News item: 7761  Back›  Oldest» 

URGENT: 5G Judicial Review 2020 - 15 days to reach £50,000 (£38,514 pledged already).
United Kingdom Created: 20 May 2020
I am a solicitor - I became involved in understanding the harmful health impact of 5G when a member of my community alerted me to an application to put a mast on the building opposite her apartment.

This page is against wireless 5G, radiofrequency radiation (“RFR”) and electromagnetic fields (“EMFs”) generally due to their impact on the health of humans, animals and plants.

Many people are sensitive to RFR and EMFs and suffer illness, distress and financial loss due to inability to work. The balance of scientific evidence is now clear that RFR/EMFs are harmful to humans.

The UK government insist on using ICNIRP’s guidelines to set limits of radiation for public health. ICNIRP’s guidelines are not fit for purpose as, among other things, they only recognise harm from heating of the body and are set for short term exposure – 6 minutes in fact. Many people suffer harm without any heating of their bodies.

5G is the fifth generation of RFR technology used in the mobile telecoms industry and follows 1G – 4G. It dwarfs RFR from 1G – 4G because millions more masts, antennae, small cells, picocells etc have to be placed at short distances apart all around the country in order to develop the infrastructure to deliver the data speed promised by 5G.

The current electrosmog from 1G – 4G will become significantly worse and it is likely to result in more harm to humans, animals, trees and pollinators.

Many people have tried to engage with the government and its agencies, including Public Health England, over the last few years in an attempt to persuade them that their existing policies are harmful to human, animal and plant health. The government rejects such approaches and insists on its adherence to ICNIRP’s guidelines. It has removed health concerns from the National Planning Policy Framework, thereby removing the ability of its citizens from raising such concerns at local council level. Its Electronic Communications Code has limited the rights of its citizens to object to equipment being put on their land. It has permitted the proliferation of RFR gadgets used by babies and children without constraint.

*SNIP* read the complete text at the source link below...

Click here to view the source article.
Source: CrowdJustice, Jessica Learmond-Criqui, 17 May 2020

 News item: 7761  Back›  Oldest»