I read through our most recent Conclave post, entitled Internet of Things: Fascism by Another Name. Powered by 5G and found it a well-written warning and one that I would like to elaborate on in this post. This seems necessary today to wake up the sleeping majority who are sleeping through this global subliminal attack.
I’ve read estimates of the percentage of the population with EHS as high as 10%, especially since it remains undiagnosed in a lot of people who aren’t clear why they are suffering. The bill Ohio passed stripping local government authority to resist 5G antennas placement is being challenged by a lawsuit from approximately 80 cities and counties. It will be interesting to see how effective that challenge is.
You have a pretty comprehensive list of wireless health impacts and some of their causes, but you could perhaps expand that a little bit. A more specific study found RFR exposure activates voltage-gated calcium channels. This leads to increased calcium levels within cells, which leads to the production of peroxynitrite. Peroxynitrite is at the root of most inflammatory diseases, including neurodegenerative and cardiovascular diseases, migraines, and allergies.
M. Pall, “Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to produce beneficial or adverse effects,” Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine, 6-26-2013.
Studies also have found that RFR exposure can remove calcium ions (positively charged calcium ions) from cell membranes in the brain. Loss of calcium ions destabilizes the membrane and can have serious metabolic and neurological consequences. The brain may become hyperactive and overloaded, leading to loss of concentration, ADHD, damage to DNA (causing loss of fertility and increased risk of cancer), and digestive enzymes from lysosomes. Membrane leakage can also open the blood-brain barrier and other protective barriers, leading to Alzheimer’s, dementia, asthma, allergies, and various autoimmune disorders.
See these relevant articles and studies:
N. D. Volkow et al., “Effects of Cell Phone Radio frequency Signal Exposure on Brain Glucose Metabolism,” Journal of the American Medical Association, vol. 305 no. 8 (2011): 808-813
R.C. Beason and P. Semm, “Responses of neurons to an amplitude modulated microwave stimulus,” Neuroscience Letters, vol. 333 (2002): 175-178
J.F. Krey and R.F. Dolmetsch, “Molecular mechanisms of autism: A possible role for Ca2+ signaling,” Current Opinion in Neurobiology, vol. 17 (2007): 12-119.
Another important 2015 review of existing studies on RFR effects was published by the National Academy of Sciences in the Ukraine, Indiana University, and the University of Campinas in Brazil. Based on 93 out of 100 peer-reviewed studies, it concluded that low-intensity RFR is an oxidative agent for living cells with a high pathological potential. The oxidative stress induced by RFR exposure explains a range of RFR health impacts, both cancer and non-cancer illnesses. In addition to chronicling illnesses, this study provides at least 6 different biological mechanisms that explain these RFR effects in the body.
Igor Yakymenko1, Olexandr Tsybulin2, Evgeniy Sidorik1, Diane Henshel3, Olga Kyrylenko4 and Sergiy Kyrylenkom “Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation,” Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine (July 2015)
Perhaps it should also be mentioned that WiFi exposure can cause interference with bodily medical devices including pacemakers, insulin pumps, Parkinsons deep brain implants, and hospital equipment.
There are also some disturbing studies on how electromagnetic radiation affects wildlife, for example birds through their feathers, which act as “antennas.”
Here is a sampling from something I wrote a couple of years ago of some more “wildlife” impact studies:
“All plants and animals, as well as humans, have adapted to the earth’s electromagnetic fields, which include a direct current (DC) magnetic field, a DC electrical field, and low-frequency Schumann Resonances (natural fields that are both electric and magnetic, caused by the geometry of the earth’s surface and the ionosphere near the top of the atmosphere).”
“To navigate in relation to these fields and to control their immune systems, birds and bees use magnetically sensitive substances called cryptochromes. These are protein pigments found in virtually all animals, plants, and many bacteria. Cryptochromes measure light to control and reset animals’ and plants’ biological clocks. Some animals also use cryptochomes to sense (or “see”) the direction of the earth’s magnetic field. Cryptochromes are badly impaired by human-made oscillating electro-magnetic fields, disrupting insects’ and animals’ solar and magnetic navigation abilities, likely leading to results such as bee colony collapse, loss of migratory birds and butterflies, and a weakening of the immune system.
For example, radio-frequency radiation (RFR) can blot out a bird’s perception of the earth’s field, causing the bird (or insect) to fly in the wrong direction, and also disrupt a bird’s internal clock based on the sun’s changing position. Birds often leave the areas for many hundreds of feet around cell towers and antennas.”
“Daily Circadian metabolic rhythms of numerous animals are also driven by cryptochome-containing internal clocks, especially in relation to dawn and dusk. Circadian rhythms control the production of melatonin (a sleep hormone); at night, they divert metabolic resources to bodily repair and immune-system strengthening. In humans reduced melatonin production would result in tiredness during the day and poor sleep at night, among other effects. Because it is supported by melatonin, the immune system may never to able to summon the great energy sometimes required to overcome pathogens or destroy developing cancer cells before they get out of control, leading to various diseases.”
