Please do your own research. The information I share is only a catalyst to expanding ones confined consciousness. I have NO desire for anyone to blindly believe or agree with what I share. Seek the truth for yourself and put your own puzzle together that has been presented to you. I'm not here to teach, preach or lead, but rather assist in awakening the consciousness of the collective from its temporary dormancy.
Researcher Zorach Glaser, Ph.D. spent decades archiving studies that examine the link between certain health issues and exposure to microwave and radio frequencies. Scholars and the public are now invited to help review Glaser’s documents.
Zorach (Zory) Glaser Ph.D., LT, MSC, USNR, is one of the most important scientists to study the impact of wireless technology on human health.
His career as a government research scientist spans decades working for the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Public Health Service, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Bureau of Radiological Health.
Glaser’s extensive archive of nearly 4,000 documents, now available to the public, provides clear evidence that the harmful effects of wireless were known long before cell phones and wireless technology were commercialized in the early 1980s.
The archive materials reveal that the U.S. government, particularly the military, knew for decades of the harm wireless technology can cause to human health.
During World War II, the U.S. military started to use radar, and the use of radio telecommunications systems was growing.
Soldiers working with these systems, which use radio and microwave frequencies — the same frequencies used for wireless devices such as cell phones and Wi-Fi — began to complain of adverse health effects from exposure to the radiation emitted by these systems.
At the time, the illness experienced by these soldiers was referred to as “Radiation Sickness /Microwave Sickness.”
Glaser was assigned by the U.S. Navy’s Naval Medical Research Center to investigate.
He spent about a decade collecting every study conducted within and outside the U.S. showing that the radiation emitted from radio frequencies (RFs) and microwave frequencies may cause adverse health effects.
Dr. Glaser’s report, “Bibliography of Reported Biological Phenomena (“Effects”) and Clinical Manifestations Attributed to Microwave and Radio-Frequency Radiation,” was published in 1971.
The report references more than 2,300 studies showing multiple adverse biological responses to radio- and microwave-frequency radiation.
Pages 5-12 of the report’s bibliography list these adverse effects, including damage to vital organs and other tissues and the central nervous system, physiological and psychological effects, blood and vascular disorders, metabolic and gastrointestinal disorders, and endocrine and histological changes.
At that time, it was mostly only military personnel who were exposed to high levels of microwaves and RF radiation and who developed Microwave/ Radiation Sickness.
But today, the whole population is exposed to levels of radiation which are millions and sometimes billions of times higher than they were when Glaser started his work a few decades ago.
The “Microwave Sickness” symptoms suffered then by the military personnel are now widely seen among growing numbers of people in the general population who are exposed to this electro-smog pollution from wireless devices. The sickness, also referred to as electro-sensitivity, is estimated to affect 10% of the general population.
Glasers’ studies and reports are of the utmost importance and relevance to existing harms from current wireless technology, including 5G, cell towers, Wi-Fi and cell phones which use the same type of frequencies and intensities as those studied by Glaser.
For this reason Glaser’s reports have been crucial in supporting advocacy efforts and letting the public know that despite what the government and telecom say, there is more than ample evidence of harm from these exposures.
A few years ago, when Glaser realized the importance of his archives, he donated them to Dr. Magda Havas, Ph.D. of Trent University in Canada.
Havas, an associate professor of environmental and resource studies, has worked for more than a decade to expose the harms of wireless technology.
According to Havas, Glaser’s archive contains quite a few “gems.” “Zory was a packrat (his words) and he kept everything, Havas said.
“I found one paper that was circulated to only nine people with health recommendations that were ignored.”
To make these important documents available to the public, Havas and her team have worked for years to scan all the documents and make them searchable.
So far Havas’ team has scanned 20 out of the 25 boxes of Glaser’s archives.
In fact, if one was to write a film script about the worst of all outcomes for the human race and planet, Schwab’s ‘Great Reset’ dream would perfectly fill the bill.
