Moss Landing Image credit: https://www.facebook.com/groups/652815133743333
https://neveragainmosslanding.org

Moss Landing, California:  Did you know a huge environmental disaster is unfolding in Northern California which may impact our food supply and wildlife, and is poisoning locals? 

Dubbed by Forbes magazine Tech’s “Three-Mile Island” moment, Moss Landing Lithium Power Plant caught on fire January 16, 2025. Moss Landing, which houses the world’s largest battery storage facility, burned for five days leaving a toxic plume that reached into agricultural and farmland in Monterey and into two other counties.

After the fire, Dr. Ivano Aiello, Department Chair at San Jose State University, home of Moss Landing Marine Laboratories, discovered at Elkhorn Slough (two miles from the plant) heavy metal toxins at levels 100 to 1,000 times greater than normal soil levels.  

80 Percent of 100,000 Batteries Ignited – Not a “Little Fire”

“These fires are not done yet that they keep reigniting, even just the smallest one can still put toxins in the air,” – warns one local.

 When lithium batteries burned for a week, smoldered for a month, and then reignited, many began questioning why the world’s largest lithium battery power plant was approved near Elkhorn Slough State Marine Conservation area, an area with the highest marine biodiversity in California (see San Jose State blog) and home of 150 endangered sea otters­­­­­­. What will be the impacts of this contamination given these sea otters, when healthy, birth a single pup every other year?

Heather Higgens, who kayaks at Elkhorn, stated in an interview with Tina Berg from Status Coup News:  

“50 sea otters gather in rafters at a time and hold hands, and you have sea lions to the entrance, we were all in shock, we couldn’t believe this [the fire] would happen.”

Filming Sea Otters at Moss Landing

Is Moss Landing Fire the Result of Unexamined and Reckless Sustainability Measures?

“If you can’t easily extinguish one battery, how are you expected to extinguish tens of thousands?  You can’t. You have to let the batteries burn themselves out” – Comment at the Monterey Board Meeting

The Battery storage at Moss Landing with frequent toxic fires is in violation of California Environmental Quality ACT (CEQA) §30240.

Locals didn’t know:

• These fires cannot be controlled, thermal runaway is a “phenomenon in which lithium-ion cells start uncontrollably heating up.“ Bay Nature Magazine
• Battery fires can severely impact human health from toxic corrosive gasses: hydrogen fluoride, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen cyanide (a toxic compound), and heavy metals, all of which require a respirator when in proximity.
• Prior to the January 2025, Vistra Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) fire, both agencies and the public were not informed how often BESS facilities catch on fire – nor were they alerted to the potential for hazardous toxins to be released after a thermal runaway event.
• There are 93 reported BESS failures worldwide, a veritable ticking time bomb.

Batteries Continue To Smolder, Risk of Another Fire Remains High as Moss Landing has Remaining Batteries Yet To Be Disconnected

Fallout from Moss Landing fires on January 16 and February 18 flare-up, included worsened symptom for locals residents: metallic taste, skin rashes, burns, bloody noses, difficulty breathing, severe headaches and more. Salinas Valley, known as the “salad bowl” of America, is situated a mere twelve miles from the power plant. It’s common sense not to consume vegetables or fruit that potentially have been affected by heavy metal fallout including impacts to the soil and water?

“These heavy metals will chemically transform as they move through the environments and potentially through the food web, affecting local aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems,” according to San Jose University  

Salinas Valley in Monterey County produces 70 percent of the United States lettuce as well as artichokes, strawberries, broccoli, wine grapes, cauliflower, celery, and spinach. Monterey County supplies our nation’s school lunches, and supermarkets such as Sprouts, Trader Joes and Whole Foods. With locals and animals in the area getting sick, people are now questioning the quality of local produce despite Monterey County assurances of safety.

The Erin Brockovich Lawsuit

Renown environmental activist, Erin Brockovich, is a spokesperson for the Moss Landing lawsuit against PG&E, Vistra, and LG.

“I am concerned with lithium power storage facilities so close to farmland and …communities because these accidents happen.  There didn’t seem to be any preparedness. People were going to the emergency room, having respiratory problems, sore throats and getting no answers. Every single situation seems to start like this. What concerns me is that it just feels like somebody knew. They did. They’ve got infrastructure inside there. Did they jerry rig something? Did they allow it to happen? The truth’s not coming out. So, my concern is that information is being concealed.”

– Erin Brockovich, Mercury News 

Knut Johnson, an attorney from Singleton Schreiber who is suing Moss Landing, reported seeing pictures of people with “horrible rashes and clients with toxic substances on their property.” 

While local scientists are checking the soil and finding toxic pollutants, and Hunterbrook New Data shows elevated heavy metal exposure 20 miles from Moss Landing including agricultural land, the EPA is minimizing the impacts assuring locals and farmers there is no problem for humans or wildlife,see report here and here. 

Vistra issued a statement in response to Erin Brockovich’s comments:

 “Air quality monitoring, which has been ongoing since the start of the fire and continues today, has been conducted by the U.S. EPA, Monterey Bay Air Resources District, and others and has not detected risks to public health at any time. Additionally, soil and water testing conducted by Cal EPA/Department of Toxic Substances Control, Monterey County, and Santa Cruz County have not detected risks to public water supplies or soil in the community.”

Norm Groot with Monterey County Farm Bureau has assured constituents that Moss Landing “product” didn’t enter the food supply, (see letter here), yet this position differs from scientifically validated heavy metal toxicity which includes Hunterbrook results of 150 surface wipe samples of the area.

Image credit: Hunterbrook New Data

Locals are calling for further real time, transparent testing, of air, water, and agricultural products across the Monterey Bay, including Santa Cruz, and inland – and to be informed of battery pile conditions, flare-ups and off-gassing.  As of March 8, local residents shared multiple reports of the same sulfur and chlorine tastes/smells once again and noticed the Slough devoid of birds. 

Sick and Dead Banana Slugs the California State Icon?

“I collected a couple of sick or dead banana slugs up here which is quite unusual. So the impacts are very real far and wide, wherever the wind pattern, fog pattern takes the blend of particulates and they are part of the atmosphere. So much worse than CO2 emissions as even the trees can’t absorb the chemicals in the air.”
– local reporting on Moss Landing Fire from Moss Landing Environmental FB group. 

Never Again Moss Landing

“Never Again Moss Landing is a fast-response grass-roots all-volunteer resident group which advocates for our community’s voice and interests in response to the Moss Landing BESS Fire.”
See Moss Landing News:

Image credit: https://neveragainmosslanding.org/news/#local

Brian Roeder from Never Again Moss Landing shares that a lot of folks are reporting terrible symptoms since the reignited fire from Feb 18^th.  However this KSBW News report does not acknowledge people’s symptoms nor the testing that showed elevated heavy metals in Elkhorn slough and surrounding communities.