The following published research studies support the selection above with brief summary comments followed by documentation of verifying research studies:
Birds and the Earth’s Magnetic Field
Typical effects of radiation from cellular communication antennas on resident, breeding, and migratory birds: site abandonment, feather deformation, locomotion problems, weight loss, weakness, reduced survivorship and death. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service continues to suggest to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and to Congress the pressing need for studies based on cumulative negative effects of RFR exposure on migratory birds under the National Environmental Policy Act.
Manville, A.M., ll. 2007a. Comments of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service submitted electronically to the FCC on 47 CFR Parts 1 and 17, WT Docket No. 03-187, FCC 06-164, Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, “Effects of Communication Towers on Migratory Birds.” February 2, 2007.
Manville, A.M., II. 2007b. U.S. Fish and Wildlife concerns over potential radiation impacts from cellular communication towers on migratory birds and other wildlife- research opportunities. Invited Presentation to “Congressional Staff Briefing on the Environmental and Human Health Effects of Radiofrequency (RF) Radiation,” House Capitol 5, Washington, DC. 16 page PowerPoint presentation. May 10, 2007.
Citing a variety of scientific research, the U.S. Department of the Interior in February of 2014 called on the National Telecommunications and Information Administration of the U.S. Department of Commerce to formulate or modify policies and procedures for cellular communications towers so that they are in conformity with Executive Order 13186 Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds and do not threaten from the towers’ emissions of RFR the 241 species of endangered or threatened U.S. birds.
In 2003 three conservation organizations filed a lawsuit against the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). The groups, Forest Conservation Council, American Bird Conservancy, and Friends of the Earth sought to enjoin the FCC from issuing any new licenses for the building of communication towers in the Gulf Coast region until their impact on migratory birds has been fully assessed and mitigated. The suit cited violations by the FCC of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), and Endangered Species Act (ESA) in the deaths of thousands of migrating birds at towers along the Gulf Coast.
Robins can navigate in the earth’s magnetic field if they receive light from wavelengths absorbed by cryptochromes. This study explored how the human-made frequencies between 01 and 10 MHz at field strengths as little as 0.085 mT (about 500 times weaker than the earth’s magnetic field) made the birds unable to respond to the earth’s magnetic field.
T. Ritz at al. “Resonance effects indicate radical pair mechanism for avian magnetic compass,” Nature, vol. 429 (5/13/2004): 177-180.
Insects and RFR Exposure
In a May 2009 report the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service urged Congress to investigate the potential relationship between wireless devices and honeybee colony collapse.
Bees are positively charged, flowers negatively charged. RFR exposure disturbs the natural orientation and navigation mechanisms of bees and other insects, who use the earth’s magnetic field and light energy to orient and navigate. It makes them restless, develop an urge to swarm, increasingly aggressive, and colony collapse in 62.5% of apiaries.
Ulrich Warnke, Bees, Birds and Mankind: Effects of Wireless Communication Technologies” (Kentum, 2009) ; and F. Ruzicka, “Schäden durch elektrosmog,” Bienenwelt 10 (2003): 34-35; and 2 additional published studies.
Studies performed in Europe have documented navigational disorientation, lower honey production, and decreased bee survivorship in honeybees due to exposure to RFR from a cell tower within 500 meters (1,635 ft) and 800 meters (2,616 feet).
Harst, W., J. Kuhn, and H. Stever. “Can electromagnetic exposure cause a change in behaviour?”
Studying possible non-thermal influences on honey bees – an approach within the framework of educational informatics,” Acta Systemica-IIAS International Journal vol. 6, no. 1 (2006):1-6l
U. Warnke, “Effects of Electric Charges on Honeybees,” Bee Worldvol. 57, no. 2 (1976): 50-56
Kimmel, S., J. Kuhn, W. Harst, and H. Stever, “Electromagnetic radiation: influences on honeybees (Apis mellifera),” Institute Environmental Sciences, Institute Science and Science Education, and Institute Educational Informatics, Univ. Koblenz-Landau/Campus Landau, Germany (2006)
Exposure to electromagnetic radiation from DECT phone towers (similar to cell phone towers) had deleterious effects on the rate of honeybee egg laying, return to hive, and honey production.
Harst, Wolfgang, et al., “Can Electromagnetic Exposure Cause a Change in Behaviour? Studying possible non-thermal influences on honey bees.” Institute of Science and Science Education (ISSE), Department of Physics, University of Koblenz-Landau/Campus, Landau, Germany. ACTA SYSTEMICA – IIAS International Journal (2006) 6(1): 1-6.