breast and other cancers. From these studies it was immediately recommended that the public exposure (acccumulative) from these masts not exceed

0.6v/m with a recommended indoor level of 0.194v/m. These were considered as urgent amendments to current levels that ICNIRP has as guidelines. Some European countries have adopted these levels already and others have set new reduced levels to help protect their citizens and have adopted the “ Precautionary Principle”.

http://www.bioinitiative.org/report

European Parliament Documents 2009

The European parliament questioned the WHO’s decision-making and advised its 27 member States not to follow the WHO’s recommendations but to follow the Bioinitiative Report’s recommendations. 522 Votes were recorded in favour of restricting exposure of populations to microwaves and 16 votes were recorded against. The European parliament has thus resoundingly discredited the WHO and ICNIRP’s recommendations, and laws are now being revised and implemented to protect citizens. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-//EP//TEXT+TA+P6-TA-2009-0216+0+DOC+XML+V0//EN

In February 2011, a new paper called The Seletun Scientific Statement declared that existing guidelines are not protecting the public and advised new levels and precautions.

Seletun Scientific Statement ( Please review pages 5,6 and 7) It is noted that children and women are particularly sensitive and vunerable to EMF.

http://media.withtank.com/1d26a2b0ba.pdf

Whilst the telecoms industry and their “ independent experts” in South Africa glibly quote ICNIRP guidelines which only refers to thermal heating and not biological effects , it still appears that no-one has read those fully either. Herewith a passage directly from ICNIRP General Approach Guidelines:

page 546 :

People being protected

Different groups in a population may have differences in their ability to tolerate a particular NIR exposure. For example, children, the elderly, and some chronically ill people might have a lower tolerance for one or more forms of NIR exposure than the rest of the population. Under such circumstances, it may be useful or necessary to develop separate guideline levels for different groups within the general population, but it may be more effective to adjust the guidelines for the general population to include such groups.

Some guidelines may still not provide adequate protection for certain sensitive individuals nor for normal individuals exposed concomitantly to other agents, which may exacerbate the effect of the NIR exposure, an example being individuals with photosensitivity. Where such situations have been identified, appropriate specific advice should be developed-within the context of scientific knowledge.

Page 546/7

Approaches to risk management

The ICNIRP approach to providing advice on limiting exposure to NIR necessarily requires well-based scientific data related to established health effects. When, in the absence of sufficient scientific evidence for the existence of a suspected adverse health effect, there are calls for protective measures, a number of approaches to risk management have been applied. These approaches generally center on reducing needless exposure to the suspected agent. However, ICNIRP emphasizes the need to ensure that the practical manner in which such approaches are applied should not undermine or be to the detriment of science based exposure guidelines. ICNIRP notes the clarification afforded by the

European Commission (CEC 2000; Foster et al. 2000) on the practical application of one such approach, the Precautionary Principle. For example, this includes the degree to which the Principle is based on the science (requiring an evaluation of risk research), and the provisional nature of measures pending further acquisition of scientific data.

It appears that the “ Precautionary Principle” is not being applied either in protecting the citizens of South Africa and hence it is imperative that the EIA be fully reintroduced with in fact more stringent measures with pre-assessment of existing masts, radiation levels and sensitive areas.

The Precautionary Principle was signed by South Africa at the Rio Summit in 2002 and we appeal for it to be applied with a sense of urgency.

Paolo Vecchia, Chairman for ICNIRP presented at the RRT ( Radiation Research Trust ) conference in September 2008. In his presentation he made it very clear that : ‘ the ICNIRP guidelines are neither mandoratory prescriptions for safety, the “ last word “ on the issue nor are they” defensive walls for industry or others”.

In addition to the biological impacts not being considered in the current guidelines, the pulse rate or modulation is not factored in either.

It is not just the frequency or power density either, but the pulsing ( modulations) that can cause harm. Dr Blackman, past president of the Bioelectromagnetics Society, published a paper in Pathophysiology – “Evidence from ELF and RF studies supporting more inclusive risk identification and assessment”.

Section 1.2. states: “Modulation signals are one important component in the delivery of EMF signals to which cells, tissues, organs and individuals can respond biologically.” He also mentions that “more recent studies of modulated RF signals report changes in human cognition, reaction time, brainwave activity, sleep disruption and immune function.” Dr Blackman includes the following sentence within the conclusion of his paper: “Current standards have ignored modulation as a factor in human health impacts, and thus are inadequate in the protection of the public in terms of chronic exposure to some forms of ELF-modulated RF signals. The current IEEE and ICNIRP standards are not sufficiently protective  of public health with respect to chronic exposure to modulated fields (particularly new technologies that are pulse-modulated and heavily used in cellular telephony). The collective papers on modulation appear to be omitted from consideration in the recent WHO and IEEE science reviews. This body of research has been ignored by current standard setting bodies that rely only on traditional energy-based (thermal) concepts.”

A letter by Barrie Trower, a retired military scientist covers the concerns of pulsing and the effects.

http://media.withtank.com/20a1337be5.pdf

As to the levels of safety for children there are no levels that are guaranteed as safe for children. None are prescribed by WHO either. The WHO told the EU it had only started observing effects on children in 2009, due to comment in approx 2024.

It is of concern that the Department of Health’s radiation department ( non-ionising)still uses thirteen year old guidelines and when faced with people being affected have said “ we do not have the time and resources to investigate. “

People are being affected and in many cases are aware of it, hence this ever growing resistance to masts or antennae on or near their residential buildings, schools, churches and homes.

Within the South African context we receive calls almost daily, where people have become ill since the erection of a tower or antennae on their buildings or have had wifi/wimax placed in their school or offices.

Please note the telecoms industry in South Africa has received reports as to people advising them they are being affected.

Other health and environmental ministries world-wide are taking action in order to protect their citizens:

Taiwan removed all masts from schools ( 1500 ) in 2007. http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/2007/11/06/129715/1500-cellphone.htm

Switzerland has installed optic fibre in their schools instead of wifi to eliminate children being exposed to microwaves.

http://www.magdahavas.com/2010/10/20/free-internet-access-in-swiss-schools-no-wifi/

France has also rolled out a network of optic fibre to homes and schools.

http://media.withtank.com/52e1c9c420.pdf

This is directly from the backbone to the home or school, eliminating the need for wifi/wimax/ completely and avoiding unnecessary exposure to EMR.

San Francisco has decided not to wifi their city following a stringent review on current scientific literature. Towns in France have removed it and wifi has also been removed from the public libraries.

Nigeria has taken notice of EMF and the dangers of indiscrinate siting of masts. http://www.tribune.com.ng/index.php/features/7142-indiscriminate-siting-of-telecoms-masts-base-stations-any-end-in-sight

( In South Africa, service providers continue to roll out masts ( cell and broadband) in schools with no concern as to the impacts on our children and The Departments of Education and Health appear to not be informed of the potential risks as no effort has been made to prevent this. GDARD continues to give approvals in sensitive areas)

Israel has prevented the rollout of 4G until the full health impacts can be assessed.

The Health and Environmental Protection ministries of Israel told the Communications Ministry on Sunday that they will oppose the expansion of cellular phone infrastructure to accommodate “fourth-generation” (4G) devices, at least until any health effects from the radiation are examined in depth.

The directors-general of the two ministries, Dr. Ronni Gamzu and Alona Schefer Caro, called on Communications Ministry Director-General Eden Bar-Tal to co-ordinate with them on the issue.

They wrote in an urgent letter that upgrading infrastructure to introduce fourth-generation cellular phones is liable to increase the use of such technologies and increase the public’s exposure to cellular electromagnetic radiation.

Its effects on health “have not yet been adequately proven,” Gamzu and Schefer Caro concluded, “thus the cautionary principle must be observed.”

http://www.jpost.com/Health/Article.aspx?id=210138

Israel bans antennaes on residences:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/916666.html

Please note these other worldwide concerns and actions :

http://www.emrrfsa.org/world-concerns-summary/

Independent doctors, scientists and researchers continue to sound the warnings :

Professor Olle Johanssen of the Department of Neuroscience and Dermatology Unit , Karolinska

Institute, Sweden explains in one of his many research papers how EM fields attack the immune system, leading to disease and impairment. ( Pathophysiology 16 ( 2009) 157 -177.) With the effect on the immune system, one needs to also consider what impact that this is having on those that are HIV positive in South Africa.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/22173694/EMF-Immune-Compromise-and-Disease

Dr Magda Havas’s groundbreaking research has shown a link between EMR and diabetes in addition to Multiple Sclerosis.

www.magdahavas.com

Other research is showing links to ADHD (ADD), CFS, Alzheimers, Fibromyalgia, autism, loss of fertility, allergies, asthma, heart disease, depression, suicides, miscarriages, obesity and electrosensitivity.

The increase in ADD and suicides are a serious concern in South Africa. A report last year indicated that suicides were up by 21% in South Africa.

Dr George Carlo was commissioned by the mobile industry in the US to conduct research on its products. His study involved 200 research doctors and 15 studies at a cost of 28.5 million US Dollars.

“Our data showed increased risk to children, concerning tumours, genetic damage and other problems.

My results were suppressed by the telecommunications industry “ he has said.

Members of the European Academy for Environmental Medicine (EUROPAEM) in April 2010 addressed an urgent appeal to European environment and health ministers, – Commission, -Parliament and other organizations. Greatly concerned about the increasing prevalence of a group of chronic multisystem illnesses (environmentally related illnesses including chemical, biological and EMF-agents, with similar pathological mechanisms) they urged these groups to takes these findings serious and financially investmore in prevention, precaution and best early detection etc. Electromagnetic fields are being noted as a trigger.

http://www.csn-deutschland.de/blog/en/environmental-medicine-international-appeal-from-

wurzburg/:

Long term studies around cell masts have shown health effects and increased cancers.

WHO (World Health Organisation ) has on their database ( 2006) a pie chart where 80% of the epidemiological studies published showed a significant increase in the adverse health symptoms being analysed from base stations which included cancers and microwave syndrome. http://www.buergerwelle.de/pdf/who_and_pubmed_epidemiological_studies_on_base_stations_20 06.pdf

Firstenberg (Firstenberg, A 2001 ) compiled a list of studies showing biological effects at levels far below most guidelines for radio frequency radiation. A study in January 2009 by the municipality of the Bavarian town of Selbitz found a correlation of symptoms found near a mast at 1.2 v/m and another German study where a mean value of 0.07 v/m was used. http://www.emrrfsa.org/newsletters/2010/07/08/specific-symptoms-and-radiation-from-mobile-basis-stations-in-selbitz-bavaria-germany/

People, have reported the following symptoms near masts , in wifi areas or being exposed to other forms of electromagnetic fields : headaches, nausea, blurred vision, memory loss or unable to concentrate, rashes, heart palpitations, increased blood pressure, eye pain and struggling to focus, extreme fatigue. Itching, burning and dehydrated skin, tinnitus, hoarse or loss of voice, suppressed immune system, always feeling cold, shooting muscle pains, insomnia and erratic sleeping patterns, gastric disturbances, sore kidneys, liver sensitivity, sore ovaries, thyroid disruption, (sudden weight gain or weight loss) irritability, and depression. People have become EHS (Electrosensitive) with continued exposure to EMF’s, a condition that makes normal life very hard for the sufferer who will feel ill at the slightest exposure to EMFs, RFs and electrical fields.