Following are some of what locals are sharing on the Moss Landing Vistra Power Plant/Fire Symptoms Facebook page:

“The last couple days have been extremely bad with coughing up blood and the metallic taste in my mouth and my tongue being numb hard to talk.”

 “I was out at Elkhorn Slough reserve for 10 minutes – so impacted that my sinus flared up, my eyes are burning.”  

According to Dr. Calvin Luther Martin, those who live and work near Moss Landing could have been inhaling caustic hydrofluoric acid and hydrochloric acid.Locals comfort each other offering advice on first aid such as eye drops or suggesting the use of blood pressure cuffs, as many are experiencing eye and blood pressure issues from long-term continual exposure. 

The following image is a map of 647 individuals who reported unusual and often severe symptoms from the Vistra fire.

N.B.: The location of individuals reporting symptoms extends from Santa Cruz to Carmel.  Locals are asking for oversight: for the California Coastal Commission to be involved in overseeing demolition and cleanup at Moss Landing, an analysis of the burn pile, and for Agricultural Inspectors to share knowledge and to be fully transparent on what is happening in the fields. 

Following is additional information from Brian Roeder of Never Again Moss Landing.

Thousands within 10 miles of this battery fire disaster need help. The Moss Landing Power Plan/Vistra Fire Symptoms Facebook page has hundreds of personal entries testifying to injuries, fear, and broken lives.  (20+) Moss Landing Power Plant/Vistra Fire Symptoms | Facebook

Few are listening. Patients and in particular women are being dismissed as hysterical when they go to their doctors.

The critical next step is to call State Senator John Laird’s three offices. Laird is a huge proponent of BESS plants.  He has a direct line to the Governor’s office.  Laird can request critical state resources that have not been on the ground.  Testing. Toxicology.  Financial assistance for families.  Medical and environmental guidance.  Help for the agricultural community and school district.  Fire mitigation strategies and wildlife impacts.

What is so tragic is that families have been and are continuing to be injured after (February’s) follow-on fire. The county authorities have gotten very little direction or resources from the State. The state toxicologist has dismissed the attached scientifically validated data and has stated publicly that he has not even looked at it. 

Please call Senator Laird and demand that he get involved:  Capital Office: (916) 651-4017, or Monterey District: (831) 657-6315, San Luis Obispo District: (805) 549-3784, Santa Cruz District: (831) 425-0401

Website: www.neveragainmosslanding.org. 

Doctors, Lawyers, and Scientists Join Together in a Declaration for a New Generation:
 Three Fundamental Rights of Children Are Affirmed Regarding Digital Technology

To sign – https://www.thechildrensdeclaration.org/become-a-signatory

Synopsis: An international group of leading lawyers, physicians, physicists, epidemiologists and other children’s health experts have today announced their support for a new International Declaration intended to raise public awareness of three fundamental rights of children which are not adequately being protected: the right to be free from addictive platforms and apps; the right to be free from hazardous radiation from wireless devices; and the right to be free from commercial exploitation of private information.

As reported by Americans for Responsible Technology, an international group of leading lawyers, physicians, physicists, epidemiologists and other children’s health experts have today announced their support for a new International Declaration intended to raise public awareness of three fundamental rights of children which are not adequately being protected: the right to be free from addictive platforms and apps; the right to be free from hazardous radiation from wireless devices; and the right to be free from commercial exploitation of private information.
 
The “International Declaration on the Human Rights of Children in the Digital Age,” builds on the 1959 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of the Child and encourage decision makers at all levels of government and education to take immediate steps to safeguard children from potential harm. The Declaration is being promoted by two non-profit organizations, the
Broadband International Legal Action Network (BBILAN), and Americans for Responsible Technology based in New York.
 
“The existence of the legal rights of children is well recognized, but not adequately or uniformly enforced, especially when those rights conflict with powerful commercial interests,” says Julian Gresser, Chairman of BBILAN and one of the Declaration’s authors. “The legal duty to protect children and enforce these rights on their behalf is the obligation of all adults, particularly parents, legal guardians and others in positions of authority. This protection of children in the digital age is a basic legal principle that we believe will increasingly be recognized as a part of international customary law that can be recognized and implemented by every country on Earth.”
 
“We’re using a wide aperture to approach this issue,” says Doug Wood, National Director of Americans for Responsible Technology. “Parents and school officials are recognizing the hazards of digital addiction, privacy experts are concerned about the monetization of children’s private data, and medical doctors and epidemiologists are worried about the long- and short-term biological impacts of radiation. This Declaration offers a holistic solution to all three of these problems.”
 
Legal, health and scientific experts and organizations, as well as other child advocates around the world, are invited to become signatories to the Declaration, which will be presented to the United Nations on World Children’s Day, November 20th.

The Press Release notes:

“The existence of the legal rights of children is well recognized, but not adequately or uniformly enforced, especially when those rights conflict with powerful commercial interests,” says Julian Gresser, Chairman of BBILAN and one of the Declaration’s authors. “The legal duty to protect children and enforce these rights on their behalf is the obligation of all adults, particularly parents, legal guardians and others in positions of authority. This protection of children is a basic legal principle that we believe will increasingly be recognized as a part of international customary law that can be recognized and implemented by every country on Earth.”

To sign – https://www.thechildrensdeclaration.org/become-a-signatory

Press release – https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/doctors-lawyers-and-scientists-join-together-in-international-childrens-declaration-for-the-digital-age-301974137.html

Website – https://www.thechildrensdeclaration.org/

Declaration text – https://www.thechildrensdeclaration.org/the-declaration

List of Expert Signatories thus far – https://www.thechildrensdeclaration.org/signatories

“Protection of children is a basic legal principle.” “The legal duty to protect children and enforce these rights on their behalf is the obligation of all adults.”

It’s a winner.

In just over three months, Remembering Nearfield, has become an internationally acclaimed animated short film. Its aim is to break down taboos around the subject of electromagnetic harm in our society and catalyze global conversations about electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS), a disability which brings an uncertain future for those highly sensitized and intolerant of the radiation from man-made electromagnetic fields.

The health impacts of EMF radiation exposure on society have remained subject to relentless scientific scrutiny. EHS is constantly being flagged up by scientists in their appeals to address a host of shortcomings in existing globally-adopted EMF radiation exposure guidelines to raise questions about public safety and draw attention to the most vulnerable, like children and those with EHS (who are not considered in the one-size-fits-all attitude of these industry-friendly guidelines).

Remembering Nearfield is eloquently narrated by Corriëlle van Vuuren. She’s an entrepreneur stricken by electromagnetic hypersensitivity compelled to speak out about her disability. Comfortable in the belief that technologies are safe, society prefers to remain naive. Her testimony challenges this blind trust.