Everything that moves and breathes is to be sanitised, anaesthetized and digitalised proclaims the WEF White Paper of October 2020. This is the way to turn the world ‘Green’ according to Schwab and his team of technocratic trolls.
Well, most of us will turn green just by reading this WEF master-plan for humanity “Resetting the Future of Work Agenda in a post Covid World” so there’s really no need to bother with its implementation, is there?
The inventory of fake green hooey to be found within the pages of this paper goes back to the Club of Rome (founded 1968) coming up with the idea that for the elite to maintain their grip on world affairs, some scary story threatening the end of life on Earth was needed.
So the idea of Global Warming was hatched to fit this need.
It also had the advantage of being a money spinner via the invention of ‘carbon taxes’ and deployment of a whole new fake green infrastructure under the title ‘The Fourth Industrial Revolution’.
Yes, a truly inspiring control package was put together – just waiting for a suitable moment to be rolled-out across the world.
Well, it just happened that something called Covid came along (sheer coincidence) to kick the whole show off at the beginning of 2020.
Aside from Global Warming, launched some twenty years earlier, the new show is proving to be quite a spectacle! There’s something for everybody in the tragi-comedy drama called ‘Covid-19’.
Fake news, fake views and fake truths – all conjoining to make a quite breathtaking virtual reality saga starring some previously little-known bit part actors, who leapt at the chance to take leading roles in bringing to life the technocratic Great Reset dynasty promised by the World Economic Forum.
A dynasty requiring the implementation of highly tuned Al-Gore-rhythms so as to edit out the communications of all who don’t do Al’s Global Warming thing.
Not just that, but EMF’ing all and sundry as a covert way of vastly reducing the global population, is also a vital part of the mix.
The only thing is, those doctors, scientists and engineers still able to think, saw immediately that they were being asked to believe that the world had gone flat again – like it was pre Copernicus and Galileo. And that 2+1=4. And that cell phone microwave radiation, now running at tens of thousands of times that of natural background radiation – doesn’t change anything and won’t do anyone any harm.
No, of course not, why should it – we must have had a delusional moment ever entertaining such an idea.
As we peer at the newspaper headlines each morning, we become aware of a very well-coordinated story line being monotonously repeated day after day, with almost no variation wherever you happen to be in the world – but especially so in Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand.
These headlines are continuously telling us to to believe in a surreal agenda that – of course – stars ‘Covid’ and comprises a whole series of absolute contradictions, invented, no doubt, for the purpose of causing mass distraction and confusion of the readership – while relentlessly pressing the fear button to ensure obeisance from a semi-paralysed public.
But what is this we see emerging out of the gloom at this eleventh hour? Could it be a new hero is rising up out of the chaos to put our minds at rest? Could it possibly be one Klaus Schwab – ‘visionary extraordinaire’ and inspired saviour of humanity?
Apparently The Green New Deal sees 5G as the solution to getting a global centralised ‘smart grid’ up and running so as to enable us to be ‘watched’ 24/7. This, one assumes, is to help us get that warm feeling of “you are never alone.”
That warm feeling will be accentuated by the fact that 5G, like its 3/4G predecessors, is a microwave weapon that cooks us from the inside out and serves us up rare, medium or well done, according to its output.
“Well done!” is the response that Schwab and his royal team are no doubt expecting us to proclaim while loudly applauding the roll-out of the Agenda 2030 – Zero Carbon – Smart City – Fourth Industrial Revolution – Transhumanist Singularity – Green New Deal – New World Order – ‘Great Reset’ blueprint for a full-on fascist future.
Well sorry, Mein Herr, but I’ve got a strange feeling that you might have got this all a bit wrong. Your megalomania has been recognised for what it is. Most of us have accordingly decided to show you two fingers and the way to the door.
Your departure should not be delayed a day longer than necessary. Don’t worry, we have made it easier for you to take your leave by ensuring the exit door has these words writ large upon it: ‘THE GREAT REJECT’.
