5G Hotspots "Kill Zones", the Truth About What's Coming Ahead, Specific Dates and Cities That Wi

a reply to: Zaphod58


5G negative health effects go further than human skin.


Published Scientific Research on 5G, 4G Small Cells, Wireless Radiation and Health

a reply to: Kenzo

And you know what almost all of those papers include? The words "seem to" "may lead to", "insufficient research", "more research is needed". Radiation doesn't magically change how it interacts with the body because you call it 5G. Certain wavelengths don't penetrate the skin very well. That's not going to suddenly change because it's called something else.

a reply to: Zaphod58


I done my research years ago.


But sheeple cant get over the barrier, the voice ftom TPTB tell's them everything is okey, you are safe, consume your daily EMF and put the wireless headphones on.



Consume obey stay sleep


I

a reply to: Kenzo

Of course. Anyone that doesn't agree with you has to be a sheeple. Why am I not surprised. Enjoy living in fear of everything.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I am wrong on things many times, but about the dangers of mann made EMF....nah, i dont think so.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Salander

5G does not cause radiation. LoL

What do you mean by '5G does not cause radiation'?

Radiofrequency (RF) radiation, which includes radio waves and microwaves, is at the low-energy end of the electromagnetic spectrum. It is a type of non-ionizing radiation.

The latest biological research looking at potential effects of 5G radiation found no link between the technology and your health.

www.cnet.com...

a reply to: Itisnowagain

I mean 5G, and microwaves are radiation.

5G waves don't produce radiation.

I mean what i said son. x

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Itisnowagain

I mean 5G, and microwaves are radiation.

5G waves don't produce radiation.

I mean what i said son. x

That would have been a good post.....if you had not ended it with 'son'.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

It was not ment as disparaging remark per-say.

Its just something a lot of Scottish people say when they are having to repeat themselves, kind of for emphasis.

Anyhoo, far as im aware microwaves are radiation, that was my point.

a reply to: andy06shake
Do Scottish people call females son?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

In this day of age, thats not to far beyond the realms of possibility.

I do apologize all the same, my bad, did not ken you were a woman.

It is not just Scottish people that do it:

Its just something a lot of Scottish people say when they are having to repeat themselves, kind of for emphasis.

It is frustration, a type of anger.....it appears to be passive aggression.....the added kiss pretends it is not anger.

I haven't said that I am female......I just wondered if, when you repeat yourself to a female, do you say 'son' at the end....

a reply to: andy06shake

5G does cause some form of radiation, just as its predecessors have. Likely it will be slightly different because of different frequencies in use, and the overall design of the system, with many smaller antennae involved, repeaters I suppose.

The leaders of Switzerland and a few other European countries have halted the implementation of 5G. They seem to care more for public health than their US counterparts who care only about money.

People learned about radiation back in the 70's when so many police officers using early model radar guns for speed enforcement came down with testicular cancer. You may not remember that, but I do.

a reply to: Salander

The leaders of Switzerland and a few other European countries have halted the implementation of 5G.

Incorrect.

“The Federal Office for the Environment’s (FOEN) letter to the cantons does not contain any recommendation to stop the permitting of 5G base stations” the representative told MWL, adding: “Rather, it sets out how the cantons can proceed with the permitting of 5G and adaptive antennas until FOEN’s enforcement aid on adaptive antennas is available.”

www.mobileworldlive.com...

People learned about radiation back in the 70's when so many police officers using early model radar guns for speed enforcement came down with testicular cancer.

How many is "so many?" More than before radar guns were in use? Did this occur everywhere the guns were in use?

a reply to: Salander

How?

How does radiation cause more radiation?

Please explain the process?

Pray-tell. x

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Mmkay x x x

Wonder on then.

If you dont know what you are, cant see how you expect me to.

originally posted by: Riffrafter

originally posted by: Tucket

Proper doom. Come Oct 28 you are all gonna die.

What happens on October 28th?

Something about china (or the Jesuits?) jacking up the 5g frequencies, thereby incinerating entire cities.
something like that...

Proper doom..

originally posted by: Riffrafter

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: Terims

What frequency is doing all the damage?

It's a wide range and one tower doesn't broadcast on all of them.

"What's the frequency, Kenneth?"

1000 bonus points for the member that correctly answers where that line comes from.

Hint - there are actually two correct answers and they're related.

REM song from MONSTER CD
and
a quote from a Dan Rather broadcast I believe....

and I didn't google it

originally posted by: Kenzo
a reply to: Zaphod58

5G negative health effects go further than human skin.

Published Scientific Research on 5G, 4G Small Cells, Wireless Radiation and Health

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Kenzo

And you know what almost all of those papers include? The words "seem to" "may lead to", "insufficient research", "more research is needed".

Where they don't, that's probably what they should say.

Radiation doesn't magically change how it interacts with the body because you call it 5G. Certain wavelengths don't penetrate the skin very well. That's not going to suddenly change because it's called something else.

True. I'm very skeptical of the claims of issues with 5G due to low power levels, and the "skin deep" effect.

I looked at some of the papers referenced in Kenzo's link, and one of them made some dramatic claims about EM radiation, "Adverse health effects of 5G mobile networking technology under real-life conditions" by Kostoff et al, link is to the pre-print, since I think the final paper is behind a paywall. But the authors didn't seem to do any actual research, except searching for other papers on the effects of EM radiation, which they even expanded beyond the scope of the title to include 60 Hz frequency which has nothing at all to do with 5G.

There's no doubt putting your head in a 1300 watt microwave oven and turning on the power can be detrimental to your health, so saying "EM can be dangerous" doesn't get us anywhere, we need specifics. So I looked to see if they pointed out any real concerns about 5G and found one of their references to be interesting: “Biological Effects of Millimeter Wavelengths” by Zalyubovskaya (1977) which was declassified by the CIA in 2012.

What's interesting is that the author acknowledges the "skin deep" penetration of millimeter waves but cites research results that the effects are more than skin deep.

The author confirmed that millimeter waves do not penetrate skin but act in a different way to cause systemic harm. This could be due to skin nerve receptors in the skin, or release of biochemical molecules, that could cause the observed diverse biological and metabolic effects.

That "release of biochemical molecules" link goes to what seems to be a speculative paper proposing a hypothetical substance it calls "s" which could be released by the skin cells to cause effects elsewhere in the body. I don't find that completely implausible, however to say "more research is needed" is an understatement when the mechanism can only be guessed at by hypothesizing a theoretical substance called "s".

The other question of course is whether Zalyubovskaya's research (see p57) is valid, or if it contains errors. It's difficult to assess since so few details are provided. For example he says research was done on rats and mice but he doesn't say how many were in the exposed group, and how many were in the control group, and whether the control was a sham exposure or just the absence of exposure. He also mentions looking at the health of 97 persons working with millimeter wave generators, but details are completely lacking and there's no mention of a control population of ~97 other people who were not working with millimeter waves.

If I could take everything Zalyubovskaya said at face value, I might be concerned about 5G, but it really raises more questions than it provides answers, so it's hard to take at face value. There are other millimeter wave research projects which didn't find what Zalyubovskaya found though I can't say they were conducted the same way. Again with Zalyubovskaya providing so few details it's hard to say. Zalyubovskaya's research exists, but I don't find it that persuasive when the author himself says that millimeter waves are absorbed mainly by the skin, and that "under the effect of millimeter waves of low intensity, the degree of affection depends on the general condition of the organism and evidently is not so great, as the observed disorders are in the main reversible". That raises even more questions since I didn't see in his research where he determined the reversibility of effects.