No-one Should Be Excluded

As Corriëlle’s revelatory testimony reveals, people with EHS become so overwhelmed and ill, as their health declines, they can eventually lose everything: property, possessions, status, family and social relationships, and income. No-one in society should be excluded because of the nature of their disability. Education matters.

Professor Olle Johansson formerly of the Karolinska Institute in Sweden, has this to say about Remembering Nearfield: “For an academic scientist like myself, it is always very impressive to see skilled movie makers, artists, and performers, summarize in less than 10 minutes a staggering 45 years of research!” 

Educational, original, and often moving, this animated film’s wide and enthusiastic reception indicates that the world is ready to learn about EHS. Remembering Nearfield has been awarded Best Health Film at the prestigious Cannes World Film Festival in July 2023.

As well as being selected and nominated by many other festivals of note, it has won ten awards since entering an array of over 235 film festivals since April 2023.

The recognition of film festivals and prospective screenings throughout the year are wonderful affirmations about the mission of the film to raise awareness and educate. The film underscores the value of EMF awareness and safety that concerns all of society. It also exposes the discrimination that has stood in the way of progress in this regard. Remembering Nearfield stands for social change, to drive equality for people with electromagnetic hypersensitivity, to bring equal recognition, accommodation, and support on par with other disabilities.

Remembering Nearfield opens our eyes anew to a neglected and misunderstood disability in a world of virtually unavoidable EMF pollution and guides us towards practical, easy-to-achieve solutions so society can reduce EMF radiation. People with EHS may no longer live in exclusion or isolation when society realizes that lowering environmental EMF not only leads to a better place for people with EHS to live and work but can have boundless potential for improving health for all.

Sean Alexander Carney, Director, Producer and Animator of Remembering Nearfield.

IMdB page: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt27747210/

Press Kit Here: https://safetechinternational.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Remembering-Nearfield-Press-Kit.pdf

nday Tuesday 6/7 February will see the Action Against 5G Court Case.
Proceedings took place at The Royal Courts of Justice on Strand, London WC2A 2LL. Kindly see enclosed leaflet.

Wilful ignorance and reckless disregard
The Government refuses to examine a large body of high quality, peer-reviewed scientific evidence of harms to life from RF radiation. Current ‘ICNIRP’ exposure guidelines take account only 

of heating effects in adult humans and as a result are set at least a
million times too high. The Government has a duty to inform the public of the risks and to
protect us from them, yet there has been no assessment of harms to developing children, to animals and plants, no environmental impact assessment and no consideration given to the dreadful impacts on Electro Hyper-sensitivity sufferers.Supporters brought yellow cut out ‘EMF Exiles’ to symbolise those who can’t make it due to high levels of Electro-Magnetic Radiation. Most Electro Hyper-sensitive people can no longer come to London due to the adverse EMF’s. In fact, they are being made refugees on their own Planet… For more details on the Case, kindly visit: https://actionagainst5g.org/blog/details-for-court-hearing/

“Honor the dead, heal the wounded, stop the wars”- Mary Kirkland

World Beyond War has provided some history about the creation of “Veteran’s Day” in the United States. “In many parts of the world, principally but not exclusively in British Commonwealth nations, this day is called Remembrance Day and should be a day of mourning the dead and working to abolish war so as not to create any more war dead. But the day is being militarized, and a strange alchemy cooked up by the weapons companies is using the day to tell people that unless they support killing more men, women, and children in war they will dishonor those already killed.

For decades in the United States, as elsewhere, this day was called Armistice Day, and was identified as a holiday of peace, including by the U.S. government. It was a day of sad remembrance and joyful ending of war, and of a commitment to preventing war in the future.

The holiday’s name was changed in the United States after the U.S. war on Korea to “Veterans Day,” a largely pro-war holiday on which some U.S. cities forbid Veterans ‘For Peace’ groups from marching in their parades, because the day has become understood as a day to praise war — in contrast to how it began.

We seek to make Armistice / Remembrance Day a day to mourn all victims of war and advocate for the ending of all war.” – World Beyond War

Let’s also take a look at all of the new technology being developed to support war. Like, 5G.

Allan Frey: Historically, Security Trumped Wireless Safety Due to War

In 2012, military radar expert Allan Frey wrote: Security concerns during the Cold War may have led to the generation of misinformation on the physiological effects of microwave radiation from mobile phones.

“The controversy over whether the technology poses a risk to human health is substantial.

And while much of science could be considered controversial, what has, and is, happening in microwave research is not a routine scientific dispute.

Concerns about the health risks of cell phones, confusions regarding the evidence for or against such risks, and even misinformation in the scientific literature may all be collateral damage of the Cold War between the USSR and the United States. This was a time when the use of micro-wave generating equipment, such as radar, was seen by some as critical to the security of the United States, and efforts were taken to ensure that such innovations were not suppressed by findings that suggested such technology to be unsafe.” – Allan Frey

Kate Kheel: Wars Meets 5G Wireless

In May of 2021, Kate Kheel of Safe Tech International published an article about the marriage made in hell between the military and 5G.  

“Against the backdrop of the rollout of 5G, is an increasingly unstable world with nations vying for power, profit, and dominion over earth and space. Along with a shift in power, outer space has increasingly become known as a war-fighting domain.”

“A move toward systems warfare is foundational for the modernization of warfare. Systems warfare relies on a vast infrastructure of cell towers, antennas, sensors, cameras, and satellites that “vacuum up” as much data as possible. The sheer quantity of data is increasingly more than humans can make sense of and that wireless bandwidth can manage. So, the data is aggregated, sorted and sifted by Artificial Intelligence (AI) to determine what is of value, and to whom it should be directed. Command and Control (still predominantly manned by humans but increasingly being outsourced to machines) then sets the parameters for the data it will need for defense or offense in a given operation. Within seconds, “thanks” to 5G and systems warfare, the data supporting military aggression is actionable.”

“In the US, the Department of Defense dubs this connected system of systems the Joint All Domain Command and Control (JADC2) and “boasts” it will increase the lethality of war by enabling near real time communications and the use of hypersonic weapons and missiles, spy systems, and Facial Recognition Technology. JADC2 will provide a vast communication network that will weave together all branches of the military – the Air Force, Army, Marine Corps, Navy, and Space Force. The stated aim is for the US to gain dominion over space for both commercial and military advantage; for whoever controls the high ground (space) controls Earth as well.” – Kate Kheel

Beating China in the Race to 5G?

One year ago, the article “Beating China to 5G is Critical to US Security” lambasted the FAA for having concerns about 5G interference with aviation.

“This is an issue of national security and American global influence. China, which imposes far fewer restrictions on wireless providers than we do, is already much closer than we are to operating 5G at scale. Imposing an arbitrary delay on U.S. wireless companies at this stage of deployment because of baseless fears of interference would compromise national security and allow the Chinese to dominate in 5G operation expertise, just as they have sought to dominate in semiconductors and other critical component manufacturing. If America cannot resolve this internal 5G challenge, 5G deployment is at risk.

