Walking TimesOctober 24, 2019
In a recently published article entitled, We Have No Reason to Believe 5G is Safe, Scientific American (SciAm) magazine issued a stern warning about the known and potential dangers of 5G technology.
Of
particular significance is the fact that SciAm is the oldest
continuously published monthly magazine in the United States, founded by
inventor and publisher Rufus M. Porter in 1845, and running monthly
since 1921. It is a highly influential publication, widely reputed for
its rigorous scientific standards, and lauded by today’s fact-checkers as highly credible and staunchly pro-science.
In the article, University of California, Berkeley public health researcher Joel M. Moskowitz
argues that 5G, along with previous w-fi and cellular technology, is
much more harmful than the government and telecomm industry wants the
public to believe.
His primary concerns center around a recent FCC announcement, made in a press release,
that the FCC is close to reaffirming the radio frequency radiation
(RFR) exposure limits that were previously adopted by the commission in
the 1990’s… well before the introduction of 5G, 4G, 3G, 2G or even WiFi.
In short, the
safety standards that the FCC wishes to maintain are severely outdated
and fail to reflect the growing body of scientific evidence
demonstrating harm.
Moskowitz notes that the ’90’s
exposure limits only address the singular concern over the potential
effects of the intensity of exposure to RFR. With the research we now
have available the health concerns are much broader, including a sincere
risk of cancer, among other things.
“The latest cellular technology, 5G, will employ millimeter waves for the first time in addition to microwaves that have been in use for older cellular technologies, 2G through 4G. Given limited reach, 5G will require cell antennas every 100 to 200 meters, exposing many people to millimeter wave radiation. 5G also employs new technologies (e.g., active antennas capable of beam-forming; phased arrays; massive multiple inputs and outputs, known as massive MIMO) which pose unique challenges for measuring exposures.
Millimeter waves are mostly absorbed within a few millimeters of human skin and in the surface layers of the cornea. Short-term exposure can have adverse physiological effects in the peripheral nervous system, the immune system and the cardiovascular system. The research suggests that long-term exposure may pose health risks to the skin (e.g., melanoma), the eyes (e.g., ocular melanoma) and the testes (e.g., sterility).
The FCC’s RFR exposure limits regulate the intensity of exposure, taking into account the frequency of the carrier waves, but ignore the signaling properties of the RFR. Along with the patterning and duration of exposures, certain characteristics of the signal (e.g., pulsing, polarization) increase the biologic and health impacts of the exposure. New exposure limits are needed which account for these differential effects. Moreover, these limits should be based on a biological effect, not a change in a laboratory rat’s behavior.” ~Joel M. Moskowitz, Scientific American
No comments:
Post a Comment