Santini et al (2002) showed many of these effects in a study of residents within 300 metres of a cell mast.

http://apps.who.int/peh-emf/research/database/emfstudies/viewstudy.cfm?ID=772

The well known Freiburger Appeal signed by over 40,000 in Germany, including over 3000 doctors listed many of these disorders and noted “ Our therapeutic efforts to restore health are becoming increasingly less effective: the unimpeded and continuous penetration of radiation into living and working areas, particularly bedrooms, an essential place for relaxation , regeneration and healing , causes uninterrupted stress and prevents the patient’s thorough recovery.” http://www.laleva.cc/environment/freiburger_appeal.html

2005 Ireland IDEA Irish doctors concern over EMR health effects and electrosensitivity. http://www.ideaireland.org/emririshresearch.htm

Switzerland: Dr. Rau Paracelsus Health Clinic treats 10,000 people annually. They assess health in light of EMF exposure. Although health issues are multi factorial, his assessment is EMFs are a hidden factor in many illnesses:

http://www.paracelsus.ch/welcome

Prof Frans Adlkofer, who was at the SABS/STUK conference and repeated the findings of the EU’s Reflex study of severe genetic damage and micronuclei formation from low-level cellphone radiation, has also put out a stringent warning about 3G technology/ broadband/umts and health, saying there is no doubt that it is “ten times more genotoxic” than ordinary cellphone radiation and raises the risk of cancer:

“The DNA strand breaks occur at only 1/40 of the guideline limits. Hence, UMTS signals are almost ten times as active as GSM signals.”

http://www.next-up.org/pdf/PressReleaseConcernPrFranzAdelkoferVerumFoundation06102007.pdf

Cancer is a significant risk of EMFs. Cancers around masts have been studied worldwide as have cancers with cell phone usage.

A German study by a team of local medical doctors in Naila with data from over 10 years, discovered a threefold increase in new malignancies in people living up to 400m from a mast after five years exposure when compared to people living further away in the same town. http://www.scribd.com/doc/3856847/Nail-A#full

Barrie Trower by 2006 had logged over 200 leukaemia clusters around cellphone masts, each cluster consisting of more than ten children under the age of 11, in the UK, Spain and France. Most of these children died.

  • study by GP’s at the Kaplan Medical Centre, Israel, discovered a fourfold increase in cancer within 350m after long term exposure to a phone mast and a TENFOLD increase specifically in women. In addition, Roland Stabenow, the head of cancer registry in Berlin, informed the residents of Steinbach-Hallenberg that there was a 7 fold increase in breast cancer amongst people in their area living near the cellular antennas.

http:/www.vws.org/documents/Wolf-Israelstudy.pdf

A study ( Hallberg 2002) looked at “before “ and “ after” the introduction of frequency modulated transmitters across Estonia. He identified a steep increase in cancer mortality after transmitters were allowed across this country.

http://heldref-publications.metapress.com/app/home /contribution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=issue,5,12;journal,29 

,58;linkingpublicationresults,1:119954,1

A 2004 study Eger,H.et al. also reconfirmed the effect of distance versus the incidence of cancer from a mast at specific power levels.

http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/news/20041118_naila.pdf

A study by Blake Levitt and Dr Henry Lai covered several studies on base stations. http://www.magdahavas.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Blake_Levit-Henry_Lai.pdf

A new recent study from Japan ( Saito T et al 2010) has again indicated the link between EM fields and cancers in children.

P Saito T et al, (2010) Power-frequency magnetic fields and childhood brain tumors: a case-control study in Japan, J Epidemiol. 2010;20(1):54-61. Epub 2009 Nov 14 [View Comments and Links] [View on Pubmed]

An industry study that was originally undertaken in German and then later was translated to English, is the ECOLOG study( funded by T-Mobile) Its conclusion after 220 peer-reviewed papers was that they found “ strong indications for cancer-initiating and cancer-promoting effects of high frequency.” It also found indications for genotoxic effects like single and double stranded DNA breaks, birth derformities, disruptions of other cellular processes, stress reactions and disruptions to the endocrine and immune system.

 http://www.hese-project.org/hese-uk/en/niemr/ecologsum.php

 The three top cancers for children in South Africa are leukaemia, followed by brain and then eye. The Cancer registry appears to have not been maintained since 2002. The increase in cancers, the types and the locations may very well be a research project for the Department of Health. This study has recently been done in Spain where a cancer map has been created, tracking the link to electromagnetic fields, industrial factors in the region of Murcia.

 “In the study were identified a total of 489 patients diagnosed between 1998 and 2009 in the region of Murcia, which was finally included to 380. With regard to the most frequent types of cancer, in the first place are leukemias – 28.4% of the total number of cases; followed by tumors of the central nervous system – 23.9%-; sarcomas of soft tissue – 10%-; and lymphomas – 8.4%-. In sections of the age, 15% focused on under 1 year of age; 37.4% between 1 and 4 years; 27.6% between 5-9; and 20 per cent between 10 and 14 years. In addition, 380 cases 187 corresponded to children and 193 to girls, and the 5-year survival rate was 80.4% between 2002 and 2005.”

 Professor Yury Grigororiev, Chairman of the Russian National Committee on non-ionizing radiation stated in a Radiation Research Trust conference “ The potential risk to children’s health is very high and a completely new problem. Use of mobile phones for those under 18 or pregnant women should be restricted. Children have a unique vulnerability as they grow and develop: there are windows of susceptibility, periods when their organs and systems may be particularly sensitive to the effects of certain environmental threats. The existing standards cannot guarantee the safe, healthy development of the next generation “

—————————

LEGAL

On the legal front there are now many cases overseas where masts have been ordered removed.

Legal precedent was set by Mr Wulf Dietrich Rose, expert in mobile communications who won three cases in the High Austrian Court of Justice ( Federal Court) (Az60b 69/Olt;26-4-2001 ) Rose proved through his studies irradiation represented serious health risks to nearby populations. http://www.mapcruzin.com/news/cell071001a.htm

In January 2002 a small village in Spain won a rare but potentially powerful victory. It left a bitter taste, for the parents of Valladolid who were fighting, they felt, for their children´s health which should never have been put at risk in the first place.

These parents sought and secured – a court order for the removal of 36 mobile phone transmitters installed on a building 50 metres from their local primary school.

In the 18 months since these masts went up three children aged 5-10 developed leukaemia and a fourth had Hodgkin´s Disease. And before the masts, there hadn´t been a single childhood cancer in the village for 32 years.

http://www.canceractive.com/cancer-active-page-link.aspx?n=208

In just one of the cases in France a judge in Angers Tribunal de Grande Instance (District Court) has forbidden the Orange phone company to install mobile phone antennas in the bell tower of a church right next to a school. This judgement was a first in France, since sentence was passed before the event.

The judge explained that his decision was based specifically on the precautionary principle. Their defence was undertaken by Maître Denis Seguin, a lawyer who specialises in environmental law, who in his summing up emphasised the precautionary principle: “At Notre-Dame-d’Allençon, the children would be exposed against their will.”

In his plea the lawyer listed the most common pathologies caused by exposure to artificial hyperfrequency microwave radiation. The terms of the judgement also sentenced the phone operator Orange to pay the sum of 2500€ to the petitioners as well as costs. Judgement was passed on Thursday March 2009. There have been several more cases in France. http://www.mast-victims.org/index.php?content=news&action=view&type=newsitem&id=3850

The Court of Appeal of Tunis (July 2010) ordered the dismantling of a base station installed on the roof of a villa in a residential neighborhood in the capital on behalf of uncertainties about its impact on health of residents. Seized in an emergency procedure by the trustee of the local residents, the judge ruled that the risk was significant for the health of residents on the basis of a report of an expert appointed for this purpose. The latter noted that electromagnetic waves generated by antennas can have adverse health effects even if they are installed at a distance of 100 meters.

Referring to Article 99 of the Code of Obligations and Contracts, Court of Appeal held that “even if the

current science cannot determine with certainty the exact impact of electromagnetic orders, there is a

risk impact on the health of residents.”

http://www.gnet.tn/revue-de-presse-nationale/la-justice-a-reconnu-leur-danger-des-antennes-relais/id-

menu-958.html

—————————

The Vatican has been held responsible for the cancers caused by the microwaves from its radio station :

Vatican Radio Caused Cancers, Must Compensate Victims

PRESS RELEASE OF FEBRUARY THE 27TH 2011

Thursday February the 24th 2011 was an historical date for the ITALIAN JUSTICE: the supreme court of cassation dismissed the appeal of radio Vatican against the decision made on the 14th October 2009, issued by the court of appeal of the court of Rome and definitively condemned the broadcaster for the crime of “the casting of dangerous things” (act. 674 of the italian penal code).

Legal action will not be taken against the sole survivor and defendant, cardinal Roberto Tucci, because the crime has gone into prescription. However, the civil rights have been confirmed: economical compensation in favour of the plaintiffs and payment of the legal expenses.

The Cassation has therefore confirmed what was said in the sentence of the 14/10/2009, n.6492 ” … that held by the plaintiff.”

The Coordinating Authority of the Committees of northern Rome (Coordinamento dei Comitati di Roma Nord) point out that this judgment pronounced was the eighth pronouncement of numerous judges of various rank in regards to this matter having duration of more than 11 years.

During this time, in fact, there have been successively two proceedings in the court of first instance, two pronouncements of second degree and 4 sentences of the Court of Cassation have occurred, of which one of them in the area of criminal proceedings for multiple manslaughter, for which the judge of preliminary investigations of the Court of Rome, after the surprising and impressive results of the epidemiological investigation carried out in 5 years in the territory neighboring the installations, the 13th of November 2010 committed the procedural documents to the Prosecutor’s office for the consequent decisions of the Prosecutor.

WE HERE SUMMARIZE THE RESULTS OF THE EPIDEMIOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION OF THE COURT OF ROME:

 Conclusions in the study of the death rate for leukemia at all ages: the risk factor up to 12 km distance from radio Vatican is 4.9 times higher than the expected value for distances beyond 12 km.

Conclusions in the study of the incidence of leukemia and lymphoma in children ranging between 0 to 14 years of age: the risk factor up to 12 km distance from radio Vatican is 4.1 to 4.7 times higher than the expected value for distances beyond 12 km and up to 6.9 times above expected when considering only children older than 1 year.