Of course, it’s also an economic issue. Not only is 5G essential to U.S. economic growth and job creation in an increasingly high-tech world, but spectrum auctions also generate significant income for the federal government. Wireless providers recently spent $80 billion to acquire rights to C-Band spectrum. If those rights are taken away from them, there will be little enthusiasm to put their capital at risk in future auctions. At a time when Congress is scrambling to come up with the money to fund their spending proposals, it would be foolish to diminish the significant value of spectrum space.”

The issue didn’t go away. In October 2022, CNET reported, “Aviation Advocates Ask FCC to Permanently Limit 5G Around Airports” Under a temporary agreement, Verizon and AT&T aren’t broadcasting C-band 5G around US airports. Aviation groups want to make some restrictions permanent.”

So, which priority will prevail? Should decision-makers protect the environments surrounding airports, or money, or the military, or the ecosystem, or health and safety?

Speaking of China, in 2020, the Limited Times reported, “Why are 5G antennas turned off at night?”’ 5G antennas consume so much energy that the telecoms operator China Unicom puts them on standby at night.  The simple title of a South China Morning Post article has ignited social media, pitting anti-5G against tech defenders. So why turn off the antennas at night? “The antennas are put on standby when they are not in use and are “turned on” when they are.” “A 5G base station consumes more than a 4G base station.”

What about the claims that 5G contributes to sustainability and energy conservation? From the Enviromental Health Trust: Reports and White Papers: 5G, Energy Consumption, and Climate including: “5G To Increase Energy Consumption By 61 Times.”

Techdirt: “5G Hype Simply Didn’t Deliver” “from the stop-overhyping-everything dept”

Karl Bode, writing for Techdirt, provided his perspective.

“We’ve noted for several years how the “race to 5G” was largely just hype by telecoms and hardware vendors eager to sell more gear and justify high U.S. mobile data prices.

[]…telecom giants like Verizon, T-Mobile, and AT&T [ ] routinely promised that 5G would change the way we live and work, usher forth the smart cities of tomorrow, and even revolutionize the way we treat cancer. None of those things wound up being true.

Two big claims by the wireless industry was that 5G was going to revolutionize self-driving vehicle automation and be a key player in the “metaverse” (Facebook’s idiotic term for all future interactive online technologies that involve virtual spaces). But again, that didn’t happen either “- Karl Bode

Three Big Things: #1 Today, People Are Waking Up and Finding a Pole With a 5G Antenna Outside the Bedroom Window

Antennas and towers are in the process of being installed, like the one featured in this news story by Fox 5 New York without true community representation and informed consent.  “Green-washing’ has given way to non-consensual ‘informed consent-washing” and abuse of community rights. And it did not start with 5G towers. (Just ask the residents of Worcester MA who were exploited for the over-budget, behind -schedule smart meter pilot program, manufactured to give the illusion of community consent.}

Three Big Things #2; Department of Homeland Security is Seeking to Police the 5G Narrative

Amber Yang, writing for the Hive, noted that “An investigation by the Intercept recently reported on efforts by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to police online speech it considers dangerous. Their plans include targeting information they deem inaccurate or false in regards to “the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic and the efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, racial justice, U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, and the nature of U.S. support to Ukraine.”

What about 5G?

Amber Yang wrote:

Three Big Things #3 This 5G Debacle is about War, or Peace, Not Only Between Nations, But Between a Nation and its People. This Nation

The Intercept report covered by Amber Yang was published on Halloween, Oct. 31, 2022, and it’s a horror show, particularly when considered relative to unsubstantiated narratives that depicted those questioning 5G as low intelligence, right-leaning, violent arsonists, under the influence of Russia. Instead of investigating propaganda, resources went to censorship.

Censorship is squandering our intellectual capacity, reason, and compassion.

“At this unique time in history when it is imperative that nations of the world join in cooperation to share resources to end the global plague assaulting its inhabitants and to avoid catastrophic climate destruction or Earth-shattering nuclear devastation. We are instead squandering our treasure and intellectual capacity on weapons and space warfare.” – Alice Slater, World Beyond War

Including 5G.

by Patricia Burke of Safe Tech International

As noted recently, international legal decisions in France (harm to cows), and Germany (property owners can be held liable for health damages) have been incrementally moving the needle further forward towards recognition that radio frequencies are a bio-active agent that can cause harm to human health and the environment.

Italy is in the news again, but it depends on the news source.

Countries Recognizing Health and Enviromental Issues vs. Countries Ignoring Both

On the other side of the equation, the historical record demonstrates clearly that many countries including the U.S. are not seeking to address unsafe technology decisions.

Italy appears to be taking a different approach. As reported in 2020 by the Children’s Health Defense,”Six Italian Courts Have Ruled Cell Phones Cause Brain Tumors.” 

Now it is seven.

Rather than covering international developments that challenge narratives about the safety of radio frequencies and wireless devices, in the U.S, the mainstream media has been complicit in obscuring the truth from the public.

It’s been going on for a long time.

U.S. Historical Record, 1976: Emphasize Military and Industrial Output

Dating back to 1976, the United States signed an agreement that dismissed extensive research conducted by the Russians regarding harm caused by radio frequencies.  “If the more advanced nations of the West are strict in the enforcement of stringent exposure standards, there could be unfavorable effects on industrial output and military functions.”

A perpetual emergency warfare mindset continues to override reason and precaution, as noted in 2012 by Allan Frey: Security concerns during the Cold War may have led to the generation of misinformation on the physiological effects of microwave radiation from mobile phones, 2012 Working for the U.S. military, he identified both microwave hearing, which is NOT tinnitus from an unknown source, and damage to the Blood Brain Barrier.

“Protecting the Health of the Cell phone Industry“

The U.S.’s decades-long emphasis on prioritizing military and economic agendas over health was sustained in a recent court case regarding labeling of cell phones at the point of sale.

As Tech  Wellness reported,” The Court said that the argument all comes down to dealing with the fact the FCC has to consider both the health and safety of people buying cellphones and the health and safety of the cellphone industry and that the 2019 RF Order specifically talked about the danger of over-warning people about a particular danger.” “The court nixed cellphone warning labels based on preemption.”

• the court said the warning was true and accurate

• the court agreed the warning was not misleading

• the court said the safety warning was same one the FCC already requires in user manuals

So, the warning that’s allowed to hide in the fine print of our cellphone and smartphone manuals has to stay there.  Buried at the end of the pdf, where most of us rarely bother to open.” – Tech Wellness

Testing and Test Dummies

Historical evidence indicates that when consumers were accurately informed about the health risks associated with cigarettes, they changed their behavior.

