Petitioning to keep us 5G free

IS 5G SAFE?: Marcus Williams, Jennie Brown (holding daughter Florence) and Laura Jackson are part of a working group trying to keep Gisborne 5G free. They want independent studies to show it is not harmful to people — studies that are not funded by telecommunications companies. They have started a petition and want to create awareness. Picture by Rebecca Grunwell
FEELING LET DOWN: Riverdale residents David File and Jenny Christophers feel the council let them down over Spark NZ putting up four large network cabinets and a 12-metre antenna outside their property (see following picture in this gallery). They were pictured here outside their home with granddaughter Ada Lasenby and Jake before it happened. The antenna went up on the verge just in front of them, and the network cabinets where they are standing. They feel it will affect their house price if they sell. Picture by Paul Rickard
Picture by Liam Clayton

As 5G technology is set to roll out in Gisborne soon, a high-energy debate is under way about how safe the technology is. Sophie Rishworth spoke to the working group who want to keep Gisborne 5G free . . .

A Gisborne-initiated petition * to put a moratorium on 5G is part of a growing campaign around New Zealand.

5G — which stands for Fifth Generation Wireless — is not available in this country yet but Vodafone has said it will start to roll it out in December.

Telecommunications companies promote it as being smarter, more efficient and as much as 100 times faster than 4G, which is what is used now.

New cellphone towers and antenna have started to go up around this district — for example the one by the bowling club on Ormond Rd a couple of months ago, and another one on Bulli Street around the same time.

Residents who have the towers put up outside their properties have found out very quickly there is little they can do about it.

Riverdale couple David File and Jenny Christophers objected to Spark NZ erecting network cabinets and a 12-metre cellphone and GPS antenna outside their home in June.

“The only thing that came out of that was yet another phone call from Spark NZ more or less saying, ‘well it is still going ahead and it’s a done deal no matter what’.”

Gisborne District Council also has its hands tied, because as long as these new antenna and poles meet with the National Environment Standards (NES) for Telecommunications Facilities 2016 then it goes through. The NES 2016 was brought in by central government on January 1, 2017 and replaced the NESTF 2008. **

A Gisborne working group of about six people want to raise awareness of potential health and security dangers of 5G.

A Facebook page called “5G Free Gisborne” has almost 1600 members. It was started by Jennie Brown — a teacher and mother who is deeply concerned about the health effects these towers can have on the community, and especially children.

“Other communities around the world are restricting the placement of towers near schools and other community centres,” she says. “Why in New Zealand are there no such restrictions? The health of our tamariki is paramount.”

Other members of the working group include “concerned citizen” Marcus Williams and Gisborne chiropractor Laura Jackson. The group is using the Facebook page to raise awareness about what they say are serious health effects, security and privacy threats of 5G wireless technology.

Of particular concern is the microwave/millimetre radiation that everyone will be exposed to when 5G goes live, says Ms Jackson.

“We are not anti-technology. We are concerned citizens demanding safe technology.
“People just assume that the Government wouldn’t implement anything that was deemed unsafe, yet there are thousands of independent peer-reviewed scientific studies that show harmful biological and environmental effects.”

Ms Jackson cites a study by Physicians for Safe Technology executive director Cindy Russell — a plastic surgeon from California, who completed her residency training at Stanford University Medical Center.

'Biggest problem having to upgrade 4G phones'

Dr Russell said it was argued the addition of this added high frequency 5G radiation to an already complex mix of lower frequencies would contribute to a negative public health outcome from both physical and mental health perspectives. She is particularly concerned about health effects of millimetre waves on skin, eyes, heart rate, the immune system and DNA. ***

In 2015, 250 scientists from 41 countries called on the United Nations and World Health Organisation to offer protection to people from non-ionising electromagnetic field (which 5G is) exposure. Their appeal said damage went well beyond the human race, with growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.

Earlier this year Brussels, the capital of Belgium and home to the European Union headquarters, moved to halt the transition to 5G. Minister for the Environment Alain Maron said there was no rush to bring 5G to Brussels until there was more certainty about the effect 5G waves had on the health of the people living there.

More than 175,000 people around the world have signed an international appeal to stop 5G on earth and in space. This petition can be found at www.5gspaceappeal.org.

5G working group member Marcus Williams said it was a global crisis.
“5G originated in the development of military weapons so it is up to the Government to be responsible with this technology.”

