We Have No Reason to Believe 5G Is Safe

The technology is coming, but contrary to what some people say, there could be health risks

Mega Communicationsystems Tower 
Credit: Bill Oxford Getty Images

By  - Scientific American - 17. 

The telecommunications industry and their experts have accused many scientists who have researched the effects of cell phone radiation of "fear mongering" over the advent of wireless technology's 5G. Since much of our research is publicly-funded, we believe it is our ethical responsibility to inform the public about what the peer-reviewed scientific literature tells us about the health risks from wireless radiation.

The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently announced through a press release that the commission will soon reaffirm the radio frequency radiation (RFR) exposure limits that the FCC adopted in the late 1990s. These limits are based upon a behavioral change in rats exposed to microwave radiation and were designed to protect us from short-term heating risks due to RFR exposure.  

Yet, since the FCC adopted these limits based largely on research from the 1980s, the preponderance of peer-reviewed research, more than 500 studies, have found harmful biologic or health effects from exposure to RFR at intensities too low to cause significant heating.

Citing this large body of research, more than 240 scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on the biologic and health effects of nonionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal, which calls for stronger exposure limits. The appeal makes the following assertions:

“Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.”

The scientists who signed this appeal arguably constitute the majority of experts on the effects of nonionizing radiation. They have published more than 2,000 papers and letters on EMF in professional journals.

The FCC’s RFR exposure limits regulate the intensity of exposure, taking into account the frequency of the carrier waves, but ignore the signaling properties of the RFR. Along with the patterning and duration of exposures, certain characteristics of the signal (e.g., pulsing, polarization) increase the biologic and health impacts of the exposure. New exposure limits are needed which account for these differential effects. Moreover, these limits should be based on a biological effect, not a change in a laboratory rat’s behavior.

The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RFR as "possibly carcinogenic to humans" in 2011. Last year, a $30 million study conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) found “clear evidence” that two years of exposure to cell phone RFR increased cancer in male rats and damaged DNA in rats and mice of both sexes. The Ramazzini Institute in Italy replicated the key finding of the NTP using a different carrier frequency and much weaker exposure to cell phone radiation over the life of the rats.

Based upon the research published since 2011, including human and animal studies and mechanistic data, the IARC has recently prioritized RFR to be reviewed again in the next five years. Since many EMF scientists believe we now have sufficient evidenceto consider RFR as either a probable or known human carcinogen, the IARC will likely upgrade the carcinogenic potential of RFR in the near future.

Nonetheless, without conducting a formal risk assessment or a systematic review of the research on RFR health effects, the FDA recently reaffirmed the FCC’s 1996 exposure limits in a letter to the FCC, stating that the agency had “concluded that no changes to the current standards are warranted at this time,” and that “NTP’s experimental findings should not be applied to human cell phone usage.” The letter stated that “the available scientific evidence to date does not support adverse health effects in humans due to exposures at or under the current limits.”

The latest cellular technology, 5G, will employ millimeter waves for the first time in addition to microwaves that have been in use for older cellular technologies, 2G through 4G. Given limited reach, 5G will require cell antennas every 100 to 200 meters, exposing many people to millimeter wave radiation. 5G also employs new technologies (e.g., active antennas capable of beam-forming; phased arrays; massive multiple inputs and outputs, known as massive MIMO) which pose unique challenges for measuring exposures.

Millimeter waves are mostly absorbed within a few millimeters of human skin and in the surface layers of the cornea. Short-term exposure can have adverse physiological effects in the peripheral nervous system, the immune system and the cardiovascular system. The research suggests that long-term exposure may pose health risks to the skin (e.g., melanoma), the eyes (e.g., ocular melanoma) and the testes (e.g., sterility).

Since 5G is a new technology, there is no research on health effects, so we are “flying blind” to quote a U.S. senator. However, we have considerable evidence about the harmful effects of 2G and 3G. Little is known the effects of exposure to 4G, a 10-year-old technology, because governments have been remiss in funding this research. Meanwhile, we are seeing increases in certain types of head and neck tumors in tumor registries, which may be at least partially attributable to the proliferation of cell phone radiation. These increases are consistent with results from case-control studies of tumor risk in heavy cell phone users.

5G will not replace 4G; it will accompany 4G for the near future and possibly over the long term. If there are synergistic effects from simultaneous exposures to multiple types of RFR, our overall risk of harm from RFR may increase substantially. Cancer is not the only risk as there is considerable evidence that RFR causes neurological disorders and reproductive harm, likely due to oxidative stress.

As a society, should we invest hundreds of billions of dollars deploying 5G, a cellular technology that requires the installation of 800,000 or more new cell antenna sites in the U.S. close to where we live, work and play?

Instead, we should support the recommendations of the 250 scientists and medical doctors who signed the 5G Appeal that calls for an immediate moratorium on the deployment of 5G and demand that our government fund the research needed to adopt biologically based exposure limits that protect our health and safety.

The views expressed are those of the author(s) and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.


(*) Author:

Joel M. Moskowitz, PhD, is director of the Center for Family and Community Health in the School of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley. He has been translating and disseminating the research on wireless radiation health effects since 2009 after he and his colleagues published a review paper that found long-term cell phone users were at greater risk of brain tumors. His Electromagnetic Radiation Safety website has had more than two million page views since 2013. He is an unpaid advisor to the International EMF Scientist Appeal and Physicians for Safe Technology.




Frank Clegg Former President of Microsoft Canada: “It’s not been made clear to the public that 5G won’t just be another number and a letter on your cell phone. It requires an entirely new infrastructure of thousands of small cellular antennas to be erected throughout the cities where it’s going to be installed.” What would 5G infrastructure look like? Small cell antennas could be placed as close as every 3rd hydro pole.

Scientists from 42 countries are now warning their governments about the emerging health problems associated with wireless radiation, and Canadian doctors and scientists have added their voices. Dr. Riina Bray: “the most prevalent symptoms include headache, fatigue, decreased ability to concentrate, tinnitus, irritability, and insomnia. Impacts on the heart and nervous system are also of concern.”

Dr. Riina Bray has been working at the Provincial Environmental Health Clinic for 15 years, and seen the number of people suffering adverse effects from electromagnetic exposure rising. Dr. Riina Bray: “we predict that the number of people who develop the symptoms I just mentioned will rise in the places where 5G is first installed.”

Dr. Magda Havas is internationally recognized for her research on the biological effects of electromagnetic pollution. She said that at high intensities these waves cause intense heat and pain because sweat glands on the surface of our skin act like mini antennas. Dr. Magda Havas, professor and researcher: "at lower intensities scientists are predicting damage to eyes, loss of insect populations, which are already declining, antibiotic resistance in bacteria, and physiological effects on the nervous system and the immune system.” Radiation from radio frequencies is classed in the same category of carcinogens as a lead.

One advisor to the World Health Organization said there's enough evidence that if they were to re-evaluate radiofrequency radiation... Dr. Anthony Miller: "it would be placed Class One, human carcinogen, the government could not possibly ignore that.” Some say the scientific debate about the health effects of microwave radiation is over. But the question remains: Can we afford to take this risk?

Medical doctors are requesting delayed deployment until testing can be conducted on the long-term biological effects of 5G technology.


Video: The 5G Space Weapon, Mind Control Agenda & Kill Grid

By Claire Edwards and Lucas Alexander - Global Research - November 20, 2019

An important and informative interview on the topic of 5G and the “International Appeal To STOP 5G on Earth and in Space”. Spokesperson for the Appeal to STOP 5G, Claire Edwards is the guest on this eye-opening, in-depth and compelling episode of Age of Truth TV, interviewed by presenter and investigative reporter, Lucas Alexander.

Watch the interview below.

Transcript of the interview is as follows.

Lucas: Hello and welcome to this edition of Age of Truth TV. I’m Lucas Alexander in Copenhagen, Denmark. It’s the 30th of October 2019 and our guest today is the British/Irish spokesperson for the International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space. She’s a former United Nations editor, an author and researcher, and has a master’s degree in intercultural competence. Claire Edwards.

Lucas: Claire Edwards, it’s wonderful to have you on the show and welcome to Denmark.

Claire: Thank you very much. It’s wonderful to be here with you.

Lucas: You are a former United Nations editor and have now become a spokesperson for the International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space. But why are you going against the rollout of 5G? A lot of people, a lot of scientists say that it’s just something that we are now going to have in order to have a faster-running Internet connection.

Claire: 5G is potentially an annihilation event for this planet. 5G was marketed as 5G because it was intended for people to believe that it was just an upgrade from 4G. But in fact, if you understand wireless technology and cell phones, you would know that cell phones were never tested for health or safety, and wireless technology was never tested for health or safety. So all of this is devastating for health. We have the health results now from all of these first generations of wireless technology so we know that this is absolutely devastating for people’s health and for the environment. And 5G is going to be a very, very different technology. It has very little in common with 4G actually, and it would be truly, truly devastating.

Lucas: What is the difference between 4G and 5G, if 5G is so different?

Claire: Well, the difference between earlier generations of wireless technology and 5G is that you could think of 4G as an antenna that you might see in the distance – and I tend to think of what 4G puts out as a soup. So we’re all sitting in this soup 24/7. But, what 5G does is – it’s basically densification on every level so you – with the 5G box you have up to or more than a thousand mini-antennas in one box. And what this produces is a beam. So it’s beam-forming. It’s like a laser and the laser goes out – a very concentrated signal and it does not attenuate over distance, so it does not weaken over distance as the 4G signal does. And therefore it maintains its power and therefore it’s particularly devastating. Now, the densification aspect of 5G is huge because, again, as I said, 4G, you have – you might see it off in the distance. But 5G would be absolutely everywhere. And the list of places from which 5G will come at you is so long that it’s hard to enumerate. So for a start, “smart” meters are part of the 5G rollout. LED street lights are part of the 5G rollout. Cabinets on the street – so they have designed new cabinets on the street which will let the signal pass. Under manhole covers – so imagine that you’re taking your baby for a walk and you see a friend and you leave the baby standing over the manhole cover. Your baby is being irradiated. Then you have satellites in the Earth orbits. So now SpaceX has asked for permission to put up a further 30,000 satellites, so now we’re up to a figure of 53,000 satellites in the Earth orbits. Plus, they want to put pseudosatellites in the stratosphere. Plus, you’re talking about networked civil aircraft, which would network between them and then beam down broadband down to Earth level, ground level. And also the plan is to put the 5G antennas approximately every third house. So you’re talking about a hugedensification. You’re talking about putting these antennas extremely close to where people are and where they live, outside their bedroom windows, for example. You’re also talking about different power levels. Now, because we have no standards for 5G – if you look at the press conference with Tom Wheeler in 2016, Tom Wheeler said it: we’re not waiting for the standards; we’re not waiting for committees and commissions to sit around deciding the standards. Therefore we have no standards for this. This is completely unprecedented. So we actually do not have a definition for 5G. It is undefined. They’re making it up as they go along. In terms of frequencies, people think that the higher frequencies will be used, which is true. They have – obviously there have been frequency auctions and it’s proposed to use frequencies up to 100 GHz for 5G. But also they will use low frequencies and we have to consider that evenextremely low frequencies do tremendous damage to the human body. So it’s a common misconception that 5G just means higher frequencies – it doesn’t. And it will devastate on all levels and at all frequencies.

Lucas: But isn’t it because of the low frequencies that a lot of scientists who are allowed to speak in the mainstream media, though, are saying that it’s not a danger to our health or anything else?

Claire: Well, 5G is complicated. The whole issue of wireless technology is complicated. The problem we have is that a lie has been perpetrated. Ever since we’ve had wireless technology. The lie is the “thermal hypothesis”. And the thermal hypothesis says that there are no biological effects to microwave radiation, which is absolutely not true. The US military collected compendia of thousands of studies detailing the biological effects of microwave radiation precisely because they wanted to develop weapons. So the biological effects are absolutely known. The World Health Organization organized a symposium in 1973, which was actually called “The Biologic Effects and Health Hazards of Microwave Radiation”. But since then they have conveniently forgotten that they organized that symposium. So it is absolute fact that there are biological effects but the regulatory agencies have been, basically, taken over and corrupted by industry and the lie of the thermal hypothesis has been propagated. So they want us to believe that there are only heating effects. So all your cell phones are based on this principle, that there are only heating effects and therefore if you simply hold the phone away from your head, you’re not being heated and therefore there’s no problem. And they test this on plastic mannequins filled with gel, into which they put a probe to ascertain to what extent this mannequin has been heated. So it’s absolutely fraudulent and people think if they hold the phone away, it’s not affecting them, but of course it’s going through their arm; it’s going into their body and there are biological effects so the whole body is being totally devastated by wireless technology and cell phones.

Lucas: So what are the possible dangers and health effects of electromagnetic radiation and frequencies?

Claire: Well, now we have the results after 25 years of cell phone use, now we have the results and they could not be more devastating. We have 9 to 10 year-old children presenting with the brains of senile old people. We have the highest suicide rate in the US since World War Two.

Lucas: So how is suicide connected to those frequencies?

