News July, August 2025

APP/C1625/W/25/3360512 The Cross, Nelson Street, Stroud, Gloucestershire, GL5 2HL

More ‘5G’ masts are being stopped around the country every day, but what matters about this particular Appeal Decision is that it has identified health concerns. It has been a huge challenge to get this particular material considered acknowledged previously, because of the stranglehold of NPPF para 123. You can read the Decision here: para 14-17.

Although the rulings and appeals have been complex, the Thomas V Cheltenham Borough court case has helped to support objecting on health grounds. The officers reasoning for supporting concerns around health was very interesting, para 13 where she quotes:

“A previous prior approval at the site has been subject to a High Court and Court of Appeal Judgement, specifically in relation to the impacts of a similar development on the health of nearby residents. The High Court judgement states that guidelines expressly state that EMF’s can cause harm by interfering with medical implants, and such issues were beyond the scope of the guidelines. Therefore, requesting additional information regarding the EMF’s and potential impact on nearby residents with medical implants would not involve setting health guidelines different from the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines for public exposure.”

Gofundme link to support Karen and Neils efforts on UK legal challenges


New blog page: coming soon Summary of UK legal actions and roadmap

Sign up to newsletter

Mast Applications

•Take action steps on RFinfo: UPDATED Template Letter Step2: rfinfo.co.uk/mast-objection/

•New portal for Mast planning application comments – ‘Esthers list’ live since August 2024


Technical

Reminder about ‘fake 5G’ and ‘real 5G’. In the UK we currently still have ‘fake 5G’. The real 5G is mmWave and phased array – about which there has been so much further concern since 2020.

In the UK we haven’t escaped, the ‘real 5G’ auctions start in September 2025
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/spectrum/frequencies/mmwave-spectrum-for-new-uses#updates
 
To date, since 2021 only the 700Mhz and 3.6-3.8Ghz are the latest additions.
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/spectrum/spectrum-awards

mmWave phased arrays are a key technology building block for making 5G successful. Phased array antennas can focus mmWave signals into narrow beams that increase their effective isotropic radiated power (EIRP) and overcome path loss.


Health and Research

New WHO-Funded Study Reports High Certainty Of The Evidence Linking Cell Phone Radiation To Cancer In Animals In response, leading scientists from the International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF) are calling for immediate policy action to protect public health and the environment, warning that further delay could have serious consequences amid the global surge in the use of wireless communication devices.

James C. Lin denounces the lack of health safety in mobile phone Standards – July 2025. Professor James C. Lin, world expert in bioelectromagnetism, influential former member of ICNIRP(2004-2016) and winner of an IEEE 2025 Award, publishes (July 21, 2025) a key article in Frontiers in Public Health. In it, he denounces the weakening of radio frequency (RF) exposure standards by ICNIRP, the influence of the “military-industrial complex”, and the connivance of global regulators. These findings confirm those of Phonegate Alert, highlighting the choice of mobile phone manufacturers to endanger the health of users for the benefit of the connectivity of their devices.

Health and safety practices and policies concerning human exposure to RF/microwave radiation There are substantial incongruities and inconsistencies in the ICNIRP guidelines and IEEE/ICES standards. Furthermore, apart from the guideline’s irregularities, the biased assessments of the scientific database and less trustworthy appraisals such as many of the recent WHO sponsored systematic reviews make it difficult to reach a judgment with confidence. Some of the safety guidelines are irrelevant, debatable, and absent of scientific justification from the standpoint of safety and public health protection.

Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field Emissions and Neurodevelopmental Outcomes in Infants: A Prospective Cohort Study Even after adjusting for low birth weight, we found that higher levels of radiation were associated with poorer outcomes for cognitive domains of development such as problem solving, and personal-social areas. Thus, there is a need to monitor the neuro-development of children in whom the RF-EMF radiations are expected to be higher (such as very close to cell phone towers, too many gadgets in the house).

A Systematic Review of the Impact of Electromagnetic Waves on Living Beings These findings underscore the significant health and environmental risks associated with rising exposure levels of EMF, highlighting the urgent need for strategies to mitigate the risks.