Mr Williams said it was concerning that six out of the 10 members of the NES advisory committee were representatives from telecommunication industries.
“The enormous amount of research that has been done since 1999 has not been taken into consideration.”
He says everyone needs to read this article at https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/we-have-no-reason-to-believe-5g-is-safe/

Mrs Brown said the NES 2016 gave corporate companies free rein to put up as many radio frequency towers as they liked, wherever they wanted.
“Yet we need consent to build a fence on our own property. Something is wrong with this process and the law needs to be challenged.”

GDC only gets advised before one is put up, so cannot say how many are planned for the future or where. That is something known only by the telecommunications companies.

Mrs Jackson said right now people had a choice to stand up and say no — the petition to push for a referendum was one way to do that.

As soon as 5G was rolled out, there would be no choice, she said.
They wanted to create an awareness, and to educate people, she said.
“Right now we have a chance.”

* The Gisborne petition can be found at: www.parliament.nz/en/pb/petitions/document/PET_91620/petition-of-jennie-brown-stop-5g-until-independent-testing

** www.health.govt.nz/our-work/environmental-health/non-ionising-radiation/radiofrequency-field-exposure-standard

*** 5G wireless telecommunications expansion: Public health and environmental implications. Environ Res 2018; 165:484-495. https://zero5g.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/5-G-wireless-telecommunications-expansion-Public-health-and-environmental-implications-Cindy-L.-russell.pdf

WHAT THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANIES SAID

Vodafone head of external affairs Rich Llewellyn said the health and safety of customers and communities was an absolute priority for Vodafone.

“5G, like all other mobile technologies such as 3G and 4G, operates well within the safety limits set out by international EMF exposure guidelines, which incorporate substantial safety margins, to deliver protection for everyone against health risks.”

Spark spokesman Arwen Vant said Spark did not have plans for any new sites in Gisborne at this time.

2degrees has not made any announcements regarding building a 5G network.
“Regarding our existing network, there are no significant extensions to the network planned in Gisborne in the near future, though in the short to mid term there may be small changes like boosting the capacity of existing sites if there is increased usage by residents. In the summer time, to meet demand, we do use temporary cell towers for events like Rhythm and Vines,” said 2degrees spokeswoman Katherine Cornish.

WHAT THE EXPERTS SAID

Auckland University senior lecturer David Krofcheck has a Master’s in science and a PhD in physics. He describes 5G as “a much wider pipe to send data from one place to another”.

The biggest problem he could see with 5G was having to spend $1000 to upgrade from a 4G phone.

As far as security concerns go, Dr Krofcheck said we were already pretty well in play regarding this with the current generation of smartphones, which he describes as “pocket supercomputers”.
“I don’t see how it could get much worse than it is now. Our data is already sold.
“I see it as a technological step forward. These other concerns like privacy are very important but I think the technology will enable many more beneficial processes.”

These include surgical techniques, instantaneous data and other high-tech endeavours like self-driving cars — “which seem scary but I have seen them in my hometown of Pittsburgh”.

Dr Krofcheck was born in the US and moved to New Zealand with his Kiwi wife in 1995, when he took up his job at the University of Auckland.
“There are things we can’t even imagine right now. Once you have a tool (like 5G) then smart people come along with clever ideas of how to use that tool.”

Of course, Dr Krofcheck could not rule out someone using 5G capabilities for harm against humans but there were a lot of things like that, he said.

Another popular talking point was that 5G was originally developed by the military for weaponry. Dr Krofcheck said 5G technology was multi-use, but he would not hold its origin against it.
“That is not what it is being used for now. It is a big pipe for information back and forth.”

The question of what the risks were if the maximum capacity of 300GHZ was used was a physics problem with a bit of biology.
“The 300GHz is low frequency energy-wise for non-ionising radiation,” he said.
“I did some calculations. Sunlight has a much higher frequency. There is more energy coming from the sun in visible light and ultra violet light.”

Dr Krofcheck said 300GHz was 100,000 to 1 million times less energy than an electron bond in the human body.
“It’s minute. These high-frequency radio waves do not penetrate human skin or bone — I know that is a concern for people, but there is too much evidence against it.
“High-frequency radiation has been around for a long time. I am not concerned at all.
“You may see more towers around town and people may not like that, but you have to ask is the benefit of being able to pass information quickly from one phone or laptop to another worth it?”

The Science Media Centre (www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz) approached experts to answer questions about what to expect from 5G technology.

