Just over a year ago, I borrowed a friend's EMF/RF (electromagnetic frequency / radio frequency) meter, and spent a couple of months measuring every radiation source I could think of. . . and it was disturbing. The worst source of RF, no surprise to anyone, is the SMART phone that, for most people, is never more than an arm’s length away.
I’ll return to this momentarily, but let me provide a little background first. I don't use a SMART phone, and happily my old 3G flip phone produces only a fraction of the RF radiation that my friends’ SMART phones emit. Nevertheless, I got into the habit of keeping my phone in a foil coffee bag, which cut it off from the world (until I chose to check my text messages or make a call).
You’ll be tempted to laugh at my ancient ‘Consumer Cellular’ flip phone, before you do though, scroll back up and take another look at the radiation coming off that conventional SMART phone. More than ever, a ‘dumb’ phone seems like the smart option.
Most people who think about such things purchase a specially made Faraday bag; which serves the same purpose of course, though it may not provoke quite as many questions. So don't be cheap (like me), you can support a real world company that is protecting people, and spreading awareness in another way.
I include the Walmart link here to show that there is a growing awareness of this issue, but you might want to go directly to a local manufacture, such as: https://teeltechcanada.com/digital-forensic-equipment/faraday-bags/
Oddly, at some point over the last year and a half, one coffee bag wasn't sufficient to cut my phone off from the world; it seemed as if the power had increased, cutting right through one layer of foil. I'll return to this later with an anecdote about the new cell phone and 5G towers, installed while much of the world was under the Globalist's prison lockdown.
The increase in power, it turns out, was not just my imagination. With a device to actually measure the levels of radiation out there in the world, we can quantify this, and (in the spirit of real science) these experiments are reproducible.
It is not possible to go back of course, to capture the readings from a year ago, or more, but the device in the picture at the top of this page (the same device I used) is now registering 10 fold increases.
I'm cutting straight to the chase here, as I don't want to lose anyone before I present this information. You see, in the picture above, a conversion scale for the varying levels RF radiation, alongside the actual recording while searching a ‘counter-narrative’ website (in this case); you can check the ‘safety’ of these levels for yourself.
I'll return to the increasing ambient radiation (electrosmog as it's sometimes called) but this phenomena is something that should concern everyone. First of all (if you're tempted to say, “I don't go to those sites so I don't have to worry”), standard emissions while receiving and transmitting data (or simply using the phone as a phone) are also at levels that should be of ‘extreme concern.’ What we see here though, is off the scale (quite literally), and very likely to result in physical harm (however this harm manifests), particularly with prolonged exposure. Glioma appears to be the most common, serious side effect, which is why the manufactures of phones include warnings in their settings – most notably: you shouldn't hold the phone beside your head.
Perhaps more distressing than the numbers we see on the EMF meter above, is the fact that these elevated bursts of radiation regularly correlate with sites that the government would consider ‘counter (its) narrative.’
Booking a hotel room, for instance, doesn't result in readings as high as this; as mentioned though, even regular exposure levels are steadily increasing. Are governments concerned as they roll out more and more connected technology, and promote SMART Cities, Intelligent Communities, the Internet of Things (IoT), and the like? No. It's all ‘Safe and Effective’:
'No adverse health effects have been scientifically established at levels below the limits in Safety Code 6.'
https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/health-risks-safety/radiation/occupational-exposure-regulations/safety-code-6-radiofrequency-exposure-guidelines.html
Of course, the further development of (and dependence on) this technology will be great for business, and for your convenience and quality of life too, we are told. ‘Health’ Canada goes on to say:
‘Most research does not support a link between radio frequency EMF and cancer. . . In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which is part of the World Health Organization, classified radio frequency EMFs as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B). This decision was based on limited evidence showing an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, associated with wireless phone use.’
From the current Canadian Amateur Radio Basic Qualification Study Guide (I recently signed up for a radio operators course, which is why I have this text book).
‘In the latest version of Safety Code 6 the exemption has been rescinded as recent scientific evidence suggests that some devices (cell phone are a case in point) may be producing emissions beyond acceptable limits.’
No kidding! Clearly, I am very much an amateur (my disclaimer here), but who among us actually trusts government sanctioned ‘experts’ anymore?
The Expert's Prayer: “Ah men (are experts)”
Many thanks to ‘BS’ News for their amazing work. The last time I looked, I could not find a trace of any of their material. If anyone is able to locate these folk, or their videos, please let me know so I can provide a direct link and proper credit.
I would suggest, therefore, that you listen to some people with real credentials in this area; those the government ignores (which is the first indication that these are people you probably should take seriously).