Weak Radiofrequency Field Effects on Biological Systems Mediated through the Radical Pair Mechanism

Environment

Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields reduce bumble bee visitation to flowers In our work, we found that electromagnetic fields can indeed influence foraging bumble bees and reduce their flower visitation rates. Urban areas are important habitats for pollinators and the electromagnetic fields will continue to play a large and important role in the human environment. 

Legal

UK Supreme Court rejects two related 5G Regulation Cases

This is a clear breach of human rights — and the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is now the only place left where the truth might be acknowledged.

In both cases (below) the government and the courts have:

  • Denied us a fair and public hearing (Article 6)  
  • Ignored health impacts on our homes and private lives (Article 8)  
  • Blocked access to and scrutiny of risk information (Article 10). 
  • Left us without any effective remedy (Article 13)

The government still has one last chance to act. Under the Retained EU Law (Revocation and Reform) Act 2023, the government have until June 2026 to put existing EECC public-health duties into effect. We are calling on them to use those powers now to resolve the conflict between Court of Appeal rulings — in Thomas v Cheltenham, the EECC was ruled part of UK law; in our case, it was ruled “not part of English law.”

Until they do, we will press ahead with our European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) application.

Right, Regulations, Remedies (N McDougall & K Churchill V Dept of Health, Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC),  Dept of Scinence & Innovation and Technology – UKSC 0071

Thomas V Cheltenham UKSC 0066 


EHT Files Petition Demanding FCC Comply with 2021 Federal Court Mandate on Wireless Radiation Safety

https://ehtrust.org/eht-petition-demanding-fcc-comply-with-federal-court-mandate-on-wireless-radiation-safety

The Environmental Health Trust (EHT) has filed a petition urging the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to comply with the August 13, 2021 federal court mandate in the case Environmental Health Trust v. FCC.

EHT’s petition implores the FCC to comply with the mandate and to encourage the wireless industry to start “competing on safety.” EHT highlighted the scientific, medical, and policy developments which have occurred in the four years since the court issued its mandate—increasing the urgency with which the commission must act. In order to protect children, the general population, the environment, and U.S. leadership in the wireless industry, EHT intends to take further legal action to enforce the mandate if the commission fails to comply with the law as established by the court.

Original blog from 2021: https://rfinfo.co.uk/landmark-fcc-case/

News April, May, June 2025

In what appears to be an astonishing volte-face, a WHO systematic review has found reliable evidence that radio-frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs) increase the risk of cancer in animal experiments.” as reported by Gillian Jamieson in the Daily Sceptic. As well as outlining why this matters, the article gives a concise history of industry wilful blindness and regulatory strategic ignorance.

Gofundme link to support Karen and Neils efforts on UK legal challenges (see News below)


Recent blogs:

https://rfinfo.co.uk/chat-gpt-on-rfr/

SIGN UP TO NEWSLETTER

Update on UK legal challenges

Steven Thomas vs Cheltenham. Judicial Review, High Court Cardiff. The appeal has been heard and published. The EEEC 2018 has been confirmed (p.15) as being part of adopted Law post Brexit, which means that Councils are competent authorities and must take into account the provisions of the EECC regarding Risk Assessment and latest scientific evidence.

EMAIL template for you to send to your council, building upon the outcome of this case so far:

FUNDRAISING & CASE UPDATE – 17 July 2025
Supreme Court Refuses Permission Without Giving Reasons — We Are Demanding Accountability

It is with great disappointment that we share the latest development in our legal battle to uphold public health protections and democratic accountability as the government pushes forward with the 5G rollout.

On 7 July 2025, we received an order from the UK Supreme Court refusing permission to appeal in our case, stating:
“Permission to appeal be REFUSED on the ground that the appeal is wholly devoid of merit. The panel refuses the application as the appeal is out of time and the panel are satisfied that the application is in any event without merit.”


This order was issued without any supporting reasons—despite the complexity and constitutional importance of the issues raised. This lack of explanation is deeply troubling. It contradicts principles of procedural fairness and undermines our ability to seek redress before the European Court of Human Rights, which requires a clear and reasoned domestic decision before it can consider an application.

We are formally invoking Rule 45(1) of the Supreme Court Rules to request a written explanation for the refusal. The Court is required to provide reasons when permission is denied, particularly where jurisdiction or admissibility is in question. 