More than 70 mayors and elected officials from France this week called for a moratorium on 5G technology, as resistance to 5G in France grows. The mayors’ main concern, they said, is that “the health risks for living organisms have not been evaluated.”
Michèle Rivasi, a member of the European Parliament (MEP) who is leading the efforts, said she is ready to go to the European Court of Justice on this issue, according to a report in the French media.
In addition to health concerns, according to an article published in French, the mayors and elected officials raised other issues, including:
the increase in electromagnetic pollution
the environmental impact of the multiplication of digital flows and additional energy requirements in a period when there is an incentive to save energy
the significant increase in the need for rare raw materials for the manufacture of new antennas and new communicating objects
the reinforcement of desocialization linked to mobile screens and the risk of dehumanization of society
Rivasi is a strong opponent of 5G. In June 2020, she published a report, “ICNIRP: Conflicts of Interest, Corporate Capture and the Push for 5G.”
The International Commission for the Protection Against Non-Ionizing Radiation (ICNIRP) is a private organization whose recommendations for radio frequency guidelines — which deny any harms of wireless technology — have been followed by the World Health Organization and several countries despite the organization’s clear conflicts of interests and ties to the telecom industry.
Concerns about ICNIRP’s conflicts of interest were confirmed in a 2012 decision by the Italian Supreme Court. The court, which ruled that the plaintiff’s brain tumor was caused by a cell phone, also concluded that experts with ICNIRP affiliations “lacked credibility and authority, and as such, were essentially outside the scientific community.”
In 2020, an Italian Court of Appeals decision made even stronger findings regarding ICNIRP and its members.
Rivasi’s report on ICNIRP was written and published with Dr. Kalus Buchner, an MEP from Germany. Buchner is a scientist who also conducted studies on how radio frequency affects health. His study on the health effects of cell towers showed adverse effects on stress hormones, including on adrenaline and dopamine. Buchner’s study also observed dose response.
This latest action by the mayors is not surprising. The resistance to 5G in France has become a top agenda item for the French Green Party, Europe Écologie Les Verts. During the local June elections, the party gained more power, and its candidates won in major cities, including Paris, Lyon, Marseille, Montpellier, Bordeaux and Strasbourg.
The party resistance to 5G was based mainly on environmental considerations, as it is estimated that 5G would exponentially increase energy consumption.
The call for a moratorium on 5G, led by Rivasi, is focused on health concerns, though it also references the environmental impacts. The resistance to 5G in France also garnered headlines in September, after employees of Orange, one of the biggest cell phone providers in Europe, wrote a letter calling on the company to not deploy 5G.
For many years experts have issued serious warnings about privacy AND cybersecurity risks associated with Internet of Things (IoT) technology (see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5). Nevertheless, the U.S. Air Force plans to start using it to monitor hundreds of millions of devices.
Next Step in Government Data Tracking Is the Internet of Things
U.S. Air Force experiments with monitoring peripherals — from autos to fitness trackers.
WASHINGTON — U. S. government agencies from the military to law enforcement have been buying up mobile-phone data from the private sector to use in gathering intelligence, monitoring adversaries and apprehending criminals.
Now, the U.S. Air Force is experimenting with the next step.
The Air Force Research Laboratory is testing a commercial software platform that taps mobile phones as a window onto usage of hundreds of millions of computers, routers, fitness trackers, modern automobiles and other networked devices, known collectively as the “Internet of Things.” — Read full article
Bermuda has halted 5G and launched a consultation in the safety of Federal Communications Commission human exposure limits, millimetre waves and 5G technology.
The consultation document of the Regulatory Authority of Bermuda regards the general concerns about alleged health impacts from the use of radiofrequency radiation, the adequacy of Federal Communications limits to protect, the use of millimeter wave spectrum and whether there should be a restriction on the number of networks that may be deployed.
The Consultation Requests answers to these 5 questions:
1. Do you agree that the Federal Communications Commission, which regulates interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable within the United States, RF Exposure standards1 are appropriate for Bermuda?