Claire: Because it causes changes in the brain and it causes people to become depressed. So we have the first three-year fall in life expectancy since World War One[in the US] and numerous other devastating health effects, really too numerous to list. British insurer Legal & General, the CEO recently told us that there is now a premature death trend.

Lucas: What does that mean? Is that because it causes cancer and other illnesses?

Claire: Well, there was recently a paper which was putting out a hypothesis that it is wireless technology, it is the ubiquitous nature of electromagnetic radiation that is causing neurological disease and deaths in the Western world. So we have the information now. The Blue Cross Blue Shield health insurance association in the United States put out a report in April this year where they said that millennials, who are the first generation to have used cell phones for a considerable period of time, they have double-digit increases in all the major diseases and you have 27 year-olds now who are presenting with dementia. It could not be more devastating. You also have a prominent scientist in the US who has predicted that, by 2025, every second baby born in the US will be autisticAutism and ADHD [attention deficit hyperactivity disorder] are both associated with electromagnetic radiation.

Lucas: And we have the studies to prove that?

Claire: Absolutely. These are the studies. These are the results.

Lucas: People, when they hear you talk about these things—we will talk much more about it—can actually do their research and find some evidence about this?

Claire: Absolutely. If people go and they read the articles that I’ve written, I reference everything that I say and I give links to all the studies. The University of Aachen has an EMF Portal and on that portal there are over 28,000 studies. Not all of those are peer-reviewed, obviously. But we have an enormous, an overwhelming amount of studies showing these biological effects, which are absolutely known.

Lucas: So why don’t we hear about them on the mainstream news? Why is it not something that they’re taking into consideration. Why don’t they stop it?

Claire: Because this industry, the telecommunications industry is one of the most powerful industries on this planet. And they estimate that the 5G rollout is worth approximately 17 trillion dollars. And you will also find, since about three months ago because of the success of our Appeal and because so many millions of people now know about the dangers of 5G, the mainstream media started a pushback of fake news. This is mainstream media fake news, which started about three months ago. And you will find that, for example, the BBC has some sort of collaboration going with a telecommunications company. Le Monde in France has done two attacks on what we are saying, one very recently which was specifically about our Appeal.

Lucas: That was a French paper?

Claire: That’s one of the main French newspapers, and that is owned by a man who owns a telecommunications company. And so it goes on. You will find very strong links between the telecommunications companies and the newspapers. So, for example, there was an article in The New York Times about three or four months ago attacking what we’re saying and then it was done – in fact, attacking what Russia Today America was saying about 5G and then Russia Today answered back and said, well, actually The New York Times has a collaboration with Verizon, one of the very major American telecommunications companies. So frankly, the mainstream media has a huge conflict of interest. Not a single whisper comes out about the dangers of 5G. There is no balance and if you listen to what they say about the evidence – please listen carefully because I’ve written an article about this and it’s called BBC Fake News on 5G Decoded – how to decode this fake news. Because if you listen very carefully to what they say. Every time they say there is no evidence, they say there is no solid evidence, there is no convincing evidence, there is no valid evidence. Listen for the key word: there’s lots of evidence, but it’s not solidconvincingvalidbelievable, etc.

Lucas: So is it not solid? Is it not believable? Is it not something we can trust?

Claire: Well, you know, do you want to dismiss in excess of 28,000 studies? And in that case, why then would the American military have compiled all these compendia on the biological effects of microwave radiation? Why would they have bothered if none of this is solid, convincing, valid or believable?

Lucas: But all these people behind the scenes or whoever is part of rolling it out, they will be irradiated as well?

Claire: I don’t know what they believe. I think that there are some innocent parties in this. I certainly believe that a lot of the people who work for the telecommunications companies cannot be aware of this.

Lucas: And so it’s on a need-to-know basis? It’s more like a compartmentalized …

Claire: Well, no, it goes back to the thermal hypothesis, you see. The regulatory agencies have put out the lie about the thermal hypothesis and a lot of people have believed it because they’re simply not aware of the biological effects. And so the main culprit in this is the so-called “international commission on non-ionizing radiation protection (icnirp). And this has this very grand name “international commission” so we should all respect this international commission. What this is, this is simply a club under German law. Now I could go and I could start a club and I could call myself the international commission. So this international commission so-called, it appoints its own members. There is no transparency; there is no supervision. It has no legal standing in international law. And yet, clearly they must be doing the bidding of industry, their pronouncements – they dismiss all the science on the biological effects. They say there is only thermal effect. And then, mysteriously, their pronouncements are taken up by the World Health Organization and by the International Telecommunication Union, both of which are UN organizations. And, as far as I can see, there is no legitimacy in the fact that their pronouncements are taken up. And you may also wish to consider that on icnirp’s website, they actually have a disclaimer disclaiming all responsibility for any of their pronouncements, obviously including their so-called safety guidelines, which actually don’t protect anybody from anything whatsoever.

Lucas: And the UN is not taking any action on this either, right?

Claire: The UN is the chief promoter of this.

Lucas: But you worked for the United Nations for a long time. So why aren’t they doing that? Do you think that the United Nations is actually a part of the New World Order structure?

Claire: I have no idea if they are part of the New World Order, but you can just look at what the United Nations actually does.

Lucas: You worked there?

Claire: I worked there and I came into this because, in December 2015, I was working in Vienna at the Vienna International Centre and they put up public access points on the ceilings. Now, these public access points were for Wi-Fi and cell phones and they have very little in common with your home Wi-Fi router. They are much, much more powerful. So when I saw these go up on the ceilings, I was extremely concerned and I tried to bring it to the attention of the authorities in Vienna, none of whom listened to me. And I was sick as a result of that. I was sick for seven months with flu, cold, flu, cold, flu, cold and the symptoms of flu …

Lucas: Caused by that, do you think?

Claire: Well, I would say so. I didn’t realize this until afterwards when I was talking to a friend. I didn’t realize it at the time but afterwards I thought, “Well, gosh, that happened as soon as those things went up”. And the symptoms of flu are almost identical to the symptoms of radiation poisoning, you know, so it’s very difficult for a doctor to differentiate between the two. So I was sick for seven months and, because nobody would listen to me and because I was extremely concerned about the situation, I actually took early retirement to get out of there. But I continued to try to alert people, including the Medical Service at the UN in Vienna, and nobody listened. Nobody even replied to my emails. So in the end, when I heard that the Secretary-General was coming in May last year and was going to speak to staff – you have to understand that when you work for the UN, you keep a grounds pass when you retire. So you’re still part of the UN if, you know, even though you’re retired.

Lucas: So you had access to go there?

Claire: Yes. So I went there to warn him about these public access points and also about 5G. Now, what I find extremely interesting – so that video is now on the Internet– and if you watch that video, what is extremely interesting is that it took me quite a time to read what I had to say out to the Secretary-General. So in other words, he had about three minutes to think how to respond to me. And when he responded to me, he laughed. Which is – I find that quite a strange response.

Lucas: Why did he laugh? That is so immature, isn’t it?

Claire: Well, I mean, I had brought my very serious concerns to him about the welfare of the UN staff. I mean, I hear anecdotally that many people have had breast cancer, some people have died. People have had heart attacks. I know a lot of people have had burnout, which is also associated with exposure to electromagnetic radiation.

Lucas: Stress, huh?

Claire: No, it’s to do with electromagnetic radiation. There’s also connections there so I know that there have been very serious consequences, but I only know anecdotally. What I was asking was that, for example, building biology experts should be brought in. Nobody needs to listen to me. I’m not an expert. I’m simply raising the alarm. So I asked the UN to bring in experts and they failed to do so. Now, what I find interesting about the fact that the Secretary-General laughed is that he could have done something else. So I raised my very serious concerns about the welfare of the staff and his response was to laugh. I find that wildly inappropriate myself. And also think about what he did notsay. So I should have been reassured – if these public access points are fine on the ceilings and he knows that they are fine, then actually he should have reassured me and said, “Oh, don’t worry about a thing. It’s all absolutely safe”. He did not do that.

Lucas: So, other than finding it funny and laughing, did he actually say something constructive or anything that you could use positively?

Claire: He said that he would consult the World Health Organization, which he did not do subsequently. Now, then you have to look at what the Secretary-General actually did do after I told him about 5G. First of all, I should say that he is an electrical engineer by training and also a physicist and he also taught telecommunications signals early in his career. So if there’s one man on this planet who should have known what I was talking about, about the dangers …

Lucas: Should have been him, shouldn’t it?

Claire: … he should have known. So what did he actually do? Approximately two months later he appointed a High-Level Panel on Digital Cooperation and this was to promote digitalization. And this Panel was stuffed solely with industry insiders. So this was all Melinda Gates and the man who started Ali Baba … all people who were pro-5G. So this was about promoting 5G. There was not a single doctor involved; there was not a single environmentalist involved. Then he went on to bring out a document on digital technologies. So, basically, you have these digital technologies being pushed through absolutely every UN programme. The word – if you look at the literature, the word that’s used in the UN literature – and other literature emanating from the European Union and the US – the word they use is to “blanket” the Earth. Their intention is to blanket the Earth. As I have already described, 53,000 satellites, pseudosatellites in the stratosphere, networked civil aviation, densification of antennas absolutely everywhere. They intend that every square centimetre of this planet be bathed in electromagnetic radiation. Now when you consider that, already, we have the canaries in the coalmine – you could say – are so-called electrohypersensitive people. Now this term electrohypersensitivity, it’s actually a political term, because, when you talk about, “Oh, you are electrohypersensitive”, this points the finger at you. “Oh, you have a problem because you are electrohypersensitive. The rest of us are not feeling anything” – because this is the problem, you don’t feel anything. We are all being attacked and our health is being massively damaged and the environment is being damaged. So some people – and we don’t know why – but some people feel this, where others don’t.

Lucas: Maybe later on they’ll feel it.

Claire: Well, with 5G, I mean, I’m quite sure that everybody will feel it because this is going to be …

Lucas: But this is the United Nations and the WHO we’re talking about here. People depend on these organizations. They think they’re doing something good, right? Trying to help the human race. That’s at least the official narrative.

Claire: There tends to be a very positive view. But we live in a society where authority is respected and people defer to authority. And I would say this is exactly the problem. That people do not realize that actually they need to inform themselves of what is really going on. And people need to realize that they have a lot of power to change what is going on.

Lucas: But the UN Secretary-General, he knows. Because he’s part of – he knew about all of this, being an engineer, right?

Claire: Yes, I would say he undoubtedly has to know.

Lucas: I mean, really know, in depth.

Claire: Yes, really know, yes, in depth. Yes.

Lucas: Yes, so this he knows and therefore he is actually he’s implement … he’s part of the knowledge and going against what is actually secure and good for the human race. That’s really what it comes down to, right?

Claire: I don’t believe in coincidences. He was appointed Secretary-General at the time when it was known that 5G was going to be rolled out. So I don’t believe in coincidences

Lucas: And he was not too thrilled to meet you when you asked him those questions or presented this material in front of him?

Claire: He patronized me. He may be regretting it now because it was actually what he did that caused me to start cooperating and working on the International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space.

Lucas: And we’re gonna talk, of course, much more about that. But why do you think that they’re rolling it out at rapid speed – so fast. Why does that have to happen, so fast?

Claire: That question was actually asked in an EU report [page 6: “The notion of a “race” is part of the campaign”]. It was asked sceptically in an EU report earlier this year. And frankly, I think nobody knows why this has been characterized as a race. My guess is that they need to roll it out before people really realize. Or they hoped to roll it out before people really realized the dangers of 5G and by giving it the name “5G”, people assume that it’s just more of the same as 4G, but just a lot better and a lot faster.

Lucas: “Next generation.”

Claire: So they were hoping really that nobody would inform the public about the real nature of 5G. So by characterizing it as a race, you have to get there before any other country gets there …

Lucas: Because it’s easier to stop it than to take it back or to actually disarm it or destroy it afterwards?

Claire: Er, no. I think they wanted to roll it out before people could realize how damaging it would be. And before people had an opportunity to organize and stop it.

Lucas: It’s more difficult to take it away once it’s there.

Claire: I would say it’s extremely difficult to take it away once it’s there. How are you going to take down 53,000 satellites once they are up? The whole point about 5G is that it affects your brain. I mean, not only does it affect your body, but it affects your brain and therefore it affects your judgment. It can also be used for mind control because it’s very closely associated with HAARP. It has many of the same characteristics as far as I can see …

5G Cell Phone Radiation: How the Telecom Companies Are Losing the Battle to Impose 5G Against the Will of the People

Lucas: Please, for the viewers, just explain what HAARP is.

Claire: HAARP is the – if I can remember correctly – the High Frequency Active Auroral Research Program. H-A-A-R-P and it’s an ionospheric heater. And what you can do with HAARP is you can mind-control people, you can change their emotional state, all sorts of things.

Lucas: Weather.

Claire: The weather, yes, you can interfere with the weather. It’s a very sinister tool. And it heats the ionosphere. Now, my question would be – I think that there are very close parallels between HAARP and 5G. Of course, nobody is drawing attention to this.

