By B.N. Frank
Cities worldwide as well as entire countries have banned, delayed, and stopped 5G installation due to health and safety risks. American opposition continues to increase for a variety of reasons in addition to health and safety risks (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7).
Federal agencies and reliable experts have warned that 5G threatens jobs, national security, public safety, and weather forecasting accuracy (see 1, 2). Nevertheless, a few months ago, Trump reintroduced his proposal to have a nationalized 5G plan and The Department of Defense (DoD) wants to own and operate it with Google. American legislators and organizations oppose this scenario as well.
On November 24, the U.S. Government Accountability Office released a report about the controversial technology’s whopping challenges.
5G Report Released by the US Government Accountability Office
The United States Government Accountability Office quietly released a new report “5G Wireless: Capabilities and Challenges for an Evolving Network” on November 24, 2020.
GAO identified key challenges could hinder 5G technology; Spectrum availability and efficiency, cybersecurity, privacy and concern over possible health effects. Although the GAO Report does note the lack of research on the long term health effects of 5G and cites the Environmental Health Trust et al. versus FCC legal appeal (footnote 94 on page 41) the report mischaracterizes the body of scientific evidence and ignores the scientific appeals of hundreds of experts in the field calling to halt the rollout.
Regarding the lack of human health research on 5G the GAQ Report states:
“While research on the biological effects of RF energy has been underway for decades, research on the long-term health effects of pre-5G technology is ongoing and research on the possibility of long-term health effects of 5G technology is largely unknown because the technology is still new and has not been widely deployed.”
The GAO Report quotes an NCI scientist on the lack of adequate human health testing:
“However, no studies have been carried out on the long-term health effects of high-band 5G frequencies in observational studies, such as those in settings experienced by the general public, because the technology has not been deployed for long enough or widely enough to conduct these studies. According to an NCI scientist, even after high-band 5G technology has been put into use in the coming years, the long-term health effects on people, if any, may not be known for many years later because some health outcomes could take decades to develop.”
“In 2008, a committee convened by the National Research Council (part of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine) reported that further research was needed to characterize exposure to RF energy in juveniles, young children, and pregnant women and fetuses in observational studies.97 An NCI scientist we interviewed reiterated these unknown long-term health effects for pre-5G technology and with respect to 5G. Further research was also needed for non-cancer outcomes, such as developmental and behavioral outcomes, according to the committee proceedings and the NCI scientist. Observational studies may be used to study health outcomes that take years and decades to develop, such as developmental, behavioral, and cancer outcomes. ” page 42
The GAO Report put forward industry friendly statements downplaying the issue of health effects, lacking scientific documentation and fully ignoring the published science finding adverse effects from non thermal levels.
“However, higher frequencies have less penetration into the human body and therefore are thought to be less of a concern than lower frequencies.” page 41
“The RF spectrum used in cellular communications has not been definitively linked to cancer or other health outcomes, according to FCC and FDA. The lower frequencies of the radio frequency spectrum that are used for wireless communication, including 5G communication, are considered “nonionizing radiation” because these frequencies lack sufficient energy to remove electrons from atoms and molecules. In contrast, X-rays are considered “ionizing” radiation, which can have significant human health effects and are known to increase the risk of cancer. The radio frequencies used by cellular communications systems can lead to tissue heating, but is not thought to emit enough RF energy to cause harmful heating.” page 41 footnote 93
Lack of a Full Evaluation by Federal Agencies
The GAO Report did clarify that despite what seems to be safety assurances by the FDA and other organizations the reality is that “each of these organizations has only reviewed a subset of the relevant research and, of these organizations, only IEEE updates its formal assessments regularly.”
- On the FDA Literature Review “The assessment focused on cancer-related animal and human studies of frequencies below 6 GHz. The assessment did not include non-cancer outcomes or frequencies above 6 GHz.” page 44
- On the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) “NCRP reviewed two larger observational studies in its 1986 review; however, it has not published an update since .
The GAO created an “explainer video” featuring Tom Wheeler, former Wireless industry head lobbyist and FCC Chairman. The issue of health effects are NOT mentioned in the video and EHT executive director Theodora Scarato calls it “propaganda by our industry captured government”. See video here and transcript here.
As the GAO report was released just before the Thanksgiving holiday on November 24, 2020, it’’s release generated no media attention however this report will be used by government officials for years.
Dr. Joel Moskowitz
Dr. Joel Moskowitz of the University of California Berkeley posted an analysis of the GAO Report:
“How can these officials ignore the results of the government’s $30 million study which proved that long-term exposure to RFR caused cancer or the Ramazzini Institute study which reproduced these results using much lower intensity RFR? How can they ignore the results of epidemiologic studies that find increased tumor risk among heavier cell phone users?”
“For more than two decades, FDA officials have ignored the lack of consensus in the scientific community regarding the safety of RFR. The majority of scientists who study RFR effects now believe that current RFR national and international safety standards are inadequate to protect our health. More than 240 scientists from 44 countries who have published over 2,000 papers in professional journals on electromagnetic fields (EMF) and biology or health have signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal which calls for stronger safety standards and health warnings.”
“The GAO report also failed to mention the 5G Appeal signed by more than 400 scientists and doctors who have demanded a moratorium on the deployment of 5G.”
GAO Explainer Video
The GAO “explainer” video features Tom Wheeler, former head of the Wireless Industry and FCC Chairman. Notably, health issues are not mentioned in the video.
Since the National Academies of Sciences has determined that American Embassy Workers were definitely harmed by exposure to microwave energy, will this make a difference in American 5G deployment (see 1, 2, 3)? We can only hope so.
Since 2017 doctors and scientists have been asking for moratoriums on deployment on Earth and in space (see 1, 2, 3, 4). Since 2018 there have been reports of people and animals experiencing symptoms and illnesses after 5G has been installed (see 1, 2, 3, 4). In 2019, telecom executives gave U.S. congressional testimony that they had NO scientific evidence that 5G is safe. There is research that has already determined exposure to 5G and other sources of wireless radiation are NOT SAFE. Exposure also affects animals (see 1, 2), insects, and plants.
Last year, the World Health Organization warned that high levels of Electromagnetic Fields (aka “Electrosmog”) could cause health issues in a significant percentage of the population. Electrosmog includes 5G and wireless.
None of the above sounds like it will make America great. Adding insult to injury, Americans have already paid to have access to safer high-speed internet.
Activist Post reports regularly about unsafe technology. For more information, visit our archives and the following websites:
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.