To the UN, WHO, EU, Council of Europe and governments of all nations
We the undersigned scientists, doctors, environmental organizations and citizens from (__) countries, urgently call for a halt to the deployment of the 5G (fifth generation) wireless network, including 5G from space satellites. 5G will massively increase exposure to radio frequency (RF) radiation on top of the 2G, 3G and 4G networks for telecommunications already in place. RF radiation has been proven harmful for humans and the environment. The deployment of 5G constitutes an experiment on humanity and the environment that is defined as a crime under international law.
Read More about the documented effects of 5G, the effects on animals, insects and plants and additional details at https://www.5gspaceappeal.org/the-appeal
The WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) concluded in 2011 that RF radiation of frequencies 30 kHz – 300 GHz are possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B).
Recent evidence, including the latest studies on cell phone use and brain cancer risks, indicate that RF radiation is proven carcinogenic to humans and should now be classified as a “Group 1 carcinogen” along with tobacco smoke and asbestos.
5G will result in a massive increase in inescapable, involuntary exposure to wireless radiation. We can stop it.
Sign the appeal here:
Articles & More Information
What to do?
Repeal Section 704 of the Telecommunication Act of 1996
Link to full document: https://transition.fcc.gov/Reports/tcom1996.pdf
SEC. 704. FACILITIES SITING; RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSION STANDARDS.
(a) NATIONAL WIRELESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS SITING POLICY- Section
332(c) (47 U.S.C. 332(c)) is amended by adding at the end the
following new paragraph:
`(7) PRESERVATION OF LOCAL ZONING AUTHORITY-
`(A) GENERAL AUTHORITY- Except as provided in this paragraph, nothing in this Act shall limit or affect the authority of a State or local government or instrumentality thereof over decisions regarding the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities.
`(i) The regulation of the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service
facilities by any State or local government or instrumentality thereof–
`(I) shall not unreasonably discriminate among providers of functionally equivalent services; and
`(II) shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services.
`(ii) A State or local government or instrumentality thereof shall act on any request for authorization to
place, construct, or modify personal wireless service facilities within a reasonable period of time after the request is duly filed with such government or instrumentality, taking into account the nature and
scope of such request.
`(iii) Any decision by a State or local government or instrumentality thereof to deny a request to place,
construct, or modify personal wireless service facilities shall be in writing and supported by
substantial evidence contained in a written record.
`(iv) No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio
frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission’s regulations concerning such emissions.
`(v) Any person adversely affected by any final action or failure to act by a State or local government
or any instrumentality thereof that is inconsistent with this subparagraph may, within 30 days after such action or failure to act, commence an action in any court of competent jurisdiction. The court shall hear and decide such action on an expedited basis. Any person adversely affected by an act or failure to act by a State or local government or any instrumentality thereof that is inconsistent with clause (iv) may petition the Commission for relief.
`(C) DEFINITIONS- For purposes of this paragraph–
`(i) the term `personal wireless services’ means commercial mobile services, unlicensed wireless
services, and common carrier wireless exchange access services;
`(ii) the term `personal wireless service facilities’ means facilities for the provision of personal wireless
`(iii) the term `unlicensed wireless service’ means the offering of telecommunications services using duly authorized devices which do not require individual licenses, but does not mean the provision of
direct-to-home satellite services (as defined in section 303(v)).’.
(b) RADIO FREQUENCY EMISSIONS- Within 180 days after the enactment of this Act, the Commission shall complete action in ET Docket 93-62 to prescribe and make effective rules regarding the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions.
(c) AVAILABILITY OF PROPERTY- Within 180 days of the enactment of this Act, the President or his designee shall prescribe procedures by which Federal departments and agencies may make available on a fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory basis, property, rights-of-way, and easements under their control for the placement of new telecommunications services that are dependent, in whole or
in part, upon the utilization of Federal spectrum rights for the transmission or reception of such services. These procedures may establish a presumption that requests for the use of property,
rights-of-way, and easements by duly authorized providers should be granted absent unavoidable direct conflict with the department or agency’s mission, or the current or planned use of the property,
rights-of-way, and easements in question. Reasonable fees may be charged to providers of such telecommunications services for use of property, rights-of-way, and easements. The Commission shall
provide technical support to States to encourage them to make property, rights-of-way, and easements under their jurisdiction available for such purposes.
5G: Leading Senators Feinstein, Schumer, Harris & Blumenthal Submitted Bill Restoring Local Control, Abolishing FCC Regulations
On June 27, 2019, some of the leading Senators in Congress submitted a Bill – S. 2012 to restore local control over the deployment of 5G and abolish FCC regulations.
While these bills are very much welcomed they still do not address the most important issue – the health effects of this technology. When will a Congressman will introduce a bill to overturn Section 704 of the Telecommunication Act of 1996 and or to amend it to clarify that ‘Environmental Considerations’ do not include ‘Health’ considerations.
