Read on Twitter
1) I& #39;ve not posted about 5G because I don& #39;t have an opinion on it one way or another. I haven& #39;t seen long-term studies that show the effects 5G could have on the body.
That being said, there are numerous studies that give people the right to be concerned about 5G.
Let& #39;s go
That being said, there are numerous studies that give people the right to be concerned about 5G.
Let& #39;s go
2) We& #39;re constantly told it& #39;s established science that wireless technology has no adverse effects on us, and anybody who thinks otherwise is a crazy conspiracy theorist, but this study from 2019 tells us there are health risks causes by wireless radiation https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6701402/">https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/artic...
3) The study does mention that 5G wavelengths are weaker, and don& #39;t penetrate our bodies as deeply, but "environmental impacts have not been evaluated and are not being followed" as its deployed into densely populated areas.
4) The study concludes with recommendations to collect and analyze more data, which we all can agree with.
•Support of data collection/analysis to monitor potential links between RFR & cancers, sperm, heart, nervous system, sleep, vision, hearing, & effects on children.
•Support of data collection/analysis to monitor potential links between RFR & cancers, sperm, heart, nervous system, sleep, vision, hearing, & effects on children.
5) Another study from 2017 shows that continued exposure to Wi-Fi "causes oxidative stress, sperm/testicular damage, neuropsychiatric effects including EEG changes, apoptosis, cellular DNA damage, endocrine changes, and calcium overload." https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935118300355?via%3Dihub">https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a...
6) The author of the previous study, Dr. Martin Pall, is a doctor of Molecular Biosciences at Washington State University.
He& #39;s also raised concerns about widespread deployment of 5G without proper testing on potential adverse effects. https://www.emfacts.com/2019/02/dr-martin-pall-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/">https://www.emfacts.com/2019/02/d...
He& #39;s also raised concerns about widespread deployment of 5G without proper testing on potential adverse effects. https://www.emfacts.com/2019/02/dr-martin-pall-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/">https://www.emfacts.com/2019/02/d...
7) In 2015, a number of scientists raised their concerns of long-term exposure of EMF and RFR resulting in potential adverse effects unless properly studied and analyzed to determine its safety. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/298533689_International_Appeal_Scientists_call_for_protection_from_non-ionizing_electromagnetic_field_exposure">https://www.researchgate.net/publicati...
8) My position is no different than these concerned scientists. There is ample data showing potential adverse effects to EMF and RFR exposure.
Instead of brushing all concerns aside as a crazy conspiracy theory, why can& #39;t the data be properly analyzed, studied, and discussed?
Instead of brushing all concerns aside as a crazy conspiracy theory, why can& #39;t the data be properly analyzed, studied, and discussed?