If not, what is a suitable alternative and why?
2. Do you agree that all antennae used by licensed sectoral providers should be registered with the RA? If not, what if anything should be registered with the RA e.g. location, direction (if applicable) and power level?
3. Do you agree that the Moratorium established by the EGD should be removed? If not, should it be modified and how should it be modified and why?
4. Do you agree that a real-time, publicly accessible Radiofrequency field intensity monitoring network should be deployed and a dedicated fee be levied on relevant sectoral providers and end-users that use Radiofrequency spectrum to cover the cost of the deployment and ongoing maintenance?
5. Should mmWave networks and small-cell technologies be restricted or prohibited in Bermuda? If so, why and what alternatives should be used?
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 has been sent to the New Hampshire Governor, House Speaker and Senate President.
Switzerland’s report on 5G health effects resulted in the Parliament’s refusal to loosen their radiation limits despite heavy industry lobbying efforts. The Netherlands issued a 5G report that recommended measuring radiation levels and also recommended against using the 26 GHz frequency band for 5G “for as long as the potential health risks have not been investigated.”
Last year Activist Post reported extensively about Sacramento children who became sick after Verizon installed a 5G tower next to their family’s home. Their uncle, Noah Davidson, has been fighting tirelessly ever since so others don’t suffer the same fate.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — As the march to install superfast 5G wireless service continues across the country, advocates for patients with electro-sensitivity are questioning the technology’s safety.
Noah Davidson of Sacramento began lobbying to have 5G antennas moved away from people’s homes and offices because his five- and seven-year-old nieces got sick for two months straight, right after Verizon installed a 5G box on a light pole next to their home.
The family hired an expert to measure the radio-frequency levels.
“He conducted some measurements and told us it was the highest indoor measurements that he’d ever recorded,” Davidson claimed. “So, we ended up installing some shielding in the home, moving the kids into a back room. And within a few days, their symptoms went away.”
Verizon’s website quotes the Federal Communications Commission’s guidance that there’s no scientific evidence linking radiation from cell phones to health problems in humans. And 5G boxes do meet all legal standards.
Davidson wants the decades-old standards updated, saying the technology hasn’t been proven safe.
Cell antennas for 3G and 4G signals are typically mounted on towers 50 to 200 feet above ground. But the 5G small cell boxes are more localized, generally placed every seven or eight houses, about 30 feet off the ground.
Dr. David Carpenter, director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at the University of Albany and an expert on RF radiation, said some people do fall ill when exposed to non-ionizing radiation from cell phones, smart meters, and components of the 5G cell sites, boxes that are now being installed across the nation.
“There are a lot of people that get ringing in their ears or get headaches, and feel fatigued and their brain isn’t working quite right, that never think about the fact that it may be coming from the Wi-Fi in their house, or the smart meter on the outside door,” Carpenter explained.
A recent study from UC Irvine in the medical journal Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders finds extreme RF exposure can produce severe illness that mimics MS.
It looked at the case of 47-year-old Rick Garwood, a former cell phone tower technician from Southern California. He was exposed to massive radiation amounts in 2011, when a Verizon worker switched the towers back on after they’d been shut down for maintenance.
Declare Your Independence!
Profit outside the rigged system! Protect yourself from tyranny and economic collapse. Learn to live free and spread peace!
Counter Markets Newsletter – Trends & Strategies for Maximum Freedom
Garwood said he’s now on permanent disability, suffering with nodules on his lungs and painful lesions on his brain, kidney and spinal cord.
“The person I was, is gone,” Garwood said. “I mean, I’ve lost everything in life. I had to move back to my parent’s home. I’m on permanent disability; I went from an $80,000-a-year career to all of a sudden, I was on worker’s comp for four-and-a-half years. And then they finally said, ‘You’re not going to get any better.’”
Garwood sued, went to mediation, and received about a year’s pay.