WE NOW QUOTE FROM THE REPORT OF THE EPIDEMIOLOGICAL INVESTIGATON OF THE COURT OF ROME:

“… the excess of risk is dramatically high … the effect is very large and cannot be attributed to random cases … . The results obtained are absolutely astounding … we are not capable of finding a different cause if not that due to radio Vatican … one cannot avoid thinking that something important has happened for the lives of those people, that can be explained due to other causes other than radio Vatican … the results have to do with the dislocation in which these people have lived during their lives and these children have lived in their lifetime. Such high levels of risk are found, in scientific literature, only in epidemiological studies relative to areas that have suffered the effects of an atomic explosion.”

Giorgio Cinciripini

esmog.free.italia@gmail.com

————————

In some cases the public have destroyed or removed the masts themselves, as in Botswana last year. http://www.mmegi.bw/index.php?sid=1&aid=189&dir=2009/October/Monday12

Service providers removed a mast in Craigavon/ Fourways and in Dainfern/ Fourways South Africa following severe opposition from the communities.

Health impacts from 56 residents were recorded by the community in Craigavon, Johannesburg which included toddlers and children.

Who will be responsible for the health impacts on the legal front for what is happening now – the industry or our government for ignoring the dangers and not implementing protective and precautionary measures ? What responsibility will the landowner share ?

————————————-

ELECTROSENSITIVITY

It is known that people are more sensitive than others to EMR. It is estimated that 3% of the world’s population are extremely sensitive ( electrohypersensitive ) and another 35% are partially electrosensitive.

For those who are electrosensitive, the effects can be debilitating and the numbers are growing as more frequencies are introduced into the spectrum. People have become electrosensitive by exposures to masts (cell / broadband) being placed close to homes and from continued exposure to wifi in offices/schools.

Initially the symptoms may just start as headaches, shooting muscle pains, stomach pains, rashes, burning, itchy skin, nausea, concentration problems but could end up with the person continually feeling unwell and more serious impacts. Whilst some people will feel and show the effects quickly, it does not mean that other people are not being affected. Some people and their medical doctors, may well not be recognising the symptoms either.

Once electrosensitive, it is exceptionally difficult to cope in cities. Sufferers have often had to leave the city and their work as they become too ill when exposed to EMR. France and Italy have set up EMR free zones to allow electrosensitive people to escape to. http://www.next-up.org/Newsoftheworld/EHS_Refuge_Zone.php#1

Sweden fully recognises the disability and special homes, work environments and facilities in hospitals are made available for them.

http://www.feb.se/index_int.htm

People who are EHS have had to screen their homes where possible, wear protective clothing and sleep in Faraday cages or under special fabrics that block a large amount of the frequencies. Those who cannot afford these methods have resorted to living hermit type lives in forests and isolated areas.

The Department of Health of South Africa does not have a database of electrosensitive people.

WHO recognises EHS and it is listed as a disability. “The symptoms are certainly real and can vary widely in their severity. Whatever its cause, EHS can be a disabling problem for the affected individual”

There are excellent papers by Professor Olle Johanssen of Sweden and Dr Magda Havas of Canada on the subject of electrosensitivity and entire international conferences are addressing the subject as concerns grow.

http://media.withtank.com/1b39aeb7dd.pdf

http://www.magdahavas.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/06_Havas_EBM.pdf

Cohen A, Carlo G, Davidson A, White M, Geoghan C, Goldsworthy A, Johansson O, Maisch D, O’Connor E, “Sensitivity to mobile phone base station signals”, Env Health Perspect 2008; 116: A63-A64

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18288297

One of the many electrosensitive magazines:http://www.es-uk.info/news/20101227-main-newsletter.pdf

In many cases we believe that health reactions to EMF is not being recognized, due to the lack of education on the matter.

Dr Willian Rea past president of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine said“ Sensitivity to electromagnetic radiation is the emerging health problem of the 21st century. It is imperative health practitioners, governments, schools and parents learn more about it. The human health stakes are significant “

————————–

ENVIRONMENT

There are many studies now showing the impacts of EMF on birds, bees, trees and fish life.

Recent mass bird and fish deaths across the world recently have been attributed to electromagnetic radiation such as 4G and HAARP. Investigation and reports are still being assessed.

There are many examples in South Africa where trees have been shown to be affected around masts.

http://www.emrrfsa.org/natures-corner/2011/03/08/the-effect-on-trees-from-nearby-masts/

Plant deteriation in homes next to masts have been noted and recorded too.

There have been preliminary research studies into the disappearance of insects in Johannesburg and a study in Natal showed the memory loss in rats subjected to electromagnetic fields.

http://www.emrrfsa.org/medical-and-scientific-research/south-african-studies/

It was estimated in 2009 that the carbon dioxide emissions produced globally by the telecoms industry released 110.7 million tonnes of Co2 into the atmosphere That is equivalent to emissions from 29 million cars. ( Bennett 2009 ).

———————–

PROPERTY VALUES

It is well known that people do not want homes near cell masts and this has been noted by Estate Agents. The loss of value of a home has been estimated between 35% and 50%.

Therefore who must be held responsible for the loss of the value of a home following the placement of a mast ?

Saturday Star, Johannesburg, December 4 2004

Nice house, but pity about the cellphone mast. People living near a cellphone mast and wishing to sell their houses may not get the prices they want. This is because prospective buyers believe that the masts and power lines are harmful.

A number of Joburg estate agents told Saturday Star of their battle to market properties situated near cellphone masts or power lines.

One family in Hurlingham Manor have been trying for five years to sell their R2,2-million house, but no one is interested because of the cellphone mast on the property next door.

The house is a prime property in Sandton and at one stage was advertised in Millionaire’s Club magazine.

Herbie Ellison, estate agent with Seeff Properties and chairperson of Hurlingham Manor North Association, said the prospective buyers had expressed concern about the proximity of the cellular mast.

“I believe that the mast could cause surrounding properties to depreciate by about 35% to 50%,” said Ellison.

The Department of the Environment , the Department of Health, the Department of Communications and GDARD do not appear to have a grid referencing all masts or antennae in South Africa as is required in other countries. Once a grid is in place of all legal and illegal installments, then perhaps better planning could be implemented to avoid areas being swamped with unnecessary levels of non-ionising radiation.

We therefore ask in the short term for the reintroduction of the EIA and full public participation with stricter enforcement and monitoring.

Areas and homes need to be measured prior to any installation in an area to assess what those homes are already being exposed to collectively.

We also request for the introduction of updated legislature that will protect our health, environment and property values. Levels that also protect electrosensitive individuals are to be considered.

An electrosensitivity registry is essential and the education of government officials on this subject.

Please consider an independent committee to assess the numerous health reports around masts/antennae on buildings and for each new technology and frequency to be pre-tested by independent health officials that are qualified before the roll-out of that technology. (including smart metres)

The retaining of hardwired telecommunications is essential and the protection of those lines must be implemented for those who do not want to subject themselves to unnecessary exposure from wireless communication. A long term solution is optic fibre, but in the interim Telkom should continue to provide landlines and ADSL actively for South Africa.

The Bill of Rights of the South African Constitution guarantees citizens the right “not to be subjected to medical or scientific experiments without their informed consent”: http://www.doj.gov.za/legislation/constitution/20081210_cn_2.pdf

The Bill of Rights also gives special protection for children,stating: “A child’s best interests are of paramount importance in every matter concerning the child”

As we stand now, the technology we are being subjected to has not been proven safe and therefore we ask that measures be taken to protect us, the citizens of South Africa.

In the words of Dr Robert O. Becker twice nominated for the Nobel Prize “ I have no doubt in my mind that at the present time, the greatest polluting element in the earth’s environment is the proliferation of electromagnetic fields. I consider that to be far greater on a global scale, than warming, and the increase in chemical elements in the environment. “

We trust that the government of South Africa is listening.

Sinerely yours

 

—————————

“Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about the things that matter ”

Martin Luther King Jnr

Affiliated to the EM Radiation Research Trust UK http://www.radiationresearch.org/

Member of the International EMF Alliance

The EMRRFSA Foundation Project is endorsed by E. Oppenheimer and Son and The Diamond Route.

The Diamond Route is a massive national project which focuses on linking the conservation properties of the Oppenheimer family and De Beers. These properties conserve vast conservation areas and provide a safe haven for a wide variety of unique, rare and ecologically important plants and wildlife and provide endless photographic opportunities. These properties are open to the public who are encouraged to explore this wealth of tourism opportunities. Please visit the website www.diamondroute.co.za or contact Duncan MacFadyen, Manager of Research and Conservation: E. Oppenheimer & Son on Duncan.MacFadyen@eoson.co.za

——————–

THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE SIGNED AT THE RIO SUMMIT BY SOUTH AFRICA IN 2002

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

process before such application may be approved by the municipality. The answer seems to be no,” he says. The only notice to be given “is to the owner of the property and nobody else”, he remarks, adding that the act does not allow for the rights of network licensees to be denied.

 

James says the City is not unsympathetic to residents’ complaints but it is unable to stand in the way of public access to reliable, necessary communication, “be it high-powered cellphone masts, street lights, mobile telephony or aerial and underground fibre”.

 

Arguments put forward regarding property values and the high risk of cancer will not form part of discussions for its new policy, James insists. The World Health Organisation (WHO) has made it clear that there is no convincing evidence that the weak RF signals from base stations and wireless networks cause adverse health effects, he says. “Unless one climbs up a mast and hugs it for a considerable period of time, probably months and months, people and animals in the proximity of cell masts are unlikely to get cancer,” James insists.

 

But this concerns anti-mast advocates like Tracey-Lee Dorny, who runs the Electromagnetic Radiation Research Foundation of SA. “The City talks about getting cancer only if you hug the tower for a few months,” she says, but “people are exposed 24/7 to these emissions that create a myriad health effects.” She says the council needs to consult the public, NGOs and scientific experts with no conflict of interest when reviewing its telecommunications policy.

 

“The current body of science is enormous and the fact that cell towers affect property values cannot be simply

 

ignored,” she says. “The time for transparency and respect for human rights as per the constitution need to be addressed. Communities should have a right to full public participation,” she insists. “Fibre is a faster, safer solution for health and the environment.” Dorny believes it is critical that cell towers should not be placed in schools and that those that have should be removed to “protect the children of South Africa”.

 

Communities of all socio-economic backgrounds across South Africa are opposing the erection of cell towers and lamp-post towers. “This opposition is growing, because the public have experienced first-hand the effects on their health, the environment and their property values over the past 20 years,” Dorny says.

 

Thousands of peer reviewed studies have shown the health impacts from electromagnetic pollution, which include central nervous system disorders, thyroid, liver, kidney and hormone disruption, immune dysfunction, ADD, autism, birth defects, sleep disorders, tinnitus, miscarriages and cancers. South Africa is guided by the WHO and the exposure guidelines published by the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), which maintains there is no risk to the health from exposure to the microwave emissions of cellular base stations. In an October 2014 fact sheet, the WHO noted the “ubiquitous” use of mobile phones, pegging usage at 6.9 billion subscriptions. “The electromagnetic fields produced by mobile phones are classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as possibly carcinogenic to humans. Studies are ongoing to more fully assess potential long-term effects.”