We are insisting on this as a matter of legal right.

We also firmly contest the panel’s claim that the appeal was out of time. Our position is that the three-year time limit for raising compatibility issues under Schedule 8, paragraph 39(5) of the EU Withdrawal Act 2018 applies, as our case concerns the failure to implement and apply obligations arising under the European Electronic Communications Code (EECC), which has been ongoing since 2018, when the previous directive governing public health consequences of mast and small cell siting was replaced.

Moreover, there now exists a fundamental legal conflict which we drew to the attention of the Registrar:
• In our case, Lady Justice Falk ruled that the EECC does not apply in domestic law.
• In the Steven Thomas v Cheltenham case, Lady Justice Andrews expressly recognised that the EECC forms part of the UK’s domestic legal framework.
(See: https://www.supremecourt.uk/cases/uksc-2025-0066)


These are two directly conflicting judgments at Court of Appeal level. That alone should have triggered Supreme Court review — not dismissal. This inconsistency raises serious concerns about the coherence and accessibility of the law. The Supreme Court is the only body capable of resolving such a constitutional inconsistency and providing the legal certainty required under both UK and retained EU law.


We will continue to:
• Challenge the refusal of permission by requesting reasons under Rule 45(1).
• Resist the imposition of costs, which we believe violates environmental law protections.
• Hold the UK legal system to account for inconsistencies in how EU law is applied.
• Prepare a potential application to the European Court of Human Rights on grounds of procedural unfairness and denial of access to justice under Article 6.


Thank you for supporting us in this critical legal and public interest fight.
We are not giving up.


Mast Applications

•Take action steps on RFinfo: UPDATED Template Letter Step2: rfinfo.co.uk/mast-objection/

•New portal for Mast planning application comments – ‘Esthers list’ August 2024


Environment

A study shows non-thermal effects below regulatory limits. A study published in Bioengineering (March 2025) by an international team involving researchers from the Sorbonne University and CNRS (France), Naresuan University (Thailand), Xavier University (USA) and the University of Surrey (UK) reveals changes in reactive oxygen species (ROS) in human cells exposed to 1.8 GHz (3G) radiofrequencies, at levels up to 100,000 times lower than current regulatory limits. 

Exploring the influence of Schumann resonance and electromagnetic fields on bioelectricity and human health. Cells and proteins may have evolved to take advantage of frequencies naturally present in the Earth’s EMF, potentially enhancing cellular energy levels and affecting resting membrane potential (RMP). Thus, changes in or absence of SR may have adverse effects on the functioning of the whole organism.


Health and Research

WHO Finds Mobile Phone and WiFi Radiation Causes Cancer – this is very significant, do read.

EMF Hazards Summit 2025 – it has passed already, but good info to search.

Recent Research on Wireless Radiation and Electromagnetic Fields

Wireless Radiation Sickness Gets a New Name — ‘EMR Syndrome’: Dr Mercola

EMR Syndrome Is Real and It’s Ruining Lives | Mercola Cellular Wisdom. This seems to be irritating AI voice, but …

A comprehensive mechanism of biological and health effects of anthropogenic extremely low frequency and wireless communication electromagnetic fields. Frontiers in Public Health, June 2025

The Holistic Health and Wellbeing Conference

Oliver Perceval – Radio Frequency, Radiation 3-5G, Wifi & Technology : https://vimeo.com/1073609945?ts

PASSWORD: 7HHWC2025!!


Legal and Resistance

The Appeal from ElectroHyperSensitive People to all elected officials and doctors in Europe 
EHS IS A HUMANITARIAN EMERGENCY

ICBE-EMF sees “Serious Flaws”. Jan 2025 Microwave News. “There is no scientific justification for the WHO concluding there is any certainty that RF exposures do not cause cancer.”

Paper here

Bring back offline access for essential services, petition. AgeUK

Make it a legal right to access certain services without a digital device. Parliament UK, petition.


Technical

Sabrina Wallace, the Global Information Grid, and Electromagnetic Warfare

MAHA, Wearables and the War for Embodied Consciousness. How “Health Freedom” Now Embraces Digital Surveillance

5G the untold story – Swedish radiation protection Foundation