Peer-reviewed studies show that wireless radiation harms bees, birds, and humans. In 2018 Newsweek reported “Technology is quite literally destroying nature” and 5G could make it even worse. Click on the flyer below to learn more, and then TAKE ACTION! What is 5G? See this fact sheet.
- Contact your local, state and federal representatives. See letter template and how to find your representatives below.
- Reduce your wireless use. See this brochure.
- Download and share the Stop 5G bee flyer, and use this flyer (best when printed on bright yellow paper) to post on telephone and light poles in your neighborhood where 5G could be installed.
Suggested letter template
The science is in: EMFs are harmful. I am calling on you to stop 5G to protect bees, birds and humans! 5G will greatly increase involuntary exposure to wireless radiation in our communities with cell towers planned for every other block. There is no scientific evidence to support any claim of 5G safety! (1) Scientists and public health experts from around the world are calling for a moratorium on 5G.(2)
In 2018 Newsweek reported: “Technology is quite literally destroying nature, with a new report further confirming that electromagnetic radiation from power lines and cell towers can disorientate birds and insects and destroy plant health. The paper warns that as nations switch to 5G this threat could increase.” (3)
Peer-reviewed studies show worker bees did not return to their hives because of wireless radiation, which led to a colony collapse. (4) Radiation impacts on wild birds documented nest abandonment, plumage deterioration and death. Lab studies of chick embryos documented heart attacks and death. (5) In 2019 the Swiss environmental group Pro Natura reported 5G increases the body temperature of insects. (6)
The 30 million dollar, ten year US National Toxicology Program study found clear evidence of cancer from exposure to wireless radiation. (7)
The telecommunication industry’s unbounded profit motive should never outweigh public and environmental safety. Communications are faster, more reliable, and safer using wired and corded connections. Stop 5G!
Sincerely, [your name and address]
How to find your representatives
- Local: search online for: “contact information for city and county officials in (your zip code)”
- State: https://openstates.org
- US Senators:
- US Representatives:
- US President: phone 202-456-1111 (TTY/TTD 202-456-6213); The White House 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20500 https://www.whitehouse.gov/contact/
The EMF Health Effects Survey 2019 is an anonymous survey circulated online from 11/27/2018 to 1/27/2019 through the EMF Safety Network lists, website, and affiliate online EMF groups. There are 876 respondents and over 1300 comments. THANK YOU to all who took the survey and to all who helped to circulate it!
Ed Halteman, PhD of Survey Design and Analysis has prepared a report of the Survey Results. A summary of the results is 52% of all respondents stated “severely”or “a lot” in response to the question of “How much does the current EMF environment (cell phones/smart meters/wireless etc.) limit your lifestyle – your ability to work, shop, play, and or spend time with friends and family?” 22% said they are affected a moderate amount, 15.6% a little and 10.5% not at all limited.
Respondents were asked to best match themselves to the following descriptions which are synonymous with mild, moderate, and severe Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS). 49.3% said they are EMF Aware: “You are aware that electromagnetic fields and wireless radiation affect your health or make you feel unwell”
27.5% EMF Injured: “You have been injured by electromagnetic fields and/or wireless radiation”
19.1% Radiation sickness: “You have electromagnetic radiation sickness, a severe and chronic condition”
4.1% None of the above
The top health problems all respondents experience(d) and believe are related to EMF exposure are: Sleep; Fatigue; Concentration, memory or learning problems; and Stress and anxiety.
The top EMF device(s), all respondents believe caused or worsened their health problems are: Wi-fi; Cell phone; Smart meters; and Cell or radio tower.
The top remediations that people tried and reported as most helpful were: Prudent avoidance of EMF; turning electricity off at the breaker box, and shielding. The least helpful remedies were reported as: Medical doctors, prescription drugs and counseling or therapy.
When you look at the survey results segmented by self-description the numbers change. People with Radiation sickness had twice the number of health problems as EMF Aware, and 50% more than EMF Injured.
94% of people with Radiation sickness reported Concentration, memory or learning problems, compared to 47% of EMF Aware. People with Radiation sickness were more affected by cell or radio tower.
See the survey report by Survey Design and Analysis for more details on all descriptors and varying results between the three groups as well as a link to Survey summary and all comments. http://emfsafetynetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/EMF_Wireless-Study-2019_Final-1.pdf
There is much to learn, and much more to say about these results. How can we best use this? Circulate this report to doctors and decision makers. Try a solution you haven’t tried yet. Have more compassion for people who are more affected than you. Understand not everyone is equally harmed. What else? Let us know!
In closing, please read the following commentary on this survey by Cindy Sage:
“The many hundreds of comments written by people responding to the EMF Health Effects Survey 2019 by the EMF Safety Network are illuminating and profoundly disturbing. The Survey itself is invaluable to teach us what it is like to live a life with EHS limitations. It doesn’t matter whether you live in the US, or Canada, or western Europe or Scandinavia. Or Asia. Or Australia. The accounts are so similar. The demoralizing effects are the same.
