The 5G Appeal, with over 230 scientists behind them, believe 5G is hazardous to human health and the environment due to the higher radiofrequency that can interfere with small cells, like those in the body and in plants.
lScientists are appealing to the WHO (World Health Organisation) that the 5G wireless signal should be moved from a Group 2B Carcinogen to a Group 1, the same as asbestos and aresenic. 1
More than 230 people, scientists and doctors from 40 countries are warning of the dangers of 5G, which lead to a massive increase in involuntary exposire to electromagnetic radiation. They have signed the 5G Appeal, which urgently calls for a moratorium on the technology.
“We, the undersigned scientists, recommend a moratorium on the roll-out of the fifth generation, 5G, for telecommunication until potential hazards for human health and the environment have been fully investigated by scientists independent from industry. 5G will substantially increase exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on top of the 2G, 3G, 4G, WiFi etc. for telecommunications already in place. RF-EMF has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment.”‘ 2
They refer to the fact that ”numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines”. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plants and animals. 3
Although Telecom lobbyists claim that guidelines are in place to protect the public, they are based on a 1996 study of how much a cell phone heated the head of an adult-sized plastic mannequin. This hasn’t taken into account that: living organisms are not plastic, they’re made up of complex, interdependent cells and tissue; fetuses, children, plants, and wildlife will all be exposed to the radiofrequency; frequencies used in the mannequin study were far lower than the exposures associated with 5G.1
‘One of the initiators is Dr. L. Hardell, Professor of Oncology at Örebro University in Sweden. He states: “The telecom industry is trying to roll out technology that may have very real, unintended harmful consequences. Scientific studies, both recently and over many years, have identified harmful effects on health when testing wireless products under realistic conditions. We are very concerned that the increase in radiation exposure by 5G leads to damage that cannot be reversed”.’2
Local Futures, Economics of Happiness report that although most people believe the FCC (Federal Communications Commision) carefully asses health risks of such technologies, a testimony from Senator Blumenthal of Connecticut reveals the FCC admitted that no safety studies have been made.4
The EU’s response to the scientists’ appeals is that it is up to the member states to protect the public from harmful electromagentic radiation.
In Brussels, 5G internet has been postponed. Celine Fremault, Minister of the Government of the Brussels-Capital Region Responsible For Housing, Quality Of Life, Environment And Energy released the statement in an interview with L’Echo:
“I cannot welcome such technology if the radiation standards, which must protect the citizen, are not respected, 5G or not. The people of Brussels are not guinea pigs whose health I can sell at a profit. We cannot leave anything to doubt.”5
The minister identified that the 5G pilot project was not compatible with Belgian radiation safety standards of 9 V/m, or 95 mW/m2.5
In Germany, a petition has been sent to parliament asking to stop 5G frequencies. It has reached over 50,000 signatures, surpassing the quorum.
Parliament in the Netherlands is concerned about the health risks, with political parties urgently wanting to know the potential dangers of masts installed on a large scale. Member of parliament Laura Bromet: ‘We still do not know about the dangers to public health. Little research has been undertaken into the effects of 5G. We have to take people’s concerns seriously and investigate this.’2
‘5G radiofrequency (RF) radiation uses a ‘cocktail’ of three types of radiation, ranging from relatively low-energy radio waves, microwave radiation with far more energy, and millimeter waves with vastly more energy. The extremely high frequencies in 5G are where the biggest danger lies. While 4G frequencies go as high as 6 GHz, 5G exposes biological life to pulsed signals in the 30 GHz to 100 GHz range. The general public has never before been exposed to such high frequencies for long periods of time.’4
‘This is a big deal. It turns out that our eyes and our sweat ducts act as antennas for absorption of the higher-frequency 5G waves. And because the distances these high-energy waves can travel is relatively short, transmitters will be required closer to homes and schools than earlier wireless technologies: the build-out will add the equivalent of a cell tower every 2-10 houses.’4
For more information on the 5G Appeal visit www.5gappeal.eu