The ‘thermal effects only’ paradigm is wrong. Non-thermal biological effects occur where the power density is lower than 56 V/m (ICNIRP guide level). Effects are shown to occur at tiny levels of power, and are mostly to do with the quality or features of the radiation – frequency, pulsing, modulation etc. This involves the study of bio-electromagnetics, which is specialised and requires combined knowledge of Physics and Biology.
| January 2021 –What is the radiation before 5G? A correlation study between measurements in situ and in real time and epidemiological indicators. | https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0013935121000281?via%3Dihub | The Madrid paper corroborates previous research showing statistically significant increase in headaches amongst other symptoms within 200 m of a mast. |
| A vast amount of research on pulsed polarised non-ionising radiation shows there are biological effects. | Priyanka Bandara, David O Carpenter,Planetary electromagnetic pollution: it is time to assess its impact,(The Lancet Planetary Health, Volume 2, Issue 12) 2018 Dr Erica Mallery-Blythe Phire Medical Consensus Report December 2020 | This recent evaluation of 2266 studies (including in-vitro and in-vivo studies in human, animal, and plant experimental systems and population studies) found that most studies (n=1546, 68·2%) have demonstrated significant biological or health effects associated with exposure to anthropogenic electromagnetic fields. 1. RFR has been proven to damage biological systems at intensities below ICNIRP guidelines. 2. Public exposure to RFR is already harmful and will rise with the deployment of 5G. 3. Exposure is unavoidable, contravening the Human Rights Act for those who do not consent. 4.Multiple international governmental health advisory groups are biased by conflicts of interest. |
| Biological Effects not caused by heating are not being recognized and effectively included in safety standards. | Belpomme et al Thermal and non-thermal health effects of low intensity non-ionizing radiation: An international perspective 2018 | Exposure to low frequency and radiofrequency electromagnetic fields at low intensities poses a significant health hazard that has not been adequately addressed by national and international organizations such as the World Health Organization. This is a particular concern in children. |
| Major new (Jan 2021) evaluation from BERENIS, the Swiss expert group on electromagnetic fields and non-ionising radiation, finds that the majority of research studies demonstrate effects on oxidative stress | BERENIS group https://ehtrust.org/wireless-and-power-frequency-emfs-impact-oxidative-balance-says-swiss-expert-group/?fbclid=IwAR047V_OkzQnxv3LwRuFw4RNupG74VIUBNOP3iCbuQzp-AVpSrCs8XPk-4Y Jan 2021 | This review confirms there is scientific evidence showing adverse impacts from RFR as the “majority of the animal and more than half of the cell studies provided evidence of increased oxidative stress caused by RF-EMF or ELF-MF.” Despite some methodological issues in the body of research “EMF exposure, even in the low dose range, can lead to changes in oxidative balance.” Furthermore, as pre-existing conditions, such as immune deficiencies or diseases (diabetes, neurodegenerative diseases), compromise the body’s defence mechanisms, “it is therefore possible that individuals with these conditions experience more severe health effects.” |
| The mechanism of harm may well be through oxidative stress, ICNIRP who set the guidelines fail to recognise this mechanism. | Yakymenko, Igor, et al.“Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation.” 2016 | Analysis of the currently available peer-reviewed scientific literature reveals molecular effects induced by low-intensity RFR in living cells. Among 100 currently available peer-reviewed studies dealing with oxidative effects of low-intensity RFR, in general, 93 confirmed that RFR induces oxidative effects in biological systems. The oxidative stress induced by RFR exposure should be recognized as one of the primary mechanisms of the biological activity of this kind of radiation. |
| Extensive review of the science supporting lowering the safety standards can be found in this report. | The Bioinitiative Report 2012 (updated 2020) | A report prepared by 29 authors from ten countries, ten holding medical degrees (MDs), 21 PhDs, and three an MsC, MA or MPH. The conclusion from the report is that bioeffects are clearly established to occur with very low exposure levels (non-thermal levels) to electromagnetic fields and radiofrequency radiation exposures. In the eight years since the BioInitiative 2012 Report was posted, there has been a substantial amount of new research. The large majority of studies report biological effects as opposed to ’no effect’. The trend continues to show that exposure to low-intensity ELF-EMF/Static Fields and RFR at levels allowable under current public safety limits pose health risks. |