What is obvious is that these people are expressing the symptoms of microwave radiation illness that could be predicted based on decades of international scientific studies. The physiological basis for brain and body effects from microwave radiation exposures are well-accounted for in the science – so it should be no surprise to hear it. At least a dozen major studies and reviews of cell tower-level RF exposures (of 0.1 microwatt per centimeter squared or more) have identified these same health effects the Survey presents through the personal comments of responders.
We don’t often get a window into the life of a person with EHS – how isolating it is – how marginalized people are – and how withdrawn they must become to protect what is left of their health. We need to listen with ears wide open. This is real and real people are living greatly diminished lives. Imagine yourself forced to give up a productive life to live on the edge, and that edge keeps moving. Imagine being denied access to business opportunities, education, transportation, healthcare, public participation, recreation and places of celebration and renewal.
Again and again we are hearing the same things. I lived a normal life until… smart meters were installed on my wall… until a major macrocell tower was built next door…. until my office installed several wireless routers. My family didn’t understand. It took me some time to realize what was making me sick. It destabilized my relationships. I lost my freedom.
People with EHS have to give up so many things most people take for granted in life. Shopping, going out to dinner, attending meetings in public places, going to a child’s graduation or recital, travel along an interstate or by rail or air. Everyday activities that make up the fabric of life are no longer accessible – at least without paying the price.
It is an insidious and invisible progression where the activities of daily life are incrementally diminished by exposures that intensify with time, subject to no health and safety accounting at all. No one is keeping track of cumulative RF body burdens. There is no governmental agency that is tracking EHS illness reports, nor conducting a serious effort to revise health standards.
Perhaps the most valuable lesson we can learn from this Survey is educated compassion. The first thing we can do is to accept that EHS is real. The next thing we can do is to change our own behaviors. And, after that, wherever we have influence – we need to help others find healthier ways of interacting with technology that protects all of us.”
Editor, BioInitiative Reports
EMF Safety Network engaged Best Best and Krieger partner Gail Karish to provide the legal means in which a California city can deny a small cell application in the public rights of way (PROW). Attorney Karish presents this information alongside the limitations on local authority in order to know the full scope of what a city can and can’t do.
Although the attorney has addressed the City of Sebastopol, the letter and legal advice is applicable and can be presented to any California city so they can know they are not powerless over small cell deployments.
Dr.Gabriel Cousens talks about how wireless is degrading public health, and how 5G is a danger to all people. He describes 5G as is “a complete unmitigated health disaster”
More information about Dr. Cousens here
Here is Dr. Cousen’s protocol for radiation protection and healing, which includes political action! http://treeoflifecenterus.com/radiation-protocol/
Commentary by Cindy Sage: Not long ago, a Physician Assistant in a hospital emergency room told us she was asked to wear a wireless headset (that connects wirelessly to the internet) while seeing her patients. She declined.
In that same week, a young mother went to a new internist in the bay area. The nurse asked if she would give consent for the doctor to wear a wireless headset while examining her child. She also declined.
What is it that these two young women know? Is it something you should be aware of? Here are some important things people should know about the problems posed by wearable wireless computers in the doctor’s office.
Driving drunk, and talking or texting on a cell phone may have in more in common than you think with extended use of a wireless headset. The exposure levels from a wireless headset are about equivalent to (or in some cases higher) than holding a smart phone to the head. Use of a cell phone while driving disrupts cognition and increases the risk of vehicular collision by 4-fold. Now imagine your doctor under the influence of constant workplace RF exposure while they treat patients, prescribe treatments, write prescriptions and juggle intense workday tasks.
Effects on brain function seem to depend in some cases on the mental load of the subject during exposure (the brain is less able to do two jobs well simultaneously when the same part of the brain is involved in both tasks). Some studies show that cell phone exposure speeds up the brain’s activity level; but also that the efficiency and judgment of the brain are diminished at the same time. Faster work but worse mental capacity is not a good thing for a practicing medical doctor.
Multitasking, memory, learning, attention, and concentration are all impaired by the use of wireless devices. Why would anyone want a distracted doctor with impaired thinking skills treating them? Or any healthcare person for that matter? And, doctors should know that wearing the equivalent of a smart phone mounted against their head is a potential risk for brain cancer (glioma and acoustic neuroma).
Next time you need to see your doctor, you may be asked if you object to them wearing wireless headsets. This could easily happen to you. Be prepared with some information.
Is your doctor using wireless medical glasses? A new paper by Cindy Sage and Lennart Hardell warns about the risks to doctors and their patients.
