Petition to stop 5G trials in the Southwest UK

[corrado33]

6 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

I think math has gotten to your head a little. You are doing math based on a conclusion. You are assuming what part of the wave is causing the issue which in your mind is power. You are very narrow minded tbh. I would like to reiterate that I am neither saying that 5g is harmful or it isn't harmful. I am saying that I would rather not have it around me because it's an unnessisary technology and the long term effects on the body are unknown. 

Oh geeze.

 

Sigh, if the radiation is non-ionizing the ONLY thing that CAN cause issues is POWER or resonance. (Thermal or non-thermal effects) Resonance has been tested, and there is no peer-reviewed evidence linking the frequencies used with any disease/illness in humans. If you don't believe me, read what the freaking american cancer society has to say about it.

 

https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/cellular-phone-towers.html

 

Hint: They make the same conclusions I do... multiple times throughout that page stating at least 5 times that cell phone towers pose no threat to humans.

 

Quote

Cell phone towers are not known to cause any health effects. 

and

 

Quote

But as noted above, most researchers and regulatory authorities do not believe that cell phone towers pose health risks under ordinary conditions.

 

Again, the frequencies being tested for 5g are NOT... NEW. They have been in use for decades, they're just being re-purposed.

[Brooksie359]

13 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

Why? There's no credible evidence that there's any harm to humans. Since the science is well understood, unless some research paper uncovers some potential harm to humans (plants dying that are exposed to thousands of times the energy you'll get exposed to is not potential harm to humans)? There seems to be valid reason to stop deployment.

Why? Internet is "unnecessary". Why not just shut off all Cellular?

It's a very simple. Test before you implement something. Assuming we know everything about a technology is very arrogant. 

[Brooksie359]

11 hours ago, corrado33 said:

Oh geeze.

 

Sigh, if the radiation is non-ionizing the ONLY thing that CAN cause issues is POWER or resonance. (Thermal or non-thermal effects) Resonance has been tested, and there is no peer-reviewed evidence linking the frequencies used with any disease/illness in humans. If you don't believe me, read what the freaking american cancer society has to say about it.

 

https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/cellular-phone-towers.html

 

Hint: They make the same conclusions I do... multiple times throughout that page stating at least 5 times that cell phone towers pose no threat to humans.

 

and

 

 

Again, the frequencies being tested for 5g are NOT... NEW. They have been in use for decades, they're just being re-purposed.

It's always better to test first. 

[dalekphalm]

41 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

It's a very simple. Test before you implement something. Assuming we know everything about a technology is very arrogant. 

Okay - but we have tested these frequencies. Over decades.

 

So...?

And 5G itself has been testing for some time now, with zero indication there's any harm or risk to human health.

 

It's not like they're throwing up commercial 5G towers right now without having tested the tech out to see how well it works, etc.

[Brooksie359]

2 hours ago, dalekphalm said:

Okay - but we have tested these frequencies. Over decades.

 

So...?

And 5G itself has been testing for some time now, with zero indication there's any harm or risk to human health.

 

It's not like they're throwing up commercial 5G towers right now without having tested the tech out to see how well it works, etc.

They have tested the effects of the 5g commercial towers on people already? Because if not then they should. 

[GeoSquigg]

I'm loving my 5g networking tho, have it for the house 

[dalekphalm]

6 hours ago, Brooksie359 said:

They have tested the effects of the 5g commercial towers on people already? Because if not then they should. 

They have tested the frequencies in use - and specifically there are dozens of years worth of data on those and other frequencies from research showing no harm to humans.

 

5G has also been in test deployments for some time now.

 

Certainly I'm sure there will be additional research on the same frequencies researched before, that will show the same results.

 

But, since there's absolutely ZERO indication that these radio frequencies are dangerous to humans (You know, assuming you don't do something illegal and climb a radio tower), there's no reason to stop deployment.

 

[dalekphalm]

6 hours ago, GeoSquigg said:

I'm loving my 5g networking tho, have it for the house 

You have 5G in your home? How...?

[GeoSquigg]

On 2/15/2019 at 7:07 PM, dalekphalm said:

You have 5G in your home? How...?

Thru Verizon Wireless (here), used to have Spectrum internet but the upped the cost to $75 for 100mbps and verizon was sending advertisements about 5G home for $50 for its current plan holders. For $85 I get phone and home service now.

[Donut417]

4 minutes ago, GeoSquigg said:

ending advertisements about 5G home

Doesnt follow the 5G standard. This is not true 5G service. Its only slightly better than the fake 5G AT&T was trying to push off on its customers. I heard Verizon is no longer deploying this service they are waiting for true 5G equipment so they can deploy proper 5G services. 

[Atmos]

I had no idea there were so many tin foils among the forum users. This thread is just plain scary man. Life is crazy people, be excellent to each other lol

 

Personally I have no qualms about them testing 5g in the wild. We already know that similar wave bands and emissions dont increase rates of cancer like the tin foils think they do. Hell we're even starting to see the results of long term studies about exposure to radiation and we're starting to find that radiation on the whole is far, far less dangerous than we've thought so far. Lets just take the Chernobyl nuclear disaster for example. How many deaths were caused by radiation and its after effects, out of the tens of thousands of people exposed to massive amounts of radiation? Less than 50 so far. Even including those who had to clear the reactor debris and were exposed to what we had thought were certainly lethal amounts of radiation.

 

a little more on what im talking about with chernobyl if you're interested

Spoiler

Out of more than 200,000 workers who cleared the city and constructed the containment dome, we expect a fatality rate of less than 1%.

Out of cancer victims caused directly by the radiation exposure there is an approximate 99% survival rate

there is no evidence to support any radiation caused birth deformities among former residents or workforce members children since the event

 

The biggest issue stemming from the chernobyl incident was the relocation of more than 350,000 residents, many of whom continue today to live in absolute poverty and fear of what they've experienced.

 

https://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2005/pr38/en/