by Gillian Jamieson, Daily Sceptic:
Two months ago, the U.S. state of New Hampshire introduced a bipartisan bill requiring wireless antennae to be placed at least 500 metres away from residences, businesses and schools as well as putting measures in place to inform the public about the health risks of radio-frequency radiation (RFR) and to replace Wi-Fi with wired technology in schools. The measures are based on the findings of the New Hampshire Commission to “Study the Environmental and Health Effects of Evolving 5G Technology”.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
In many countries including the U.K., mobile communications base stations can be placed as close as 20 to 25 metres to residential properties. Over the last few years, many of these masts have been upgraded to 5G using frequencies of 3.5 GHz and including a complex set of special signal modulations, pulses, polarisation, phased arrays and novel equipment designs to enable faster and larger data downloads.
But what are the health implications of placing these new high tech 5G base stations so close to living and working accommodation? Professor Lennart Hardell, an Oncologist from the Environment and Cancer Research Foundation, Sweden, and Mona Nilsson from the Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation have just completed a series of eight 5G case studies, in which they study 18 people in a real-life 5G environment.
The authors state in their introduction to the fifth study, that:
5G base stations for wireless communication have been deployed on a broad scale since 2019-2020 in many countries despite [there being] no previous research on possible negative effects from the radiation emitted from 5G on human health and the environment.
They go on to explain that there are now a few animal studies involving the frequency of 3.5 GHz as used for 5G, but that they lack most other elements of the 5G real-life environment, which include modulation, pulsation and simultaneous exposure to multiple frequencies. Even without these extra elements, however, the studies showed negative effects such as oxidative stress in the liver, kidneys, the plasma, degenerated neurons in the brain as well as oxidative stress in muscles and negative effects on bone strength. Furthermore, modified behaviour after foetal exposure was reported.
Thus, the Hardell/Nilsson case studies are groundbreaking because they study the effects on humans of living in a real-life 5G environment for the very first time. They can be found here: first study, second study, third study, fourth study, fifth study, sixth study, seventh study, eighth study.
Precise radiation measurements are given for different areas of the participants’ accommodation in relation to the distance from the masts involved. Generally speaking, the studies describe how previously healthy people developed symptoms of microwave syndrome immediately after 5G phone masts were installed near their accommodation at distances of between five and 500 metres. Most of the symptoms disappeared within days of them moving to less irradiated accommodation, but reappeared when they returned to the strongly irradiated accommodation. In two cases, symptoms appeared more quickly than before on return to a strongly irradiated environment, suggesting that these participants had become more sensitive.
Their symptoms included neurological symptoms, headaches, tinnitus, fatigue, insomnia, emotional distress, skin disorders, joint and muscle pain, cardiovascular abnormalities and blood pressure variability. Participants were asked to fill in questionnaires about their health before the 5G masts had been installed, after installation and after they had moved away to less irradiated accommodation. They were asked to grade the severity of their symptoms, with 10 being unbearable. The results are produced in tables in the studies and show that many symptoms were unbearable while near the 5G base stations.
These studies are highly readable in themselves. Here, I will highlight elements of some of the later studies, as well as of the very first one and present some of the background they provide. I introduced the first four studies in another article.
In the first study it is noteworthy that readings of the radiation levels prior to the 5G mast deployment were available. A couple had lived in their apartment for 10 years under a 3G and 4G mast without obvious health problems and, when they heard that the mast was to be upgraded, arranged for measurements to be taken beforehand. The maximum (peak) measurement was 9,000 μW/m2 (microwatts per square metre). However, after installation of the 5G mast, very high radio-frequency radiation (RFR) with maximum levels of 354,000, 1,690,000 and over 2,500,000 μW/m2 were measured in their flat.
