5G

READ THIS FIRST

“.. After reviewing the peer reviewed scientific literature a couple of times over the last year, I'm pretty confident that there's not yet been a credible study showing an association between 5G exposure in humans or animals and reduced immune function. Or an association to harm at all.

However, there is evidence that Russian twitter bots have shown a strategic and organised operation spreading 5G disinformation (as well as anti-vaccination disinformation). The likely reason is that their technology isn't keeping up with that of many other countries, and using disinformation to slow our development will help their economy keep up.

The irony is that in railing against the idea that our governments are lying to us about 5G, people who propagate 5G fear are furthering the agenda of a far more authoritarian, deceptive and manipulative regime.

With regards to the science of radiation, we're more at risk from both sunlight (which is higher in frequency than 5G) and radio waves (which is much lower in frequency than 5G).

Sunlight contains ionizing radiation and causes our electrons to detach from our atoms, potentially leading to cancer (UV light being the threshold where frequencies above this threshold are ionizing, and frequencies below this threshold like 5G, micro waves and radio waves do not).

Radio waves do not contain ionizing radiation, but they're lower in frequency and higher in power. As such, they have more potential to cause local heating of the human body. So in theory, they're more dangerous than 5G (although still, there's been no evidence of harm from radio waves).

Lastly, with any type of radiation, we need to consider exposure. 5G (and other radiation that the WHO and science in general has determined is safe) produces very very low exposure levels of non-ionizing radiation. Taking the strongest association between any type of radiation and any negative outcome, we can look at the increased risk of cancer as a result of exposure to ionizing radiation: there's a 5.5% increase in cancer risk for every 1Sv of radiation we're exposed to. To get to 1Sv, we'd have to have 10,000 chest xrays (0.1 mSV per x-ray). The lifetime risk of cancer is about 39%.

Multiplying that by the increase from 10,000 xrays gives us a 41% lifetime chance of getting cancer. That 2% increase (from the equivalent of 10,000 x-rays) in risk is enough that the WHO has said it's unacceptable, and that radiation from those sources must be mitigated.

They're not saying that for 5G. Because there's currently no evidence of elevated risk. Given that 5G is non-ionizing, and similar to all radiation that we've been using for a century that has no evidence of harm, and that the levels we're exposed to are so much lower than x-rays (which are already low in radiation level and increased risk as a result), even if 5G did have a negative effect on our immune system, we'd be looking at an increase in risk that was too small to measure, even in population level studies. Given the difficulty in devoting enough resources to the COVID19 response to avoid overwhelming the hospital system, it really isn't worth considering the less than negligible to non-existent risk posed by 5G (or perhaps I should say "it's not worth considering the risk posed by 5G because there is no evidence for that risk").

There are certainly many things in the world to be concerned about right now - if we're worried about government malpractice, we should certainly concern ourselves with how democratic processes bounce back after the lock down period. However, concerns around 5G are not in that category..”

- Neil Bailey

* * * 

Verifiable facts are slow. Conspirational thinking is alluring, and spreads fast. Properly investigated and evaluated evidence comes staggering, slowly, after.

 

Four experts investigate how the 5G coronavirus conspiracy theory began

 

"In times of crisis conspiracy theories can spread as fast as a virus.
As the coronavirus pandemic tightened its grip on a world which struggled to comprehend the enormity of the situation it was facing, darker forces were concocting their own narratives.
Scientists and researchers were working – and continue to work – around the clock for answers. But science is slow and methodical. So far-fetched explanations about how the outbreak started began filling the vacuum."

5G radiation health risks have been hyped, but Dr Karl explains why you don't need to worry

 https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2019-08-28/is-5g-safe-dr-karl-radiation-explainer/11416070

To those with 5G concerns

Underlying some people's concerned reasoning about 5G is a solid nugget of truth — that we have been lied to in the past, and we have been wrong about things.

Big Oil, Big Tobacco and Big Pharma have all had their moments.

As a result, there has been a loss of trust in various authorities, which unfortunately has spread to scientists.

Yet oddly, science is one of the most trustworthy of all the fields of human endeavour.

In terms of cancer, it's worth considering that if non-ionising radiation does turn out to be carcinogenic — and this has still not been proven — it will almost certainly be a less effective carcinogen than sunlight and alcohol, which are proven cancer-causing agents that we interact with on a daily basis.

That then turns the conversation to how to classify and rank carcinogens, which is another story entirely.

And let's not forget, as Dr Sarah Loughran has pointed out, that anxiety has consequences: fear of 5G may in fact be more dangerous than 5G itself.

Hmm. Russians, AGAIN! Oh the expression on my face as I contemplate the "white right" at the source of so many of these conspiracy theories, who seems to consider (at least, in America) capitalism to be a national sport and socialism to be unpatriotic a thing of the devil  ... taking their lead from the very "evil Communists" they denigrate at all turns!

Who's spreading 5G fake news?

So where else is this fear-mongering news about mobile phones and 5G coming from?

According to the New York Times, a major source of disinformation about the 5G network has been the Russian TV network Russia Today (RT), which is available worldwide.

RT claims the 5G network poses risks including "brain cancer, infertility, autism, heart tumours and Alzheimer's disease".

There is zero scientific proof for these claims — especially considering the 5G network has been running only in a very few locations, and only since the beginning of 2019.

RT has run segments with titles including "A Dangerous Experiment on Humanity", "5G Apocalypse", and "Could 5G Put More Kids At Risk For Cancer?".

But where does RT get its data from? It's certainly not from science.