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is not a health or environmental agency. They replaced the EPA as the regulatory body assigned to protect Americans from the telecom industry. Unfortunately, they have catered to the telecom industry for decades and have become more dangerous since Trump was elected.
The push for 5G forges on regardless of any safety testing. The mainstream continues to tout the idea that no science shows dangers associated with 5G radiation, but there are also no studies to show that it is safe.
The truth is, there are medical and health experts who have been raising their concerns with regards to 5G technology, and human exposure to electromagnetic frequencies for quite some time. I’ve published multiple articles expressing these concerns.
For example, Dr. Sharon Goldberg, an internal medicine physician, a former medical school assistant professor, and academic with more than two decades in the field gave her testimony regarding electromagnetic radiation and 5G in Michigan, after an industry sponsored 5G wireless infrastructure legislation recently passed through the Michigan House Energy Policy Committee with a vote of 15 to 4. You can watch that and read more about that here.
So, it’s not like awareness is not getting out there, a few months ago, a number of doctors, scientists and activists sent a National 5G Resolution letter to President Trump, requesting a moratorium on 5G technology until the potential hazards for human health have been appropriately investigated.
The Environmental Health Trust is actually a great place to access more of the science on this topic if you’re interested in learning more.
Unfortunately, President Donald Trump recently signed into law a pair of bills designed to boost wireless and broadband networks: the Secure 5G and Beyond Act and the Broadband Deployment Accuracy and Technological Availability Act. You can read more about that here.
Despite all of the concerns being raised, the international body in charge of setting limits on exposure to radiation, The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), A Germany-based scientific body that assesses the health risks of this kind of thing, is claiming that 5G radiation is completely safe.
Dr. Eric van Rongen, the ICNIRP chair, said:
“We know parts of the community are concerned about the safety of 5G and we hope the updated guidelines will help put people at ease. The guidelines have been developed after a thorough review of all relevant scientific literature, scientific workshops and an extensive public consultation process.
“They provide protection against all scientifically substantiated adverse health effects due to [electromagnetic field] exposure in the 100 kHz to 300 GHz range.” (source)
The question is, why is there so much conflicting information, with some scientific bodies claiming that it’s safe, and others claiming that it’s not? Clearly, there are some issues here.
Why would they refer to such concerns being published by doctors and scientists in peer-reviewed literature as “conspiracy theories?” Why do they constantly use the ridicule factor instead of simply sharing both sides from a place of neutrality?
Why is this “conspiracy theory” narrative constantly used within the mainstream instead of actually addressing the concerns that many scientists and health experts are having?
Perhaps this conflict comes as a result of corporate influence? Paul Bischoff, a tech journalist and privacy advocate, recently compiled data regarding telecom’s political contributions to influence policies that benefit their industry, it’s quite revealing.
A study published in 2019 is one of many that raises concerns. It’s titled “Risks to Health and Well-Being From Radio-Frequency Radiation Emitted by Cell Phones and Other Wireless Devices.”
It outlines how, “In some countries, notably the US, scientific evidence of the potential hazards of RFR has been largely dismissed (. Findings of carcinogenicity, infertility and cell damage occurring at daily exposure levels—within current limits—indicate that existing exposure standards are not sufficiently protective of public health.
“Evidence of carcinogenicity alone, such as that from the NTP study, should be sufficient to recognize that current exposure limits are inadequate.”
It goes on to state that “Public health authorities in many jurisdictions have not yet incorporated the latest science from the U.S. NTP or other groups. Many cite 28-year old guidelines by the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers which claimed that “Research on the effects of chronic exposure and speculations on the biological significance of non-thermal interactions have not yet resulted in any meaningful basis for alteration of the standard”
It’s one of many that call for safety testing before the rollout of 5G testing, because all we have right now from those who claim that it’s safe are ‘reviews of literature’ that are determining it’s safe.
This particular study emphasizes:
The Telecom industry’s fifth generation (5G) wireless service will require the placement of many times more small antennae/cell towers close to all recipients of the service, because solid structures, rain and foliage block the associated millimeter wave RFR (72).
