Is 5G Technology The Deathstar, or just faster internet?
In my recent travels, I stayed a few days in Hardy, Arkansas, at one of it’s finest, and oldest hotels. The Springriver Lodge. It was clean, friendly, and not at all soundproof. Since the locals were up in the common room, basically outside my door, I decided it was a great time to flop on my old soft bed and do some writing. WTF? No signal? Tap, Tap, Tap. Uh..I went to the front desk and was cheerfully informed that I would have to wait until the line was clear. The ethernet line. After my one nano second of culture shock, I had to laugh at myself. I am a huge advocate of the freedom of choice over how and when I choose to damage my physiology, and I truly did not mind. I’m an artist, not a surgeon, and there is nothing in my world that can’t wait an extra five minutes.
So what exactly is 5G?
There are two aspects to this controversial term. The first, is in reference to the generational progression from 4 to 5 gigahertz in the aspect of the overall speed and performance of our wireless systems. It’s catchy, it sounds good, and who doesn’t want their car, phone, t shirt and cell phone to observe and record their every move? (Me, for one). There are medical, scientific and aeronautical advances possible with this technology, and heck, you can download a movie faster than you can find it on Netflix.
The second part of that definition is a reference to the weapons grade pulse frequency that will be coming from meters attached to every other house, as well as every ‘smart’ device you own. Basically, anything that can be connected, will be connected. This endeavor will require literally billions of transformers. The newer systems are being constructed on top of the existing systems, which will result in pulse variances from sub hertz, in the 8-900mg range, up to the highest, between 3-300 GHz. This is generally called broadband, or broad spectrum. In addition, the major carriers will each be being broadcast at their preferred frequency.
Why is this a problem?
The pulse frequencies are not harmless, no matter how you look at it. Since the 1940’s, people have been using microwave radiation as a weapon because it can cause physiological damage. Some of this damage can be graphed and measured, some it simply cannot. This is the loophole that the FCC is holding onto fast. They have ‘adopted’ the safety standards put forth decades ago that measured the biological damage past exposure at 2 GHz. This was exposure, not saturation. The current exposures and what is being installed in neighborhoods all over the world is hundreds of times greater. The proponents argue that the aggregate exposure is only 45 minutes a day. That isn’t the point. The damage is from the constant microbursts, or pulses, which are constant.
I can, and will, attach a long list of scientific evidence. If you are interested, please do your own research. The short version of this story is that human beings, and every other life form, are a complex system of chemical, biological and electromagnetic systems that are in constant communication within their given carbon unit (you). Anything that repeatedly and constantly effects the homeostasis of that unit is going to alter it.
Just as a “for instance”, the minute amounts of iron in our brains react in a best-case healthy dance with the naturally produced hydrogen peroxide. When you alter this system (oxidative stress) with a high frequency, it depletes the balance, and turns it into hydroxyl iron, a carcinogen, which increases the presentation of Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, ADHD, and a host of other neurological issues. Exposure to these variable frequencies can cause many side effects. The sensory organs are prone to become over sensitive, resulting in itchy skin, rashes, ringing in the ears, tinnitus, vertigo and nausea, it can disrupt hormone functions, increase infertility rates, increase the uptake of calcium to soft tissue, where it does not belong-and that is the short list. This technology has been used for crowd control and subduing prison riots. Think about that for minute.
The argument is often that the high frequencies are safer, because they don’t actually pass through the dermas to directly heat up your organs like the old stuff used to, but what is not measurable, is the electromagnetic and bio-electric stress, which transforms the behavior of the cells and creates in turn, a physiological effect.
Independent studies have been dis allowed from the decision making process, and researchers who found conclusions not in alignment with the results that would get contracts signed, found themselves out of a job, or their work was directed away from the scientific process, as they were given specific limitations on which to draw their findings, or they found themselves sudden victims of budget cuts.
It’s a clear case of the criminal being the judge and jury. The FCC does not employ one biologist or scientist in the field of human physiology on which to base its release. The original standards were created by and for electrical engineers. In 1949, and the cell phone carriers have their hands tied, as to show some uncertainty regarding safety and ethics would mean certain financial death, and no one would mourn their loss as the survivor’s perch on the fallen.
Just for fun, you might want to consider the tariff issues, and why the administration wants to pull production of cell phone components out of certain countries. (They don’t want questionable foe making the parts that run the parts that they hope will run our society). Duh.
There are so many directions I could go with this train of thought, but I will list as many references below as I can, and if it concerns you, share the information, or start a petition in your neighborhood.
Alternatively, we can all get flip phones, land lines, ethernet, and stick orgonite all over our houses, churches and schools. (more on that later..). We are not powerless. I don’t know about you, but I don’t think they are spending trillions of dollars so I can download a movie faster.
Note: These guidelines refer to the adoption of standards that were agreed to back in the 1940’s as a response to assessing engineering codes for safe working conditions in factories and submarines, or military environments. It does not adapt to any modern changes in the amount, context, variables or pulsation rates, nor the effects of constant exposure of variable frequencies, both well above and below what was at that time deemed a safe exposure level. These standards were created to designate a possible exposure to these factors, as in an incident, or a work hazard.
The FCC is required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, among other things, to evaluate the effect of emissions from FCC-regulated transmitters on the quality of the human environment. Several organizations, such as the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE),and the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) have issued recommendations for human exposure to RF electromagnetic fields. On August 1, 1996, the Commission adopted the NCRP’s recommended Maximum Permissible Exposure limits for field strength and power density for the transmitters operating at frequencies of 300 kHz to 100 GHz. In addition, the Commission adopted the specific absorption rate (SAR) limits for devices operating within close proximity to the body as specified within the ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992 guidelines. (See Report and Order, FCC96-326) The Commission’s requirements are detailed in Parts 1 and 2 of the FCC’s Rules and Regulations [47 C.F.R. 1.1307(b), 1.1310, 2.1091, 2.1093]. The potential hazards associated with RF electromagnetic fields are discussed in OET Bulletin No. 56, “Questions and Answers About the Biological Effects and Potential Hazards of Radio frequency Electromagnetic Fields.”
FCC Policy on Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields