Pause the Roll Out of 5G on the Isle of Wight

We urge the Isle of Wight Council to follow the sensible example set by many other UK local authorities, and invoke the Precautionary Principle (a core principle of EU environmental law) to issue a moratorium (authorised period of delay) on the roll out of 5G on the Isle of Wight, until or unless they can verify through independent reliable research, that 5G and the total radiation levels caused by RF-EMF (5G together with 2G, 3G, 4G, and WiFi) will not be unduly harmful to human life (especially infants, children and pregnant women) as well as insects, animals and the environment.

Reasons why we oppose the roll out of 5G on the Isle of Wight (further links to sources of evidence for all these points can be found in the petition document below):

1. The adverse health effects of Electromagnetic Field (EMF) exposures upon humans have now been well documented in a large database of scientific literature [1], [2], [3], [4]. Research shows that babies, children and pregnant women are far more susceptible to harm from exposure to EMFs [5]. 5G would bring with it a huge increase in widespread exposure to EMF radiation. [6]

2. The so called 'safety limits' recommended for 5G which the UK government relies upon (and which have given rise to much inaccurate media reporting about the alleged 'safety' of 5G) have been challenged by scientific groups for not being anywhere near stringent enough and completely out of date [7]. The body responsible for the current safety 'standards' regarding EMFs (ICNIRP) has been shown to have conflicts of interest due to links to multinational telecoms companies [8] and furthermore the ICNIRP has repeatedly ignored a growing body of scientific evidence which clearly shows evidence of adverse health effects of non-thermal RF radiation to humans and the environment. [9]

3. Scientific research strongly suggests a detrimental impact of drastically increased EMF exposures (which is what 5G would mean) on plant life and the environment [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]

4. Multiple appeals have now been signed by thousands of scientists, medical doctors and engineers, as well as hundreds of thousands of lay people, from countries around the world, urging the United Nations, W.H.O., UNEP and all UN member states to enact a halt to the roll out of 5G until reliable safety testing has been conducted/valid safety limits have been established, arguing that until these requests are met, allowing the roll out of 5G constitutes a breach of human rights [15], [16], [17], [18]

5. The refusal of insurance companies to cover harms caused by EMF and all wireless telecommunications technologies since as far back as 2010 [19]

6. The growing number of countries, regions and cities (including other UK county and city councils) around the world that have already enacted a blanket moratorium on the roll out of 5G due to the scientific evidence of links between EMF exposures and harm to biological organisms. [20]

7. Due to the weight of scientific evidence linking EMF exposures to adverse health effects, there is a strong argument that the Precautionary Principle (a core principle of EU environmental law) ought to be invoked, because 5G can be classified as a phenomenon, product or process which may have a dangerous effect, identified by a scientific and objective evaluation. [21]

8. There have been no public consultations to ensure Public Consent (see Article 7 of the United Nations’ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which includes a prohibition on medical and scientific experimentation without consent). [22]

9. The fact that 5G technology has never been reliably tested for health effects means the roll out breaches the Nuremberg Code 1947 [23]

10. The financial cost of rolling out 5G, which amounts to billions of pounds, at a time when the UK economy is already in dire straits [24]

Misleading Media Reporting and Conflicts of Interest within Regulatory Bodies
---------------
There has been, and continues to be a persistent trend of misleading, incomplete and misinformed reporting about 5G across numerous mainstream media outlets, which has led the vast majority of people who are not aware of the many hundreds of peer-reviewed scientific research papers (which cite proven links between Electromagnetic Field (EMF) exposure and adverse health effects in biological organisms – more links to which can be found here and here) to erroneously believe that 5G has been reliably proven to be within acceptable safety limits. This is simply not the case. 5G is so new that there has not yet been any opportunity to conduct reliable safety testing upon it. Furthermore, in terms of the potential harms from existing EMFs (i.e. 2G, 3G, 4G and WiFi), the vast majority of the scientific research so far conducted into EMFs demonstrates clear links between EMF exposures and a wide range of significant health issues in biological organisms. Much of this evidence has been ignored by the group whose guidelines inform the EMF protection policies of UK governments, which explains why the safety limits they have suggested have been so heavily criticised by scientific groups as being out of date and far too lenient (https://ehtrust.org/fcc-and-icnirp-limits-do-not-protect-people-of-the-environment-from-cell-phone-radiation-health-effects/).

Confusion about the risks of 5G has arisen in no small part because guidelines recommended by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP, the group referred to above) claim that the EMF exposure from 5G falls well within acceptable safety limits, despite the fact they have ignored so much scientific research, and have proven conflicts of interest. Public Health England relies upon the recommendations of the ICNIRP to form its EMF policy advice to the UK government.

The ICNIRP is an unelected group of 14 people, answerable to no overseeing body, and with proven ties to big telecoms companies, which it appears have influenced their proclamations about 5G. Governments and the mainstream media, relying on these ICNIRP guidelines, have seen fit to reassure the public that 5G is within reliable safety limits. Worryingly, the scientific research so far conducted demonstrates otherwise. The following is taken from a recent report, entitled Health risks from radiofrequency radiation, including 5G, should be assessed by experts with no conflicts of interest which states: “The evaluation of RF radiation health risks from 5G technology is ignored in a recent publication from The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection [ICNIRP]. Conflicts of interest and ties to the industry seem to have contributed to the biased reports. The lack of proper unbiased risk evaluation of the 5G technology places populations at risk. Furthermore, there seems to be a cartel of individuals monopolizing evaluation committees, thus reinforcing the no-risk paradigm. We believe that this activity should qualify as scientific misconduct.”

The information and sources contained within this petition comprehensively reveal this mainstream media narrative, as well as current UK government policy on 5G, as potentially dangerous, misleading, and a departure from the preponderance of scientific research into the health implications of EMFs.

Increasing Global Awareness of 5G Risks, International Actions of Governments to Halt 5G
---------------
Thankfully, global awareness of the truth about this issue is on the increase. Awareness about the proven lack of reliable safety testing, as well as the large body of peer reviewed research linking EMF exposure to adverse health effects continues to rise, and motions to immediately halt the roll out of this experimental and apparently dangerous new technology (5G) have already been passed by central governments in Belgium, Slovenia, Corsica, Nigeria, Switzerland and PaPau New Guinea, as well as French NGOs (and mayors of 60 French regions so far), hundreds of municipalities, 140 cities and two regions in Italy, the High Court of Bangladesh, as well as regional, city, and town councils in England, Ireland, Bulgaria, Cyprus, The Netherlands, Australia, and numerous states of the USA. https://ehtrust.org/international-actions-to-halt-and-delay-5g
However, as yet the Isle of Wight is not included in this list. 5G roll out is still permitted on the Isle of Wight, and deployment of 5G infrastructure on the island is progressing unhindered by any government or council intervention.

Further still, many other countries which have not yet enacted a blanket pause on 5G roll out have nevertheless already acknowledged the implications of the growing body of scientific evidence, by issuing guidelines or laws to limit the potential harms from exposure to EMFs (in many instances relating specifically to children and infants, who are according to research, up to ten times more susceptible to harm https://ehtrust.org/research-on-childrens-vulnerability-to-cell-phone-radio-frequency-radiation). These include Argentina, Chile, Canada, China, Croatia, Denmark, Finland, French Polynesia, Germany, Ghana, Israel, Korea, New Zealand, Romania, Russia, Singapore, Spain, Taiwan, Tunisia, Turkey and the United Kingdom (http://ehtrust.org/policy/international-policy-actions-on-wireless ).

This goes a long way to countering the erroneous argument often made by those in support of 5G, that concerns are undue, because no significant harms have so far been linked to existing telecommunications technologies (such as 2G, 3G, 4G and WiFi). Clearly there is acknowledgement from governments across the globe that there is already sufficient evidence that EMF exposures are a likely causative factor in adverse health effects, particularly in young people. As sources cited later in this document make clear, 5G represents a giant leap in terms of EMF exposure, compared to all previous generations combined (2G, 3G, 4G and Wifi). For example, 4G operates at up to 60GHz, whereas 5G can be as much as 300GHz. However, the strength of the Radiofrequency Radiation (RFR) is not the only vector by which harm has been shown to occur. The nature of the radiation is also relevant. Studies have found that the pulsed nature of EMFs which 5G uses to function, is a highly probable cause of health issues in biological organisms https://ehtrust.org/absorption-of-5g-radiation-in-brain-tissue-as-a-function-of-frequency-power-and-time/. 5G utilizes Millimetre Waves (MMW), unlike any of the previous telecommunications technologies. Scientific research has found MMW to be uniquely concerning in terms of its potential health implications. For example, in one study, MMWs were found to inhibit repair of damage to DNA https://ehtrust.org/5g-millimeter-wave-energy-may-penetrate-deeper-than-predicted/.

Given this impending exponential increase in terms of blanket EMF exposure (5G masts are planned to be installed every 300 feet in urban areashttps://mdsafetech.org/5g-telecommunications-science/, and the fact that governments in so many countries have already stepped in and passed laws/issued guidelines to protect their younger citizens from existing EMF exposures, don't children and infants (and indeed all residents of any age) on the Isle of Wight also deserve better protection from the massive increase in EMF radiation which 5G will bring with it too? Ought not the Isle of Wight Council to follow the sensible example set by other UK councils, as well as so many countries across the globe, and halt the roll out of this huge increase in exposure to EMFs until reliable safety testing has been carried out?

As mentioned above, the British government has published guidelines advising limits to the exposure of children and infants to EMFs, but yet they have not enacted a halt on the roll out of 5G, which will cause a huge increase in blanket EMF radiation, especially to those living in urban areas. Given that the British government has already acknowledged the risks from excessive EMF exposure in their guidelines for children, how then can they then still permit the widespread deployment of 5G – which will mean a huge increase in exposure of people of all ages to EMF radiation - until reliable safety testing has been conducted?! Refusing to wait for the government to rectify this extemely concerning policy contradiction, residents in cities and other counties in the UK have taken matters into their own hands, and have been successful in appealing to their local council representatives about this issue, which has in some cases already brought about a halt on the deployment of 5G and related infrastructure. This is what we are seeking to achieve here on the Isle of Wight by appealing to the Isle of Wight Council for a moratorium on the roll out of 5G and 5G infrastructure.

In the USA, the state of New Hampshire has a 5G Bill HB 522 that asks, “Why have 1,000s of peer-reviewed studies, including the recently published U.S. Toxicology Program 16-year $30 million study, that are showing a wide range of statistically significant DNA damage, brain and heart tumours, infertility, and so many other ailments, been ignored by the Federal Communication Commission (FCC)?” and, “Why have more than 220 [now over 400] of the world's leading scientists signed an appeal to the WHO and the United Nations to protect public health from wireless radiation and nothing has been done?” https://trackbill.com/bill/new-hampshire-house-bill-522-establishing-a-commission-to-study-the-environmental-and-health-effects-of-evolving-5g-technology/1630657/

Appeals to Governments and International Bodies from Coalitions of Experts
---------------
Several coalitions, including hundreds of scientists and thousands of physicians - a growing number of experts in the fields of biochemistry and radiation www.5gappeal.eu/signatories-to-scientists-5g-appeal/, www.5gspaceappeal.org/the-appeal, www.emfscientist.org, www.freiburger-appell-2012.info/en/home.php have warned that the vast majority of scientific studies conducted into EMFs so far suggests that 5G technology is very likely to be harmful to humans and a range of biological organisms in numerous ways (1.600+ pubmed papers which demonstrate a link between EMFs and various health effects can be found here: www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/studies.asp, another 4000+ studies can be downloaded from here: www.bioinitiative.org, and another 23,840 studies also linked here: www.EMF-portal.org

The 5G Appeal (http://www.5gappeal.eu/), which has been sent to the United Nations asking for a worldwide moratorium on the roll out of 5G, signed by over 400 scientists so far, states that “The current ICNIRP ”safety guidelines” are obsolete. All proofs of harm mentioned above arise although the radiation is below the ICNIRP “safety guidelines”. Therefore new safety standards are necessary. The reason for the misleading guidelines is that “conflict of interest of ICNIRP members due to their relationships with telecommunications or electric companies undermine the impartiality that should govern the regulation of Public Exposure Standards for non-ionizing radiation”.

They state 'The 5G Appeal was prepared in 2017 by scientists and doctors who are urgently calling for the EU to halt the roll out of 5G due to serious potential health effects from this new technology. 5G will substantially increase exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on top of the 2G, 3G, 4G, Wi-Fi, etc. for telecommunications already in place. RF-EMF has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment.”

Expert Opinions on Dangers of EMFs and 5G
---------------
Professor Emeritus Dr Joel Moskowitz, director of the Center for Family and Community Health in the University of California at Berkeley’s School of Public Health and creator of the www.saferemr.com website, says this regarding ICNIRP safety testing for 5G:

“The guidelines fail to protect us from non-thermal effects, especially from long-term exposure to wireless radiation because ICNIRP continues to dismiss the many hundreds of peer-reviewed studies that have found biologic and health effects from exposure to low-intensity, radio frequency radiation including many human as well as animal studies. The preponderance of the research has found evidence of increased cancer incidence, oxidative stress, DNA damage, and infertility from exposure to wireless radiation.” (Source: https://ehtrust.org/fcc-and-icnirp-limits-do-not-protect-people-of-the-environment-from-cell-phone-radiation-health-effects/ )

As stated above, 5G will be the first type of telecommunications technology to utilise Millimetre Waves (MMW). Professor Moskowitz states in relation to this: 'Millimetre Wave (MMW) effects as alterations of cell growth rate and UV light sensitivity, biochemical and antibiotic resistivity changes in pathogenic bacteria, as well as many others are of potential significance for safety standards, but even local and short-term exposures were reported to produce marked effects. It should also be realized that biological effects of a prolonged or chronic MMW exposure of the whole body or a large body area have never been investigated. Safety limits for these types of exposures are based solely on predictions of energy deposition and MMW heating, but in view of recent studies this approach is not necessarily adequate.” (Pakhomov et al., 1998)

Martin Pall, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry at Washington State University lists four main dangers of 5G to humans: 1) an extraordinary number of antennae are required, 2) high outputs are needed for penetration, 3) pulsation levels will be very high, and 4) 5G will have an impact on the human body’s cellular electrical field. He warns that pulsed radiation used by 5G satellites is biologically active and can produce radiation effects deep within human bodies. https://www.radiationresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/EU-EMF2018-6-11US3.pdf

Dr Devra Davis, author, president of the Electromagnetic Health Trust, and internationally recognized expert on the subject of RF EMFs, states that: “Relying on twentieth-century science to set standards for 21st-century technology makes no sense. The complexity of the technology [5G] makes it possible for this unelected group of 11 [now up to 14] persons [ICNIRP] that reports to no authority and has no oversight to wield unreasonable influence. This report relies on a highly selective literature review.” She goes on to say “They make no mention of the fact that infertility clinics around the world advise men having problems impregnating their partners to remove wireless devices from their bodies. They completely discount results from the U.S. flagship testing program, the National Toxicology Program, that produced what peer-reviewers concurred was clear evidence of cancer in animals and compelling evidence of DNA damage in both mice and rats exposed to the same amounts of cellphone radiation as humans can receive in their lifetimes. They do not even consider the work of Lennart Hardell, arguably one of the top experts in the field studying the human impacts of cell phones, and fail to mention the large French national study of brain cancer that confirmed increased risks in the heaviest cellphone users.” https://ehtrust.org/scientists-counter-icnirps-guidelines-on-5g-cell-phone-and-wireless-radiation-exposures/

Dr Davis is one of the key figures in the movement to raise awareness about the dangers of EMFs. Her most recent book, Disconnect:The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation, What the Industry Is Doing to Hide It, and How to Protect Your Family, was selected by TIME magazine as a top pick in 2010, received the Silver Medal from Nautilus Books for courageous investigation for the paperback edition in 2013, and was identified by Project Censored as “the news that didn’t make the news,” and is the subject of multi-media international policy-making attention–including special editions recently released in India and Australia. (Source: https://ehtrust.org/about/dr-devra-davis/ )

Excerpts and Links to a Selection of Scientific Research including Evidence of Adverse Health Effects in Biological Organisms
---------------
Taken from the abstract of the following research paper (just one of tens of thousands which cite, suggest or refer to links between EMF exposures and adverse health effects in biological organisms):

“Radiofrequency (RF) radiation in the frequency range of 30 kHz-300 GHz is classified as a ‘possible’ human carcinogen, Group 2B, by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) since 2011. The evidence has since then been strengthened by further research; thus, RF radiation may now be classified as a human carcinogen, Group 1. In spite of this, microwave radiations are expanding with increasing personal and ambient exposure. One contributing factor is that the majority of countries rely on guidelines formulated by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), a private German non-governmental organization. ICNIRP relies on the evaluation only of thermal (heating) effects from RF radiation, thereby excluding a large body of published science demonstrating the detrimental effects caused by non-thermal radiation. The fifth generation, 5G, for microwave radiation is about to be implemented worldwide in spite of no comprehensive investigations of the potential risks to human health and the environment. In an appeal sent to the EU in September, 2017 currently >260 scientists [now over 400 at the time of writing this petition] and medical doctors requested for a moratorium on the deployment of 5G until the health risks associated with this new technology have been fully investigated by industry-independent scientists. The appeal and four rebuttals to the EU over a period of >2 years, have not achieved any positive response from the EU to date. Unfortunately, decision makers seem to be uninformed or even misinformed about the risks.“

Source: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7016513/

*Worthy of note is the contradiction between the above research paper, which states that RF EMF radiation has now been classified as a Group 1 carcinogen (other examples of which include formaldehyde, tobacco smoke and diesel fumes), and on the other hand, the following article from the BBC published in June this year, which claims that 5G – by far the most powerful incarnation of EMF radiation telecommunications technology so far – is merely a 'possible carcinogen', in the same group as pickled vegetables and talcum powder. These kind of inconsistencies between mainstream media messaging and the scientific consensus are alarmingly widespread, and go a long way to explaining why so many people are so misinformed about this subject. (www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-51613580)

Exposure to electromagnetic frequencies (EMFs) have been shown to be linked to a range of adverse health effects including depression, infertility, cancer, damage to DNA/gene expression, oxidative stress, pregnancy complications, ADHD, obesity, asthma, melatonin production, neurological disorders, electro-hypersensitivity and more. Here follows a small, sample selection of sources specifically referring to EMF connections to the above named adverse health effects.
Depression: www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9420528/, www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3288221/
Infertility: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6469375/
Cancer: www.powerwatch.org.uk/health/leukaemia.asp, www.powerwatch.org.uk/health/braintumours.asp, www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12709519/, https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/25749340/
Gene expression, DNA and electro-hypersensitivity: www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30025338/
Oxidative stress: www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29402696/, www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26151230/
Pregnancy & Miscarriage: www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11805581/, www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11805582/
ADHD, Asthma, Miscarriage and Obesity: www.ehtrust.org/science/pregnancy-wireless-and-electromagnetic-fields/
Melatonin production: www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15352165/
Neurodegenerative diseases: www.pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12843765/
Links to these and tens of thousands of other scientific research papers concerning connections between various health effects and EMF exposures can be found here: www.EMF-portal.org/.

Specific Details of 5G and Mechanisms of Harm
---------------
The US group Physicians for Safe Technology state ‘there is convincing emerging scientific evidence causing great concern for the environment, with harm to mammals, insects and bacteria.’ (Source: mdsafetech.org/5g-telecommunications-science/)
The above referenced document states:

“Frequencies: 4G uses several different frequencies from 750MHz to about 2,400-5,000 MHz(2.4 GHz to 5 GHz- typical Wi Fi and cell phone) – 5G (proposed 5th generation) uses 10GHz to 300GHz

Wavelengths: 4G electromagnetic wavelengths are inches to feet long – 5G frequencies are in centimeters to millimeters.

Depth of Skin and Body Absorption: 4G microwave radiation (2.4GHz and 5 GHz) passes through bodies and the energy is absorbed by anything that contains water (can’t cook dry rice in a microwave oven), while 5G (5th Generation) penetrates only the outer layers of the skin in humans.

Distance Radiation Travels: 4G can travel dozens of miles in a line of sight and if poles are placed high. In experiments (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7914696?reload=true) 5G can travel a few miles but is easily blocked by objects, trees and plants thus poles are planned for every 300 feet in cities. The 5G Innovation Centre has stated that mature trees can block 5G signal up to 70%. Thus, there is also a risk that mature trees are taken to enable better connectivity.

Mechanisms of Harm: 4G emissions can cause oxidation of tissues (93 of 100 studies: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26151230/ also linked above), 5G radiation can have its effect through heat (tissue destruction), through a resonance effect of increased vibration in an object the size of the wavelengths, and at low power levels through signaling of skin structures that can affect metabolism, the nervous system, the endocrine system, the reproductive system (declassified military studies here: mdsafetech.files.wordpress.com/2019/02/biological-effects-of-millimeter-wavelengths.-zalyubovskaya-declassif-by-cia-1977-biol-eff-mm-waves.pdf).

Amount of Testing Done: 4G technology has been tested by the military and by international scientists with an abundance of studies showing broad harm to animals, humans, plants, insects and bacteria. 5G technology has been studied by some in the military showing broad harm and some newer studies are showing damage to insects, tissue burns and overheating with streaming of data. Despite this, there has been no safety testing of 5G before it is rolled out.”

Breaches of International Agreements about Human Rights
---------------
The biological effects of 5G microwave radiation are not yet well-studied enough to be fully clear. It is not until the population has been exposed to these for years that we will have more comprehensive data. However, the warnings from scientists and the research so far indicate that it is possible or probable that 5G technology may cause much harm to living organisms.

The fact that 5G technology has never been reliably tested for health effects means the roll out breaches the Nuremberg Code 1947 (https://media.tghn.org/medialibrary/2011/04/BMJ_No_7070_Volume_313_The_Nuremberg_Code.pdf). This legally-binding code requires informed consent before performing experiments on human populations. Under UK and EU law, a Strategic Environmental Assessment should have been carried out before the implementation of the 5G Wireless Network Technology was authorised. That has not been done.

There have been no public consultations to ensure Public Consent (see Article 7 of the United Nations’ International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which includes a prohibition on medical and scientific experimentation without consent. https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx)

Furthermore, according to the European Commission, the Precautionary Principle can be invoked to protect populations when a phenomenon, product or process may have a dangerous effect, identified by a scientific and objective evaluation. Given the preponderance of scientific research which clearly shows links between existing EMF exposures and adverse health effects in biological organisms, 5G can be classified as a product which may have a dangerous effect identified by a scientific and objective evaluation. This is why we are calling for the Isle of Wight Council to invoke this principle of EU law, and pause the deployment of 5G and 5G infrastructure on the Isle of Wight until or unless it has been tested for safety, and until or unless it has been proven to be within acceptable, reliable safety limits. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3Al32042

Unwillingness of Insurance Entities to Accept Liability for Adverse Effects from EMF Exposures
---------------
Electro-magnetic fields including those from wireless technology are classified as a “pollutant” alongside smoke, chemicals and asbestos. Lloyds of London Insurers (Lloyds of London EMF Report 2010) as long ago as 2010 identified wireless technologies as an uninsurable risk. No insurance company in the world will now cover health risks from Wi-Fi, mobile phones or mobile masts. Therefore how can the Isle of Wight Council see fit to allow the roll out of this untested new technology upon our communities, when it cannot even insure itself against liability arising from harm caused to people, animals or the environment? Does this not constitute a crime of negligence, recklessness or dereliction of duty, given the scientific research which shows clear links between rising EMF exposures and adverse health effects?

Leaders and members of the Isle of Wight Council are asked to consider the legal case already being brought against the government (headed by Michael Mansfield QC) over the governments failure of duty to protect the health of its citizens, which states on its website that: "we lack confidence in Public Health England. PHE has dismissed multiple warnings from both government and independent scientists including many Scientific Committees for Health and the evidence of many hundreds of peer reviewed scientific papers. Instead it accepts outdated opinions from unreliable and unaccountable agencies." EHTrust article, https://actionagainst5g.org/

Please see the following link to view the reports, white papers and news articles where companies report on the insurance liability issue: https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx

In light of this extensive body of very concerning evidence, we urge the Isle of Wight Council to follow the sensible example set by many other UK councils and invoke the Precautionary Principle to pause the roll out of this as yet untested technology (5G) on the Isle of Wight, until or unless they can verify through independent reliable research, that 5G and the total radiation levels caused by RF-EMF (5G together with 2G, 3G, 4G, and WiFi) will not be unduly harmful to human life (especially infants, children and pregnant women) as well as insects, animals and the environment.

If you find yourself in agreement with the purpose of this petition, please do consider sharing it with friends, family and other Isle of Wight residents. Many thanks for taking the time to read.

Further Sources/References:

https://ehtrust.org/ - The Environmental Health Trust (EHT) is a think tank that promotes a healthier environment through research, education, and policy. They are the only non-profit organization in the world that carries out cutting edge research on environmental health hazards and also works directly with communities, health and education professionals, and policymakers to understand and mitigate these hazards.

https://stop5ginternational.org - Stop 5G International is a group formed in order to support the global effort to stop 5G because it poses an immediate threat to life on earth. They rely on evidence-based information and non-violent actions.

http://www.5gappeal.eu – Over 400 scientists and medical doctors appeal to the European Union for immediate halt to the roll out of 5G due to the myriad unaddressed apparent adverse health implications to biological life.

https://actionagainst5g.org/legal-case/5g-space-appeal/ - crowd funded legal case against the UK government (led by Michael Mansfield QC) regarding their decision to allow the roll out of 5G despite evident links to myriad adverse health effects in biological organisms. This case has so far secured over £100,000 in funding.

https://www.5gspaceappeal.org - 260,000 international scientists, medical doctors and engineers warning against the harmful effects of electromagnetic fields on humans, animals and the environment. This appeal was delivered to the Prime Minister in early 2020, as well as to the United Nations, World Health Organisation, EU parliament, the Council of Europe and governments of all nations, for an immediate moratorium on the roll out of 5G.

https://emfscientist.org/ - The EMF Scientists are over 236 reputable scientists from 41 countries who have peer reviewed publications on electromagnetic fields who made a 2015 appeal to the United Nations and all member States in the world to encourage the World Health Organization “to exert strong leadership in fostering the development of more protective EMF guidelines, encouraging precautionary measures, and educating the public about health risks, particularly risk to children and fetal development.”

https://www.powerwatch.org.uk - Powerwatch is a small non-profit independent organisation with a central role in the UK EMF and Microwave Radiation health debate. They work with other like-minded groups and with decision-makers in government and business, promoting policies for a safer environment. They have been researching EMF effects on health for over 20 years, and provide information to help people understand these complex issues, including an extensive library of scientific evidence regarding EMFs and adverse health effects in biological organisms.

https://www.saferemr.com - Established by Professor Emeritus Dr Joel Moskowitz, director of the Center for Family and Community Health in the University of California at Berkeley’s School of Public Health. Saferemr.com is a website concerned with scientific and policy developments regarding the health effects of electromagnetic radiation exposure from cell phones, cell towers, Wi-Fi, Smart Meters, and other wireless technology.

https://whatis5g.info/health/ - “We are now facing a serious threat to human health and wildlife due to the proliferation of wireless technology - and most people remain completely uninformed.”

Increasing public awareness of the myriad dangers of 5G:
https://www.technocracy.news/telecoms-face-major-global-resistance-to-5g-rollout/

Physician's Heath Initiative for Radiation and the Environment – 5G Facts Sheet
http://phiremedical.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/5G-5-facts.pdf

Numbered References cited above:

[1] https://ehtrust.org/published-research-submitted-to-fcc-indicating-radio-frequency-is-harmful/

[2] 1.600+ pubmed papers which demonstrate a link between EMFs and various health effects can be found here: https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/studies.asp

[3] Another 4000+ studies can be downloaded here: http://www.bioinitiative.org

[4] Another 23,840 studies also linked here: http://www.EMF-portal.org

[5] Babies, children and foetuses in utero are far more susceptible to harm than adults: https://ehtrust.org/research-on-childrens-vulnerability-to-cell-phone-radio-frequency-radiation/