Lucas: Some people say that HAARP, which was in Alaska, is no longer functioning.

Claire: No, that’s not true. There was an interview with Dr. Nick Begich, who has written several books on this. And it’s all a switcheroo. It’s all just public relations to make people believe things.

Lucas: So it’s kept under the radar?

Claire: In his opinion, it was taken over, I think, from the American military, it was given to DARPA. And, as we know, DARPA is one of the most sinister organizations on this planet. And from DARPA, it was then transferred to the University of Alaska. So it comes under the University of Alaska now, but the University of Alaska was already working with the American military on HAARP. So it’s just a question of PR. Now the University of Alaska is still providing the same services to those same “clients”, if you want to call it. So, basically, it’s still controlled by the same people. HAARP has multiplied over the years so I believe – I mean, I can’t substantiate that – I haven’t done any detailed research into HAARP, but I believe that there are HAARP stations all around the world at this stage.

Lucas: The European version is placed in Norway, in Tromso.

Claire: Exactly. Exactly. And that was just updated – a couple of years ago there was a huge investment in that. So, far from being downgraded, I would say this is something that has been upgraded.

Lucas: So just explain DARPA. What does that stand for? What is DARPA?

Claire: [Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.] I’ve forgotten what it stands for. This is the organization that does some of the most sinister projects on the planet. So, for example, they have designed these battlefield robots that look like robotic dogs. Now, the problem on the battlefield – and this really shows you the connection with 5G because you can – so, for example, the invasion of Iraq by the US.

Lucas: In 2003.

Claire: Yes, exactly. So a lot of the veterans from the Iraq so-called war came back and complained of some sort of peculiar syndrome. Now, it would appear that, in fact, the Iraq invasion – they were using electronic weapons. So if you listen to what Mark Steele has to say … Mark Steele is based in the UK and he’s a weapons expert. And he says that 5G is battlefield interrogation technology, which it is. So what happened with these Iraq veterans is that they were very damaged by this battlefield interrogation technology. And therefore you really cannot deploy soldiers on the battlefield any more, which is why you need these DARPA robotic dogs.

Lucas: Like Manchurian Candidate syndrome, really?

Claire: That sort of thing, yes. It’s a similar technology. I mean, we also have to realize that the mind-control technology goes back decades. And was taken from the Nazis. In Operation Paperclip, where a lot of Nazis were – thousands of Nazi scientists were brought into the US. And all the various projects that they worked on were taken up by the Americans. And, of course, they’ve had decades to improve this technology.

Lucas: CIA?

Claire: Yes, and the mind-control technology is absolutely real.


Claire: MKULTRA. And it’s extremely sophisticated at this stage and 5G also includes mind control.

Lucas: So frequencies can be beamed from this satellite grid around Earth that they’re creating with this technology? And it can be beamed into a person’s mind in order to make them do certain things or think in a certain direction. Is that what you mean?

Claire: Exactly. Well, we have the proof you see. This was deployed during the Iraq war when these frequencies were beamed at Iraqi soldiers. In fact, it was put on top of a radio signal so when they were listening to prayers and so forth and they went into fear and panic. And they were told to put down their weapons and they did. So they didn’t understand where this fear and panic came from. So we’ve already had a public demonstration of this.

Lucas: Is 5G part of UN agenda 21, also now known as UN Agenda 2030?

Claire: I can’t really speak to that because I don’t have expertise in that area. I would simply say that 5G …

Lucas: Even if you worked for the UN?

Claire: Well, no, because it depends who you work for. I worked in the Conference Management Service so we were providing services to conferences, so translations and documentation, conference rooms, etc. And, you know, there are many different parts of the UN. So Agenda 21 is the UN Environment Programme and we don’t have the UN Environment Programme in Vienna. In Vienna, we work on space so I edited a lot of the space documents, which is why I have some knowledge of space law and the issues in space.

Lucas: And they also work closely with NASA?

Claire: Not necessarily, no.

Lucas: When you talk about space?

Claire: Oh, well – you know – there are various parts of the UN work on space. So you have the Office of Disarmament Affairs is one, the First Committee in New York is another one. And in Vienna we have the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space and so for several years I edited all the documents for them, including their Legal, and Scientific and Technical subcommittees. And what I can tell you is that the two major, major issues that were always talked of were space debris and weaponization. So right now – I don’t know if it’s because of 25 years of cell phone use, but it’s like we have gone into some sort of collective amnesia because the 5G rollout is totally illegal. It’s totally illegal on every level. The number of international treaties that it breaches– you know – I can’t even list them for you. But environmental treaties, human rights, space law. It’s astonishing. And so the two issues that the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space [discussed] were always space debris and weaponization. And it’s almost as if those discussions never ever took place because now we’re putting up 53,000 satellites and so the two issues – let’s separate them. So the space debris – there was a paper written, I think back in the 1970s or 1980s by a man called Kessler who posited what became called the Kessler syndrome. And what he says is that if you reach a point where you have so much space debris that it starts colliding, you could have a cascade effect where you cannot stop the constant cascade of collisions and you would have a situation where the space orbits became unusable for a thousand years.

Lucas: Please explain to us where this space debris comes from. How does that happen?

Claire: Well, there’s – we’ve had a lot of space exploration, obviously, for decades, and so as you – I mean, some, certain countries have actually attacked their own satellites.

Lucas: So it’s from satellites, it’s from rockets or from …

Claire: Rockets, satellites, all the activities that have gone on in space. So you you’ve had I think the US has also attacked its own satellite. Certainly China did, and India did. India did that earlier this year. And when you destroy your own satellite, of course, it shatters into – I don’t know how many pieces. And you have to consider that the velocity at which these pieces travel means that the tiniest, tiniest piece could cause such damage, for example, to the International Space Station, that it could no longer function. So the tiniest – it’s not a question of size. The tiniest piece can be absolutely devastating. And they estimate that there are over 500,000 pieces of space debris already. And by 2025 they estimate that …

Lucas: How can it cause damage when it’s so tiny?

Claire: Because of the velocity at which it travels. And also there was a project during the Cold War called Project West Ford, where the Americans put up 480 million needles into the Earth orbits and those are still up there. They’re floating around. So you – if you look at a picture of space debris. If you go on to YouTube, for example, and look up the Kessler syndrome or space junk, you can actually see the tremendous amount of space debris that exists up there. And so, at the UN, year after year after year, they constantly talked about the dangers from space debris. And now suddenly we’ve forgotten all of that. It’s like we never had those discussions. But now we’re going to put up 53,000 satellites and nobody considers it a problem any more. But the other issue that constantly came up year by year was the issue of weaponization of space. The Outer Space Treaty of 1966 bans weapons in space – it’s actually illegal now the problem with the weaponization of space is of course you don’t have visibility you can’t look out the window and see what’s happening in the earth orbits so if a military satellite and of course the militaries all depend increasingly on the intelligence satellites so if one of these satellites blips out suddenly and makes that country vulnerable. Now, if that country believes that it was another state that caused the , of their satellite, they could launch nuclear missiles! They could think that they’re under attack! It’s tremendously dangerous. This issue of weaponization in space. And again this is another issue where it’s as if these conversations never ever took place because now we have NATO, this December, intends to designate space a domain of warfare! And this year, President Trump announced a space force.President Macron of France has also announced a space force. Where are we going now? We have descended into lunacy now. And all I can suppose is that, because we’ve had 25 years of cell phones, people have lost their minds. It’s unimaginable what is happening now.

Lucas: Some people say that the governments of the world, well, the top elite factions of the governments are working with alien races, people from other worlds. What are your thoughts on that when you’re talking about, let’s say, human-made space stations around Earth?

Claire: I can’t speculate about alien races. I mean, my personal opinion is I don’t see why there should not be alien races. If we exist, you know, why should alien races not equally exist? But I can’t really speak to that, but I can speak to artificial intelligence. Again, this is not an area where I have expertise.

Lucas: People think that 5G is actually, let’s just say a pathway, a route to AI, artificial intelligence.

Claire: Absolutely. 5G is what facilitates artificial intelligence.

Lucas: Is that the agenda?

Claire: 5G, in my view, is about a total surveillance and mind control and kill grid. That’s what 5G is.

Lucas: A kill grid? In order to kill the population?

Claire: Well, people speculate on that.

Lucas: What are your thoughts?

Claire: Well, you know, people say, “Is it a weapon?” Well, you know, if you have a technology which is potentially going to annihilate everything on Earth, do we need to decide whether it’s a weapon or not? I mean, the only difference between it being a weapon and not a weapon is just intention.

Lucas: But why would the leaders of the world and even the moguls in the financial system who are behind the whole control system. Why would they want to kill a large number of the population on Earth known as depopulation?

Claire: Please don’t ask me for insights into the mind of psychopaths. You know, I am not the author of 5G. I think it is more insane, demented than anything I have ever come across in my life.

Lucas: Is it because they think we’re too many or is it because a growing number of the population is waking up to what possibly is behind what we talked about just before a little bit –the new world order structure, a one-world government strategy.

Claire: Well, for me it is a form of madness. What we have in the West is – we have the materialist-reductionist paradigm. And this is very much left-brain thinking. So in left-brain thinking, everything is separate, so nothing is ever seen in context. And in left-brain thinking, you are very much in fear. You tend to exercise control. The right-brain thinking is much more holistic and much more accepting of the idea that you cannot grasp everything – not everything is understandable. So the left-brain thinking is materialistic. Now, if you subscribe to this kind of thinking, which frankly I don’t. Nikola Tesla said that if you think of the universe in terms of energy, frequency and vibration, you would make more progress in a decade in science than ever before. So clearly it’s an energy universe. I mean, this is absolutely indisputable. And I don’t understand why anybody would even argue about it. Even at school we are taught that everything is atoms and molecules. So we know that everything is energy and when you touch something, you should know by now that what you’re touching is, it’s about electron repulsion. You’re not actually touching something solid because there IS nothing solid.

Lucas: Because atoms have no solidity. So everything is holographic in structure or …

Claire: According to some theories, yes. But it’s an energy universe. But when you believe – as many scientists, extraordinarily, still perpetuate this belief that we live in a material world, then you tend to think that everything is scarce and perishable. Life is limited. And therefore you live in fear. And you believe that the resources of the world are limited because they’re made of matter. Now, when you believe that, then you start to worry that you have too many people on Earth. So, depopulation agenda? Is it a conspiracy theory? Well, I would invite people to go and do the research because …

Lucas: Or conspiracy fact?

Claire: Conspiracy fact. Because if you go and do the research and you look at eugenics, this has been touted for well over a hundred years. And very prominent people such as George Bernard Shaw were talking about finding a humane gas to reduce the human population, so if …

Lucas: Bill Gates talked about it.

Claire: Bill Gates talked about it as well.

Lucas: Even Prince Philip.

Claire:  I don’t know if that’s true or not. I’ve certainly heard it. But eugenics and the depopulation agenda is absolutely real. So whether 5G is intended to depopulate the planet, I couldn’t say, but as to its potential for doing so, absolutely!

Lucas: What’s the reason for AI? What is artificial intelligence? Well, that of course explains a little bit what it is, but please talk about why we need that. Why do we want to connect the human brain to artificial intelligence?

Claire: Well, this again for me, it goes to your perception of our existence and potential as human beings. Our brain is fantastically powerful so when Elon Musk talks about the Neuralink, it seems to me a complete inversion. So what he’s offering is that people should connect up their brains to the Internet. And artificial intelligence can be thought of as algorithms, so, you know, in terms of algorithms, I mean it’s pathetic and childish. So I think that this kind of Neuralink and this kind of artificial intelligence is actually about tapping our brain power. It’s not about us connecting ourselves to the Internet and tapping in to the Internet. No. It’s that for such an Internet to work they would actually need our brain power. So it’s complete nonsense to think that you want to connect your brain via Neuralink.

Lucas: To imprison the mind.

Claire: Yes, I think it’s about imprisoning the mind. Absolutely. Yes. But as to artificial intelligence, you know, I think that there are different perceptions of artificial intelligence. It always seemed to me – I was never interested in Facebook. But if you look back to the beginning of the Internet, you used to receive these emails from people, which said “Oh, you have to send on this email to 10 people within the next 15 minutes, and then something wonderful will happen to you”. And I was always very suspicious of this so I never did it. And then Facebook started up and it was very clear to me from the start that Facebook was about getting people’s data. So what they’ve collected over the years is the human reaction to every type of human event in order to develop machines such as Sophia the robot. So that Sophia can come out with a reaction to anything that she might be presented with because it’s been picked up from social media. So is this creature intelligent? I would say absolutely not. It’s just based on algorithms. Now, whether there is another type of artificial intelligence on another level, which could be trained to be intelligent. Well, that may be possible, yes.

Lucas: What are you talking about now? Are you talking about something other-worldly, extraterrestrial or connected to that?