Massey University communication engineering and networks senior lecturer Dr Faraz Hasan said security issues would always remain associated with connectivity in general.

“The severity of these issues increases if connectivity is ‘wireless’. Because we are interconnecting not just our laptops and mobile phones, but also vehicles, medical professionals, livestock, even our power grid with 5G, any breach in security may have far-reaching implications.”

EMF Services director Martin Gledhill, who declared a conflict of interest as he works for clients in the telecommunications industry, had this to say: “5G is just a new application of radio technology, and the knowledge gained from some 60 years of research is as applicable to 5G as any other form of radio technology. The radio frequencies to be used by 5G are similar to those that have been used for several decades.”

University of Auckland professor of health psychology Keith Petrie said worries about new technology causing health problems were not new.

“Throughout history, there are many examples of the introduction of new technology being followed by new symptoms and illness.
“There was a fear when telephones were introduced that they caused an increase in aural pressure, giddiness and pain.

Similarly with radios, that radio signals caused an increase in nausea. There were also fears that steam trains caused problems in the spine because the human body was not designed to go so fast. Following the introduction of visual display units in Scandinavia there were reports of skin problems and other symptoms.

“The internet has now brought a new dimension to worries about technology and unsubstantiated health worries can be spread instantly to those with similar concerns.”

MetService systems engineering manager Bruce Hartley said some frequency bands may affect either satellite communications, weather satellite data collection, or both.

“The impacts on satellite communications, earth-to-space and/or space-to-earth, are under the management of telecommunications service providers, and not a direct concern to MetService. Even if a communication link is affected, there are other technology or band usage options that can be applied to mitigate the issue. It is the impacts on weather satellite data collection that are a significant issue and of concern to MetService. This is because there is the potential for spurious emissions from equipment using 5G (eg transmitters such as cell towers, cell phones and smart devices) to “leak” out of the approved band(s) and into adjacent bands that are important for weather forecasting.”

As 5G technology is set to roll out in Gisborne soon, a high-energy debate is under way about how safe the technology is. Sophie Rishworth spoke to the working group who want to keep Gisborne 5G free . . .

A Gisborne-initiated petition * to put a moratorium on 5G is part of a growing campaign around New Zealand.

5G — which stands for Fifth Generation Wireless — is not available in this country yet but Vodafone has said it will start to roll it out in December.

Telecommunications companies promote it as being smarter, more efficient and as much as 100 times faster than 4G, which is what is used now.

New cellphone towers and antenna have started to go up around this district — for example the one by the bowling club on Ormond Rd a couple of months ago, and another one on Bulli Street around the same time.

Residents who have the towers put up outside their properties have found out very quickly there is little they can do about it.

Riverdale couple David File and Jenny Christophers objected to Spark NZ erecting network cabinets and a 12-metre cellphone and GPS antenna outside their home in June.

“The only thing that came out of that was yet another phone call from Spark NZ more or less saying, ‘well it is still going ahead and it’s a done deal no matter what’.”

Gisborne District Council also has its hands tied, because as long as these new antenna and poles meet with the National Environment Standards (NES) for Telecommunications Facilities 2016 then it goes through. The NES 2016 was brought in by central government on January 1, 2017 and replaced the NESTF 2008. **

A Gisborne working group of about six people want to raise awareness of potential health and security dangers of 5G.

A Facebook page called “5G Free Gisborne” has almost 1600 members. It was started by Jennie Brown — a teacher and mother who is deeply concerned about the health effects these towers can have on the community, and especially children.

“Other communities around the world are restricting the placement of towers near schools and other community centres,” she says. “Why in New Zealand are there no such restrictions? The health of our tamariki is paramount.”

Other members of the working group include “concerned citizen” Marcus Williams and Gisborne chiropractor Laura Jackson. The group is using the Facebook page to raise awareness about what they say are serious health effects, security and privacy threats of 5G wireless technology.

Of particular concern is the microwave/millimetre radiation that everyone will be exposed to when 5G goes live, says Ms Jackson.

“We are not anti-technology. We are concerned citizens demanding safe technology.
“People just assume that the Government wouldn’t implement anything that was deemed unsafe, yet there are thousands of independent peer-reviewed scientific studies that show harmful biological and environmental effects.”

Ms Jackson cites a study by Physicians for Safe Technology executive director Cindy Russell — a plastic surgeon from California, who completed her residency training at Stanford University Medical Center.

'Biggest problem having to upgrade 4G phones'

Dr Russell said it was argued the addition of this added high frequency 5G radiation to an already complex mix of lower frequencies would contribute to a negative public health outcome from both physical and mental health perspectives. She is particularly concerned about health effects of millimetre waves on skin, eyes, heart rate, the immune system and DNA. ***

In 2015, 250 scientists from 41 countries called on the United Nations and World Health Organisation to offer protection to people from non-ionising electromagnetic field (which 5G is) exposure. Their appeal said damage went well beyond the human race, with growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.

Earlier this year Brussels, the capital of Belgium and home to the European Union headquarters, moved to halt the transition to 5G. Minister for the Environment Alain Maron said there was no rush to bring 5G to Brussels until there was more certainty about the effect 5G waves had on the health of the people living there.

More than 175,000 people around the world have signed an international appeal to stop 5G on earth and in space. This petition can be found at www.5gspaceappeal.org.

5G working group member Marcus Williams said it was a global crisis.
“5G originated in the development of military weapons so it is up to the Government to be responsible with this technology.”

Mr Williams said it was concerning that six out of the 10 members of the NES advisory committee were representatives from telecommunication industries.
“The enormous amount of research that has been done since 1999 has not been taken into consideration.”
He says everyone needs to read this article at https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/we-have-no-reason-to-believe-5g-is-safe/

Mrs Brown said the NES 2016 gave corporate companies free rein to put up as many radio frequency towers as they liked, wherever they wanted.
“Yet we need consent to build a fence on our own property. Something is wrong with this process and the law needs to be challenged.”

GDC only gets advised before one is put up, so cannot say how many are planned for the future or where. That is something known only by the telecommunications companies.

Mrs Jackson said right now people had a choice to stand up and say no — the petition to push for a referendum was one way to do that.

As soon as 5G was rolled out, there would be no choice, she said.
They wanted to create an awareness, and to educate people, she said.
“Right now we have a chance.”

* The Gisborne petition can be found at: www.parliament.nz/en/pb/petitions/document/PET_91620/petition-of-jennie-brown-stop-5g-until-independent-testing

** www.health.govt.nz/our-work/environmental-health/non-ionising-radiation/radiofrequency-field-exposure-standard

*** 5G wireless telecommunications expansion: Public health and environmental implications. Environ Res 2018; 165:484-495. https://zero5g.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/5-G-wireless-telecommunications-expansion-Public-health-and-environmental-implications-Cindy-L.-russell.pdf

WHAT THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANIES SAID

Vodafone head of external affairs Rich Llewellyn said the health and safety of customers and communities was an absolute priority for Vodafone.

“5G, like all other mobile technologies such as 3G and 4G, operates well within the safety limits set out by international EMF exposure guidelines, which incorporate substantial safety margins, to deliver protection for everyone against health risks.”

Spark spokesman Arwen Vant said Spark did not have plans for any new sites in Gisborne at this time.

2degrees has not made any announcements regarding building a 5G network.
“Regarding our existing network, there are no significant extensions to the network planned in Gisborne in the near future, though in the short to mid term there may be small changes like boosting the capacity of existing sites if there is increased usage by residents. In the summer time, to meet demand, we do use temporary cell towers for events like Rhythm and Vines,” said 2degrees spokeswoman Katherine Cornish.

WHAT THE EXPERTS SAID

Auckland University senior lecturer David Krofcheck has a Master’s in science and a PhD in physics. He describes 5G as “a much wider pipe to send data from one place to another”.

The biggest problem he could see with 5G was having to spend $1000 to upgrade from a 4G phone.

As far as security concerns go, Dr Krofcheck said we were already pretty well in play regarding this with the current generation of smartphones, which he describes as “pocket supercomputers”.
“I don’t see how it could get much worse than it is now. Our data is already sold.
“I see it as a technological step forward. These other concerns like privacy are very important but I think the technology will enable many more beneficial processes.”

These include surgical techniques, instantaneous data and other high-tech endeavours like self-driving cars — “which seem scary but I have seen them in my hometown of Pittsburgh”.

Dr Krofcheck was born in the US and moved to New Zealand with his Kiwi wife in 1995, when he took up his job at the University of Auckland.
“There are things we can’t even imagine right now. Once you have a tool (like 5G) then smart people come along with clever ideas of how to use that tool.”