The industry and its partners have been at war with the warnings about wireless (including war-gaming scientists.)  

The Environmental Health Trust compiled Read The Fine Print, All cell phones and wireless devices instruct that they should be held away from your body.

(The media and entertainment industry routinely portray phones being held directly against the head.) 

Italy’s 2020 Decision: Turin Court of Appeals

In 2020, news aggregator Mondaq reported  “On 13 January 2020 the Turin Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal filed by the National Insurance Provider (“INAIL”) and upheld the first instance decision issued by the Court of Ivrea in 2017, which had established causation between extensive work-related use of mobile phone and brain tumour, ordering INAIL to compensate the claimant with a lifelong payment.”

“A 57-year-old employee of the Italian telecommunication company Telecom sued INAIL before the Court of Ivrea alleging that he developed an acoustic neurinoma as a result of the allegedly extensive work-related use of mobile phone.

”In the appeal proceedings, the Turin Court of Appeals directed a new court expertise in order to re-investigate over causation. Based on the findings of the new court appointed experts, the Court fully confirmed the first instance decision thus rejecting the appeal brought by INAIL.”

“The recent decision of the Turin Court of Appeals follows in the footstep of various Italian courts’ decisions that have in some way acknowledged the link between cancer and the intense and extensive use of mobile phones.”

“ [ ] Mobile phone manufacturers operating in Italy might need to reconsider the warnings included in the users’ instructions manual, so as to include a specific and more detailed warning on the potential health risks.” – Hogan Lovells Publications analysis distributed by Mondaq

An analysis of the 2020 Turin decision by the Environmental Health Trust is here.

The November 2022 Decision; The 2020 Turin Decision Has Been Upheld

On November 5, 2022, newsrnd.com reported. “ A tumor due to prolonged cellular use, is entitled to an annuity’ “ This was established by the Court of Appeal of Turin (ANSA)  There is a “high probability” that the cell phone was the cause of the cancer. This was established by a sentence of the Court of Appeal of Turin, which confirmed the decision of the Court of Aosta which had sentenced Inail to pay the pension for occupational disease to a worker, now retired, specialized technician of the Cogne Acciai Speciali.

The 63-year-old man, between 1995 and 2008, used his mobile phone for more than ten thousand hours for work purposes, with an average of 2.5 hours a day.

A use that has caused a benign intracranial tumor and a consequent “left deafness, paresis of the facial nerve, balance disorder and depressive syndrome”.

In 2020 the Court of Aosta had recognized the causal link between the use of mobile phones and the onset of neuroma of the acoustic nerve, but Inail had appealed for new advice.”- newsrnd.com

An analysis of the court decision (roughly translated) noted;

“Two important issues were debated during the CTU: the conflict of interest, and the quality of the studies [ ] to underestimate, or affirm, the causal link”

“This RF hypothesis must be considered even if “the exact mechanism of action of radio frequencies” is still unknown (whether it is heat, or [ ] a genetic mutation).”

A press release about the court case noted that after conducting a risk assessment, the Italian mobile phone services company Wind-Tre required that their 7000 employees use wired headsets and/or corded landline phones, which indicates that the company is aware of the health risks.

“It is known that Swiss reinsurers do not insure risks from RF.”

“The American researchers of the NTP (National Toxicology Program) stated: “We believe that the link between radiofrequency (RF) radiation and tumors in male rats is real”. NTP experienced schwannomas and gliomas, malignant tumors of the brain.”

How will the New York Times and other U.S. media outlets cover the story?

IARC

A translated analysis of the Italian decision noted, “IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) after the publication of the animal studies by NTP and Ramazzini has included radio frequencies among the agents for which a re-evaluation of carcinogenicity in the 2020-2024 period is considered a priority because ”new biological tests and mechanistic action of the RF) justify a reassessment of the classification”.

“A change towards; “probable” or “certain” is expected. “ 

This prediction applies to the classifications used by IARC.

In 2011, the WHO/IARC classified RF-EMF (radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, otherwise known as “wireless radiation”) as a Class 2B Possible Human Carcinogen based on credible evidence that linked long term wireless exposure to brain cancer.

The IARC cancer classification has been routinely dismissed and/or misinterpreted. for example here and here. “When I realized that the reports suggested that RF-energy from cell phones was not considered any more carcinogenic than coffee, as both are now in the company of other class 2B carcinogens, I gave up the idea” “Looking at the pictures on TV of the brain that was impacted by the wicked RF energy coming from the cell phones, I was remorseful to have ever used the cell phone. I was especially saddened to hear that the brain of a child was more vulnerable to the harmful effects of the RF-EMF. Little did I know then that these conclusions were based on the ‘anatomical models of humans’!”

The author didn’t note that ‘safety guidelines’ themselves are based on inanimate anatomical models, including recent research concluding that 5G waves “vanish” before they reach “the brain layer.” 

Additionally, the myopic focus on cancer is a play out of the tobacco industry playbook, and denies the emerging tsunami of other adverse impacts, including neurological damage, especially for older American women,

“Invasion” by Industry and ICNIRP, Courtesy of the Media

An analysis of the decision this week in Italy noted, “For anyone who deals with these cases it is important to remind the experts and judges that the literature over the years has been literally invaded by articles, which distract the interpreters and confuse, written by those who are financed by the industry who have opposite interests.”

The Court of Turin ruled in February 2020 that ICNIRP (international Commission on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection) should not be relied upon for meaningful guidelines due to bias.

“ICNIRP refuses to acknowledge the robust body of peer reviewed research demonstrating harmful bio-effects from manmade radio frequency electromagnetic radiation. ICNIRP produces ‘guidelines’ which are based largely on theory and do not take into account independent experimental evidence.”

As noted by the Environmental Health Trust, FCC and ICNIRP do not protect people or the environment.

Internationally

Around the country and in many nations worldwide, planning departments and decision makers are being told that new infrastructure is safe “because it meets FCC or ICNIRP guidelines”

Some nations, like India, (which issued new EMF guidelines and new exposure limits lowered to 1/10 of the ICNIRP level) are not buying it.

EHT notes, “More than 20 countries and other government jurisdictions have official government advice on cell phones with recommended steps to minimize cell phone radiation to the brain, especially for children, Including Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Croatia, Cyprus, Denmark, Finland, France, French Polynesia, Germany, Greece, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Korea, Russia, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom Krakow, Poland; European Parliament (Resolution 1815).”

Decisions in other countries are listed here.

Americans

Because the U.S. continues to build its tech growth economy on the basis of hiding the truth from the public, eventually the house of cards will collapse.

The cigarette century was never only a question about lung cancer and smokers, (in part because it caused so many other adverse health effects, and because second-hand smoke also causes harm.)

As infrastructure is being installed outside bedroom windows, wireless ‘safety” was never only a question about cellphone users and brain cancer… although that evidence is mounting.

