A Community Website by Lopez Island
Started by Julienne Battalia
Nov 10, 2020
Agree
5
New Hampshire State 5G Commission Report
Nov 10, 2020
New Hampshire State Report on Health and Environmental Effects of 5G and Wireless Radiation

Nov 7, 2020

New Hampshire Bombshell Report Documents Scientific Evidence That Questions the Safety of 5G

15 Recommendations Include Reducing Public Exposure to Wireless, Radiation Measurements, Reducing Radiation from Cell Phones and Protection of Trees and Bees

On November 1, 2020, the New Hampshire Commission to Study the Environmental and Health Effects of Evolving 5G Technology has released its final report to New Hampshire Governor Christopher T. Sununu, Speaker of the House Stephen J. Shurtleff, President of the Senate Donna Soucy summarizing its findings that safety assurances for 5G have “come into question because of the thousands of peer-reviewed studies documenting deleterious health effects associated with cellphone radiation exposure.”

The majority of the New Hampshire Commission voted to support 15 recommendations to the New Hampshire Governor. Recommendations include: support an independent study of 5G health effects; reduce public exposure to cell phones, wireless devices and Wi-Fi in schools and libraries; ensure cell network infrastructure antenna setbacks from schools and homes; measure levels of cell network radiation; establish wireless radiation limits to protect trees and insects; establish more sophisticated measurement protocols to include high data rates; require software changes to reduce radiation exposure into the body; establish wireless radiation-free zones; and call on the US Federal Communications Commission to do an environmental assessment on the impact of 5G and wireless infrastructure expansion.

The report referred to the FCC as a “captured agency with undue industry influence,” citing the Harvard Press Book “Captured Agency: How the Federal Communications Commission is Dominated by the Industries it Presumably Regulates,” which compares the wireless industry to the tobacco industry.

The 5G Report recommends US federal agencies coordinate “to protect people, wildlife, and the environment from harmful levels of radiation” and states “until there is Federal action, New Hampshire should take the initiative to protect its environment.”

The New Hampshire Commission includes several legislators who are also medical doctors and engineers, a scientist with expertise in electromagnetic radiation, a New Hampshire Town Councilperson and representatives from the New Hampshire Attorney General’s Office, Department of Health & Human Services and the Department of Business and Economic Affairs. Also represented on the Commission were members of the industry, including a CTIA Wireless Industry representative who was one of the three members signing onto the minority report. In contrast to the majority report which documents why hundreds of scientists are raising the alarm about 5G because of substantial scientific evidence finding harmful health and environmental impacts, the minority report purports that “the scientific consensus” is that wireless is safe.



PLEASE SIGN THE 5G PETITION TO OPALCO

Member Urge OPALCO Board to mandate ROCKISLAND create a safe use EMF radiation campaign
http://chng.it/KmjDhR8WYM

http://chng.it/KmjDhR8WYM
Comment by Julienne Battalia
Nov 20, 2020
Agree
3
Thanks everyone for your interesting comments.
Comment by Mike Colyar
Nov 16, 2020
Agree
7
Nothing is a sensitive as epidemiology. Nothing. And no one has found any such link. Here's your definitive source of information.

https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/cell-phones-fact-sheet#how-common-is-brain-cancer-has-the-incidence-of-brain-cancer-changed-over-time

How much more effort and money do w ... Read All
Comment by Heike And Terry
Nov 15, 2020
Agree
1
So exposure is cumulative/additive, depending on the density of RF-EMF sources. And I think you’re saying that you’d never get up to the levels in the Nature study (roughly equal to 4 i-phones I believe) from cumulative exposure to suffer 25% less dopamine after one month. I think you also might be saying that lower levels (say one i-phone) therefore lea ... Read All
Comment by Mike Colyar
Nov 15, 2020
Agree
5
The test was run at 835 mHz. The whole point of 5G is to move to much higher frequencies to get the bandwidth in order to get the speed. Frequencies between 2 and 6 gHz. Tissue penetration is much less at the higher frequencies. That's one of the problems with 5G. You need lots of towers to deal with things like wet trees. The idea is to have lots of lo ... Read All
Comment by John Waugh
Nov 15, 2020
Agree
4
Yeah, Mike, you've got some good points, as others have made in the past. However, the first sentence in the article states, "Concern is growing about possible neuronal effects of human exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields because of the increasing usage of cell phones and the close proximity of these devices to the brain when in use. ... Read All
Comment by Mike Colyar
Nov 15, 2020
Agree
7
This study is so full of holes that it is hard to know where to start. I’ll pick one and leave the others for when I feel like jousting at windmills for grins. But I’ll bet a couple of chicken strips and a half pound of jojos that this study is not replicated.