Claire: Well, there’s the algorithmic AI, which I think, frankly, is pretty childish and it’s just imitative of human beings. A sort of fake imitation. But there’s also another level to AI, where it’s posited that machines can actually learn. And that, I think, is extremely sinister and I think it’s that aspect of AI that the UK Prime Minister was addressing when he spoke at the General Assembly just a few weeks ago. And he gave a very, very strong warning about the threat from AI. And he spent some time on it. And he talked about it as a dark cloud, lowering over the human race, over which potentially the human race would have no say whatsoever. So I was very glad to see that he …

Lucas: Boris Johnson?

Claire: Boris Johnson.

Lucas: Why do you think that he actually did that? If he’s part of – like all presidents and prime ministers in a way, supposedly part of this new world order structure and the whole agenda behind that. Why do you think he actually spoke and was allowed to talk about that?

Claire: Well, because I do think that occasionally you can get wildcards. I don’t think everybody … You know, I personally don’t live in fear and paranoia. And so I think that it’s perfectly possible to get somebody who is independent-minded and don’t forget that Boris Johnson came to be Prime Minister in a fairly accidental way because of Brexit. Now, there’s been some questioning about the – how can I put it? The authenticity of what Boris Johnson said. And in the second part of his speech he went on to talk about the importance of vaccinations and so on.

Lucas: And you’re not for that?

Claire: No. And I just think that that was window dressing because he had to be supportive of technologies for strategic reasons. But if you listen to the first part of his speech, he – Boris Johnson is a maverick. And I think that 5G is going to be combatted by mavericks. What you need is, you need free-thinkers, people who don’t just go with the herd. People who actually are clear-sighted and can see what is happening and are prepared to stand up and oppose it. And it seems to me that Boris Johnson is one of those. I’m told that he has planted an enormous number of trees. Certainly he always used to cycle to the House of Commons. So it seems to me that – he’s also a writer and a journalist and he’s benefited from a very good education. So I would say that he was genuine when he was talking.

Lucas: But you don’t like what he said about vaccinations?

Claire: Well, it would appear that, possibly, the vaccinations, the purpose of the vaccinations is again something to do with interfering with the processes of the mind because the adjuvant that is used in vaccinations is aluminium. And it would appear that aluminium in some way also works with these frequencies. Now, I’m not sure exactly how, but certainly aluminium and barium had something to do with the HAARP processes. So equally, I would suggest, that that’s going to affect the brain – the combination of the aluminium adjuvant and these frequencies.

Lucas: And microchipping the population, even through vaccines.

Claire: Well, you don’t need to microchip the population because everybody has cell phones and they’re addicted to them. And it would be my guess that very soon it will become compulsory to carry a “smart” phone. I don’t have one. I don’t want to be mind-controlled. I don’t have one. I took a hammer and I smashed my cell phone in January this year. And I’ve never been happier than to be free of this mobile phone.

Lucas: So please talk about your thoughts on climate change, which is the big thing at the moment. We are in October 2019 and all through this year we’ve been hearing about the climate, almost that the world is going under and that the whole CO2 scare and this Swedish girl, 16-year-old girl Greta Thunberg and how she has been promoted all over the world. But it seems that everybody is worried about the environment and the climate. But the same people are not very worried, it seems, about 5G. So what are your thoughts on climate change? Is it real or not? And why is it not connected to 5G?

Claire: As far as I’m concerned, you cannot talk about anthropogenic climate change as long as you are interfering with the weather, which is what you’re doing with HAARP and it’s what you’re doing with geoengineering. Now, as far as Little Greta is concerned, I thought – if you look at what she said in front of the UN, this terrible rage and distorted expression on her face. Pointing the finger and accusing adults of stealing her childhood. This is revolting. This child is being manipulated. She has a German handler who is paid by one of the George Soros organizations. The child is autistic. She’s being manipulated. And this is about distracting people from the reality of the danger of 5G. The Powers That Be want everybody to be looking in the wrong direction. And if you look at the – all the green parties, the environmental organizations, are so busy talking about anthropogenic climate change and they absolutely refuse to look at electromagnetic radiation, which has been far more devastating over the last 25 years. We have lost between 75 and 80 per cent of our insects at this stage. If you look – there are papers, studies that have been done. The insect loss in the Puerto Rico rainforest can also be attributed to the installation of a very large radar antenna there. There were other studies done in Germany on radar antennas, Cold War radar antennas which have shown absolute devastation to the environment [Summary of Invisible Rainbow: A History of Electricity and Life, chap. 16: Bees, Birds, Trees, and Humans;full book here]. So in my view, and in the view of a lot of scientists, the environmental devastation is actually far more attributable to electromagnetic radiation than it is to any hypothesized climate change.

Lucas: But everybody is talking about that now. It’s covered all in the mainstream media, on the news every single day. Everybody’s, even scientists are saying that we have manmade climate change.

Claire: There are – there’s a substantial body of scientists who say that there is no anthropogenic climate change. And if you look into the climate issue, you will find that the science has actually been distorted and the calculations have been very conveniently done to exclude the [Little] Ice Age. So these figures have been distorted. We know that there has been manipulation in scientific circles. So the whole climate change agenda originated – there was a very interesting document published a couple of months ago by the Canadian civil liberties organization. And they actually identified this fake climate change agenda as coming from, I think, the 1970s and …

Lucas: Club of Rome.

Claire: Club of Rome, exactly. So it’s something that has been cooked up to put people in fear and manipulate them. Now, as to the real motive behind the climate change agenda. This was revealed a couple of weeks ago, where I came across a very interesting article, which included a video, where our Little Greta has now teamed up with a very fake environmental journalist called George Monbiot who writes for the UK Guardian. And so we had Little Greta lying on a carpet on her stomach, looking into the camera. So they were clearly trying to make her look like an ordinary teenage girl and not an autistic child. So she spoke first and then she was followed by George Monbiot, who told us, “Wow, we have a machine that converts CO2 to oxygen and it’s called a tree!” So now we have, the trees are now machines. This again is materialist-reductionist paradigm. It’s the madness of seeing everything as mechanistic. The tree is a living organism. This is not a machine. And what I further learned from this article is that actually the aim of all this is a new regime which is “Naturocracy”. So Naturocracy is now about monetizing nature. So it’s not enough that the neoliberals of the last 40 years have stolen everything on this planet, stolen all the resources, exploited everybody, stacked up vast fortunes in tax havens, but now they want the Earth orbits, they want the stratosphere, they want the ionosphere, and they want every last blade of grass! This is what this is about. It’s about monetizing nature. That is the purpose of the fake climate change agenda. And I don’t know about you, but I find that frankly horrifying. This is my planet. This is my home and I will do everything to defend this planet and protect all the creatures that live on it and all the nature that lives on it. So I would say to people, they have to stop following blindly what they find in the media. Now, I suspect that, we do know that the cell phones are about mind control and manipulation. We know that people do become addicted to cell phones. Weapons expert Barrie Trower has told us that these phones are 17 times as addictive as heroin. So what you have now is, I think, you have memes that are put out by the media and they are reinforced by these cell phones to make people into herds who will simply follow what they have been told. And you can just move them left and right and manipulate them. I would ask people to stop parroting absolute nonsense which has no scientific foundation whatsoever and to actually go and do their own research. There’s enough information …

Lucas: Most people believe the scientists when they speak through the mainstream media.

Claire: Well, you know, it’s always a manipulation. I mean, you know, cui bono? Who is making money out of this? People need to ask some serious, hard questions.

Lucas: Who benefits.

Claire: Who benefits?

Lucas: Some of those people, some climate activists who are advocating that we have to really worry about the climate, say now that the oil company, I think called Exxon, is part of this anti-climate change propaganda happening, saying that it’s not real because they are worried about the whole oil industry thing. Do you think that could also be orchestrated?

Claire: I think everything is a fiction at this stage. I mean, if people were to wake up and look around them, I think they would quickly see that everything is a fiction. And I find it very interesting to note that you recently saw these so-called Extinction Rebellion people, who again are funded by the same George Soros organizations, by the way. But recently they all dressed up in red robes and protested somewhere. Now, did nobody else notice the parallels with the ISIS theatricals where the ISIS so-called terrorists were all dressed up in theatrical costumes and all arranged – you know, posing for photographs. It’s the same manipulation. I think that I would really say – I would really plead with people to get rid of these dangerous cell phones because people are clearly being prevented from thinking properly. Their brains don’t function properly and they’re being seriously misled. People need to get rid of these cell phones, they need to switch off their Wi-Fi routers, they need to cable their computers and they need to start seriously looking at the facts.

Lucas: Here in Denmark, and maybe other places around the world, “smart” meters are mandatory. It’s actually forced that we must have a “smart” meter rigged up in our homes. How can we actually say no to that?

Claire: Lucas, you can say no to anything. It depends whether you are in your power and your sovereignty. We are sovereign human beings. It doesn’t matter what manmade laws there are. It doesn’t matter what you are told. Ultimately, you are a human being and you are sovereign. So you don’t have to be told anything whatsoever. You simply refuse to cooperate. And this is really what is the problem on this planet. That people think they have no power. They do not realize that they are creator beings. And their intention creates everything. What do you think creates everything that we have around us? Everything started with an idea. Everything started with the creation of a mind. Everything that we have here is about intention. So the most important thing that we have to do now is say “No!” to this whole agenda. Every single part of it. Now, you don’t need everybody to do that; you simply need a sufficient number for a tipping point. So people need to take back their power. In fact, I would simply say they need to recognize the power that they have and they need to start asserting it. They just have to refuse. So do what you feel necessary to make sure that you do not have a “smart” meter. And I would say further, that you have a lot of – so the 5G rollout is taking place on a local basis and people are following orders. “Oh, the government told us we have to do this.” Okay, but the government is acting illegally under national and international law. So are you like Nazis now? Is that your excuse? That you’re going to follow orders and kill your local population? Or are you going to inform yourself and stand up and confront this agenda?

Lucas: You certainly do that through the International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space. Please talk about this initiative. Who is part of this International Appeal to Stop 5G and how can people join or sign up? What is the purpose of this Appeal? What do you think can be the positive result?

Claire: Well, there have been a lot of previous scientific appeals. People don’t realize this. There have been at least 60 previous appeals by scientists and doctors and none of those succeeded in coming to public notice, really. So they really didn’t have any effect because they remained within those closed circles and the governments and institutions just ignored them. Now, what’s different about our International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space is that, one, it’s extremely comprehensive. It’s telling you the whole context of 5G and not purely addressing the science. So it tells a story to people. It sets out the whole situation and, for me, the most important aspect of this Appeal is that it provides the information people need and information is empowering. So that’s the most important aspect of the Appeal as far as I’m concerned. In terms of an appeal, I think it’s questionable – making an appeal to the very organizations that are rolling out 5G, appealing to them to stop. I wonder about the effectiveness of that. However, again, the Appeal – by signing the Appeal, you are joining a project to refuse your consent. So rather than the Appeal side of things, it’s more like a vehicle to say that you do not agree with this agenda. So in those terms I think it’s extremely powerful. We currently have approximately 165,000 signatories, which includes many thousands of scientists and doctors and also organizations. We would like to have a lot more signatories. It’s being sent to the addressees at the moment, but it’s going to remain open for people to sign. And I would like to see millions of people sign that Appeal because, as I say, that expresses their own intention to oppose this agenda.

Lucas: How can people sign the Appeal?

Claire: Well, they simply look up “5G space appeal” on the Internet and they will instantly find it. There’s one other very significant thing about this Appeal. It’s that we chose as our symbol the bee. And the bee is a symbol of life. And it’s also an insect that we really love and we really love it because we know that the bee assists us in in having our food. So it’s something very beautiful and it’s motivating because we love the bee. Now, a lot of other appeals, they would put a cell phone mast as the symbol of their appeal. Well, you don’t motivate people by fear. You motivate people by love. And it’s absolutely love that motivates me in campaigning here. For me, this has nothing to do with fear. Now, when people – you know, some people say, “Oh, you know, they’re so powerful. There’s nothing I can do to change this because I’m just one person.” But this is absolute nonsense because – if you say that, it means that you have not understood 5G. 5G is potentially an annihilation event. Oleg Grigoriev, who is the head of the Russian National Committee on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection, he has called 5G “a slow Hiroshima”. Professor Emeritus Martin Pall has said that, with 5G we can expect societal breakdown within months, not years. So when you really understand 5G, you are not going to say, there is nothing I can do and I have no power. You are absolutely going to stand up and oppose this agenda.

Lucas: Can 5G be stopped from being rolled out?

Claire: Absolutely. I’ve always believed it. I’ve always said this must be stopped. The important thing is that 5G is unlike any other human challenge we have had because, in the past, when we’ve made mistakes, for example, with asbestos and tobacco. Okay, many people have been injured and many people have died and then we’ve adjusted and done something about it. But with 5G you cannot do that. You’re talking about a total surveillance, mind control and kill grid. Once this is in place, you will not be able to stop it. You will already be damaged. And you will not be able to withdraw it. So people have to take action now so that 5G never happens. Now, it’s being rolled out as we speak. In many countries, it’s being rolled out, but there’s also huge opposition. People have to realize that millions of people are now aware of the dangers of 5G. I have a list of at least 30 countries where people are opposing the 5G agenda. So far from being powerless, it’s absolutely the opposite. I recently published an article where I listed all the official pushback. I’m not talking about demonstrations I’m talking about official pushback against 5G and this is massive. We are already succeeding in stopping 5G.

Lucas: They stopped the rollout in the former EU capital, Brussels, in Belgium, didn’t they? Why do you think they hesitated or stopped it there and not all over the world?

Claire: Well, the Environment Minister said that the people of Brussels were not guinea pigs and she acknowledged that the scientific data were not there on the safety of 5G and therefore she was not prepared to roll it out in Brussels. My question would be, what’s happening with the rest of Belgium? Why do the environment ministers there only talk about Brussels? So are they rolling it out in the rest of Belgium? Or is it just Brussels that is unique? But you’ve already had – one company has pulled out of Australiabecause they were convinced by the health arguments. And another company has pulled out of the US. So we have to remember that this is being rolled out by commercial companies. So this is their Achilles heel. I would say that we need to keep pushing these companies. These companies cannot get insurance for injuries or damage caused by electromagnetic radiation. So this is their Achilles heel. One thing about these space launches. I would like to know whether these companies launching these satellites actually have insurance. Because there isa space Liability Convention, which says that launching states are responsible for any damage caused by objects launched into space. And if these companies cannot get insurance – you know, you have to think about the potential consequences here. I mean, you could have vastareas of this planet destroyed, you know, vast populations affected by this. So these companies need to have insurance in the many billions. Do they have any insurance at all? I mean, for example, we have Portugal now, which has set up a space port– or it’s just about to be set up in January 2020 on the island of Santa Maria in the Azores. And if you look at the Liability Convention, it’s the launching state that carries the liability for damage caused by a space launch. So you have to ask the question, “Why is Portugal establishing its space agency on Santa Maria, which is a little island with nothing. I would guess that they are trying to avoid liability. Now, Portugal is not a signatory to the Liability Convention, but nevertheless, we need to make these people accountable. What we have with 5G is a total free-for-all. And I come back to the beginning of this conversation, where we said that in 2016 Tom Wheeler said that they would not wait for the standards. That means that 5G is completely undefined. Now, a lot of people are saying that this is a crime against humanity under the Nuremberg Code because there has never been any health or safety testing on 5G. But, in my view, it’s not that that makes it a crime against humanity. What makes it a crime against humanity is that it’s undefined and it’s a free-for-all. Because if you had to define this and create norms and standards for this before it’s rolled out, it would never be rolled out. So the first person who has to be held liable for crimes against humanity is Tom Wheeler of the Federal Communications Commission. But we need now, as the population of the world, we need to hold these people accountable.

Lucas: And you say that the global warming or climate change scare propaganda is actually a diversion away from 5G, which you say is the essential problem.

Claire: Absolutely. The climate change agenda is a total distraction and it’s designed to have people focus on something which is irrelevant. 5G is a planetary emergency and everybody needs to drop everything to stop 5G.

Lucas: Is there any possibility …?

Claire: The people who realize this, Lucas, they have they have given up their jobs to work on this. I’ve been working on this day and night since I found out about it and that’s what you do once you understand 5G. If you are not currently working on stopping 5G, it means you don’t understand it yet. When you understand it, nothing else matters any more because this is about the survival of you, your children and this planet.

Lucas: Do you know if there is a possibility that we can shield ourselves from 5G radiation, the electromagnetic frequencies that’s coming from 5G? If it’s being rolled out.

Claire: This is one of my bêtes noires, my hobbyhorses. To me, this is another manifestation of the mad thinking of the left brain: “Oh, we have a disaster of a technology. Let’s find another technology to combat the last technological disaster. And if that turns out to be a disaster, perhaps we can find another technology to combat that as well.” The fact is, you cannot shield yourself against 5G. There is no shielding yourself against 5G. You’re not going to paint your walls with lead paint. You’re not going to wear little doo-dads, pendants and so on. There is nothing that you are going to be able to use to shelter yourself from 5G. And even if you did, what then would happen to the environment? How are you going to have your food when we have no pollinators left? Do you want to live in a totally devastated environment, where all the trees are dead? So the solution to this has to be holistic. It’s not about you solely and your individual survival. This is about the survival of all of us together and that’s why it’s so beautiful. I think that this is a problem for individuals to stand up to and cooperate with other individuals. So this is not a problem where you’re going to go to an organization or a leader or a government to stop this. This is the responsibility of every single individual to confront this. And when you confront 5G, you’re confronting something that is more terrifying than anything you have ever confronted in your life. Because you are talking about the potential annihilation of everything you have ever related to in your entire life. Everything you’ve ever known could be annihilated by this. So this is a terror such as you have never felt. You are facing your own death and you have to look truth in the face. And when you do that, you find that you pass through a trial by fire. And it’s necessary. If you like, this trial by fire is transformative. Because the only way you can deal with this is to change yourself. We have to change from passive, powerless beings into immensely powerful creator beings and say “No!” to this. And we do that inside ourselves. There are no answers out there. Forget it! Who’s doing this? All these authorities that you have believed in all your life – they are the ones doing this. And the only people who are going to stop this are individuals.

Lucas: So that is your most important message for people to hear if they are a bit fearful after hearing all of what you’ve said here.

Claire: Well, people have to realize that it’s necessary to feel the fear. Unless you feel the fear, you have not understood 5G unless you feel this terror. But all I can say is, yes, you feel the terror, and it’s a process and you pass through it and you come out the other side. And you come out the other side transformed. I don’t feel any fear about it. I have a job here to do, which is to stop 5G. And I do that in love; I don’t do that in fear. Because every time I hear something more horrible about an aspect of 5G, which unfortunately I hear pretty much every day, I actually feel more love. I feel more love and I feel more connection. When I walk out in the street and I see the children, the little children dancing and playing and smiling and laughing, I feel devastated for them. They don’t know that these antennas are underneath manhole covers or coming at them from cabinets on the street that they’re passing. They don’t know that these cell phones are injuring their brains. They have no idea. These are innocents in all of this and I feel tremendous love for them. I feel tremendous love for the trees. So everything I hear about 5G now actually generates more love in me. For me, 5G means fifth-generation, but for me, what it is generating? It’s generating love. Now, you know, people talk about the Awakening. 2012 and the Awakening. Well, to my mind, 5G IS the Awakening. That’s exactly what it is. So when you confront 5G, you transform internally. And the Awakening is not something out there, it’s something in here. And it’s every individual responding to this threat. And what is unique about 5G is precisely that there is no escape. It’s hermetically sealed. You cannot protect yourself because it’s going to come at you from everywhere. And therefore you have to transform. Therefore, the answer is always within yourself. So 5G for me is absolutely perfect. And in my team, we always say, “I love 5G”.

Lucas: If people want to know more, read your articles, maybe get involved, to participate or something, or have you to come to their place or their country for a lecture, how can they contact you?

Claire: People – a lot of my articles are published on Global Research. I think they probably have all of my articles at this stage.

Lucas: What is the website?

Claire: Well, just look up Global Research and my name and they’ll find me as an author on Global Research and they’ll be able to see all my articles. Now, the mainstream media is completely missing in action over 5G so what I try to do is I try to write articles which address the different aspects of 5G. I’m trying to cover the different aspects. Now, as a former UN editor, I reference everything extremely carefully. I don’t put anything in my articles that I cannot substantiate. So if people look at the references and the links to those articles, they can do their own research and they will see that I have all the evidence in those articles.

Lucas: Under your name, Claire Edwards.

Claire: Absolutely. I try to simplify and make this – I like to put the whole thing in context and try to make it clear for people. So, at the end of those articles, they will find my address and they can contact me there. []

Lucas: It’s been absolutely fascinating, really informative, mind-blowing and very, very interesting to have you on the show and you are obviously a great inspiration and we wish you the best of luck with the International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space. Claire Edwards, thank you very much for doing this interview.

Claire: Thank you for inviting me, Lucas. It’s been a real pleasure.

Lucas: Thank you.

Lucas: Thank you very much to Claire Edwards. And thanks to all of you for watching Age of Truth TV. You can support us by clicking onto our website, Age of Truth TV. And please like our videos, subscribe to our channel and hit the bell for notifications. Your support is greatly appreciated. Thank you very much for watching and we’ll see you again soon.


Video: The Madness of Putting 53,000 5G Satellites in Space

By Claire Edwards

Claire Edwards was speaking at a seminar in Oslo, Norway, on Saturday 26 October 2019.

Elon Musk has now applied to the Federal Communications Commission for permission to launch a further 30,000 satellites into Earth orbit, bringing the current total to 53,000 (October 2019). With the issues of space debris and weaponization being the two major issues of concern at the UN year after year, this is a mad enterprise, especially when NATO intends to declare space a domain of warfare in December 2019.

We stand at the brink of extinction if we do not stop the madness.

Claire Edwards, BA Hons, MA, worked for the United Nations as Editor and Trainer in Intercultural Writing from 1999 to 2017. Since May 2018, she has collaborated with Arthur Firstenberg to publish the International Appeal to Stop 5G on Earth and in Space (www.5gspaceappeal.org), which is available in 30 languages. The Appeal has attracted over 153,000 individual and group signatories from more than 207 countries as of 7 October 2019. Claire warned the Secretary-General about the dangers of 5G during a meeting with UN staff in May 2018, calling for a halt to its rollout at UN duty stations.

America is flying blind into a potentially disastrous health catastrophe: The ‘5G revolution’ could bring the ‘5G apocalypse’

By  - 20. November 2019

Image: America is flying blind into a potentially disastrous health catastrophe: The ‘5G revolution’ could bring the ‘5G apocalypse’

(Natural News) While globalists happily push 5G into America and now on a fast-track with words like ‘5G Revolution‘ being tossed around, the website Scientific American recently put out this story within which they warned “We Have No Reason to Believe 5G Is Safe“. As this story Steve Quayle linked to Sunday over at the Mind Unleashed reports of the Scientific American story, of particular significance is the fact that SciAm is the oldest continuously published monthly magazine in the United States, founded by inventor and publisher Rufus M. Porter in 1845, and running monthly since 1921. It is a highly influential publication, widely reputed for its rigorous scientific standards, and lauded by today’s fact-checkers as highly credible and staunchly pro-science.

(Article by Stefan Stanford republished from AllNewsPipeline.com)

With the Scientific American story reporting that “the technology is coming, but contrary to what some people say, there could be health risks“, their story confirmed much of what the independent media has been reporting for the past couple of years about 5G, that America is flying blind into a potentially disastrous health mess with potential damages to human beings including:

Millimeter waves are mostly absorbed within a few millimeters of human skin and in the surface layers of the cornea. Short-term exposure can have adverse physiological effects in the peripheral nervous system, the immune system and the cardiovascular system. The research suggests that long-term exposure may pose health risks to the skin (e.g., melanoma), the eyes (e.g., ocular melanoma) and the testes (e.g., sterility).

And as we’ve reported numerous times previously on ANP, with 5G technology using the same millimeter waves as the Pentagon’s Crowd-Control Active Denial Systems, we’re not surprised that one so-called ‘conspiracy theorist‘ in the UK recently took apart a 5G streetlight that was sent to him by a whistleblower and found technology equivalent to a weapon’s system.

Since we know that not everyone is going to take the word of a ‘conspiracy theorist‘ about the dangers of 5G, before we go any further, let’s take a look at a recent warning given by one Medical doctor, Dr. Martin Pall, in this story titled “5G and the Wireless Revolution: When Progress Becomes a Death Sentence. Much more below including how we can go about protecting ourselves from 5G and other wireless radiation as also heard in the final video at the bottom of this story. These quotes from Dr. Pall are mind boggling.

“Without any 5G, without any expansion of 4G, without putting any radar units in cars, all of these things are being planned for us, I believe we’ll be going…our reproduction will crash essentially to zero within probably about 2-3 years….5G, it could be months…”

“The regulatory agencies around the world have been corrupted by the industry and are serving the goals of the industry, and are not serving the goals of the people that they’re supposed to be protecting.”

You can hear directly from Dr. Pall in the 3rd video at the bottom of this story in which he expands upon those thoughts above and much more, warning the fast-tracking of 5G across America is absolutely insane.

While the FCC continues over and over and over again to say that 5G is safe, the extended excerpt below which comes to us from this story over at Global Research titled “5G Danger: 13 Reasons 5G Wireless Technology Will Be a Catastrophe for Humanity” gives us many reasons to believe otherwise.

The 5G danger can’t be overstated. 5G (5th Generation) is now being actively rolled out in many cities around the world. Simultaneously, as awareness over its horrific health and privacy impacts is rising, many places are issuing moratoriums on it or banning it, such as the entire nation of Belgium, the city of Vaud (Switzerland) and San Francisco (USA). Radiofrequency radiation (RF or RFR) and electromagnetic fields (EMF) are being increasingly recognized as new types of pollution – environmental pollution.

Read more at: AllNewsPipeline.com and 5GAlert.com.


Oct 17, 2019

250,000 Telecom workers are burned by cell towers every year according to a new insurance company study….