This concerns the entire eco-system.

Every wireless transmission requires scrutiny towards safer choices.

Druid teacher Sarah Furho used the metaphor of traveling by kayak and balancing the oars. She wrote about “the pilot who has the skill and courage necessary to bring under control the destructive potential of carelessness.  [ ] “must make the paddle into a means of transportation rather than a weapon.” [ ] May this full Moon, this tender moment of balance and imbalance, inspire a new relationship between my culture and the natural world.”

For all our relations.

By Patricia Burke of Safe Tech International with Karen Churchill

Part 1 highlights the historic UK Frome decision and other recent international developments challenging the telecommunications industry. Despite the fact that Public Health England deferred to irrelevant ICNIRP guidelines which only protect against thermal heating effects caused by short term exposures, campaigners in the UK have had a tremendous impact in opposing the installation of telecommunications infrastructure (masts) In Frome, councilors considered other sources of evidence about the known hazards (other than ICNIRP).

UK By the Numbers

(A mast is a tower. The number of objections filed in a community is indicative of a high level of outreach, education, and engaged activism by campaigners.) 

1 Decision; “Councils Must Consider Other Sources of Evidence about the Known Hazards and Apply Precaution“

”The UK’s Karen Churchill explains, “Government policy constrains planners with a specifically worded policy that they must not consider evidence other than an ICNIRP compliance certificate.  But after committed consistent campaigning, the statutory obligation to reconcile the health and environmental risks at the local level was established in the South West of the UK.

 The local Planning Board in Mendip Council set aside national policy and voted that there is insufficient proof of 5G safety, and refused to grant planning permission for a 5G mast in Frome, Somerset.  73 masts have been refused in the City of Bristol on the basis of visual appearance (aesthetics) since late 2020. It could well be the planners there are playing safe and strictly applying policy, whilst secretly applying precaution, as thousands of objections about health impacts have been submitted in Bristol. Visual amenity is a minimal concern in the objections.

1 Student in the UK Who Received an EHS Accommodation

Dr Erica Mallery-Blythe’s and Phire’s concluded and long awaited case – Child awarded the right to a low EMF Environment:

Excerpts from Decision Letter (First Tier Tribunal – FtT): “on balance we concluded, in the face of considerable evidence produced by the parents, that the impairment existed and that child XXX met the definition of disability within section 6 of the Equality Act 2010: that is that it had substantial long-term effect on day-to-day functioning.“

3 MPs (UK national politicians) Object

in Spalding May 2022 https://www.spaldingtoday.co.uk/news/opposition-to-fresh-5g-mast-plan-9252949/

10 Downing Street 

(10 Downing Street in London, also known in the United Kingdom as Number 10, is the official residence and executive office of the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom.)

10 Mast Refusals

in Hastings, Stroud, and Bath

17 Objections

in Linslade Sept. 2021 https://www.leightonbuzzardonline.co.uk/news/people/opposition-mounts-to-proposed-linslade-5g-mast-but-phone-company-insists-site-is-crucial-to-providing-reliable-network-337184

26 Objections in Hunningham Warwickshire

Sept. 2021 https://www.warwickshireworld.com/news/people/residents-speak-out-against-outlandish-5g-mast-planned-for-village-near-leamington-3375722

28 Objections in Thurrock Mast Refused

August 2022  https://thurrock.nub.news/news/local-news/residents-campaign-of-opposition-to-5g-mast-has-a-successful-outcome-as-council-vetoes-application-148021 August 2022

30 Objections in Southampton

June 22, 202  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-61799598

30 Objections in Derby Mast Refused

July 2022 https://www.derbytelegraph.co.uk/news/derby-news/controversial-5g-mast-derby-street-7309442

35 Mast Refusals

in London

40 Objections in Reading – Mast Refused  

June 2022 https://www.readingchronicle.co.uk/news/20244741.plans-5g-mast-emmer-green-refused-council/

59 Age of UK Social Worker Awarded Early Retirement for EHS

59 year-old social worker wins ‘early ill health retirement’ for disabling ‘Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS) – Phire Medical

59 Objections in Worcester – Mast Refused and the Appeal

by Telecoms failed. April 2022  https://www.worcesternews.co.uk/news/20092358.inspector-makes-ruling-controversial-5g-mast-holt-heath-near-worcester/

63 Parish Councils in Mendip District were informed about the Pittsfield Cease and Desist Order (USA) ahead of the historic Frome Decision (see number 1 above)

Safe Tech International’s Amanda Kenton emailed planning departments informing them of their legal obligations under the European Electronics Communications Code which include making public health an imperative and reconciling the health and environmental risks. (See Amanda’s article Take The Fight Against 5G To Your Local Council page 8)

“This obligation supercedes the National policy which instructs the local planning authorities to not set health safeguards other than ICNIRP. If a threshold of evidence of unsafety is reached or a threshold of lack of evidence of safety s reached which justifies setting aside this policy then it is within the Local authorities “authority” and their legal obligation to refuse the planning application.” 

(See Board of Health Orders Verizon to Cease and Desist in Pittsfield Massachusetts Cell Tower Battle. Feb 9, 2022. https://mdsafetech.org/2022/02/09/board-of-health-orders-verizon-to-cease-and-desist-in-pittsfield-massachusetts-cell-tower-battle%EF%BF%BC/

70 Comments Submitted in Cambridge

July 2022 https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/local-news/how-5g-masts-springing-up-24498812

73 Mast Refusals

in Bristol

100 Objections in Caversham

July 2022 https://www.readingchronicle.co.uk/news/20517305.reading-5g-mast-looks-like-war-worlds/ July 2022

122 Objections in Havant, Hampshire

July 22https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-hampshire-62057423

160 Objections in Ashford, Kent – Mast Refused

April 2022 https://www.kentonline.co.uk/kent/news/getting-5g-is-just-as-important-as-a-bus-route-265028/

300 Objections in Bath – Mast Refused

Nov 2020  https://www.bathecho.co.uk/news/community/people-object-plans-new-5g-mast-92578/

353 Councils Contacted

353 councils were personally contacted on two occasions, including

• The Director of Planning.
• Environmental Health Officers.
• Chair of Planning Committee.

400 Objections in Glastonbury Mast Withdrawn

March 2022 https://glastonbury.nub.news/news/local-news/plans-for-a-20m-5g-mast-in-glastonbury-have-been-withdrawn-and-other-planning-news-from-in-and-around-the-town-129489

500 Legal 500 and ‘Action Against 5G’ Legal Case 

The Legal 500 recently described Michael Mansfiend as “the king of human rights work” and as a Leading Silk in civil liberties and human rights. Michael Mansfield QC is leading the legal team and is one of the most venerated barristers of our time. He has led legal teams in high profile cases of civil liberty and miscarriages of justice and has represented the families of Grenfell Tower, Lockerbie, the Ballymurphy Massacre and Stephen Lawrence.