Wireless-enabled headsets that connect to the internet can provide remote transcribing of patient examination notes. Audio and video can be captured and transmitted by wireless signals sent from the computer screen in the frame of the glasses. But using wireless glass-type devices can expose the user to a specific absorption rates (SAR) of 1.11–1.46 W/kg of radiofrequency radiation. That RF intensity is as high as or higher than RF emissions of some cell phones. Prolonged use of cell phones used ipsilaterally at the head has been associated with statistically significant increased risk of glioma and acoustic neuroma. Using wireless glasses for extended periods to teach, to perform surgery, or conduct patient exams will expose the medical professional to similar RF exposures which may impair brain performance, cognition and judgment, concentration and attention and increase the risk for brain tumors. The quality of medical care may be compromised by extended use of wireless-embedded devices in health care settings. Both medical professionals and their patients should know the risks of such devices and have a choice about allowing their use during patient exams. Transmission of sensitive patient data over wireless networks may increase the risk of hacking and security breaches leading to losses of private patient medical and financial data that are strictly protected under HIPPA health information privacy laws. Link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15368378.2017.1422261
Environmental Working Group: WASHINGTON – Data from the largest-ever animal study of cellphone radiation effects, released today by the federal National Toxicology Program, confirms earlier evidence from human studies that cellphone radiation increases the risk of cancer.
The research found that male rats exposed to radio-frequency radiation had a greater chance of developing malignant brain cancer, tumors in the heart and tumors in other organs. Various tumors were also observed in mice exposed to radio-frequency radiation. The amount of radiation to which the laboratory animals were exposed included the levels emitted by cellphones millions of people use everyday.
“This is the most authoritative study published that connects cancer with cellphone radiation it should raise alarms for policymakers and awareness for all Americans”, said Olga Naidenko, Ph.D., senior science advisor at EWG. “These studies should have been done before more than 90 percent of Americans, including children, started using this technology day in and day out.”
The threat that radiation from wireless devices could be a public health risk only mounts with todays report from the NTP. In 2011, the World Health Organizations International Agency for Research on Cancer declared the kind of radiation emitted by cellphones as a possible carcinogen based on human epidemiological studies that found increased gliomas and acoustic neuromas in long-term cellphone users.
“As new telecom networks are built around the country, in-depth assessment of childrens health risks is essential”, Naidenko added.
EWG has been at the forefront of public interest organizations raising concerns about cellphone use and cancer. The decade-long, $25 million federal study confirms reports by EWG from 2009 and 2013 that highlighted potential health risks from cellphones and wireless devices, especially for children.
EWGs 2009 Science Review on Cancer Risks and Childrens Health summarized comprehensive studies showing a variety of health harms linked to long-term cellphone use. This included increased risk of two types of brain tumors, including glioma; decreased sperm counts, motility and vitality among men; neurological effects; and changes in brain metabolism.
In December 2017, the state of California officially issued guidelines advising cellphone users to keep phones away from their bodies. When the groundbreaking guidelines were made public, California Department of Public Health Director Karen Smith said: “Simple steps, such as not keeping your phone in your pocket and moving it away from your bed at night, can help reduce exposure for both children and adults Children’s brains develop through the teenage years and may be more affected by cell phone use. Parents should consider reducing the time their children use cell phones and encourage them to turn the devices off at night.”
To help concerned consumers take steps to protect themselves and their families, EWG has created tools and tips that can help reduce exposure to cellphone radiation. This includes EWGs Guide to Safer Cellphone Use and Six Questions about Cellphone Radiation and Your Health.
Results of the federal studies released for peer review by the National Toxicology Program today are available here.
By Diane Testa, PhD: Apple season here in New England yielded an abundant harvest this year. But this year, consumers have a new apple option in supermarket bins: GMO apples. Genetically-modified organisms, or GMOs for short, look the same, taste the same, and smell the same as conventionally grown produce. A GMO apple’s main difference is that the cells of the apple have been altered in a laboratory whereby in most cases it contains genetic information from another organism. The developers of this technology claim these alterations lead to better crop yields or larger produce by killing off pests and weeds. However, in order for these effects to take place, large amounts of pesticides and herbicides must be sprayed on the plants and trees for the GMO technology to have its full effect.
One popular GMO herbicide is Roundup, but despite its popularity, many researchers have serious concerns with its potency as a chemical trigger for disease. When someone eats a GMO food, researchers have found that the main chemical in Roundup, called glyphosate, triggers the body to make a dangerous compound named peroxynitrite. At the same time, glyphosate causes the destruction of some essential amino acids, which are the building blocks for many critical life processes. In a landmark study performed by Dr. Pal Patcher and colleagues at the National Institutes of Health, peroxynitrite generation was implicated as a crucial mechanism underlying more than 40 chronic diseases, such as stroke, heart attack, diabetes, cancer, asthma, arthritis, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s diseases. Doctors don’t often consider one unifying factor as causing such diverse disease states as allergies and hypertension, but Dr. Patcher considers peroxynitrite as the “smoking gun” in chronic disease.
With the prevalence of so many chronic diseases on the rise, is there another external factor besides glyphosate in GMO foods that triggers the production of peroxynitrite?