The stated exposure is 4W/kG. This is obviously about the level of heating that the mo ... Read All
Comment by John Waugh
Nov 15, 2020
Agree
2
Thanks for the info, Heike. I believe this is the report you refer to:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-37874-z

This does bring up evidence for disturbances due to eg cell phone radiation. This is more specific than the sometimes-generalized "radiation is bad" meme. Looks like time to do more texting and less talking! Read All
Comment by Heike And Terry
Nov 15, 2020
Agree
1
Wireless radiation appears to permanently destroy dopamine neurons. Nature recently published research on that and I also recall a German study years ago that found a permanent drop in dopamine levels after cell tower installation. To understand the health effects of dopamine deficiency, refer to Parkinsons Disease, and depression. Great setup for a futurist ... Read All
Comment by John Waugh
Nov 13, 2020
Agree
3
I think it's good to keep possible health risks in the public eye. However, it's also a good idea not to jump overboard when the boat isn't on fire. The New Hampshire committee had good recommendations, essentially erring on the side of safety:

Recommendations include: support an independent study of 5G health effects; reduce public e ... Read All
Comment by Julienne Battalia
Nov 13, 2020
Agree
2
Yes indeed,it is very sad but true there is a conspiracy theory that 5G caused COVID!! This is false and has nothing to do with New Hampshires Commission Report findings on 5G and public health.
Comment by James Rapson
Nov 13, 2020
Agree
5
Snopes dot com has an excellent, well-referenced article on this (see link below). The article refers to the New Hampshire State 5G Commission Report specifically, and the topic generally as a connection of conspiracy theoris and "A toxic cocktail of misinformation."

https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/06/12/how-the-5g-coronavirus-conspiracy ... Read All
Comment by Mike Colyar
Nov 11, 2020
Agree
9
EMF sensitivity is nonsense on stilts.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15784787/

And I quote from this NIH metaanalysis:

"Results: Thirty-one experiments testing 725 "electromagnetically hypersensitive" participants were identified. Twenty-four of these found no evidence to support the existence of a biophysical hype ... Read All
Comment by Julienne Battalia
Nov 11, 2020
Agree
4
Well then, I guess you take it that the New Hampshire State Government has been taken over by 5G conspiracy theories....
Now that's a great theory.
Comment by Dean Hoshizaki
Nov 11, 2020
Agree
5
5G is a pretty wide spectrum, some of which is repurposed. I could conceive of some being not so good if they are directed and high power, while others being more benign. Pretty much just like 4G and 3G. Don't stand in front of that amplified antenna! But power and distance is related at an inverse cubed. I.e. it dissipates quickly. The reason we ... Read All
Comment by Julienne Battalia
Nov 11, 2020
Agree
3
Your a lucky old man!! You probably will never experience much noticeable health effects from wireless radiation,as with most neurotoxins, it takes effect gradually over time,like 15 years plus. It is your children, grandchildren and great grandchildren who need protection. Just like with the climate crisis it is the generations forward whom we must prote ... Read All
Comment by Mike Colyar
Nov 11, 2020
Agree
6
For years the cancer rate in the U.S. has slowly but surely dropping. If non-ionizing radiation is killing us, as asserted, where are the bodies? The epidemiology doesn't support the conclusions.

If anecdotal evidence is being allowed, I have been sitting next to my ham station for 62 years now and I seem to be still sane and healthy.

... Read All
Comment by Ruby Layne Hampton
Nov 11, 2020
Agree
3
Thank you Julienne