UK campaigners are bringing a historic legal case against the UK Government, challenging the irresponsibility of continuing to allow unacceptable levels of exposure to electro-magnetic radiation that will not protect us from known harm, and takes no account of the cumulative effects of the unseen hazardous electro-smog from multiple sources.

“The case concerns an important issue of public safety. It raises the risk to which members of the public, including particular vulnerable individuals, and children, are being exposed without having consented to or agreed to expose themselves to that risk; and without an adequate and proper consideration undertaken by the relevant safeguarding authorities of the creation of those man-made public health risks.

We provided documents containing evidence from a multitude of respected and eminent experts concerning the health effects of the technology used by 5G, and the attendant risks to the public and individuals, upon which the Defendants declined to act.

The Defendants cannot lawfully continue to ignore or overlook the evidence that indicates the existence of a risk that has not been quantified. To date there has been a failure to engage with this body of evidence, and an inappropriate attempt to delegate any assessment of risk to an external body – a body against which membership legitimate criticism of industry finance and conflict of interest is levelled.´- https://actionagainst5g.org/legal-case/

See https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/legalactionagainst5g/        

600 Mendip had 600 objections

to the Glastonbury and Frome masts.

1815 – Resolution 1815

In 2011 the European Parliamentary Assembly stated: Given the context of growing exposure of the population, in particular that of vulnerable groups such as young people and children, there could be extremely high human and economic costs if early warnings are neglected.

‘The Assembly regrets that, despite calls for the respect of the precautionary principle and despite all the recommendations, declarations and a number of statutory and legislative advances, there is still a lack of reaction to known or emerging environmental and health risks and virtually systematic delays in adopting and implementing effective preventive measures. Waiting for high levels of scientific and clinical proof before taking action to prevent well-known risks can lead to very high health and economic costs….’See: PACE – Resolution 1815 (2011) – The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment https://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp

2020 Year of First International Global protest against 5G

Global protest days against 5G were the brainchild of Dorotea Radoš Čulina of Croatia, Tanja Katarina Rebel of the U.K. and other colleagues around the world. “We do not consent to a few powerful technology and satellites companies dictating the future of all life on Earth.”  https://www.facebook.com/groups/548912049259423

2020 Year of Launch of Alternative News Source “The Light Paper, The Uncensored Truth”

See ”Take The Fight Against 5G To Your Local Council” by Amanda Kenton, page 8 and Brighter Times article about the 5G legal case https://brightertimes.world/brighter-times-issue-4/ page 6

3500 Medical Experts

NIR (Non-Ionizing Radiation) Consensus Statement has been signed by medical groups representing over 3,500 medical doctors so far, including experienced clinicians and widely published and respected scientists who are experts in this field. It declares current safety levels to be inadequate and highlights some of the disease processes linked with NIR exposure in peer-reviewed publications; it points out the vulnerabilities of children10 and other hypersensitive groups, whose symptoms may include sleep problems, impaired concentration, headaches, and mood disturbance;11 it also highlights the contravention of Human Rights and Equalities acts and requests urgent responses from governments and health authorities to halt further deployment of emitting technology and address current public health failures.

6500 extra 5G masts in addition to 4G 3G and 2G

have been installed in the last two years

Masts have also been installed without obtaining planning permissions

 For example; “Angry mum dumps car on pavement in protest to 5G mast on Raymond Road” reports “Plans for a 5G mast in Raymond Road, off Hill Lane, were refused last October after residents raised concerns it would block pavements for dog walkers and wheelchair users. Now, almost a year later, spray-painted markings have appeared where the mast would be put up.”

Part 3 spotlights additional efforts in the UK to address unsafe standards for wireless technologies.

By Patricia Burke of Safe Tech International with Karen Churchill “We are the ones writing and reporting the true story”

“And then the people said ‘NO’. The End” –Courtney and Amelia Gilardi, Pittsfield, MA from the Oct. Safe Tech International event Celebrating Local Successes and Actions

Recent International Developments

Although the mainstream media in the U.S. has failed to provide coverage, several significant decisions have recently been made in different countries regarding inadequate safety protections for wireless technologies and infrastructure.  For example:

Germany

A German court found that property owners can be liable for health impacts from base station antennas on their property.  “As even official bodies such as the European Parliament’s Research Service (STOA) point out that the electromagnetic radiation limit values are too high by at least a factor of 10, the owner takes a liability when entering into an agreement with a mobile phone system operator in this regard.” – Source

France

A court in France has found in favour of a farmer who claimed that a 4G antenna was damaging his cows’ health, and has ordered for the antenna to be switched off for two months. “Philippe Molhérat, the mayor of Mazeyrat-d’Allier, who had previously authorised the antenna’s installation, testified in favour of the farmer. He said that he feared “a catastrophe on a human level” and that his “concerns” were growing for the 1,500 inhabitants of his village.” – Source

Italy

The Court of Turin ruled in February 2020 that ICNIRP should not be relied upon for meaningful guidelines due to bias. Court of Turin Ruling: ICNIRP refuses to acknowledge the robust body of peer reviewed research demonstrating harmful bio-effects from manmade radio frequency electromagnetic radiation. ICNIRP produces ‘guidelines’ which are based largely on theory and do not take into account independent experimental evidence. https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/Turin-Verdict-ICNIRP_Judgment-SUMMARY-of-the-Turin-Court-of-Appeal-9042019_EN-min.pdf

Spotlight: United Kingdom

In addition to a legal case against 5G, there are a number of recent historical developments in the UK:

• A mast (tower) application in Frome was denied on the basis of health concerns
• A child was awarded an education health plan on the basis of EHS
• A social worker was awarded disability on the basis of EHS

Background: ICNIRP and Public Health England are Bedfellows

As noted by the Environmental Health Trust, “ICNIRP (the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) is an ‘invite only’ club with longstanding industry ties that is accountable to no one. ICNIRP is short for the International Commission for Non-ionizing Radiation Protection. ICNIRP is an invite only, small group of just 14 members that has no oversight. It was founded by scientist Michael Repacholi who was funneling industry money though a hospital to fund his EMF activities and is now an industry consultant. Repacholi remains an ICNIRP Emeritus Member.” 

Public Health England began operating on 2013 to protect and improve health and wellbeing and reduce health inequalities.

Although regulators and industry have not addressed mounting health and environmental issues, campaigners (activists) worldwide have been achieving significant successes.

Spotlight on UK: “Councils Must Consider Other Sources of Evidence About the Known Hazards and Apply the Precautionary Principle”

The UK’s Karen Churchill explains, “A UK 5G Mast was refused on health grounds. Government policy constrains planners with a specifically worded policy that they must not refuse a mast application on the basis of health concerns.  But after committed consistent campaigning, the statutory obligation to reconcile the risks at the local level was established in the South West of the UK.