 

In May 2015, nearly 200 scientists submitted an appeal to the UN and the WHO, requesting they adopt more

 

protective exposure guidelines for electromagnetic fields and wireless technology in “the face of increasing evidence of risk”. Professor Walter Meyer, of the physics department at the University of Pretoria, says “the intensity of electromagnetic radiation you receive from a cellphone next to you is probably much higher than that of a base station a few tens of metres away… There is no conclusive proof that electromagnetic radiation at the levels from cellphone base stations can cause any health effects.”

 

But Dawson, who blames Eldorado’s proliferation of masts for his headaches and insomnia, will keep fighting. He carries a petition that garnered over 300 signatures this week “against network providers who place numerous network poles in our areas without proper public participation. “All these towers are rolled out at schools, shopping centres, churches and old-age homes, because it provides an income for these places, but without explaining allegations of health risks and property depreciation,” Dawson says.

 

After she considered selling her property in Craighall Park because of the mast, Fandam now rents it out. “It doesn’t really matter what I think the negative health impacts may be. “It’s what the potential buyers of my property think. If given a choice, would you live directly next to a 30m tower or would you buy a similar property elsewhere? “My property is my single biggest investment and now, through no fault of my own, I stand to lose a fair portion of the value.”

OTHER ORGANISATIONS WORKING ON THIS ISSUE IN SA: TAKEN FROM: https://www.emfsa.co.za/south-african-community-involvement/

Problems with 5G

Telecommunications companies worldwide, with the support of governments, are in various stages of rolling out the fifth-generation wireless network (5G). This is set to deliver what is acknowledged to be unprecedented societal change on a global scale. We will have “smart” homes, “smart” businesses, “smart” highways, “smart” cities and self-driving cars. Virtually everything we own and buy, from refrigerators and washing machines to milk cartons, hairbrushes and infants’ diapers, will contain antennas and microchips and will be connected wirelessly to the Internet. Every person on Earth will have instant access to super-high-speed, low- latency wireless communications from any point on the planet, even in rainforests, mid-ocean and the Antarctic.

What is not widely acknowledged is that this will also result in unprecedented environmental change on a global scale. The planned density of radio frequency transmitters is impossible to envisage. In addition to millions of new 5G base stations on Earth and 20,000 new satellites in space, 200 billion transmitting objects, according to estimates, will be part of the Internet of Things by 2020, and one trillion objects a few years later. Commercial 5G at lower frequencies and slower speeds was deployed in Qatar, Finland and Estonia in mid-2018. The rollout of 5G at extremely high (millimetre wave) frequencies is planned to begin at the end of 2018.

Despite widespread denial, the evidence that radio frequency (RF) radiation is harmful to life is already overwhelming. The accumulated clinical evidence of sick and injured human beings, experimental evidence of damage to DNA, cells and organ systems in a wide variety of plants and animals, and epidemiological evidence that the major diseases of modern civilization—cancer, heart disease and diabetes—are in large part caused by electromagnetic pollution, forms a literature base of well over 10,000 peer-reviewed studies.

If the telecommunications industry’s plans for 5G come to fruition, no person, no animal, no bird, no insect and no plant on Earth will be able to avoid exposure, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, to levels of RF radiation that are tens to hundreds of times greater than what exists today, without any possibility of escape anywhere on the planet. These 5G plans threaten to provoke serious, irreversible effects on humans and permanent damage to all of the Earth’s ecosystems.

Immediate measures must be taken to protect humanity and the environment, in accordance with ethical imperatives and international agreements.

5G will result in a massive increase in inescapable, involuntary exposure to wireless radiation

Ground-based 5G

In order to transmit the enormous amounts of data required for the Internet of Things (IoT), 5G technology, when fully deployed, will use millimetre waves, which are poorly transmitted through solid material. This will require every carrier to install base stations every 100 metres[1] in every urban area in the world. Unlike previous generations of wireless technology, in which a single antenna broadcasts over a wide area, 5G base stations and 5G devices will have multiple antennas arranged in “phased arrays” [2],[3] that work together to emit focused, steerable, laser-like beams that track each other.

Each 5G phone will contain dozens of tiny antennas, all working together to track and aim a narrowly focused beam at the nearest cell tower. The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has adopted rules [4] permitting the effective power of those beams to be as much as 20 watts, ten times more powerful than the levels permitted for current phones.

Each 5G base station will contain hundreds or thousands of antennas aiming multiple laser-like beams simultaneously at all cell phones and user devices in its service area. This technology is called “multiple input multiple output” or MIMO. FCC rules permit the effective radiated power of a 5G base station’s beams to be as much as 30,000 watts per 100 MHz of spectrum,[2] or equivalently 300,000 watts per GHz of spectrum, tens to hundreds of times more powerful than the levels permitted for current base stations.

Space-based 5G

At least five companies[5] are proposing to provide 5G from space from a combined 20,000 satellites in low- and medium-Earth orbit that will blanket the Earth with powerful, focused, steerable beams. Each satellite will emit millimetre waves with an effective radiated power of up to 5 million watts[6] from thousands of antennas arranged in a phased array. Although the energy reaching the ground from satellites will be less than that from ground-based antennas, it will irradiate areas of the Earth not reached by other transmitters and will be additional to ground-based 5G transmissions from billions of IoT objects. Even more importantly, the satellites will be located in the Earth’s magnetosphere, which exerts a significant influence over the electrical properties of the atmosphere. The alteration of the Earth’s electromagnetic environment may be an even greater threat to life than the radiation from ground-based antennas (see below).

Harmful effects of radio frequency radiation are already proven

Even before 5G was proposed, dozens of petitions and appeals[7] by international scientists, including the Freiburger Appeal signed by over 3,000 physicians, called for a halt to the expansion of wireless technology and a moratorium on new base stations.[8]

In 2015, 215 scientists from 41 countries communicated their alarm to the United Nations (UN) and World Health Organization (WHO).[9] They stated that “numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF [electromagnetic fields] affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines”. More than 10,000 peer-reviewed scientific studies demonstrate harm to human health from RF radiation.[10] [11] Effects include:

Effects in children include autism,[28] attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)[29][30] and asthma.[31]

Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is abundant evidence of harm to diverse plant- and wildlife[32][33] and laboratory animals, including:

Negative microbiological effects[48] have also been recorded.

The WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) concluded in 2011 that RF radiation of frequencies 30 kHz – 300 GHz are possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B).[49] However, recent evidence, including the latest studies on cell phone use and brain cancer risks, indicate that RF radiation is proven carcinogenic to humans[50] and should now be classified as a “Group 1 carcinogen” along with tobacco smoke and asbestos.

Most contemporary wireless signals are pulse-modulated. Harm is caused by both the high-frequency carrier wave and the low-frequency pulsations.[51]

The deployment of 5G satellites must be prohibited

The Earth, the ionosphere and the lower atmosphere form the global electric circuit[52] in which we live. It is well established that biological rhythms—of humans,[53][54] birds,[55] hamsters,[56] and spiders[57][58]—are controlled by the Earth’s natural electromagnetic environment and that the well-being of all organisms depends on the stability of this environment, including the electrical properties of the atmosphere.[59][60][61][62] Cherry, in a groundbreaking paper, [63] explained the importance of the Schumann resonances[64] and why ionospheric disturbances can alter blood pressure and melatonin and cause “cancer, reproductive, cardiac and neurological disease and death”.

These elements of our electromagnetic environment have already been altered by radiation from power lines. Power line harmonic radiation[65] reaches the Earth’s ionosphere and magnetosphere, where it is amplified by wave-particle interactions.[66][67] In 1985, Dr. Robert O. Becker warned that power line harmonic radiation had already changed the structure of the magnetosphere, and that the continued expansion of this effect “threatens the viability of all life on Earth”.[68] The placement of tens of thousands of satellites directly in both the ionosphere and magnetosphere, emitting modulated signals at millions of watts and millions of frequencies, is likely to alter our electromagnetic environment beyond our ability to adapt.[69]

Informal monitoring has already provided evidence indicating serious effects on humans and animals from the approximately 100 satellites that have provided 2G and 3G phone service from low orbit since 1998. Such effects cannot be understood only from consideration of the low levels of radiation on the ground. Knowledge from other relevant scientific disciplines must be taken into account, including the fields of atmospheric physics and acupuncture.[70][71][72][73] Adding 20,000 5G satellites will further pollute the global electric circuit[74][75] and could alter the Schumann resonances,[76] with which all life on Earth has evolved. The effects will be universal and may be profoundly damaging.

5G is qualitatively and quantitatively different from 4G

The idea that we will tolerate tens to hundreds of times more radiation at millimetre wavelengths is based on faulty modelling of the human body as a shell filled with a homogeneous liquid.[77][78] The assumption that millimetre waves do not penetrate beyond the skin completely ignores nerves,[79] blood vessels[80][81] and other electrically conducting structures that can carry radiation-induced currents deep into the body.[82][83][84] Another, potentially more serious error is that phased arrays are not ordinary antennas. When an ordinary electromagnetic field enters the body, it causes charges to move and currents to flow. But when extremely short electromagnetic pulses enter the body, something else happens: the moving charges themselves become little antennas that reradiate the electromagnetic field and send it deeper into the body. These reradiated waves are called Brillouin precursors.[85] They become significant when either the power or the phase of the waves changes rapidly enough.[86] 5G will probably satisfy both criteria.