The Bill S. 2012 – Restoring Local Control Over Public Infrastructure Act of 2019 was submitted by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and is cosponsored by some of the leading Democrat Senators in Congress: Senator Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Kamala D. Harris (D-Calif.), Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Ben Cardin (D-Md.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.).
The Bill aims to abolish 3 the following regulatory actions adopted by the Federal Communication Commission and declares then as having “no force or effect”. Following a
1. The – “Accelerating Wireline Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment and Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment’’ adopted by the Commission on August 2, 2018 (FCC 18–111).
2. The ‘‘Declaratory Ruling and Third Report and Order in the matter of Accelerating Wireless Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment and Accelerating Wireline Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment’’ adopted by the Commission on September 26, 2018 (FCC 18–133).
3. The rule adopted by the Commission titled ‘‘Accelerating Wireless and Wireline Broadband Deployment by Removing Barriers to Infrastructure Investment’’ (83 Fed. Reg. 51867 (October 15, 2018)).
The Bill is The bill is supported by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, National Association of Telecommunications Officers and Advisors, American Public Power Association, Communications Workers of America, National Association of Counties, League of California Cities and American Public Works Association.
Rep. Eshoo (D-CA) submitted on January 14, 2019 a House Bill – H.R. 530 Accelerating Broadband Development by Empowering Local Communities Act of 2019 which overturns the FCC’s ruling FCC 18–111 & 83 Fed. Reg. 51867 . Hence, the Senate Bill is wider and overturns also the Sept. 26 ruling FCC 18–133
State of the Science on EMF Impacts and Steps for Policy Change
Cell Phone Radiation Leads to Cancer, Says U.S. NTP in Final Report
Rats Developed Rare Heart Tumor
Cancer Link Was Once Thought Impossible
WHOSE SAID NO TO 5G?
Where You Live: The Pushback Against 5G is Going Viral
While Brussels becomes the first major international city to block 5G, dozens of local governments have passed legislation to prevent or restrict 5G rollouts due to health effects. Environmental Health Trust lists legislation from 21 local governments in the USA.
And on March 13, the Portland (OR) city council demanded that the FCC update its research on the health and environmental impacts of 5G.
Websites such as EMF Safety Network, WhatIs5G.info and My Street, My Choice provides guidelines for how to put the brakes on 5G where you live.
This industry-promoted summary of state-by-state 5G legislative actions is also useful, and gives an insight into their modus operandi.
Below is a partial list of resources where you can learn more and get involved. We applaud everyone out there who is taking the reins and leading from their heart.
Scientific Evidence on 5G Harm
• EHTrust: Scientific Research on 5G, Small Cells and Health
• Dr. Martin Pall’s free e-book: “5G: Compelling Evidence for Eight Distinct Types of Great Harm Caused by Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Exposures and the Mechanism that Causes Them” (PDF, 90 pages)
• Dr. Joel Moskowitz: “5G Wireless Technology: Cutting Through the Hype“
• Electric Sense: “5G Radiation Dangers – 11 Reasons To Be Concerned“
• Health resources summary from WhatIs5G.info
• Health resources summary from TelecomPowerGrab.com
• EMF interview by Luke Storey: Dr. Jack Kruse
• SaferEMR: Summary 400 new EMF scientific studies, Aug 2016 to present (EMF in general)
• Research from Magda Havas
• News from Clear Light Ventures
• Articles from BN Frank at ActivistPost
Grassroots Communities & Organizations
Note: Several of the organizations listed below are still promoting actions limited to contacting your elected representatives and pleading for help. With that being said, there is a resounding increase in awareness that a firmer response is now required.
• 5G Space Appeal: An International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and In Space (sign it)
• Environmental Health Trust
• Parents For Safe Technology
• Physicians For Safe Technology
• EMF Safety Network (California)
• Our Town, Our Choice
• Americans For Responsible Technology
• InPower Movement Episode 1: A Mass Action of Liability
• Scientists For Wired Technology
• Dr Jack Kruse (website & community)
BRUSSELS, Belgium SAYS NO TO 5G
“I cannot welcome such technology if the radiation standards, which must protect the citizen, are not respected, 5G or not. The people of Brussels are not guinea pigs whose health I can sell at a profit. We cannot leave anything to doubt.”
Ms. Fremault accurately identified that a 5G pilot project is not compatible with Belgian radiation safety standards (9 V/m, or 95 mW/m2 according to this online converter), and stated that she does not intend to make an exception. (In the Building Biology guidelines, the threshold for extreme concern is 1 mW/m2. However, many government agencies still only consider thermal effects, instead of the cumulative body of thousands of peer-reviewed scientific studies.) READ FULL ARTICLE http://themillenniumreport.com/2019/04/why-is-brussels-terminating-the-5g-roll-out/
– Céline Fremault, Minister of the Government (Brussels-Captial Region), responsible for Housing, Quality of Life, Environment and Energy