Frequency bands for 5G are separated into two different frequency ranges. Frequency Range 1 (FR1) includes sub-6 GHz frequency bands, some of which are bands traditionally used by previous standards, but has been extended to cover potential new spectrum offerings from 410 to 7,125 MHz. Frequency Range 2 (FR2) includes higher frequency bands from 24.25 to 52.6 GHz.
Bands in FR2 are largely of millimeter wave length, these have a shorter range but a higher available bandwidth than bands in the FR1. 5G technology is being developed as it is also being deployed, with large arrays of directional, steerable, beam-forming antennae, operating at higher power than previous technologies.
5G is not stand-alone—it will operate and interface with other (including 3G and 4G) frequencies and modulations to enable diverse devices under continual development for the “internet of things,” driverless vehicles and more (72).
Novel 5G technology is being rolled out in several densely populated cities, although potential chronic health or environmental impacts have not been evaluated and are not being followed.
Higher frequency (shorter wavelength) radiation associated with 5G does not penetrate the body as deeply as frequencies from older technologies although its effects may be systemic (73, 74).
The range and magnitude of potential impacts of 5G technologies are under-researched, although important biological outcomes have been reported with millimeter wavelength exposure. These include oxidative stress and altered gene expression, effects on skin and systemic effects such as on immune function (74).
In vivo studies reporting resonance with human sweat ducts (73), acceleration of bacterial and viral replication, and other endpoints indicate the potential for novel as well as more commonly recognized biological impacts from this range of frequencies, and highlight the need for research before population-wide continuous exposures.
One major theme of the study is the absence of science proving that this technology is safe.
With this absence of human evidence, governments must require large-scale animal studies (or other appropriate studies of indicators of carcinogenicity and other adverse health effects) to determine whether the newest modulation technologies incur risks, prior to release into the marketplace.
Governments should also investigate short-term impacts such as insomnia, memory, reaction time, hearing and vision, especially those that can occur in children and adolescents, whose use of wireless devices has grown exponentially within the past few years.
How can science like this be deemed a conspiracy theory? If it is, why are scientists allowed to publish it after going through a rigorous peer-reviewed process in an esteemed scientific journal?
At the end of the day, many doctors and scientists are concerned about the rollout of 5G technology, and the already existing levels of unnatural radiation that humanity is exposed to.
Clearly, there are biological effects, but some studies point out that conclusions can’t be made.
For example, a study published in The International Journal of Environmental Health titled “5G Wireless Communication and Health Effects—A Pragmatic Review Based on Available Studies Regarding 6 to 100 GHz” pointed out that,
The majority of studies with MMW exposures show biological responses. From this observation, however, no in-depth conclusions can be drawn regarding the biological and health effects of MMW exposures in the 6–100 GHz frequency range.
The studies are very different and the total number of studies is surprisingly low. The reactions occur both in vivo and in vitro and affect all biological endpoints studied.
This particular study was even funded by Deutsche Telekom Technik GmbH, and again, it emphasizes that “no -in-depth” conclusions can be drawn.
If this is true, as some studies argue it’s not and certain conclusions can be drawn, then shouldn’t we wait until “in-depth” conclusions can be drawn that guarantee our safety? Something to think about.
A list of Annual Reports by telecommunication companies clearly shows how companies warn their shareholders but not residents living near cell antennas. Read more here. They are already facing numerous lawsuits.
At the end of the day, this begs the question, do we really live in a democracy? If 5G came down to a vote from the people within that country, it’s hard to believe the vote would pass.
Today, we seem to be living in a time where governments and big corporations can enforce measures upon us that we do not desire, or in this case, impose measures upon us that have not yet been proved to be safe.
This is one of many examples of why people continue to lose trust in governments as well as federal health regulatory agencies. Furthermore, there seems to be a large bias within the mainstream media, almost ridiculing the idea.