In addition, shallow penetration in itself poses a unique danger to eyes and to the largest organ of the body, the skin, as well as to very small creatures. Peer-reviewed studies have recently been published, predicting thermal skin burns[87] in humans from 5G radiation and resonant absorption by insects,[88] which absorb up to 100 times as much radiation at millimetre wavelengths as they do at wavelengths presently in use. Since populations of flying insects have declined by 75-80 per cent since 1989 even in protected nature areas,[89] 5G radiation could have catastrophic effects on insect populations worldwide. A 1986 study by Om Gandhi warned that millimetre waves are strongly absorbed by the cornea of the eye, and that ordinary clothing, being of millimetre-size thickness, increases the absorption of energy by the skin by a resonance-type effect.[90] Russell (2018) reviews the known effects of millimetre waves on skin, eyes (including cataracts), heart rate, immune system and DNA.[91]

Regulators have deliberately excluded the scientific evidence of harm

Stakeholders thus far in the development of 5G have been industry and governments, while renowned international EMF scientists who have documented biological effects on humans, animals, insects and plants, and alarming effects on health and the environment in thousands of peer-reviewed studies have been excluded. The reason for the current inadequate safety guidelines is that conflicts of interest of standard-setting bodies “due to their relationships with telecommunications or electric companies undermine the impartiality that should govern the regulation of Public Exposure Standards for non-ionizing radiation”. [92] Professor Emeritus Martin L. Pall lays out the conflicts of interest in detail, and the lists of important studies that have been excluded, in his literature review. [93]

The thermal hypothesis is obsolete—new safety standards are needed

Current safety guidelines are based on the obsolete hypothesis that heating is the only harmful effect of EMFs. As Markov and Grigoriev have stated, “Today standards do not consider the real pollution of the environment with nonionizing radiation”.[94] Hundreds of scientists, including many signatories to this appeal, have proven that many different kinds of acute and chronic illnesses and injuries are caused without heating (“non-thermal effect”) from radiation levels far below international guidelines.9 Biological effects occur even at near-zero power levels. Effects that have been found at 0.02 picowatts (trillionths of a watt) per square centimetre or less include altered genetic structure in E. coli[95] and in rats,[96] altered EEG in humans,[97] growth stimulation in bean plants,[98] and stimulation of ovulation in chickens.[99]

To protect against non-thermal effects, duration of exposure must be considered. 5G will expose everyone to many more transmissions simultaneously and continuously, day and night without cessation. New safety standards are needed and should be based on cumulative exposure and not only on power levels but also on frequency, bandwidth, modulation, waveform, pulse width and other properties that are biologically important. Antennas must be confined to specific, publicly identified locations. To protect humans, antennas must be located far from where people live and work, and excluded from the public rights-of-way where people walk. To protect wildlife, they must be excluded from wilderness sanctuaries and strictly minimized in remote areas of the Earth. To protect all life, commercial communications satellites must be limited in number and prohibited in low- and medium-Earth orbits. Phased arrays must be prohibited on Earth and in space.

RF radiation has both acute and chronic effects

RF radiation has both immediate and long-term effects. Cancer and heart disease are examples of long-term effects. Alteration of heart rhythm[100] and changes in brain function (EEG)[101] are examples of immediate effects. A syndrome that was called radiowave sickness[102] in the former Soviet Union and is called electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) around the world today[103] can be either acute or chronic. Professor Dr. Karl Hecht has published a detailed history of these syndromes, compiled from a review of more than 1,500 Russian scientific papers and the clinical histories of more than 1,000 of his own patients in Germany. Objective findings include sleep disorders, abnormal blood pressure and heart rate, digestive disorders, hair loss, tinnitus and skin rash. Subjective symptoms include dizziness, nausea, headache, memory loss, inability to concentrate, fatigue, flu-like symptoms and cardiac pain. [104]

The EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 states that EHS develops when people are “continuously exposed in their daily life” to increasing levels of EMFs, and that “reduction and prevention of EMF exposure” is necessary to restore these patients to health.[105] EHS should no longer be considered a disease, but an injury by a toxic environment that affects an increasingly large portion of the population, estimated already at 100 million people worldwide,[106][107] and that may soon affect everyone[108] if the worldwide rollout of 5G is permitted.

The International Scientific Declaration on EHS and multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS), Brussels, declared in 2015 that “[i]naction is a cost to society and is not an option any more… [W]e unanimously acknowledge this serious hazard to public health… [urgently requiring] that major primary prevention measures are adopted and prioritized, to face this worldwide pan-epidemic in perspective” (emphasis added).[109]

World governments are failing in their duty of care to the populations they govern

In their haste to implement 5G and to encourage the unconstrained use of outer space, the European Union, United States and national governments worldwide are taking steps to ensure a “barrier-free” regulatory environment.[110] They are prohibiting local authorities from enforcing environmental laws,[111] and “in the interest of speedy and cost-effective deployment”, removing “unnecessary burdens… such as local planning procedures [and] the variety of specific limits on electromagnetic field (EMF) emissions and of the methods required to aggregate them”.[112]

Governments are also enacting laws to make wireless facilities a permitted use in all public rights-of-way.[113] To date, most wireless facilities have been located on private property at some distance from homes and businesses. In order for them to be spaced less than 100 metres apart as required by 5G, however, they will now be located on the sidewalk directly in front of homes and businesses and close above the heads of pedestrians, including mothers with babies.

Public notice requirements and public hearings are being eliminated. Even if there were a hearing and 100 scientific experts were to testify against 5G, laws have been passed making it illegal for local authorities to take their testimony into consideration. US law, for example, prohibits local governments from regulating wireless technology “on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency radiation”,[114] and courts have reversed regulatory decisions about cell tower placement simply because most of the public testimony was about health.[115] Insurers will not provide coverage against EMF risks,[116] and there is zero clarity as to what entity will bear legal responsibility for damage to life, limb and property arising from exposure to 5G, whether ground- or space-based.[117]

In the absence of an agreed comprehensive legal regime governing activities in outer space, legal liability for those activities is non-existent, despite the prospect of whole continents, the atmosphere and the oceans being put at risk by them.

 International agreements are being violated

Children and duty of care

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: States shall “undertake to ensure the child such protection and care as is necessary for his or her well-being” (art. 3), “ensure… the survival and development of the child” (art. 6) and “take appropriate measures to combat disease… taking into consideration the dangers and risks of environmental pollution” (art. 24(c)).

The Nuremberg Code (1947) applies to all experiments on humans, thus including the deployment of 5G with new, higher RF radiation exposure that has not been pre-market tested for safety. “The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential” (art. 1). Exposure to 5G will be involuntary. “No experiment should be conducted, where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur” (art. 5). The findings of over 10,000 scientific studies and the voices of hundreds of international organizations representing hundreds of thousands of members who have suffered disabling injury and been displaced from their homes by already-existing wireless telecommunications facilities, are “a priori reasons to believe that death or disabling injury will occur”.

Duty to inform and EMFs

The World Telecommunication Standardization Assembly (2012) of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) stated that “[t]here is a need to inform the public of the potential effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs)” and invited Member States “to adopt suitable measures in order to ensure compliance with relevant international recommendations to protect health against the adverse effect of EMF”.

The Mid-term review of the European Environment and Health Action Plan 2004-2010 (2008): “The European Parliament… [n]otes that the limits on exposure to electromagnetic fields which have been set for the general public are obsolete, … obviously take no account of developments in information and communication technologies, of the recommendations issued by the European Environment Agency or of the stricter emission standards adopted, for example, by Belgium, Italy and Austria, and do not address the issue of vulnerable groups, such as pregnant women, newborn babies and children.”

Resolution 1815 (Council of Europe, 2011): “Take all reasonable measures to reduce exposure to electromagnetic fields, especially to radio frequencies from mobile phones, and particularly the exposure to children and young people.”

Environment

The Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (1972): “The discharge of toxic substances… in such quantities or concentrations as to exceed the capacity of the environment to render them harmless, must be halted in order to ensure that serious or irreversible damage is not inflicted upon ecosystems” (principle 6).

The World Charter for Nature (1982): “Activities which are likely to cause irreversible damage to nature shall be avoided… [W]here potential adverse effects are not fully understood, the activities should not proceed” (art. 11).

The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (1992): “States have… the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction” (principle 2).

The United Nations World Summit on Sustainable Development (2002): “There is an urgent need to… create more effective national and regional policy responses to environmental threats to human health” (para. 54(k)).

The African Convention on the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (2017): “The Parties shall… take all appropriate measures to prevent, mitigate and eliminate to the maximum extent possible, detrimental effects on the environment, in particular from radioactive, toxic, and other hazardous substances and wastes” (art. 13).

Health and human rights

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948): “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person” (art. 3).

The United Nations Global Strategy for Women’s, Children’s and Adolescents’ Health (2016-2030) has as objectives and targets to “transform”, by expanding enabling environments; to “survive”, by reducing maternal and newborn mortality; and to “thrive” by ensuring health and well-being and reducing pollution-related deaths and illnesses.

Space

The Outer Space Treaty (1967) requires that the use of outer space be conducted “so as to avoid [its] harmful contamination and also adverse changes in the environment of the Earth” (art. IX)

The United Nations Guidelines for The Long-Term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities (2018): “States and international intergovernmental organizations should address… risks to people, property, public health and the environment associated with the launch, in-orbit operation and re-entry of space objects” (guideline 2.2(c)).

World governments are playing dice with life on Earth

Albert Einstein famously asserted that “God does not play dice”.[118] Yet by pursuing the broadcast on Earth and from space of 5G, an unprecedented technology of millimetre waves previously used as an energy weapon in military operations and crowd control,[119] world governments are recklessly playing dice with the future of life on Earth.

To refuse to accept and apply relevant and valid scientific knowledge is ethically unacceptable. Existing research shows that 5G—and especially space-based 5G—contravenes principles enshrined in a host of international agreements.

We call upon the UN, WHO, EU, Council of Europe and governments of all nations,

(a) To take immediate measures to halt the deployment of 5G on Earth and in space in order to protect all humankind, especially the unborn, infants, children, adolescents and pregnant women, as well as the environment;

(b) To follow the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and Council of Europe Resolution 1815 by informing citizens, including teachers and physicians, about the health risks (to adults and children) from RF radiation, and why they should and how they can avoid wireless communication and base stations, particularly in or near day-care centres, schools, hospitals, homes and workplaces;

(c) To favour and implement wired telecommunications instead of wireless;

(d) To prohibit the wireless/telecommunications industry through its lobbying organizations from persuading officials to make decisions permitting further expansion of RF radiation, including ground- and space-based 5G;

(e) To appoint immediately—without industry influence—international groups of independent, truly impartial EMF and health scientists with no conflicts of interest, [120] for the purpose of establishing new international safety standards for RF radiation that are not based only on power levels, that consider cumulative exposure, and that protect against all health and environmental effects, not just thermal effects and not just effects on humans;

(f) To appoint immediately—without industry influence—international groups of scientists with expertise in EMFs, health, biology and atmospheric physics, for the purpose of developing a comprehensive regulatory framework that will ensure that the uses of outer space are safe for humans and the environment, taking into account RF radiation, rocket exhaust gases, black soot, and space debris and their impacts on ozone, [121] global warming, [122] the atmosphere and the preservation of life on Earth. Not only ground-based but also space-based technology must be sustainable [123] for adults and children, animals and plants.

Please respond to the Appeal Administrator listed below,

detailing the measures you intend to take to protect the global population against RF radiation exposure, especially 5G radiation. This appeal and your response will be publicly available on www.5gSpaceAppeal.org.