The local Planning Board in Mendip Council set aside national policy and voted that there is insufficient proof of 5G safety and refused to grant planning permission for a 5G mast in Frome, Somerset. 73 masts have been refused in the City of Bristol on the basis of visual appearance (aesthetics) since late 2020.

Could planners be playing safe and strictly applying policy, whilst secretly applying the precautionary principle, as thousands of objections about health impacts have been submitted in Bristol? Visual amenity is a minimal concern in the objections.”

Stop5G.co.UK: ICNIPR is No Longer ‘Carte Blanche’ for Telecom

According to the UK advocacy group Stop5g.co.UK

“When campaigners write to Councillors, MPs, or Schools they find more often than not that the standard response is that they are following PHE guidelines.  The PHE guidelines defer to the ICNIRP recommended exposure levels for non-ionising radiation (NIR). 

This is incredibly frustrating since the guidelines are not fit for purpose, but there is still a brick wall defending them.”

The ICNIRP guidelines were set in 1998 and based on short term tests on radiation from a single mobile phone. 

They are irrelevant to today’s patterns of exposure (multiple devices, interference patterns, hotspots, continuous exposure), and still ignore non-thermal, direct biological effects at levels way below those stated.

The majority (up to 70%) of independent peer reviewed studies show evidence of harm from wireless exposure, even at low power levels, and especially to children. 

PHE also fail to put their 0.1 watt (100 milliwatts) advice into any context such as cm2 or m2 for it to be actually used.

As can be seen in the BioInitiative 2012 Colour Charts which summarise over 60 studies that report biological effects and adverse health effects relevant for cell towers, wi-fi, ‘smart’ wireless utility meters, wireless laptops, baby monitors, cell phones and cordless phones. Every one of these studies reports one of the effects listed below at exposure levels below the Public Health England, and therefore ICNIRPs, guidelines.  [ ]

In 2004 Public Health England adopted the ICNIRP guidelines as the basis for their own guidance, but for which they take no responsibility. Their only duty under 2A of the Public Health Act is to forward any draft revised guidance to the Health and Safety Executive HSE for consideration.

Public Health England guidance only conveys information from the ICNIRP about impacts on health from non-ionising radiation, which can be used to assess a hazard at thermal levels. Their guidance is presented solely as a reference point for the User or Public Body, who are advised to also take into account other submissions made to them by the public, or other bodies.

PHE does not review or take into account itself all the available scientific evidence or research on issues covered by the guidance but rely solely on reviews by the ICNIRP.

The Guidance [on PHE website] is not maintained or revised by PHE for the explicit purpose of any other body undertaking any other statutory function. That body must determine what other evidence to consider in making any decision. (Public Health Act 2A)

The PHE guidelines are NOT Law.

The only Regulation in the UK that is defined by the ICNIRP levels is the Control of Electromagnetic Fields at Work Regulations 2016.

This means that councils, when considering other effects from long term exposure to RFR (radio frequency radiation) on say the environment and vulnerable groups, must consider other sources of evidence about the known hazards, and apply the EU Precautionary Principle.” – https://stop5g.co.uk/public-health-england-phe/.

PHE and ICNIRP vs. European Electronics Communications Code, Reconciling Risk

Karen Churchill reiterates, “The PHE guidelines are NOT Law. The public and the Planning Departments are being misled by national planning policy which includes statements “that they must not set health safeguards other than ICNIRP.

There is a statutory requirement to risk reconcile in the European Electronics Communications Code, which requires that public health be made imperative and requires the application of precaution. This Law supersedes Policy and the yet this truth is being suppressed.”

(Note that health and environmental advocates in the U.S. have a similar challenge due to section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 being invoked, as explained by Physicians for Safe Technology. Attorney Andrew Campanelli of Anti-Cell Tower Lawyers has been successfully instructing communities in “How to Control the Placement of Cell Towers, Small Cells and Das Nodes” in accordance with FCC requirements.]

Learn More:

Karen Churchill, World Council for Health: Action Against 5G

https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/multimedia/karen-churchill-action-against-5g/  (16 minutes), with written transcript

“Call For Govt Action on Dangers of 5G” by Sean Carney

“The good news is, we can change this, but only if we act together and acknowledge the scandal, promote this video’s message, and pursue a solution, holding the government to account for protectionism, mismanaging public health and reimagining legislation to favour an unimpeded roll out of wireless 5G that hasn’t been proven safe for humans, wildlife, or the environment.” – Sean Carney

In Part 2 of 3, we will look at the UK, by the numbers

Their message: “We do not consent to a few powerful technology and satellites companies dictating the future of all life on Earth.” Actions ranged from Demonstrations and Flash Mobs to Stands in the Park and Nature Art.

The 5G/satellite/internet of things/data/AI juggernaut entails the manufacturing, use, and disposal of thousands of satellites in space, millions of new transmitters on Earth, and trillions of IoT gadgets, devices, appliances and “things” that together pose one of the greatest threats of all human generated health and environmental assaults. Though being sold to the public as a way to address climate change, the gargantuan global technology footprint is itself a major contributor to environmental devastation. On top of this, the 5G infrastructure on Earth and in Space will create an inescapable Planetary Digital Surveillance Grid which will constitute a huge threat to personal Freedom and Autonomy.

https://www.naturalblaze.com/2022/06/the-international-demand-to-stop-5g-solstice-days-of-action.html

Space Force has been at the front of U.S. government efforts to safeguard this key domain, and to help private industry players navigate this inherently dangerous environment.

Outer space is getting crowded, with both commercial endeavors and secretive military projects. And it’s going to be up to the newest United States military branch, the Space Force, to protect American interests there.

Space launches in the U.S. have been on the rise, and participation by private companies has increased over the last decade. What’s more, satellite imaging in the ongoing war between Ukraine and Russia has underscored the importance of space-based assets, both commercial and military.

“We’ve been collaborating with private industry for years now,” said Maj. Gen. Shawn N. Bratton, commander of the U.S. Space Force Space Training and Readiness Command. “And certainly we increase that activity as the presence of commercial industry increases in space.”

SpaceX, Virgin Orbit and United Launch Alliance, which is a joint venture of Lockheed Martin and Boeing, are launching more and more satellites into space. And in SpaceX’s case, some have increasingly ambitious projects involving reusable rockets, crewed flights and potential colonization.

“That’s what really provides us the edge over any other country in the world,” said U.S. Rep. Salud Carbajal, D-Calif., a member of the Space Force Caucus in Congress. “We really have a great partnership between our Department of Defense and those companies who make their own personal investments in technology for their own economic interests, of course, and we are able to spur that innovation”

Watch the video to find out more about the future of the U.S. Space Force