Of course, Dr Krofcheck could not rule out someone using 5G capabilities for harm against humans but there were a lot of things like that, he said.

Another popular talking point was that 5G was originally developed by the military for weaponry. Dr Krofcheck said 5G technology was multi-use, but he would not hold its origin against it.
“That is not what it is being used for now. It is a big pipe for information back and forth.”

The question of what the risks were if the maximum capacity of 300GHZ was used was a physics problem with a bit of biology.
“The 300GHz is low frequency energy-wise for non-ionising radiation,” he said.
“I did some calculations. Sunlight has a much higher frequency. There is more energy coming from the sun in visible light and ultra violet light.”

Dr Krofcheck said 300GHz was 100,000 to 1 million times less energy than an electron bond in the human body.
“It’s minute. These high-frequency radio waves do not penetrate human skin or bone — I know that is a concern for people, but there is too much evidence against it.
“High-frequency radiation has been around for a long time. I am not concerned at all.
“You may see more towers around town and people may not like that, but you have to ask is the benefit of being able to pass information quickly from one phone or laptop to another worth it?”

The Science Media Centre (www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz) approached experts to answer questions about what to expect from 5G technology.

Massey University communication engineering and networks senior lecturer Dr Faraz Hasan said security issues would always remain associated with connectivity in general.

“The severity of these issues increases if connectivity is ‘wireless’. Because we are interconnecting not just our laptops and mobile phones, but also vehicles, medical professionals, livestock, even our power grid with 5G, any breach in security may have far-reaching implications.”

EMF Services director Martin Gledhill, who declared a conflict of interest as he works for clients in the telecommunications industry, had this to say: “5G is just a new application of radio technology, and the knowledge gained from some 60 years of research is as applicable to 5G as any other form of radio technology. The radio frequencies to be used by 5G are similar to those that have been used for several decades.”

University of Auckland professor of health psychology Keith Petrie said worries about new technology causing health problems were not new.

“Throughout history, there are many examples of the introduction of new technology being followed by new symptoms and illness.
“There was a fear when telephones were introduced that they caused an increase in aural pressure, giddiness and pain.

Similarly with radios, that radio signals caused an increase in nausea. There were also fears that steam trains caused problems in the spine because the human body was not designed to go so fast. Following the introduction of visual display units in Scandinavia there were reports of skin problems and other symptoms.

“The internet has now brought a new dimension to worries about technology and unsubstantiated health worries can be spread instantly to those with similar concerns.”

MetService systems engineering manager Bruce Hartley said some frequency bands may affect either satellite communications, weather satellite data collection, or both.

“The impacts on satellite communications, earth-to-space and/or space-to-earth, are under the management of telecommunications service providers, and not a direct concern to MetService. Even if a communication link is affected, there are other technology or band usage options that can be applied to mitigate the issue. It is the impacts on weather satellite data collection that are a significant issue and of concern to MetService. This is because there is the potential for spurious emissions from equipment using 5G (eg transmitters such as cell towers, cell phones and smart devices) to “leak” out of the approved band(s) and into adjacent bands that are important for weather forecasting.”

Your email address will not be published. Comments will display after being approved by a staff member. Comments may be edited for clarity.

Jane, Wellington - 13 days ago
Yer this is all pretty silly. There is so so much evidence that 5G is not harmful. I suggest that you focus your energy elsewhere on something useful maybe.

Janet, Auckland - 13 days ago
Good on you, at Gisborne. Based on what I have read (having received the scripts from the 5G Summit put on by Joshua del Sol and Sayer Ji and reading over the past three weeks) - the vast body evidence is with 'very harmful'.
See bioinitiative.org, Google Dr Ronald Melnick on the $30m NTP study, Dietrich Klinghardt MD PhD on EMFs and 5G, Martin Pall PhD Professor Emeritus (frightening what he has to say). The vast majority of the general population have absolutely no idea of what they are letting themselves in for and, therefore, will do nothing to stop it or protect themselves. The cost of health in the future would be too staggering to contemplate, not to mention the survival of the fauna and flora. Blasting everything with microwaves (which you cook food with - and destroy vitamins in the process, I might add). All bad. Please do some research - everyone.

Janet, Auckland - 13 days ago
Another thing - there is something you can do to stop it before and after towers have gone up - see Raymond Broomhall LLB GDLP.