Respectfully submitted,

Arthur Firstenberg, Appeal Administrator, info@5gSpaceAppeal.org

Initial signatories

AFRICA

Lauraine Margaret Helen Vivian, PhD, Anthropology and Psychiatry; Honorary Research Associate, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark. Signatory for South Africa

ASIA

Girish Kumar, PhD, Professor, Electrical Engineering Department, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai, India

AUSTRALIA

Don Maisch, PhD, Independent researcher, author of ”The Procrustean Approach”, Lindisfarne, Tasmania, Australia

EUROPE

Alfonso Balmori, BSc, Master in Environmental Education, Biologist. Valladolid, Spain

Klaus Buchner, Dr. rer. nat., Professor, MEP – Member of the European Parliament, Kompetenzinitiative zum Schutz von Mensch, Umwelt und Demokratie e.V., München, Germany

Daniel Favre, Dr. phil. nat., Biologist, A.R.A. (Association Romande Alerte aux Ondes Electromagnétiques), Switzerland

Annie Sasco, MD, DrPH, SM, HDR, former Chief of Research Unit of Epidemiology for Cancer Prevention at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), Lyon; former Acting Chief, Programme for Cancer Control of the World Health Organization (WHO); former Director of Research at the Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM); France

NORTH AMERICA

Martin Pall, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences, Washington State University, residing in Portland, Oregon, USA

Kate Showers, PhD, Soil Science, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for World Environmental History, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton, UK, residing in Bolton-Est, Québec, Canada

SOUTH AMERICA

Carlos Sosa, MD, University of Antioquia, Medellín, Colombia



References

[1] De Grasse M. AT&T outlines 5G network architecture. RCR Wireless News, Oct. 20, 2016. https://www.rcrwireless.com/20161020/network-infrastructure/att-outlines-5g-network-architecture-tag4. Accessed July 9, 2018.

[2] Hong W, Jiang ZH, Yu C, et al. Multibeam antenna technologies for 5G wireless communications. IEEE Tr Ant Prop. 2017;65(12):6231-6249. doi: 10.1109/TAP.2017.2712819.

[3] Chou H-T. Design Methodology for the Multi-Beam Phased Array of Antennas with Relatively Arbitrary Coverage Sector. Conference paper: 2017 11th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation; Paris, France. doi: 10.23919/EuCAP.2017.7928095.

[4] 47 CFR § 30.202 — Power limits.

[6] Federal Communications Commission. Pending Application for Satellite Space and Earth Station Authorization. Schedule S, Technical Report. Dated April 2016, filed March 1, 2017. http://licensing.fcc.gov/myibfs/download.do?attachment_key=1200245. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[7] Governments and organizations that ban or warn against wireless technology. Cellular Phone Task Force website. http://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/governments-and-organizations-that-ban-or-warn-against-wireless-technology/. Accessed June 10, 2018. Continually updated.

[8] The International Doctors ́ Appeal (Freiburger Appeal). http://freiburger-appell-2012.info/en/home.php?lang=EN. Published in 2012. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[9] International appeal: scientists call for protection from non-ionizing electromagnetic field exposure. International EMF Scientist Appeal website. https://emfscientist.org/index.php/emf-scientist-appeal. Published May 11, 2015. Accessed June 10, 2018. As of March 2018, 237 EMF scientists from 41 nations had signed the Appeal.

[10] Glaser Z. Cumulated index to the bibliography of reported biological phenofmena (‘effects’) and clinical manifestations attributed to microwave and radio-frequency radiation: report, supplements (no. 1-9).BEMS newsletter (B-1 through B-464), 1971-1981. http://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Zory-Glasers-index.pdf. Accessed June 26, 2018. Report and 9 supplements issued by Naval Medical Research Institute, Bethesda, MD; Research Division, Bureau of Medicine & Surgery, Dept. of the Navy, Washington, DC; Electromagnetic Radiation Project Office, Naval Medical Research & Development Command, Bethesda, MD; Naval Surface Weapons Center, Dahlgren, VA; and National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Rockville, MD. Index by Julie Moore and Associates, Riverside, CA, 1984. Lt. Zorach Glaser, PhD, catalogued 5,083 studies, books and conference reports for the US Navy through 1981.

[11] Sage C, Carpenter D., eds. Biolnitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically-Based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Radiation. Sage Associates; 2012. www.bioinitiative.org. Accessed June 10, 2018. The 1,470-page BioInitiative Report, authored by an international group of 29 experts, has reviewed more than 1,800 new studies and is continually updated.

[12] Grigoriev Y. Bioeffects of modulated electromagnetic fields in the acute experiments (results of Russian researches). Annu Russ Natl Comm Non-Ionising Radiat Protect. 2004:16-73. http://bemri.org/publications/biological-effects-of-non-ionizing-radiation/78-grigoriev-bioeffects07/file.html. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[13] Obajuluwa AO, Akinyemi AJ, Afolabi OB, et al. Exposure to radio-frequency electromagnetic waves alters acetylcholinesterase gene expression, exploratory and motor coordination-linked behaviour in male rats.Toxicol Rep. 2017;4:530-534. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221475001730063X/pdfft?md5=0af5af76124b1f89f6d23c90c5c7764f&pid=1-s2.0-S221475001730063X-main.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[14] Volkow ND, Tomasi D, Wang G-J, et al. Effects of cell phone radiofrequency signal exposure on brain glucose metabolism. JAMA. 2012;305(8):808-813. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3184892. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[15] Eghlidospour M, Ghanbari A, Mortazavi S, Azari H. Effects of radiofrequency exposure emitted from a GSM mobile phone on proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis of neural stem cells. Anat Cell Biol. 2017;50(2):115-123. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5509895. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[16] Hardell L, Carlberg C. Mobile phones, cordless phones and the risk for brain tumors. Int J Oncol.2009;35(1):5-17. https://www.spandidos-publications.com/ijo/35/1/5/download. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[17] Bandara P, Weller S. Cardiovascular disease: Time to identify emerging environmental risk factors. Eur J Prev Cardiol. 2017;24(17):1819-1823. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2047487317734898. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[18] Deshmukh P et al. Cognitive impairment and neurogenotoxic effects in rats exposed to low-intensity microwave radiation. Int J Toxicol. 2015;34(3):284-290. doi: 10.1177/1091581815574348.

[19] Zothansiama, Zosangzuali M, Lalramdinpuii M, Jagetia GC. Impact of radiofrequency radiation on DNA damage and antioxidants in peripheral blood lymphocytes of humans residing in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations. Electromag Biol Med. 2017;36(3):295-305. doi: 10.1080/15368378.2017.1350584.

[20] Zwamborn A, Vossen S, van Leersum B, Ouwens M, Mäkel W. Effects of Global Communication system radio-frequency fields on Well Being and Cognitive Functions of human subjects with and without subjective complaints. TNO Report FEL-03-C148. The Hague: TNO Physics and Electronics Laboratory; 2003. http://www.milieugezondheid.be/dossiers/gsm/TNO_rapport_Nederland_sept_2003.pdf.
Accessed June 16, 2018.

[21] Havas M. When theory and observation collide: Can non-ionizing radiation cause cancer? Environ Pollut. 2017;221:501-505. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2016.10.018.

[22] Narayanan SN, Kumar RS, Potu BK, Nayak S, Mailankot M. Spatial memory performance of Wistar rats exposed to mobile phone. Clinics. 2009;64(3):231-234. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2666459. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[23] Houston BJ, Nixon B, King BV, De Iuliis GN, Aitken RJ. The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation on sperm function. Reproduction. 2016;152(6):R263-R266. http://www.reproduction-online.org/content/152/6/R263.long. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[24] Han J, Cao Z, Liu X, Zhang W, Zhang S. Effect of early pregnancy electromagnetic field exposure on embryo growth ceasing. Wei Sheng Yan Jiu. 2010;39(3):349-52 (in Chinese). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20568468.

[25] Salford LG, Brun AE, Eberhardt JL, Malmgren L, Persson BRR. Nerve cell damage in mammalian brain after exposure to microwaves from GSM mobile phones. Environ Health Perspect. 2003;111(7):881-883. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1241519/pdf/ehp0111-000881.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[26] Milham S. Evidence that dirty electricity is causing the worldwide epidemics of obesity and diabetes. Electromagn Biol Med. 2014;33(1):75-78. doi: 10.3109/15368378.2013.783853.

[27] Yakymenko I, Tsybulin O, Sidorik E, Henshel D, Kyrylenko O, Kyrylenko S. Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagn Biol Med. 2016;35(2):186-202. doi: 10.3109/15368378.2015.1043557.

[28] Herbert M, Sage C. Findings in autism (ASD) consistent with electromagnetic fields (EMF) and radiofrequency radiation (RFR). In: Sage C, Carpenter D., eds. Biolnitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically-Based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Radiation. Sec. 20. Sage Associates; 2012. http://www.bioinitiative.org/report/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/sec20_2012_Findings_in_Autism.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2018.

[29] Divan HA, Kheifets L, Obel C, Olsen J. Prenatal and postnatal exposure to cell phone use and behavioral problems in children. Epidemiology 2008;19: 523–529. http://www.wifiinschools.com/uploads/3/0/4/2/3042232/divan_08_prenatal_postnatal
_cell_phone_use.pdf
. Accessed June 29, 2018.

[30] Divan HA, Kheifets L, Obel C, Olsen J. Cell phone use and behavioural problems in young children. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2010;66(6):524-529. doi: 10.1136/jech.2010.115402. Accessed July 16, 2018.

[31] Li D-K, Chen H, Odouli R. Maternal exposure to magnetic fields during pregnancy in relation to the risk of asthma in offspring. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2011;165(10):945-950. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/fullarticle/1107612. Accessed June 29, 2018.

[32] Warnke U. Bees, Birds and Mankind: Destroying Nature by ‘Electrosmog.’ Competence Initiative for the Protection of Humanity, Environment and Democracy; 2009. http://www.bemri.org/publications/wildlife-and-plants/1-birds-bees-and-mankind/file.html. Accessed March 11, 2020.

[33] Balmori A. Electromagnetic pollution from phone masts. Effects on wildlife. Pathophysiology. 2009;16:191-199. doi:10.1016/j.pathophys.2009.01.007. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[34] Cammaerts MC, Johansson O. Ants can be used as bio-indicators to reveal biological effects of electromagnetic waves from some wireless apparatus. Electromagn Biol Med. 2014;33(4):282-288. doi: 10.3109/15368378.2013.817336.

[35] Broomhall M. Report detailing the exodus of species from the Mt. Nardi area of the Nightcap National Park World Heritage Area during a 15-year period (2000-2015). Report for the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/Mt-Nardi-Wildlife-Report-to-UNESCO-FINAL.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[36] Kordas D. Birds and Trees of Northern Greece: Changes since the Advent of 4G Wireless. 2017. https://einarflydal.files.wordpress.com/2017/08/kordas-birds-and-trees-of-northern-greece-2017-final.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2018.

[37] Waldmann-Selsam C, Balmori-de la Puente A, Breunig H, Balmori A. Radiofrequency radiation injures trees around mobile phone base stations. Sci Total Environ. 2016;572:554-569. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.08.045.

[38] Balmori A. Mobile phone mast effects on common frog (Rana temporaria) tadpoles: The city turned into a laboratory. Electromagn Biol Med. 2010(1-2):31-35. doi: 10.3109/15368371003685363.

[39] Margaritis LH, Manta AK, Kokkaliaris KD, et al. Drosophila oogenesis as a bio-marker responding to EMF sources. Electromagn Biol Med. 2014;33(3):165-189. doi: 10.3109/15368378.2013.800102.

[40] Kumar NR, Sangwan S, Badotra P. Exposure to cell phone radiations produces biochemical changes in worker honey bees. Toxicol Int. 2011;18(1):70-72. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3052591. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[41] Balmori A. Efectos de las radiaciones electromagnéticas de la telefonía móvil sobre los insectos.Ecosistemas. 2006;15(1):87-95. https://www.revistaecosistemas.net/index.php/ecosistemas/article/ download/520/495. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[42] Balmori A. The incidence of electromagnetic pollution on wild mammals: A new “poison” with a sloweffect on nature? Environmentalist. 2010;30(1):90-97. doi: 10.1007/s10669-009-9248-y

[43] Magras IN, Xenos TD. RF radiation-induced changes in the prenatal development of mice.Bioelectromagnetics 1997;18(6):455-461. http://collectiveactionquebec.com/uploads/8/0/9/7/80976394/exhibit_r-62_magras_mice_study.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[44] Otitoloju AA, Osunkalu VO, Oduware R, et al. Haematological effects of radiofrequency radiation from GSM base stations on four successive generations (F1 – F4) of albino mice, Mus Musculus. J Environ Occup Sci. 2012;1(1):17-22. https://www.ejmanager.com/mnstemps/62/62-1332160631.pdf?t=1532966199. Accessed July 30, 2018.

[45] Magone I. The effect of electromagnetic radiation from the Skrunda Radio Location Station on Spirodela polyrhiza (L.) Schleiden cultures. Sci Total Environ. 1996;180(1):75-80. doi: 0048-9697(95)04922-3.

[46] Nittby H, Brun A, Strömblad S, et al. Nonthermal GSM RF and ELF EMF effects upon rat BBB permeability.Environmentalist. 2011;31(2):140-148. doi: 10.1007/s10669-011-9307-z.

[47] Haggerty K. Adverse influence of radio frequency background on trembling aspen seedlings: Preliminary observations. International Journal of Forestry Research. 2010; Article ID 836278. http://downloads.hindawi.com/journals/ijfr/2010/836278.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[48] Taheri M, Mortazavi SM, Moradi M, et al. Evaluation of the effect of radiofrequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi router and mobile phone simulator on the antibacterial susceptibility of pathogenic bacteria Listeria monocytogenes and Escherichia coli. Dose Response. 2017;15(1):1559325816688527. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5298474. Accessed June 18, 2018.

[49] International Agency for Research on Cancer. Non-ionizing radiation, part 2: radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. In: IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Vol 102. Lyon, France: WHO Press; 2013.  http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol102/mono102.pdf. Accessed July 2, 2018.

[50] Carlberg M, Hardell L. Evaluation of mobile phone and cordless phone use and glioma risk using the Bradford Hill viewpoints from 1965 on association and causation. Biomed Res Int. 2017:9218486. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5376454. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[51] Blackman CF. Evidence for disruption by the modulating signal. In: Sage C, Carpenter D., eds. Biolnitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically-Based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Radiation. Sec. 15. Sage Associates; 2012. http://www.bioinitiative.org/report/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/sec15_2007_Modulation_Blackman.pdf. Accessed June 19, 2018.

[52] Williams ER. The global electrical circuit: a review. Atmos Res. 2009;91(2):140-152. doi:10.1016/j.atmosres.2008.05.018.

[53] Wever R. Human circadian rhythms under the influence of weak electric fields and the different aspects of these studies. Int J Biometeorol. 1973;17(3):227-232. www.vitatec.com/docs/referenz-umgebungsstrahlung/wever-1973.pdf. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[54] Wever R. ELF-effects on human circadian rhythms. In: ELF and VLF Electromagnetic Field Effects. (Persinger M, ed.) New York: Plenum; 1974:101-144.

[55] Engels S, Schneider N-L, Lefeldt N, et al. Anthropogenic electromagnetic noise disrupts magnetic compass orientation in a migratory bird. Nature. 2014;509:353-356. doi:10.1038/nature13290.

[56] Ludwig W, Mecke R. Wirkung künstlicher Atmospherics auf Säuger. Archiv für Meteorologie, Geophysik und Bioklimatologie Serie B (Archives for Meteorology Geophysics and Bioclimatology Series B Theoretical and Applied Climatology). 1968;16(2-3):251-261. doi:10.1007/BF02243273.

[57] Morley EL, Robert D. Electric fields elicit ballooning in spiders. Current Biology. 2018;28:1-7. https://www.cell.com/current-biology/pdf/S0960-9822(18)30693-6.pdf. Accessed July 14, 2018.

[58] Weber J. Die Spinnen sind Deuter des kommenden Wetters (Spiders Are Predictors of the Coming Weather). 1800; Landshut, Germany. “The electrical material works always in the atmosphere; no seasoncan retard its action. Its effects on the weather are almost undisputed; spiders sense it, and alter theirbehaviour accordingly.”

[59] König H. Biological effects of extremely low frequency electrical phenomena in the atmosphere. J Interdiscipl Cycle Res. 2(3):317-323. www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09291017109359276. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[60] Sulman F. The Effect of Air Ionization, Electric Fields, Atmospherics, and Other Electric Phenomena On Man and Animal. American lecture series. Vol 1029. Springfield, Ill: Thomas; 1980.

[61] König HL, Krüger, AP, Lang S, Sönning, W. Biologic Effects of Environmental Electromagnetism. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1981. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4612-5859-9.

[62] Sazanova E, Sazanov A, Sergeenko N, Ionova V, Varakin Y. Influence of near earth electromagnetic resonances on human cerebrovascular system in time of heliogeophysical disturbances. Progress in Electromagnetics Research Symposium. August 2013:1661-1665.

[63] Cherry N. Schumann resonances, a plausible biophysical mechanism for the human health effects of solar/geomagnetic activity. Natural Hazards. 2002;26(3):279-331. doi:10.1023/A:1015637127504.

[64] Polk C. Schumann resonances. In Volland H, ed. CRC Handbook of Atmospherics. Vol. 1. Boca Raton, Fla: CRC Press; 1982:111-178. https://archive.org/stream/in.ernet.dli.2015.132044/2015.132044.Crc-Handbook-Of-Atmospherics-Vol-1#page/n115/mode/2up/search/polk. Accessed June 18, 2018.

[65] Park C, Helliwell R. Magnetospheric effects of power line radiation. Science. 1978;200(4343):727-730. doi:10.1126/science.200.4343.727.

[66] Bullough K, Kaiser TR, Strangeways HJ. Unintentional man-made modification effects in the magnetosphere. J Atm Terr Phys. 1985;47(12):1211-1223.

[67] Luette JP, Park CG, Helliwell RA. The control of the magnetosphere by power line radiation. J Geophys Res. 1979;84:2657-2660.

[68] Becker RO, Selden G. The Body Electric: Electromagnetism and the Foundation of Life. New York: Morrow; 1985:325-326.

[69] Firstenberg A. Planetary Emergency. Cellular Phone Task Force website. http://www.cellphonetaskforce.org/planetary-emergency. Published 2018. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[70] Becker RO. The basic biological data transmission and control system influenced by electrical forces. Ann NY Acad Sci. 1974;238:236-241. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1974.tb26793.x.

[71] Maxey ES, Beal JB. The electrophysiology of acupuncture; How terrestrial electric and magnetic fields influence air ion energy exchanges through acupuncture points. International Journal of Biometeorology. 1975;19(Supp. 1):124. doi:10.1007/BF01737335.

[72] Ćosić I, Cvetković D, Fang Q, Jovanov E, Lazoura H. Human electrophysiological signal responses to ELFSchumann resonance and artificial electromagnetic fields. FME Transactions. 2006;34:93-103. http://scindeks-clanci.ceon.rs/data/pdf/1450-8230/2006/1450-82300602093C.pdf. Accessed July 18, 2018.

[73] Cohen M, Behrenbruch C, Ćosić I. Is there a link between acupuncture meridians, earth-ionosphere resonances and cerebral activity? Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Bioelectromagnetism, Melbourne, Australia. 1998:173-174. doi: 10.1109/ICBEM.1998.666451.

[74] Chevalier G, Mori K, Oschman JL. The effect of earthing (grounding) on human physiology. European Biology and Bioelectromagnetics. January 2006:600-621. http://162.214.7.219/~earthio0/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Effects-of-Earthing-on-Human-Physiology-Part-1.pdf. Accessed June 10, 2018. “Highly significant EEG, EMG and BVP results demonstrate that restoring the natural electrical potential of the earth to the human body (earthing) rapidly affects human electrophysiological and physiological parameters. The extreme rapidity of these changes indicates a physical/bioelectrical mechanism ratherthan a biochemical change.”

[75] Firstenberg A. Earth’s Electric Envelope. In: The Invisible Rainbow: A History of Electricity and Life. Santa Fe, NM: AGB Press; 2017: 113-131.

[76] Cannon PS, Rycroft MJ. Schumann resonance frequency variations during sudden ionospheric disturbances. J Atmos Sol Terr Phys. 1982;44(2):201-206. doi:10.1016/0021-9169(82)90124-6.

[77] Technical Report. European Telecommunications Standards Institute; 2007:7. http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_tr/125900_125999/125914/07.00.00_60/
tr_125914v070000p.pdf
. Accessed June 10, 2018. “The Specific Anthropomorphic Mannequin (SAM) is used for radiated performancemeasurements [and is] filled with tissue simulating liquid.”

[78] Research on technology to evaluate compliance with RF protection guidelines. Electromagnetic Compatibility Laboratory, Tokyo. http://emc.nict.go.jp/bio/phantom/index_e.html. Accessed July 18, 2018.“SAR is measured by filling phantom liquid that has the same electrical properties as those of the human body in a container made in the shape of the human body, and scanning the inside using an SAR probe.”

[79] Becker RO, Marino AA. Electromagnetism and Life. Albany: State University of New York Press; 1982:39.“The evidence seems to be quite conclusive that there are steady DC electric currents flowing outside of the neurones proper in the entire nervous system.”

[80] Nordenström B. Biologically Closed Electric Circuits. Stockholm: Nordic Medical Publications; 1983.

[81] Nordenström B. Impact of biologically closed electric circuits (BCEC) on structure and function. Integr Physiol Behav Sci. 1992;27(4):285-303. doi:10.1007/BF02691165.

[82] Devyatkov ND, ed. Non-Thermal Effects of Millimeter Radiation. Moscow: USSR Acad. Sci.; 1981 (Russian).

