1) A class action lawsuit is being started in the US as a result of the Chicago Tribune’s report on cellphones exceeding allowable limits of RF emissions. Still no response from Health Canada or ISED about this situation. Obviously they have no intention of responding or even testing phones used by Canadians to see if they, too, are in violation of SC 6’s SAR, which they would be unless the telecoms sell different/safer phones here — which it very doubtful.
Don’t people have the right to know that cellphones, whether they exceed SC 6 or not, should be used with caution? Why can’t there be labels on phones that say the same thing that is hidden in the manual? Don’t they want their customers to know there is potential harm involved with using this gadget?
(click on photos to enlarge)
Smartphone Class Action Lawsuits Consolidated. FCC Accredited Lab Confirms Models Exceed RF Safety Levels Up to 500%
“National consumer-rights law firm FeganScott consolidated its two proposed class action suits against Apple (AAPL) and Samsung Electronics (SSNLF) after independent testing from a Federal Communications Commission-accredited laboratory confirmed that radio-frequency (RF) radiation levels from popular Apple and Samsung smartphones far exceeded federal limits when the devices are used as marketed by the manufacturers.”
A response from Dr. Kostoff:
“Such a lawsuit, if successful, will reduce cellphone exposures from extremely high to very high. Any reduction is a step in the right direction. However, I am concerned about the precedent such a ‘victory’ would set. It would effectively give the FCC limits some credibility as being ‘safe’.
It is my understanding that the ICNIRP-FCC exposure limits were set on the basis that tissue temperatures (averaged over a multi-minute period) would not exceed about 1 C. What this lawsuit is really saying is that the cell phones in question will cause tissue heating to levels that the FCC deems to be unsafe, and these heating levels need to be reduced. The lawsuit does not address the athermal component, and I fail to see its contribution to retarding progression of the impending global rollout of 5G and beyond. If the FCC limits are four to six orders of magnitude greater than what various groups would call ‘safe’ (based on the findings in the biomedical literature), what’s another factor of five among friends?”
RNK
2) EHS is just one environmental sensitivity. Many people suffer terribly from these sensitivities, often with one sensitivity leading to suffering from another. This is exacerbated by the fact that few governments recognize these as disabilities.
” “The results from the ANRES register shows that people with Environmental Sensitivities have a number of co-morbid diseases and have significant hardships and disabilities that occur in all aspects of their lives. These disabilities are, apart from ill health symptoms, an inability to earn an income, inability to find safe and affordable housing, inability to socialise and function in society particularly in public areas where chemicals and EMFs are prevalent….
The Australian National Register for Environmental Sensitivities (ANRES) want to show the Australian Government, employees and Health Services that there are Australians from all around the country suffering from these conditions. We need Environmental Sensitivities to be recognised as a disability and facilitate moving forward with issues such as access to medical and disability services for people with Environmental Sensitivities.”“
The complete report:
A snapshot of living with Environmental Sensitivities in 2019
By Dr Sharyn Martin
The information on EHS can be found at:
3) Finnish scientist Dr. Dariusz Leszczynski has shared a powerpoint presentation in which he asks serious questions about the science behind 5G, and concludes that there is enough evidence for the Precautionary Principle to be implemented. There aren’t enough studies to prove what biological effects will be, and we have few safeguards. ICNIRP, the industry/military complex-led body that establishes the exposure limits that are followed by many countries including the US and Canada, is aware that 5G milliwaves will penetrate the skin, our largest organ. So it is planning on calling skin “limbs” because the RF guidelines allow limbs to be exposed to higher levels of RF than the head or trunk. (slide 36) Industry argues that it couldn’t operate if the Precautionary Principle were implemented. See slide 48 for Dr. L’s response.
5G AND HEALTH — IS IT SAFE?
WHAT THE SCIENCE TELLS US
4) Telus is sending out letters to customers about their “fiber optic network” that is the basis for the 5G grid. Of course they say nothing about this leading to microcells being installed outside their homes right after they bring the fiber optic cable. And they have the support of the local Mayor. It’s vital to get accurate info out to local governments [http://www.civicinfo.bc.ca/12.asp] to enable them to be adequately informed before Telus enlists their support for this horrendously dangerous project.
Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters
“If I asked you how much more radiation is penetrating your body today compared to ten years ago, is it twice as much, three times as much? No, it’s a quintillion times more. That’s a one with eighteen zeros (1,000,000,000,000,000,000)” Prof. Olle Johansson