J Brown - 13 days ago
I'm unsure what you think is "silly", Jane.
Senator Richard Blumenthal raised his concern about the lack of safety research and data on the potential health risks of 5G. https://www.blumenthal.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/at-senate-commerce-hearing-blumenthal-raises-concerns-on-5g-wireless-technologys-potential-health-risks
All we are asking for is independent studies into this new technology. I, for one, do not trust big business to make these decisions for my whanau. If we've learnt anything from history, it's that big business puts profit before the people.

Dr Robin Kelly, Auckland - 13 days ago
In reply to Jane, Wellington. Please name one peer-reviewed independent scientific study that shows that 5G is not harmful to living tissue.

Veronika Lambert - 13 days ago
Being concerned about our health and not believing everything that is fed to us is a good thing in my opinion. Good on you for doing this! Many times in the past we were told something is safe (or even good for you) and now we know better. Most famous is tobacco. I do not want a cell tower outside my children's bedroom either!

Peter Jones - 13 days ago
Jane from Wellington sounds like a Lees-Galloway troll. LOL.

Pip Reynolds, US - 12 days ago
Unfortunately that won't be enough. Smart meters, LED streetlights, death towers, Wifi and satellites everywhere. We will be bathed in radiation, like invisible gas. We are now living in a microwave. We must fight the worldwide FCC and telecommunications act, petition your CC, write your Senate, protest, hang signs, talk to neighbours, family, friends, strangers about 5G dangers. And join a class action suit and sue! We must win, it's the only option!

Niggly - 12 days ago
Six people get this kind of coverage? Let's get some balance Gisborne Herald.

Ella, Auckland - 12 days ago
Look at countries where it has been implemented. People are already suffering ill effects. Is that not all the proof you need?

S.Williams - 12 days ago
Thank you to The Gisborne Herald.
I was astounded by Dr Krofcheck's assertions. Of course, there is more energy coming from the sun than there will be from 5G. However, the point he's missing is that 5G radiation is pulsed, and there's a lot of evidence that pulsed radiation is bad for biology, while sunlight is much less so because it's constant. Sunlight comes on gradually at dawn and goes off gradually at dusk, so is not experienced by biological organisms as a sudden stressor. It is also true that the energy carried by single photons of 5G radiation is many orders of magnitude less than the bonding energy of single electrons -- the relevant equation is E = hf, where E is photon energy, h is Planck's constant and f is the frequency of the radiation -- but this is completely irrelevant, because the mechanisms by which 5G radiation causes biological problems do not involve single photons evicting single electrons from their orbits.
Dr Krofcheck may be good at his narrow field of expertise in physics, but he obviously knows nothing about biology and, sadly, has not read the literature on the effects of any sort of RF, let alone millimetre (MM) waves, on biological organisms. He simply makes pronouncements on the basis of his (and the telcos') erroneous assumptions that non-ionizing means non-harmful.
The two reviews in the reference below * detail many experimental tests of those assumptions, which prove them incorrect.
They show that MM waves do nasty things to animals in a large percentage of the studies reviewed -- in the 30-40GHz frequency range ~95% of studies show a biological effect.
Obviously, Dr Krofcheck needs to be educated on the other physical aspects of information carrying pulsed microwaves and their biological effects. He needs to understand that RF interaction with the neuro-endocrine system of the skin will have systemic effects. Skin is a very important organ and a key part of the immune system.
He needs to read published science like this to understand:
"The human skin as a sub-THz receiver - Does 5G pose a danger to it or not?" **
Professor Petrie also really needs to read peer-reviewed scientific literature before slinging mud at people who raise concerns about health effects of 5G or those who have actually researched the subject. He clearly knows nothing about the thousands of peer-reviewed scientific papers showing that 3G and 4G radiation do cause biological harm. And if 3G and 4G radiation does harm, why should higher frequency radiation (5G) not do harm? Prof. Petrie should try behaving like a scientist and actually reading the scientific literature before making general pronouncements about how stupid everyone else is.

S.Williams - 12 days ago
Part 2
The "5G Space Appeal" states***: "Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF [electromagnetic fields] affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines." "More than 10,000 peer-reviewed scientific studies demonstrate harm to human health from RF radiation." Some listed effects: Alteration of heart rhythm and cardiovascular disease, cancers, altered metabolism, cognitive impairment, DNA damage, learning and memory deficits, impaired sperm function and quality, miscarriage, neurological damage, obesity and diabetes.
The 5G industry, under oath in the US Senate, has admitted that no safety studies on 5G have been conducted. ****
Kiwis have not given consent to be treated as lab rats for 5G radiation.
With the Government intending to auction off parts of the 5G spectrum early next year, we need to call for an urgent moratorium on the introduction of 5G into NZ until such time as proper pre-market safety testing has shown the technology to be safe.