[83] Devyatkov ND, Golant MB, Betskiy OV. Millimeter Waves and Their Role in the Processes of Life. (Millimetrovye volny i ikh rol’ v protsessakh zhiznedeyatel’nosti). Moscow: Radio i svyaz’ (Radio and Communication); 1991 (Russian).

[84] Betskii OV. Biological effects of low-intensity millimetre waves (Review). Journal of Biomedical Electronics. 2015(1):31-47. http://www.radiotec.ru/article/15678. Accessed July 31, 2018.

[85] Albanese R, Blaschak J, Medina R, Penn J. Ultrashort electromagnetic signals: Biophysical questions,safety issues and medical opportunities,” Aviat Space Environ Med. 1994;65(5 Supp):A116-A120. http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a282990.pdf. Accessed June 18, 2018.

[86] Pepe D, Aluigi L, Zito D. Sub-100 ps monocycle pulses for 5G UWB communications. 10th European Conference on Antennas and Propagation (EuCAP). 2016;1-4. doi: 10.1109/EuCAP.2016.7481123.

[87] Nasim I, Kim S. Human exposure to RF fields in 5G downlink. arXiv:1711.03683v1.https://arxiv.org/pdf/1711.03683. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[88] Thielens A, Bell D, Mortimore DB. Exposure of insects to radio-frequency electromagnetic fields from 2 to 120 GHz. Nature/Scientific Reports. 2018;8:3924. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-22271-3.pdf. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[89] Hallmann CA, Sorg M, Jongejans E. More than 75 per cent decline over 27 years in total flying insect biomass in protected areas. PLOS One. 2017;12(10):e0185809. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0185809&type=printable. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[90] Gandhi O, Riazi A. Absorption of millimeter waves by human beings and its biological implications. IEEE Trans Microw Theory Tech. 1986;34(2):228-235. doi:10.1109/TMTT.1986.1133316.

[91] Russell CL. 5G wireless telecommunications expansion: Public health and environmental implications. Environ Res 2018;165:484-495. https://zero5g.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/5-G-wireless-telecommunications-expansion-Public-health-and-environmental-implications-Cindy-L.-russell.pdf. Accessed November 1, 2018.

[92] Hardell L. World Health Organization, radiofrequency radiation and health—a hard nut to crack (review). Int J Oncol. 2017;51:405-413. doi:10.3892/ijo.2017.4046.

[93] Pall M. 5G: Great risk for EU, U.S. and international health: Compelling evidence for eight distinct types of great harm caused by electromagnetic field (EMF) exposures and the mechanism that causes them. European Academy for Environmental Medicine. http://www.5gappeal.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/pall_2018.pdf. Published May 2018. Accessed June 22, 2018.

[94] Markov M, Grigoriev Y. Wi-Fi technology: An uncontrolled global experiment on the health of mankind,Electromagn Biol Med. 2013;32(2):200-208. http://www.avaate.org/IMG/pdf/Wi-fi_Technology_-_An_Uncontrolled_Global_Experiment_on_the_Health_of_Mankind_-_Marko_Markov_Yuri_G._Grigoriev.pdf. Accessed June 23, 2018.

[95] Belyaev I, Alipov Y, Shcheglov V, Polunin V, Aizenberg O. Cooperative response of Escherichia coli cells to the resonance effect of millimeter waves at super low intensity. Electromagn Biol Med. 1994;13(1):53-66. doi:10.3109/15368379409030698.

[96] Belyaev I. Nonthermal biological effects of microwaves: Current knowledge, further perspective, and urgent needs. Electromagn Biol Med. 2005;24(3):375-403. doi:10.1080/15368370500381844.

[97] Bise W. Low power radio-frequency and microwave effects on human electroencephalogram and behavior. Physiol Chem Phys. 1978;10(5):387-398.

[98] Brauer I. Experimentelle Untersuchungen über die Wirkung von Meterwellen verschiedener Feldstärke auf das Teilungswachstum der Pflanzen. Chromosoma. 1950;3(1):483-509. doi:10.1007/BF00319492.

[99] Kondra P, Smith W, Hodgson G, Bragg D, Gavora J, Hamid M. Growth and reproduction of chickens subjected to microwave radiation. Can J Anim Sci. 1970;50(3):639-644. doi:10.4141/cjas70-087.

[100] Frey AH, Seifert E. Pulse modulated UHF energy illumination of the heart associated with change in heart rate. Life Sciences. 1968;7(10 Part 2):505-512. doi: 10.1016/0024-3205(68)90068-4.

[101] Mann K, Röschke J. Effects of pulsed high-frequency electromagnetic fields on human sleep.Neuropsychobiology. 1996;33(1):41-47. doi: 10.1159/000119247.

[102] Tiagin NV. Clinical aspects of exposure to microwave radiation. Moscow: Meditsina; 1971 (Russian).

[103] Belpomme D, Campagnac C, Irigaray P. Reliable disease biomarkers characterizing and identifying electrohypersensitivity and multiple chemical sensitivity as two etiopathogenic aspects of a unique pathological disorder. Rev Environ Health 2015;30(4):251–271.  https://www.jrseco.com/wp-content/uploads/Belpomme-Environmental-health-2015.pdf. Accessed June 18, 2018.

[104] Hecht K. Health Implications of Long-term Exposure to Electrosmog. Competence Initiative for the Protection of Humanity, the Environment and Democracy. 2016: 16, 42-46. https://kompetenzinitiative.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/KI_Brochure-6_K_Hecht_web.pdf. Accessed November 19, 2019.

[105] Belyaev I, Dean A, Eger H, et al. EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses. Rev Environ Health. 2016;31(3):363-397. doi:10.1515/reveh-2016-0011.

[106] Schreier N, Huss A, Röösli M. The prevalence of symptoms attributed to electromagnetic field exposure: A cross-sectional representative survey in Switzerland. Soz Praventivmed. 2006;51(4):202-209. doi:10.1007/s00038-006-5061-2. Accessed July 16, 2018.

[107] Schroeder E. Stakeholder-Perspektiven zur Novellierung der 26. BImSchV: Ergebnisse der bundesweitenTelefonumfrage im Auftrag des Bundesamtes für Strahlenschutz (Report on stakeholder perspectives onamending the 26th Federal Emission Control Ordinance: Results of the nationwide telephone survey ordered by the Federal Office for Radiation Protection). Schr/bba 04.02.26536.020. Munich, Germany. 2002 (German).  https://www.bfs.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/BfS/DE/berichte/emf/befuerchtungen.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=3. Accessed July 19, 2018.

[108] Hallberg Ö, Oberfeld G. Letter to the editor: Will we all become electrosensitive? Electromagn Biol Med.2006;25:189-191. https://www.criirem.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/03/ehs2006_hallbergoberfeld.pdf. Accessed June 22, 2018.

[109] Brussels International Scientific Declaration on Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity and Multiple Chemical Sensitivity. ECRI Institute.  http://eceri-institute.org/fichiers/ 1441982765_Statement_EN_DEFINITIF.pdf. Published 2015. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[110] Removal of barriers to entry, 47 U.S.C. § 253. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2015-title47/pdf/USCODE-2015-title47-chap5-subchapII-partII-sec253.pdf; 5G For Europe: An Action Plan. European Commission; 2016. http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=17131. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[111] Federal Register – Rules and Regulations. 47 CFR Part 1 [WT Docket No 17–79; FCC 18–30] Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment. 2018;83(86). Accessed June 10, 2018.

[112] 5G For Europe: An Action Plan. European Commission; 2016. http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/dae/document.cfm?doc_id=17131. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[113] PCIA – The Wireless Infrastructure Association. Model wireless telecommunications facility siting ordinance. 2012. https://wia.org/wp- content/uploads/Advocacy_Docs/PCIA_Model_Zoning_Ordinance_June_2012.pdf. Accessed June 29, 2018.

[114] Mobile services, 47 U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(iv). https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2016-title47/pdf/USCODE-2016-title47-chap5-subchapIII-partI-sec332.pdf: “No state or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the [Federal Communications] Commission’s regulations concerning such emissions.” Courts have reversed regulatory decisions about cell tower placement simply because most of the public testimony was about health.

[115] Cellular Telephone Company v. Town of Oyster Bay, 166 F.3d 490, 495 (2nd Cir. 1999). https://openjurist.org/166/f3d/490/cellular-telephone-company-at-v-town-of-oyster-bay. Accessed June 10, 2018.; T-Mobile Northeast LLC v. Loudoun County Bd. of Sup’rs, 903 F.Supp.2d 385, 407 (E.D.Va. 2012). https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-4th-circuit/1662394.html. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[116] Vogel G. A Coming Storm For Wireless? TalkMarkets. July 2017. http://talkmarkets.com/content/stocks–equities/a-coming-storm-for-wireless?post=143501&page=2. Accessed September 13, 2018.

[117] Swiss Re: SONAR – New emerging risk insights. July 2014:22. http://media.swissre.com/documents/SONAR_2014.pdf. Accessed June 10, 2018. “[A]n increasing level of interconnectivity and the growing prevalence of digital steering and feedback systems also give rise to new vulnerabilities. These could involve cascading effects with multiple damages as well as long-lasting interruptions if the problems turned out to be complex and/or difficult to repair. Interconnectivity and permanent data generation give rise to concerns about data privacy, and exposure to electromagnetic fields may also increase.”

[118] Albert Einstein, letter to Max Born, Dec. 4, 1926.

[119] Active Denial Technology. Non-Lethal Weapons Program. https://jnlwp.defense.gov/Press-Room/Fact-Sheets/Article-View-Fact-sheets/Article/577989/active-denial-technology/. Published May 11, 2016. Accessed June 10, 2018.

[120] Conflicts of interest have frequently arisen in the past. For example, the EU Commission (2008/721/EC) appointed industry-supportive members for SCENIHR who submitted to the EU a misleading SCENIHR report on health risks, which gave the telecommunications industry carte blanche to irradiate EU citizens. The report is now quoted by radiation safety agencies in the EU. Another example is the US National Toxicology Program contracting with the IT’IS Foundation, which is funded by the entire telecommunications industry, to design, build and monitor the exposure facility for a two-year, 25-million-US-dollar study of cell phones. It subsequently produced a misleading report that is now quoted by industry officials in the US.

[121] Ross M, Mills M, Toohey D. Potential climate impact of black carbon emitted by rockets. Geophys Res Lett. 2010;37:L24810.  https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029/2010GL044548. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[122] Ross MN, Schaeffer PM. Radiative forcing caused by rocket engine emissions. Earth’s Future. 2014;2:177-196.  https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/2013EF000160. Accessed June 17, 2018.

[123] Callicott JB, Mumford K. Ecological sustainability as a conservation concept. Conservation Biology. 1997;11(1):32-40. https://www.sierraforestlegacy.org/Resources/Community/Sustainability/
SY_CallicottMumford1997.pdf
. Accessed June 20, 2018.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started