[6] 5G will necessitate a huge increase in exposures to blanket EMF radiation: https://ehtrust.org/5g-increases-radiation-industry-is-lobbying-countries-to-weaken-cell-tower-radiation-laws/

[7] FCC and ICNIRP limits do not protect people or the environment from cell phone radiation health effects: https://ehtrust.org/fcc-and-icnirp-limits-do-not-protect-people-of-the-environment-from-cell-phone-radiation-health-effects/

[8] Health risks from radiofrequency radiation, including 5G, should be assessed by experts with no conflicts of interest: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7405337/

[9] Appeals that matter or not on a moratorium on the deployment of the fifth generation, 5G, for microwave radiation: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7016513/

[10] https://www.buglife.org.uk/news/could-our-obsession-with-mobile-technology-destroy-wildlife/

[11] Exposure of Insects to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields from 2 to 120 GHz: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-22271-3

[12] Radiofrequency radiation injures trees around mobile phone base stations: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969716317375?via%3Dihub

[13] https://ehtrust.org/research-studies-on-impacts-to-the-environment-from-wireless-trees-plants-pollinators-birds-and-wildlife/

[14] https://ehtrust.org/environmental-effects-of-wireless-radiation-and-electromagetic-fields/

[15] http://www.5gappeal.eu/signatories-to-scientists-5g-appeal/

[16] https://www.5gspaceappeal.org/the-appeal

[17] https://emfscientist.org/

[18] http://freiburger-appell-2012.info/en/home.php?lang=EN

[19] Why insurance firms don't provide coverage for EMF related claims: https://www.aihs.org.au/news-and-publications/news/why-insurance-firms-don%E2%80%99t-provide-coverage-emf-related-claims

[20] https://ehtrust.org/international-actions-to-halt-and-delay-5g

[21] EU legislation – The Precautionary Principle: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3Al32042

[22] United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx

[23] Roll out of 5G without reliable safety testing, given the proven links to harm of EMF exposures constitutes breach of the Nuremberg Code (1947): http://www.electricalpollution.com/documents/WirelessViolatesHumanRights2016.pdf

[24] https://newsvoice.se/2020/09/global-5g-protest-warns-of-health-and-ecological-costs/

Planetary electromagnetic pollution - it is time to assess its impact: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(18)30221-3/fulltext

Exposure of Insects to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields from 2 to 120 GHz published in Nature in March 2018

Electromagnetic Radiation on Wildlife published by Buglife in May 2018: https://www.buglife.org.uk/news-and-events/news/could-our-obsession-with-mobile-technology-destroy-wildlife

Newsvoice article: 'To bee, or not to bee, that is the five “G” question' With Olle Johansson, former head of The Experimental Dermatology Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden, and former adjunct professor of The Royal Institute of Technology, also Stockholm, Sweden, now retired and leading The Institute of Common Sense for Common Sense, Utö/Stockholm, Sweden.
https://newsvoice.se/2019/05/5g-question-olle-johansson/

Written evidence submitted by Dr Sarah Starkey on the evidence-base for the link between adverse childhood experiences and long-term negative outcomes, in terms of exposure to wireless radiofrequency signals: https://cdn.website-editor.net/2479f24c54de4c7598d60987e3d81157/files/uploaded/Early_Years_Inquiry_EY10062.pdf

High Exposure to Radio Frequency Radiation Associated With Cancer in Male Rats: https://www.niehs.nih.gov/news/newsroom/releases/2018/november1/index.cfm

Neufeld E & Kuster N (2018). Systematic Derivation of Safety Limits for Time-Varying 5G Radiofrequency Exposure Based on Analytical Models and Thermal Dose. Health Phys Sept 21 2018.

World Health Organization, radiofrequency radiation and health - a hard nut to crack (Review): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5504984/

'5G: Great risk for EU,U.S. and International Health! Compelling Evidence for Eight Distinct Types of Great Harm Caused by Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Exposures and the Mechanism that Causes Them' Written and Compiled by Martin L. Pall, PhD Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences, Washington State University : https://www.radiationresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/EU-EMF2018-6-11US3.pdf