There are more than 1,000 scientific studies

- conducted by independent researchers from around the world concerning the biological effects of RF radiation.

Here we present some of the most recent. 

I. Effects On Fetal And Newborn Development

  1. Mother’s Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields Before and During Pregnancy is Associated with Risk of Speech Problems in Offspring. Zarei, S., et al. Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering 9(1):61-68 (2019).

  2. Prenatal Exposure to Extremely Low Frequency Magnetic Field and Its Impact on Fetal Growth. Ren, Y., et al. Environmental Health (2019).

  3. The Effects of Radio Frequency Radiation on Mice Fetus Weight, Length and Tissues. Alimohammadi, I., et al. Data in Brief 19:2189-2194 (2018).

  4. Effects of Prenatal Exposure to WiFi Signal (2.45 GHz) on Postnatal Development and Behavior in Rat: Influence of Maternal Restraint. Othman, H., et al. Behavioral Brain Research 326: 291-301 (2017).

  5. Exposure to Magnetic Field Non-Ionizing Radiation and the Risk of Miscarriage: A prospective Cohort Study. Li, De-Kun, et al. Scientific Reports (2017). 

  6. Postnatal Development and Behavior Effects of In-Utero Exposure of Rats to Radiofrequency Waves Emitted From Conventional WiFi Devices. Othman, H., et al. Environmental Toxicology and Pharmacology 52:239-247 (2017).

  7.  Lasting Hepatotoxic Effects of Prenatal Mobile Phone Exposure. Yilmaz, A., et al. The Journal of Maternal-Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 30(11): 1355-1359 (2017).

  8. Multiple Assessment Methods of Prenatal Exposure to Radio Frequency Radiation from Telecommunication in the Mothers and Children’s Environmental Health (MOCEH) Study. Choi, Ha, et al. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health 29(6):959-972 (2016).

  9. The Use of Signal-Transduction and Metabolic Pathways to Predict Human Disease Targets from Electric and Magnetic Fields Using in vitro Data in Human Cell Lines. Parham, Portier, et al. Frontiers in Public Health (2016). 

  10. A Review on Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs) and the Reproductive System. Asghari, Khaki, et al. Electronic Physician 8(7):2655-2662 (2016).

  11. Genotoxicity Induced by Foetal and Infant Exposure to Magnetic Fields and Modulation of Ionising Radiation Effects. Udroiu, Antoccia, et al. PLoS One (2015).

  12. Oxidative Stress of Brain and Liver is Increased by Wi-Fi (2.45 GHz) Exposure of Rats During Pregnancy and the Development of Newborns. Çelik, Ömer, et al. Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy 75(B):134-139 (2015).

  13. Neurodegenerative Changes and Apoptosis Induced by Intrauterine and Extrauterine Exposure of Radiofrequency Radiation. Güler, Göknur, et al. Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy 75(B):128-133 (2015).

  14. Maternal Exposure to a Continuous 900-MHz Electromagnetic Field Provokes Neuronal Loss and Pathological Changes in Cerebellum of 32-Day-Old Female Rat Offspring. Odaci, Ersan, et al. Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy 75(B):105-110 (2015).

  15. Different Periods of Intrauterine Exposure to Electromagnetic Field: Influence on Female Rats' Fertility, Prenatal and Postnatal Development. Alchalabi, Aklilu, et al.  Asian Pacific Journal of Reproduction 5(1):14-23 (2015).

  16. Use of Mobile Phone During Pregnancy and the Risk of Spontaneous Abortion. Mahmoudabadi, Ziaei, et al. Journal of Environmental Health Science and Engineering  13:34 (2015).

  17. Oxidative Mechanisms of Biological Activity of Low-Intensity Radiofrequency Radiation. Yakymenko, et al.  Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine 34(3):1-16 (2015).

  18. Effects of Prenatal 900 MHz Electromagnetic Field Exposures on the Histology of Rat Kidney. Ulubay, et al. International Journal of Radiation Biology 91(1):35-41 (2015).

  19. The Effect of Exposure of Rats During Prenatal Period to Radiation Spreading from Mobile Phones on Renal Development. Bedir, et al. Renal Failure 37(2):305-9 (2014).

  20. Dosimetric Study of Fetal Exposure to Uniform Magnetic Fields at 50 Hz. Liorni, et al. Bioelectromagnetics  35(8):580-97 (2014).

  21. Influence of Pregnancy Stage and Fetus Position on the Whole-Body and Local Exposure of the Fetus to RF-EMF. Varsier, et al. Physics in Medicine and Biology 59(17):4913-26 (2014).

  22. Autism-Relevant Social Abnormalities in Mice Exposed Perinatally to Extremely Low Frequency Electromagnetic Fields. Alsaeed, et al. International Journal of Developmental Neuroscience 37:58-6 (2014).

  23. Pyramidal Cell Loss in the Cornu Ammonis of 32-day-old Female Rats Following Exposure to a 900 Megahertz Electromagnetic Field During Prenatal Days 13–21. Bas, et al. NeuroQuantology Volume 11, Issue 4: 591-599 (2013).

  24. The Effects of 900 Megahertz Electromagnetic Field Applied in the Prenatal Period on Spinal Cord Morphology and Motor Behavior in Female Rat Pups. Odaci, et al. NeuroQuantology Volume 11, Issue 4: 573-581 (2013).

  25. Fetal Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure From 800-1900 MHz-Rated Cellular Telephones Affects Neurodevelopment and Behavior in Mice. Aldad, Gan, et al. Scientific Reports 2(312) (2013).

  26. Cranial and Postcranial Skeletal Variations Induced in Mouse Embryos by Mobile Phone Radiation. Fragopoulou, Koussoulakos, et al. Pathophysiology 17(3):169-77 (2010).

  27. Dysbindin Modulates Prefrontal Cortical Glutamatergic Circuits and Working Memory Function in Mice. Jentsch, et al Neuropsychopharmacology 34, 2601–8 (2009).

  28. Stress Signalling Pathways that Impair Prefrontal Cortex Structure and Function. Arnsten, A. F. National Review of Neuroscience 10, 410–22 (2009).

  29. Maternal Occupational Exposure to Extremely Low Frequency Magnetic Fields and the Risk of Brain Cancer in the Offspring. Li, Mclaughlin, et al. Cancer Causes & Control 20(6):945-55 (2009).

  30. Reproductive and Developmental Effects of EMF in Vertebrate Animal Models. Pourlis, A.F. Pathophysiology 16(2-3):179-89 (2009).

  31. Prenatal and Postnatal Exposure to Cell Phone Use and Behavioral Problems in Children. Divan, Kheifets, et al. Epidemiology19(4):523-29 (2008).

  32. Effects of Prenatal Exposure to a 900 MHz Electromagnetic Field on the Dentate Gyrus of Rats: A Stereological and Histopathological Study. Odaci, et al. Brain Research 1238: 224–229 (2008).

  33. Exposure to Cell Phone Radiation Up-Regulates Apoptosis Genes in Primary Cultures of Neurons and Astrocytes. Zhao, et al. Science Digest 412: 34–38 (2007).

  34. Cell Death Induced by GSM 900-MHz and DCS 1800-MHz Mobile Telephony Radiation. Panagopoulos, et al. Mutation Research626, 69–78 (2006).

  35. Ultra High Frequency-Electromagnetic Field Irradiation During Pregnancy Leads to an Increase in Erythrocytes Micronuclei Incidence in Rat Offspring. Ferreira, Knakievicz, et al. Life Sciences 80(1):43-50 (2006).

  36. Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Biederman, J. & Faraone, S. V. Lancet 366, 237–248 (2005).

  37. Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: An Overview of the Etiology and a Review of the Literature Relating to the Correlates and Lifecourse Outcomes for Men and Women. Brassett-Harknett, A. & Butler, N. Clinical Psychology Review 27,188–210 (2005).

II. Effects On Young Children 

  1. Electromagnetic Fields, Pulsed Radiofrequency Radiation, and Epigenetics: How Wireless Technologies May Affect Childhood Development. Sage, C. & Burgio, E. Child Development (2017). 

  2. Prospective Cohort Analysis of Cellphone Use and Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties in Children. Sudan, M, et al. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health (2016). 

  3. Why Children Absorb More Microwave Radiation than Adults: The Consequences. Morgan, Kesari, et al. Journal of Microscopy and Ultrastructure 2(4):196-204 (2014).

  4. Epidemiological Characteristics of Mobile Phone Ownership and Use in Korean Children and Adolescents. Byun, Yoon-Hwan, et al. Environmental Health and Toxicology 28 (2013).

  5. A Prospective Study of In-Utero Exposure to Magnetic Fields and the Risk of Childhood Obesity. Li, De-Kun, et al. Scientific Reports 2.540 (2012).

  6. Exposure to Extremely Low-Frequency Magnetic Fields and the Risk of Childhood Cancer: Update of the Epidemiological evidence. Schüz and Joachim. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology 107(3):339-42 (2011).

  7. Cell Phone Use and Behavioural Problems in Young Children. Divan, Kheifets, et al. Journal of Epidemiol Community Health 66(6):524-9 (2010).

  8. Mobile Phones, Radiofrequency Fields, and Health Effects in Children-Epidemiological Studies. Feychting, Maria. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology 107(3):343-348 (2010).

  9. Exposure to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields and Behavioral Problems in Bavarian Children and Adolescents. Thomas, Silke, et al. European Journal of Epidemiology 25(2):135-41 (2009).

  10. The Sensitivity of Children to Electromagnetic Fields. Repacholi, et al. Deventer. Journal of Pediatrics 116(2):303-313 (2005).

III. Brain Tumors 

  1. Simulation of The Incidence of Malignant Brain Tumors in Birth Cohorts That Started Using Mobile Phones When They First Became Popular in Japan. Sato, Y., Kojimahara, N., and Yamaguchi, N. Bioelectromagnetics 40(3): 143-149 (2019).

  2. ​Report of Final Results Regarding Brain and Heart Tumors in Sprague-Dawley Rats Exposed From Prenatal Life Unitl Natural Death to Mobile Phone Radiofrequency Field Representative of a 1.8 GHz GSM Base Station Environmental Emission. Falcioni, L, et al. Environmental Research (2018).

  3. Exposure to Cell Phone Radiofrequency Changes Corticotrophin Hormone Levels and Histology of The Brain and Adrenal Glands in Male Wistar Rat. Shahabi, S., et al. Iranian Journal of Basic Medical Sciences 21:1269-1274 (2018).

  4. Brain Tumours: Rise in Glioblastoma Multiforme Incidence in England 1995-2015 Suggests an Adverse Environmental or Lifestyle Factor. Philips, A., et al. Journal of Environmental and Public Health (2018).

  5. The 2100 MHz Radiofrequency Radiation of a 3G-Mobile Phone and the DNA Oxidative Damage in Brain. Sahin, Ozgur, et al. Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy 75(B):94-98 (2016).

  6. Mobile Phone and Cordless Phone Use and the Risk for Glioma - Analysis of Pooled Case- Control Studies in Sweden 1997-2003 and 2007-2009. Hardell and Carlberg. PathoPhysiology 22(1):1-13 (2015).

  7. Mobile Phone Radiation Causes Brain Tumors and Should Be Classified as a Probable Human Carcinogen. Morgan, Miller, et al. International Journal of Oncology 46:1865-1871 (2015).

  8. Mobile Phone Use and Brain Tumours in the CERENAT Case-Control Study. Coureau, Bouvier, et al. Occupational & Environmental Medicine 71(7):514-22 (2014).

  9. Use of Mobile Phones and Cordless Phones is Associated with Increased Risk for Glioma and Acoustic Neuroma. Hardell, Carberg, et al. PathoPhysiology 20(2):85-110 (2013).

  10. Mobile Phones and Head Tumours: A Critical Analysis of Case-Control Epidemiological Studies. Levis, Minicuci, et al. Open Environmental Sciences 6(1):1-12 (2012).

  11. On the Association Between Glioma, Wireless Phones, Heredity and Ionising Radiation. Carlberg and Hardell. PathoPhysiology19(4):243-252 (2012).

  12. Mobile Phones and Head Tumours. The Discrepancies in Cause-Effect Relationships in the Epidemiological Studies - How Do They Arise? Levis, Minicuci, et al. Environmental Health 10:59 (2011).

  13. Indications of Possible Brain Tumour Risk in Mobile-Phone Studies: Should We Be Concerned? Cardis and Sadetzki. Occupational & Environmental Medicine 68:169-171 (2011).

  14. Estimating the Risk of Brain Tumors from Cell Phone Use: Published Case-Control Studies. Morgan, LL. Pathophysiology 16(2-3):137-147 (2009).

  15. Cell Phones and Brain Tumors: A Review Including the Long-Term Epidemiologic Data. Khurana, Teo, et al. Surgical Neurology72(3):205-14 (2009).

  16. Epidemiological Evidence for an Association Between Use of Wireless Phones and Tumor Diseases. Hardell, Carlberg, et al. PathoPhysiology 16(2-3):113-122 (2009).

  17. Histopathological Examinations of Rat Brains After Long-Term Exposure to GSM Mobile Phone Radiation. Grafström, Gustav, et al. Brain Research Bulletin 77(5):257-63 (2008).