REFERENCES:

*5G Wireless Communication and Health Effects. A Pragmatic Review Based on Available Studies Regarding 6 to 100 GHz
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335801195_5G_Wireless_Communication_and_Health_Effects-A_Pragmatic_Review_Based_on_Available_Studies_Regarding_6_to_100_GHz

5 G wireless telecommunications expansion: Public health and environmental implications
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935118300161

** https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29459303
*** https://www.5gspaceappeal.org/the-appeal)

****https://takebackyourpower.net/senate-hearing-wireless-industry-confesses-no-studies-showing-5g-safety/
http://www.electrosmogprevention.org/public-health-alert/health-alerts-5g-small-wireless-cells/red-alert-5g-industry-leaders-admit-no-safety-testing-when-questioned-by-senator-blumenthal-ct/

Wyn, Twizel - 12 days ago
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=735996050152440

Carolyn Fraser, Christchurch - 11 days ago
Switzerland has documented 5G radiation injury immediately after towers were erected in July 2019. Especially children: bleeding noses, headaches, dizziness, nausea, runny eyes, earaches! (See Physicians for Safe Technology website). Brussels, Rome, Geneva, and many other places have called a halt to 5G! Wake up people please, do your research. 5G does not belong in NZ or anywhere. 5G is a military weapon used in WW2. Furthermore, fibre optice can do everything 5G is purported to do, and IT IS SAFE!

Elly - 11 days ago
First The Gisborne Herald used a clickbait title for a ridiculous anti-vax opinion piece, and now it's on the anti-5G train too.
This paper is just anti-science to try to get clicks.

Toni R, Auckland - 11 days ago
Funny how the industry-sponsored science always finds RFR to be 'harmless' but other research finds DNA breakage and a plethora of deleterius effects.

S. Williams - 11 days ago
Next week, Professor Dariusz Leszczynski (PhD, DSc), a highly regarded research scientist and international expert on the biological effects of EMF radiation, is travelling from Europe to lecture around NZ, Auckland Tues 19 Nov, Hawkes Bay Sun 24 Nov, Wellington Weds 27 Nov, Nelson Fri 29 Nov. please find details on https://www.5g.org.nz/events/

Professor Leszczynski was a member of the WHO/IARC advisory committee whose report resulted in RFEMR (radio frequency electromagnetic radiation) being classified as a Class 2B carcinogen in May 2011. IARC - International Agency for Research on Cancer

Kent S, Auckland - 11 days ago
oh, Jane from Wellington, 'there is so much evidence that 5G is not harmful' <

Kent S - 11 days ago
Remember that current standards are based upon the Specific Absorbed Radiation (SAR) assumption that damage to humans can only occur if the effect is thermal. It is an old standard that seemed sufficient at the time. Have a look at how low levels (non-thermal) of non-ionising radiation ('EMFs') can affect the body's voltage-gated calcium channels as pointed out by multiple papers here https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3780531/table/tbl1/. VGCCs are just one effect, there are others. There may be no acute damage but ultimately this is a non-native EMF that is influencing the body's chemistry in a way that our cells have not evolved for.
Another example of the negative effects via VGCC from non-ionising RF energy is shown here.... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26300312
And another test on rats

Kent S - 11 days ago
Wise science should be seeking to resolve the questions, not offering an industry-driven white-wash, but hey - funding/protectionism.
This is a question for bio-physicists, not RF engineers, theoretical physicists and communications industry reps.
There is a growing body of evidence that continual exposure to low levels of RF energy has a negative effect on biology, and responsible public policy should be taking the precautionary approach.

And another test on rats and mice conducted under a US Govt funded program do show an effect ... https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/topics/cellphones/index.html.

Also take note that the respected medical journal The Lancet has raised concerns about the effect of unprecedented levels of human exposure to RF... https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(18)30221-3/fulltext

Kent S - 11 days ago
Hi Elly, "This paper is just anti-science to try to get clicks". Well, so far there seems to be more science on display regarding the risks to health from the long-term exposure of low level non-ionising radiation (EMFs) than there is showing its safety. Admittedly the paper did go a bit wonky when they contacted the ScienceMediaCentre and got delivered 'expertise' from absolutely no one in the area of bio-physics or mitochondrial mechanics.

