- We wish to help you understand what Radiofrequency Radiation (RFR) is, and why it can be harmful.
- In addition we want to help inform you, and key decision takers in councils and schools, about the relevant issues, and how to mitigate exposure.
New portal for Mast planning application comments: ‘Esthers list’ August 2024.
PHIRE UK: Education Health Care Plan (EHCP) awarded (Aug 2022) for UK child on the basis of Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS). “If you have EHS, and are struggling to stay in good health, or can’t go to school, or work, don’t give up, because everything will get better. People are becoming more aware of this condition, and even if right now it seems like nothing will ever change, it already is”
Please read this UK initiative: PHIRE 2020 NIR Consensus Statement – of health effects from RFR – signed by over 3500 medical and scientific experts, and open to the public to support.
ICBE-EMF challenge ICNIRP: Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radiofrequency radiation: implications for 5G
FCC loses case: August 2021 significant judgment in US court of Appeal. Federal court orders FCC to explain why it ignored scientific evidence showing harm from wireless radiation. No deadline set however.
Primary issues with 5G: Unaccountable surveillance, Public health impact, Environmental impact.
The 5/6G expansion IS NOT for us: please lobby local government, and inform others.
Primary issues with WiFi, bluetooth, mobile devices: chronic short range exposure to RFR, parallel environmental and surveillance issues.
This IS consumer led: but please make wise and informed choices, form new habits.
There should be an open debate about the safety of radio frequency and microwave radiation
Radio and radar were introduced in the early 1900s. The Telecoms industry has blatantly ignored any evidence about the health effects of exposure to radiofrequency radiation (RFR). Now it is easy to find thousands of studies showing direct biological effects at low power-levels.
On the whole we rely on government and other authorities to give us useful explanations and regulatory protection. Of course the Telecoms industry can exert enormous pressure on them to protect their interests before ours. Think big tobacco, asbestos, DDT, lead in petrol and paint. It is a fact that there are any number of bio-hazards that took decades to be controlled through regulation, see here.
False assumptions
There are 3 main false assumptions about the safety of wireless radiofrequency radiation (RFR). They are promoted by those who overtly have a vested interest, and are believed and propagated by the vast majority of us simply through ignorance:
- Fallacy 1: wireless exposure is regulated so that ‘guideline levels’ pose no danger.
This statement is meaningless when we consider that ‘guideline levels’ are irrelevant to our health. see here. - Fallacy 2: man made non-ionising radiation (i.e all frequencies below UV light) causes no harm to living systems.
This claim is highly misleading, and easily refuted, see here. - Fallacy 3: there is insufficient evidence to show there is non-thermal or biological harm from exposure to RFR.
This is incorrect. see here.
It’s important to know that we can educate ourselves about the subject in less than an hour, and learn how to mitigate this bio-hazard in our own lives.
Here are 2 videos selected as very good authoritative primers, to give you an overall feel of the subject. Click for further resources.
“Putting in tens of millions of 5G antennae without a single biological test of safety has got to be about the stupidest idea anyone has had in the history of the world.”
Dr. Martin Pall. Washington State University