  18. Mobile Phone Use and the Risk of Acoustic Neuroma. Lonn, Ahlbom, et al. Epidemiology 15(6):653-659 (2004).

IV. Parotid Gland Tumors

  1. Influence of Handheld Mobiles on Parotid: A Cohort Study. Ranjitha, G., et al. Journal of Indian Academy of Oral Medicine & Radiology 29:254-258 (2017).

  2. Does Cell Phone Use Increase the Chances of Parotid Gland Tumor Development? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. De Siqueira, de Souza, et al. Journal of Oral Pathology and Medicine 45(11) (2016). 

  3. Pooled Analysis of Case-Control Studies on Acoustic Neuroma Diagnosed 1997-2003 and 2007- 2009 and Use of Mobile and Cordless Phones. Hardell, Carlberg, et al. International Journal of Oncology 43(4):1036-144 (2015).

  4. Using the Hill Viewpoints from 1965 for Evaluating Strengths of Evidence of the Risk for Brain Tumors Associated with use of Mobile and Cordless Phones. Hardell and Carlberg. Reviews on Environmental Health 28(2-3):97-106 (2013).

  5. Case-Control study of the Use of Mobile and Cordless Phones and the Risk for Malignant Melanoma in the Head and Neck Region. Hardell, Carlberg, et al. Pathophysiology 18(4):325-333 (2011).

  6. Correlation Between Cellular Phone Use and Epithelial Parotid Gland Malignancies. Duan, Zhang, et al. Clinical Paper Head and Oncology 40(9):966-7 (2011).

  7. Mobile Phones Use and Risk of Tumors: A Meta-Analysis. Mynf, Ju, et al. Journal of Clinical Oncology 27(33):5565-72 (2009).

  8. Mobile Phone, Cordless Phones and the Risk for Brain Tumours. Hardell and Carlberg. International Journal of Oncology 35(1):5-17 (2009).

  9. Public Health Implications of Wireless Technologies. Sage and Carpenter. PathoPhysiology 16(2-3):233-46 (2009).

  10. Epidemiological Evidence for an Association Between use of Wireless Phones and Tumor Diseases. Hardell, Carlberg, et al. PathoPhysiology 16(2-3):113-122 (2009).

  11. Cell Phone Use and Risk of Benign and Malignant Parotid Gland Tumors - A Nationwide Case- Control Study. Sadetzki, Chetrit, et al. American Journal of Epidemiology 167(4):457-467 (2008).

V. Other Malignancies

  1. The Carcinogenic Potential of Non-Ionizing Radiations: The Cases of S-50 Hz MF and 1.8 GHz GSM Radiofrequency Radiation. Soffritti, M. and Giuliani, L. Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology (2019).

  2. Tumor Promotion by Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields Below Exposure Limits for Humans. Lerchl, Klose, et al. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 459(4):585-590 (2015).

  3. Swedish Review Strengthen Grounds for Concluding that Radiation from Cellular and Cordless Phones is a Probable Human Carcinogen. Davis, Kesari, et al. Pathophysiology 20(2):123-129 (2013).

  4. Multifocal Breast Cancer in Young Women with Prolonged Contact Between Their Breasts and Their Cellular Phones. West, Kapoor, et al. Case Reports in Medicine (2013).

  5. Epidemiological Evidence for an Association Between Use of Wireless Phones and Tumor Diseases. Hardell, Carlberg, et al. PathoPhysiology 16(2-3):113-122 (2009).

  6. Study on Potential Effects of "902 MHz GSM-type Wireless Communication Signals" on DMBA-Induced Mammary Tumours in Sprague-Dawley Rats. Hruby, Neubauer, et al. Mutation Research 649(1-2):34-44 (2008).

VI. Effects On DNA

  1. Microwaves from Mobile Phones Inhibit 53BP1 Focus Formation in Human Stem Cells More Strongly Than in Differentiated Cells: Possible Mechanistic Link to Cancer Risk. Markova, Malmgren, et al. Environmental Health Perspectives 118(3):394-399 (2010).

  2. Radiofrequency Radiation and Gene/Protein Expression: A Review. McNamee and Chauhan. Radiation Research 172(3):265-287 (2009).

  3. Evaluation of HSP70 Expression and DNA Damage in Cells of a Human Trophoblast Cell Line Exposed to 1.8GHz Amplitude-Modulated Radiofrequency Fields. Valbonesi, Franzellotto, et al. Radiation Research 169(3):270-279 (2008).

  4. Gene and Protein Expression Following Exposure to Radiofrequency Fields from Mobile Phones. Vanderstraeten and Verschaeve. Environmental Health Perspectives 116(9):1131-5 (2008).

  5. Nonthermal Effects of RadioFrequency-Field Exposure on Calcium Dynamics in Stem Cell- derived Neuronal Cells: Elucidation of Calcium Pathways. Rao, Titushkin, et al. Radiation Research 169(3):319-329 (2008).

  6. Gene Expression Changes in the Skin of Rats Induced by Prolonged 35 GHz Millimeter-Wave Exposure. Millenbaugh, Roth, et al. Radiation Research 169(3):288-300 (2008).

  7. DNA Damage in Molt-4 T-lymphoblastoid Cells Exposed to Cellular Telephone Radiofrequency Fields in Vitro. Philips, Ivaschuk, et al. Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics 45(1):103-110 (1998).

VII. Neurological/Cognitive Effects

  1. Early-Life Exposure to Pulsed LTE Radiofrequency Fields Causes Persistent Changes in Activity and Behavior in C57BL/6 J Mice. Broom, K., et al. Bio Electro Magnetics 40(7):498-511 (2019).

  2. Are Rises in Electro-Magnetic Field in The Human Environment, Interacting with Multiple Environmental Pollutions, The Tripping Point for Increases in Neurological Deaths in the Western World? Pritchard, C., Silk, A. and Hansen, L. Medical Hypotheses 127: 76-83 (2019).

  3. Effect of 1800-2100 MHz Electromagnetic Radiation on Learning-Memory and Hippocampal Morphology in Swiss Albino Mice. Kishore, G., Venkatashu, K., and Sridevi, N. Jorunal of Clincal and Diagnostic Research 12(2): 14-17 (2019).

  4. Monitoring of BALB/C Strain Mice Health, Investigation of Behavior, Hematological Parameters Under the Effect of an Electromagnetic Field. Zymantiene, J., et al. Medycyna Weterynarjna 75(03): 158-163 (2019).

  5. 2.45 GHz Microwave Radiation Impairs Learning, Memory, and Hippocampal Synaptic Plasticity in The Rat. Karimi, N., et al. Toxicology and Industrial Health 34(12): 873-883 (2018).

  6. Mobile Phone Distance From Head and Temperature Changes of Radio Frequency Waves on Brain Tissue. Forouharmajd, F., Ebrahimi, H. and Pourabdian, S. International Journal of Preventative Medicine (2018).

  7. A Prospective Cohort Study of Adolescents’ Memory Performance and Individual Brain Dose of Microwave Radiation from Wireless Communication. Foerster, M., et al. Environmental Health Perspectives 126(7) (2018). 

  8. Electromagnetic Radiation 2450 MHz Exposure Causes Cognition Deficit with Mitochondrial Dysfunction and Activation of Intrinsic Pathway of Apoptosis in Rats. Gupta, S.K., Mesharam, M.K., and Krishnamurthy, S. Journal of Biosciences 43(2) 263-276 (2018). 

  9. The Effect of Wi-Fi Electromagnetic Waves in Unimodal and Multimodal Object Recognition Tasks in Male Rats.  Hassanshahi, A., et al. Neurological Sciences 38(6):1069-1076 (2017). 

  10. Effects of Short and Long Term Electromagnetic Fields Exposure on the Human Hippocampus. Deniz, O.G., et al. Journal of Microscopy and Ultrastructure 5(4):191-197 (2017). 

  11. Effects of Long Term Exposure of 900-1800 MHz Radiation Emitted from 2G Mobile Phone on Mice Hippocampus – A Histomorphometric Study. Mugunthan, Shanmugasamy, et al. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research 10(8):AF01-6 (2016).

  12. Effect of Mobile Phone Radiation on Pentylenetetrazole-Induced Seizure Threshold in Mice. Kouchaki, Motaghedifard, et al. Iranian Journal of Basic Medical Sciences 19(7):800-3 (2016).

  13. Effects of 3 Hz and 60Hz Extremely Low Frequency Electromagnetic Fields on Anxiety-Like Behaviors, Memory Retention of Passive Avoidance and ElectroPhysiological Properties of Male Rats. Rostami, Shahani, et al. J Lasers Medical Science 7(2):120-125 (2016).

  14. Short-Term Memory in Mice is Affected by Mobile Phone Radiation. Ntzouni, Stamatakis, et al. PathoPhysiology 18(3):193-199 (2011).

  15. Use of Mobile Phones and Changes in Cognitive Function in Adolescents. Thomas, Benke, et al. Occupational Environmental Medicine 67(12):861-866 (2010).

  16. Increased Blood-Brain Barrier Permeability in Mammalian Brain 7 Days After Exposure to the Radiation from a GSM-900 Mobile Phone. Nittby, Brun, et al. PathoPhysiology 16(2-3):103-112 (2009).

  17. Effects of GSM 1800 MHz on Dendritic Development of Cultured Hippocampal Neurons. Ning, Xu, et al. Acta Pharmacol Sin28(12):1873-1880 (2007).

  18. Neurological Effects of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation. Lai, Henry. Advances in Electromagnetic Fields in Living Systems1:27-80 (1994).

VIII. Effects On Male Fertility

  1. Long-Term Exposure to 4G Smartphone Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation Diminished Male Reproductive Portential by Directly Disrupting Spck3-MMP2-BTB Axis in the Testes of Adult Rats. Yu, G., et al. Science of The Total Environment 698 (2020).

  2. Radiations and Male Fertility. Kesari, K., Agarwal, A. and Henkel, R. Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology 16(118) (2018).

  3. The Effect of 2.45 GHz Non-Ionizing Radiation on the Structure and Ultrastructure of The Testis in Juvenile Rats. Histology and Histopathology(2018).

  4. Modulatory Effect of 900 MHz Radiation on Biochemical and Reproductive Parameters in Rats. Narayana, SN., et al. Bratislava Medical Journal119(9):581-587 (2018).

  5. Aloe Arborescens Juice Prevents EMF-Induced Oxidative Stress and Thus Protects from Pathophysiology in the Male Reproductive System In Vitro. Solek, P., Majchrowics, L., and Koziorowski, M. Environmental Research 166:141-149 (2018).

  6. Radiofrequency Radiation (900 MHz)-Induced DNA Damage and Cell Cycle Arrest in Testicular Germ Cells in Swiss Albino Mice. Pandey, N., et al. Toxicology and Industrial Health 33(4) 373-384 (2017).

  7. The Effects of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation on Sperm Function. Houston, Nixon, et al. Reproduction (2016)

  8. Male Fertility and its Association with Occupational and Mobile Phone Tower Hazards: An Analytical Study. Al-Quzwini, Al-Taee, et al. Middle East Fertility Society Journal (2016).

  9. Sperm DNA Damage – The Effect of Stress and Everyday Life Factors. Radwan, M, et al. International Journal of Impotence Research 28, 148-154 (2016). 

  10. Electromagnetic Radiation at 900 MHz Induces Sperm Apoptosis through bcl-2, bax and caspase-3 Signaling Pathways in Rats. Liu, Si, et al. Journal of Reproductive Health 12:65 (2015).

  11. Habits of Cell Phone usage and Sperm Quality - Does It Warrant Attention? Zilverlight, Wiener-Megnazi, et al. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 31(3):421-426 (2015).

  12. Extremely Low frequency Magnetic Fields Induce Spermatogenic Germ Cell Apoptosis: Possible Mechanism. Lee, Park, et al. BioMed Research International (2014).

  13. In Vitro Effect of Cell Phone Radiation on Motility, DNA Fragmentation and Clusterin Gene Expression in Human Sperm. Zalata, El-Samanoudy, et al. International Journal of Fertility and Sterility 9(1):129-136 (2014).

  14. Effect of Electromagnetic Field Exposure on the Reproductive System. Gye and Park. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine 39(1):1-19 (2012).

  15. Effects of the Exposure of Mobile Phones on Male Reproduction: A Review of the Literature. Vignera, Condorelli, et al. Journal of Andrology 33(3):350-356 (2012).

  16. Use of Laptop Computers Connected to Internet Through Wi-Fi Decreases Human Sperm Motility and Increases Sperm DNA Fragmentation. Avendano, C., et al. Fertility and Sterility 97(1):39045 (2012).

  17. Exposure to Magnetic fields and the Risk of Poor Sperm Quality. Li, Yan, et al. Journal of Reproductive Toxicology 29(1):86-92 (2010).

  18. Mobile Phone Radiation Induces Reactive Oxygen Species Production and DNA Damage in Human Spermatozoa In Vitro. Luliis, Newey, et al. PLoS ONE 4(7) (2009).

