Citizens Concerned About 5G Dangers

Medical care & lifestyle choices align with natural processes, including birth and death.

Integration Principle: Joining Eastern, Western and other philosophies of medicine.
Post Reply
golly
Site Admin
Posts: 303
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2018 11:14 am
Location: Hohokam / Piipaash / Apache / O'odham / Pueblo / Mexico / Arizona

Gender

Skin

Sexuality

Belief

Political

Citizens Concerned About 5G Dangers

Post by golly »

In a letter addressed to:
"Chairman Ajit Pai" <Ajit.Pai@fcc.gov>,
"Michael O'Rielly, Commissioner" <Mike.O'Rielly@fcc.gov>,
"Geoffrey Starks, Commissioner" <Geoffrey.Starks@fcc.gov>,
"Jessica Rosenworcel, Commissioner" <Jessica.Rosenworcel@fcc.gov>
and
Neil.Grace@fcc.gov [auto-reply from this FCC PR personnel has shown that he is no longer with the FCC as of this year]

I wrote about the perceived dangers of 5G from a medical point of view, and I asked for a response.
I am writing you on behalf of Citizens Concerned About 5G Dangers on the subject of higher frequency 5G such as 60 Ghz and higher, in reference to the March 15, 2019 press release "FCC Opens Spectrum Horizons for New Services & Technologies" (https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-opens-spectrum-horizons-new-services-technologies)

I have seen at FCC.gov that these spectrum(s) are being made available:

High-band: The FCC has made auctioning high-band spectrum a priority. The FCC concluded its first 5G spectrum auction this year in the 28 GHz band, and its auction of 24 GHz spectrum is taking place right now. Later this year, the FCC will auction the upper 37 GHz, 39 GHz, and 47 GHz bands. With these auctions, the FCC will release almost 5 gigahertz of 5G spectrum into the market—more than all other flexible use bands combined.
Mid-band: Mid-band spectrum has become a target for 5G buildout given its balanced coverage and capacity characteristics. With our work on the 2.5 GHz, 3.5 GHz, and 3.7-4.2 GHz bands, we could make more than 600 megahertz available for 5G deployments.
Low-band: The FCC is acting to improve use of low-band spectrum (useful for wider coverage) for 5G services, with targeted changes to the 600 MHz, 800 MHz, and 900 MHz bands.

These might seem (particularly the Mid- and Low- band frequencies) relatively innocuous, but once you increase those frequencies around the country with thousands of new towers and then add more frequencies by the ten and hundred folds, you expose people, birds, trees, insects and all area life around the towers to unprecedented levels of harmful radiation that compounds many existing health issues (as you are certainly aware, Americans are already not the healthiest people in the world) and harms the delicate balance of the biosphere.

In the wake of COVID-19 and the recent ongoing threat of pandemics to public health, it is irresponsible to increase EMF smog. It is known that high levels of EMF (particularly in the 100s of Ghz range) hurts human bodies and other life. It's not merely 'harmless thermal effects' or 'corona virus causing' as various media have tried to erroneously establish.

The true concern is that basic functioning of cell biology such as calcium voltage regulation, oxygen uptake, mental health and other issues are very negatively impacted by increased exposure to millimeter wave/microwave bandwidths. This is why our military organizations have been testing high bandwidths as weapons.

It states in the release, "The First Report and Order provides unprecedented opportunities for new experimental and unlicensed use in the frequencies above 95 GHz and will help ensure that the United States stays at the forefront of wireless innovation." but there is no documentation whatsoever provided to demonstrate the truth of the claim that new uses of 95 GHz will result in any important forefront of innovation.

Unless the innovation you are talking about is testing the effects of radiation smog on live, unwilling human subjects. Or perhaps the innovation is new levels of corporate greed-based control over public health.

Are these the innovations that the FCC feels are important?

It is clear that the communications companies do not promote the best medical information from epidemiologists, cardiologists, neurologists and other professional scientists & doctors on exactly how adequately tested and understood higher 5G bandwidths are. As one research article states as found on your own web site at https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/1210030663890/The%20human%20skin%20as%20a%20sub-THz%20receiver%20%E2%80%93%20Does%205G%20pose%20a%20danger%20to%20it%20or%20not%20(1).pdf
"The need for high data transmission rates, coupled with advances in semiconductor technology, is pushing the communications industry towards the sub-THz frequency spectrum. While the promises of a glorious future, resplendent with semi-infinite data streaming, may be attractive, there is a price to pay for such luxury [...] There is enough evidence to suggest that the combination of the helical sweat duct and wavelengths approaching the dimensions of skin layers could lead to non-thermal biological effects. Such fears should be investigated and these concerns should also effect the definition of standards for the application of 5G communications."

This dreadful fad is careless and reckless, and acting belligerently ignorant of long term consequences. I understand that the FCC wants to be innovative, but this level of communication tech should (and can) be redesigned to use non-harmful spectrums. And we (the general public) should not be treated as test subjects for new wavebands of commercial IT that harm us. That is, you do not have the right to harm the American public by giving dangerous spectrums to a commercial market that is ignorant of (or deliberately obfuscating) the dangers for private profit, at the expense of public health.

This communication and any related communication sent to me will become public due to the urgency of the matter and the importance of the FCC's position on it.

Please do not experiment on us at all, by selling off the high bandwidths to companies that lack oversight and regulation. And if you're going to do it anyway, despite public concern, don't hide the dangers. Cap it at your "Mid-band" model (or at worst your "High-band" model) and give time to observe and study the medical consequences of doing so, particularly before implementing any plan to open frequencies higher than that.

Please do NOT sanction 60 Ghz or higher for any party yet, which I believe could come to be viewed as the FCC sanctioning a military-level attack on the public (and for which the FCC would be held responsible). If you would like to be forwarded papers on studies throughout the past 50 years up until today connecting EMF to higher incidents of cancer, heart and brain malfunction, anxiety, depression, suicidal thoughts, breathing issues and other problems, please let me know.

The public deserves an official response from the FCC on its plan to test 5G in a controlled environment (without increasing public exposure to EMF) and its plan to widely announce and publish public documentation on the proven risks of the newest highest bandwidths of 5G, 6G and beyond. These should be sponsored by third party health experts and not private NGOs or corporations and especially not wireless transmission companies trying to push new products.

The reports should be timely and provided before any auctions of higher bandwidths, so that the public is given its fair chance to make decisions on the matter, since it directly effects their health.
Thank you!

Warm Regards,
[... Citizens Concerned About 5G Dangers ...]

Post Reply