S. Williams - 10 days ago
In NZ, both NES 2016 and its predecessor NES 2008 use the 1999 standard NZS 2772.1* which sets a maximum power density (or signal strength) of 1000 microW/cm2 (equivalent to 10 million microW/m2)
Building biology guideline for extreme concern is .1 microW/cm2 and biological effects on living beings and health effects start at even lower levels than that and progressively continue to get worse. For example, DNA damage to cells happens at 6 microW/cm2. In NZ (and globally) many electricity consumers have requested the removal of their smart meters (around 8 microW/cm2) after experiencing health problems. And many people choose to use Ethernet plugged in wall connection rather than WIFI for their internet access.

So, we can imagine that the radiation levels of 10,000 times more than what is already deemed harmful for living beings will have horrendous health impacts on humans (and animals, trees and bees, etc.) This short video @1 min mark, shows a visual comparison of different radiation levels in regard to human health: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fEl-w-zxu6k
I am too frightened to even think about total radiation exposure from multiple sources, ie different towers, smart meters, WIFIs, cell phones, etc. Indeed, if 5G masts go ahead you can throw away your cellphones, laptops and smart meters and you will still be exposed to high radiation levels no matter where you go!
And you may also like to know that a cellphone can operate on .2 billionth of microW/cm2, so there is no justification for such powerful signal densities from cell towers. Reading 5G literature, one quickly understands 5G is not driven by customers demand or businesses need. Who is pouring so much money into these costly (and ugly) infrastructure for 5G throughout NZ?

NZS 2772.1:1999 Radiofrequency fields - Maximum exposure levels https://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/environmental-health/non-ionising-radiation/radiofrequency-field-exposure-standard

S. Williams - 10 days ago
With the Government intending to auction off parts of the 5G spectrum early next year, we need to ask our Government if the health costs of 5G will be reflected in the auction price of sold spectrum or if telcos will be asked to pay for any health claims associated with 5G. Or will taxpayers be expected to pay the costs for radiation damages inflicted on us by the telcos?

Can the Education Minister guarantee a safe school environment for our children, free from harmful RF radiations? The science for harmful effects of these RF radiations on human health, esp. on children, is overwhelming.

Can businesses guarantee that they can take preventative measures to protect their employees from radiation damage while at work?

We need an urgent commission of enquiry as to why such high-risk radiations have been declared safe by our MOH (in spite of all the international experts' warnings) and to the composition of the advisory boards who wrote NZS 2772.1:1999 standard and NES 2106 and its predecessor NESTF 2008.

Since 1999 there have been thousands of scientific papers regarding health consequences of RF radiations and MM waves. Why has this standard not been changed to reflect the existing science and evidence? The 99 standard is well and truly outdated!

Why the outdoor pulsed radiation limit of NZ is 1000 times higher than those of Belgium, Ukraine, Switzerland and 100 times more than China, Lithuania, Russia, Italy, Poland, Paris and 10 times more than India?
It gives me no comfort that we are in the same group as the USA, UK, Australia, Canada!

Precautionary target level of 3-6 microW/m2 was proposed by the BioInitiative Working Group in 2012. Why NZ safety level is set at 10,000,000 microW/m2? Yes, you read it right 10 million microW/m2!

What was the qualification of the people who approved such horrendous safety limits for NZ?
Russel Norman, in a 2010 post re cellphone towers, health and democracy asked similar questions which stay relevant to this day. I highly recommend everyone to read his post: https://web.archive.org/web/20120126053516/https://blog.greens.org.nz/2010/12/14/cellphone-towers-health-and-democracy/

J Brown - 9 days ago
Lawyer and environmentalist Sue Grey asks why the MoH is too busy to accept an invitation to meet with world expert Professor Dariusz Leszczynski who was on the WHO/IARC advisory panel that classified RFEMR as a Class 2B carcinogen during his public lecture tour of Auckland, Wellington and Nelson New Zealand this month.
https://envirowatchrangitikei.wordpress.com/2019/11/12/why-is-nzs-min-of-health-is-too-busy-to-meet-with-a-visiting-5g-world-expert-who-iarc-who-helped-classify-5g-as-a-class-2b-carcinogen-sue-grey-lawyer/

Christopher Dean, Waikanae - 9 days ago
Check this guy out https://youtu.be/DIV39-KOzh0