  19. Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Radiation (Rf-EMR) from GSM Mobile Phones Induces Oxidative Stress and Reduces Sperm Motility in Rats. Mailankot, Kunnath, et al. Clinical Science 64(6):561-5 (2009).

  20. Cell Phones: Modern Man's Nemesis? Makker, Varghese, et al. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 18(1):148-157 (2008).

  21. Indicative SAR Levels Due to an Active Mobile Phone in a Front Trouser Pocket in Proximity to Common Metallic Objects. Whittow, Panagamuwa, et al. Propagation Conference 149-152 (2008).

  22. Cell Phones and Male Infertility: Dissecting the Relationship. Deepinder, Makker, et al. Reproductive BioMedicine Online 15(3):266-270 (2007).

  23. Evaluation of the Effect of Using Mobile Phones on Male Fertility. Wdowiak, Wiktor, et al. Annals of Agricultural and Medicine14(1):169-172 (2007).

  24. Effect of Cell Phone Usage on Semen Analysis in Men Attending Infertility Clinic: An Observational Study. Agarwal, Deepinder, et al. American Society for Reproductive Medicine 89(1):124-8 (2008). 

IX. Electromagnetic Sensitivity

  1. Becoming Electro-Hypersensitive: A Replication Study. Dieudonne, M. Bioelectromagnetic 40: 188-200 (2019).

  2. Functional Brain MRI in Patients Complaining of Electrohypersensitivity After Long Term Exposure to Electromagnectic Fields. Heuser, G. & Heuser, S. Reviews on Environmental Health 32(3):291-299 (2016).

  3. Hot Nano Spots" as an Interpretation of So-Called Non-Thermal Biological Mobile Phone Effects. Pfutzner, Helmut. Journal of Electromagnetic Analysis and Applications 8(3):62-69 (2016).

  4. Analysis of the Genotoxic Effects of Mobile Phone Radiation Using Buccal Micronucleus Assay: A Comparative Evaluation. Banerjee, Singh, et al. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research 10 (3):ZC82-ZC85 (2016).

  5. Tinnitus and Cell Phones: The Role of Electromagnetic Radiofrequency Radiation. Medeiros and Sanchez. Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology 82(1):97-104 (2016).

  6. Microwave Frequency Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs) Produce Widespread Neuropsychiatric Effects Including Depression. Pall, Martin L. Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy (2015).

  7. Subjective Symptoms Related to GSM Radiation from Mobile Phone Base Stations: a Cross- Sectional Study. Gomez-Perretta, Navarro, et al. BMJ Open 3.12 (2013).

  8. Green Communication- A Stipulation to Reduce Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity from Cellular Phones. Kumar, Khan, et al. Procedia Technology 4:682-686 (2012).

  9. Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity: Fact or Fiction? Genius and Lipp. Science of the Total Environment 414(1):103-112 (2012).

  10. Radiofrequency (RF) Sickness in the Lilienfeld Study: An Effect of Modulated Microwaves? Liakouris, A. Archives of Environmental Health 236-238 (2010). 

  11. Neurobehavioral Effects Among Inhabitants Around Mobile Phone Base Stations. Abdel-Rassoul, El-Fateh, et al. NeuroToxicology28(2):434-440 (2007).

  12. Electrohypersensitivity: Sate-Of-The-Art of A Functional Impairment. Johansson, O. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine 25(4): 245-258 (2006).

  13. Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity: Biological Effects of Dirty Electricity With Emphasis on Diabetes and Multiple Sclerosis. Havas, M. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine 25(4): 259-268 (2006).

  14. Establishing the Health Risks of Exposure to Radiofrequency Fields Requires Multidisciplinary Research. Hietanen, Maila. Scandinavian Journal of Work, the Environment, and Health 32(3):169-170 (2006).

  15. Hypersensitivity of Human Subjects to Environmental Electric and Magnetic Field Exposure: A Review of the Literature. Levallois, Patrick. Environmental Health Perspectives 110(4):613-8 (2002).

  16. Electric Hypersensitivity and Neurophysical Effects of Cellular Phones - Facts or Needless Anxiety? Harma, Mikko Ilmari. Scandinavian Journal of Work, the Environment and Health 26(2):85-86 (2000). 

X. Effects On Implanted Medical Devices

  1. Ad Hoc Electromagnetic Compatibility Testing of Non-Implantable Medical Devices and Radio Frequency Identification. Seidman and Guag. Biomedical Engineering OnLine 12:71 (2013).

  2. Electromagnetic Interference of Pacemakers. Lakshmanadoss, Chinnachamy, et al. Interchopen 229-252 (2011).

  3. Interference Between Mobile Phones and Pacemakers: A Look Inside. Censi, Calcagnini, et al. Annali dell'Istituto superiore di sanità 43(3):254-259 (2007).

  4. Electromagnetic Interference on Pacemakers. Erdogan, Okan. Indian Pacing and Electrophysiology Journal 2(3):74-78 (2002).

  5. Electromagnetic Interference in Patients with Implanted Cardioverter-Defibrillators and Implantable Loop Recorders. Sousa, Klein, et al. Indian Pacing and Electrophysiology Journal 2(3):79-84 (2002).

  6. Radiofrequency Interference with Medical Devices. A Technical Information Statement. IEEE Committee on Man and Radiation, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers 17(3):111-4 (1998).

  7. Cellular Telephones and Pacemakers: Urgent Call or Wrong Number? Ellenbogen and Wood. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 27(6):1478-9 (1996).

XI. 5G Effects

  1. Model of Steady-state Temperature Rise in Multilayer Tissues Due to Narrow-beam Millimeter-wave Radiofrequency Field Exposure. Gajda, G., et al. Health Physics 117(3):254-266 (2019).

  2. Untargeted Metabolomics Unveil Alterations of Biomembranes Permeability in HumanHaCaT Keratinocytes Upon 60 HGz Millimeter-Wave Exposure. Pogam, Pierre., et al. Scientific Reports 9(9343) (2019).

  3. Ocular Response to Millimeter Wave Exposure Under Different Levels of Humidity. Kojima, M., et al. Journal of Infrared Milli Terahz Waves 40: 574–584 (2019).

  4. Millimeter Wave Radiation Activates Leech Nociceptors via TRPV1-Like Receptor Sensitization. Romanenko, S., et al. Biophysical Journal 116(12): 2331-2345 (2019).

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

  6. Towards 5G Communication Systems: Are There Health Implications? Ciaula, AD. International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health 367-375 (2018). 

  7. 5G Wireless Telecommunications Expansion: Public Health and Environmental Implications. Russell, C.L. Environmental Research 165:484-495 (2018).

  8. The Human Skin As A Sub-THz Receiver – Does 5G Pose a Danger To It or Not? Betzalel, N., Ishai, P.B., and Feldman, Y. Environmental Research163:208-216 (2018).

  9. The Modeling of the Absorbance of Sun-THz Radiation by Human Skin. Betzalel, N., Feldman, Y., and Ishai, P.B. IEEE Transactions on Terahertz Science and Technology 7(5):521-528 (2017).

  10. Human Exposure to RF Fields in 5G Downlink. Nasim, I. and Kim, S. Georgia Southern University (2017).

  11. The Human body and Millimeter-Wave Wireless Communication Systems: Interactions and Implications. Wu, T., Rappaport, T., and Collins, C. IEEE International Conference on Communications (2015).

  12. State of Knowledge on Biological Effects at 40-60 GHz. Drean, Y., et al. Comptes Rendus Physique (2013).

  13. Effects of millimeter waves radiation on cell membrane-A brief review. Ramundo-Orlando, Alfonsina. Journal of Infrared, Millimeter, and Terahertz Waves 31(12): 1400-1411 (2010).

  14. Human Skin as Arrays of Helical Antennas in Millimeter and Submillimeter Wave Range. Feldman, Y., et al. The American Physical Society (2008).

XII. Miscellaneous Articles

  1. Untargeted Metabolomics Unveil Alterations of Biomembranes Permeability in Human HaCaT Keratinocytes Upon 60 HGz Millimeter-Wave Exposure. Pogam, Pierre., et al. Scientific Reports  9(9343) (2019).

  2. Risks to Health and Well-Being From Radio-Frequency Radiation Emitted by Cell Phones and Other Wireless Devices. Miller, A., et al. Frontiers in Public Health 7(223) (2019).

  3. Computational Simulations of The Penetration of 0.30 THz Radiation into the Human Ear. Vilaagosh, Z., et al. Biomedical Optics Express 10(3) (2019).

  4. Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure and Risk Perception: A Pilot Experimental Study. Zeleke, B., et al. Environmental Research 170: 493-499 (2019).

  5. Commentary on The Utility of The National Toxicology Program Study on Cell Phone Radiofrequency Radiation Data for Assessing Human Health Risks Despite Unfounded Criticisms Aimed at Minimizing the Findings of Adverse Health Effects. Melnick, R. Environmental Research 168:1-6 (2019).

  6. Pathological Findings Observed in the Kidneys of Postnatal Male Rats Exposed to the 2100 MHz Electromagnetic Field. Bedir, R., et al. Archives of Medical Research (2019).

  7. Genotoxic and Carcinogenic Effects of Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Fields. Kocaman, A., et al. Environmental Research 163:71-79 (2018). 

  8. Non-Ionizing EMF Hazard in the 21st Century. Koh, W.J., and Moochhala, S.M. IEEE (2018).

  9. Thermal and Non-Thermal Health Effects of Low Intensity Non-Ionizing Radiation: An International Perspective.  Belpomme, D., et al. Environmental Pollution 242(A):643-658 (2018).

  10. Comparison of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure Levels in Different Everyday Microenvironments in an International Context. Sagar, S, et al. Environmental International 114:297-306 (2018).

  11. Wi-Fi is an Important Threat to Human Health. Pall, M. Environmental Research 405-416 (2018).

  12. Mobile-Phone Radiation-Induced Perturbation of gene-Expression Profiling, Redox Equilibrium and Sporadic-Apoptosis Control in the Ovary of Drosophila Melanogaster. Manta, A., et al. FLY 11(2): 75-95 (2017).

  13. World Health Organization, Radiofrequency Radiation and Health – A Hard Nut to Crack (Review). Hardell, L. International Journal of Oncology51:405-413 (2017). 

  14. Radiation from Wireless Technology Elevates Blood Glucose and Body Temperature in 40-Year-Old Type 1 Diabetic Male. Kleiber, C. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine 36:3 259-264 (2017).

  15. Cardiovascular Disease: Time to Identify Emerging Environmental Risk Factors. Bandara, P. & Weller, S. European Journal of Preventative Cardiology (2017).

  16. Effects of Exposure to 2100MHz GSM-like Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field on Auditory System of Rats. Celiker, Ozgur, et al. Brazilian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology (2017).

  17. An Investigation of the Effect of Extremely Low Frequency Pulsed Electromagnetic Fields on Human Electrocardiograms (ECGs). Fang, Mahmoud, et al. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 13(11) (2016).

  18. Evaluation of the Protective Role of Vitamin C on the Metabolic and Enxymatic Activities of the Liver in the Male Rats After Exposure to 2.45 GHz of Wi-Fi Routers. Shekoohi-Shooli, F., et al. Journal of Biomedical Physics and Engineering 6(3):157-164 (2016).

  19. Exposure of ELF-EMF and RF-EMF Increase the Rate of Glucose Transport and TCA Cycle in Budding Yeast. Lin, Yan, et al. Frontiers in Microbiology (2016).

  20. Awareness Campaign Against Cell Phone Radiation Hazard: Case Study Oman. Osmen and Saar. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 205(9):381-385 (2015).

  21. Electromagnetic Energy Radiated from Mobile Phone Alters Electrocardiographic Records of Patients with Ischemic Heart Disease. Alhusseiny, Al-Nimer, et al. Annals of Medical and Health Science Research 2(2):146-151 (2012).

  22. Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation on Human Ferritin: An in vitro Enzymun Assay. Fattahi-asl, Baradaran-Ghahfarokhi, et al. Journal of Medical Signals and Sensors 2(4):235-240 (2012).

  23. Apoptosis is Induced by Radiofrequency Fields through the Caspase-Independent Mitochondrial Pathway in Cortical Neurons. Joubert, Bourthoumieu, et al. Radiation Research 169(1):38-45 (2008).

  24. Source of Funding and Results of Studies of Health Effects of Mobile Phone Use: Systematic Review of Experimental Studies. Huss, Egger, et al. Environmental Health Perspectives 115(1):1-4 (2007).

  25. Epidemiology of Health Effects of Radiofrequency Exposure. Ahlbom, Green, et al. Environmental Health Perspectives 112(17):1741-1753 (2004).

  26. The Possible Role of Radiofrequency Radiation in the Development of Uveal Melanoma Stang, Anastassiou, et al. Journal of Epidemiology 12(1):7-12 (2001).

  27. Biological Effects of Amplitude-Modulated Radiofrequency Radiation. Juutilainen and Seze. Scandinavian Journal of Work, the Environment and Health 24(2):245-254 (1998).