Just before the world was locked down, retired Microsoft Canada CEO, Frank Clegg, Drs. Magda Havas, Riina Bray, Meg Sears and Anthony Miller staged this press conference at Queen’s Park in Toronto. Needless to say, it was poorly attended, and then largely forgotten (ignored), as the 5G infrastructure that had already been ordered was installed under cover of the lockdown. I’ll also include here an earlier press conference, and a link to Magda Havas (for your interest):
Media Release - Ontario Doctors Warn of Rising Health Care Costs after 5G Roll Out
C4ST Press Conference July 9, 2014
https://magdahavas.com/
When Health Canada tells you that ‘most research does not support a link between radio frequency EMF and cancer’ you should should probably consider this statement very carefully (please note my emphasis on the word ‘most’). The foundational study, however, the reason Health Canada has really only paid attention to ‘tissue heating,’ relates to SAR (Specific Absorption Rate).
From RADIATION NATION: The Fallout of Modern Technology (pgs 72-73)
‘In the study, which is the largest and most complex ever conducted the NTP [National Toxicology Program], thousands of rats were exposed to three levels of RF radiation - 1.5, 3, and 6 watts per Kilogram (W/kg) - over two years. . . Overall, 8.5 percent (46 of 540) of male rats exposed to cell phone radiation developed cancer or precancerous cells. None of the ninety unexposed male rats developed cancer or precancerous cells. In the group of rodents exposed to the lowest intensity of radiation (1.5W/kg), 12 out of 180, or 6 percent, of male rats developed cancer or precancerous cells.’
So the lowest level of exposure – 1.5 watts per kilogram of brain tissue (‘W/kg averaged over 1 gram of tissue for the head’ - pg 119) – resulted in 6% of the study rats developing cancer or pre-cancerous cells in the brain (as we saw). Interestingly, the control group rats (those not exposed to any radiation) had zero tumours, of any kind.
From microwavenews.com:
‘Cell Phone Radiation Boosts Cancer Rates in Animals; $25 Million NTP Study Finds Brain Tumors — U.S. Government Expected To Advise Public of Health Risk’
‘Importantly, the exposed rats were found to have higher rates of two types of cancers: glioma, a tumor of the glial cells in the brain, and malignant schwannoma of the heart, a very rare tumor. None of the unexposed control rats developed either type of tumor.’
But Health Canada and other government agencies (it would appear) felt this was acceptable (as in the United States, which didn’t ‘advise the public’ in any meaningful way), and set the limit (not at 1.5 but) at 1.6 W/kg. Europe opted for 2 W/kg! So what are they thinking? I'm no ‘expert’ of course, but it looks as if the human rats, on which the next phase of this experiment would continue, were being assured levels of exposure within the existing test parameters. I'd be curious for your thoughts on this?
“But animal studies don't really count,” some will tell you.
Funny that when it comes to EMF, animal studies should be questioned. . . yet, when the Bivalent Covid Booster was tested on only 8 mice, that was A-okay! It turns out this wasn't quite right (we do always have to be vigilant for misinformation). The point is, animals were used here in the initial testing, before the human phase of the study, because these test do tell us something.
Searching for these studies (some time ago now) other strange things became apparent. The fact that there were still no long-term studies was conveniently brushed aside (just in time for the new shipment to arrive); here’s (the most reassuring) Jean-Yves Duclos, then Minister of Health:
https://globalnews.ca/news/9102367/moderna-mice-omicron-covid-vaccine-fact-check/
This article also provides a link to the Regulatory Decision Summary, where you can read more:
‘814 individuals both male and female) were included in the study, a total of 437 individuals received the Spikevax Bivalent™ and 377 individuals received the comparator vaccine Spikevax ™ Original.’
The way these initial human studies are conducted is now raising questions. Unlike the rats, the human studies have no control group prior to the initial rollout; it's a choice between product A and product B. So test subjects might get the ‘Original™’ recipe, or the ‘New and Improved™’ formula (but there is no placebo group at this stage, only a ‘comparator’ group). The product that appears most ‘effective’ gets rolled out to the public as “Safe and Effective™.”
“We'll keep you safe”
Words of wisdom from Tom Cruise: “If they tell you you’re ‘safe’ . . . just run!”
In the case of cancer drugs, when the test subject is known to have a serious affliction, it is considered unethical to withhold treatment (of some kind) from the patient; and this seems reasonable. The rationale here though, is debatable; as was Pfizer’s controversial ‘unblinding’ of its trial. I include an NIH paper on this, and as more information surfaces around efficacy (over a year later) we must return to this subject.
So it's a good thing we have the rat EMF control group, which provides a real basis for comparison; here, we can actually see what’s going on. It is time to take a much closer look at all of the ‘science’ we have assumed was responsibly undertaken in years past, and this brings us to the other side of the equation — ‘proven efficacy’ (or, at least, stated efficacy). Previous filings, and on-going phases of clinical trials, reveal something even more shocking, which explains why Pablo Sanchez, member of the CDC’s Advisory Committee, stated: “. . . we need better vaccines because obviously we’re still having a lot of COVID despite vaccination.” What a tangled web. . . but this is a whole other story, for a future commentary.
Returning to the EMF story. In the ‘Media release’ video above, Dr. Meg Sears explains how science (driven by profit) has gone astray: “All research requires ethical approval, informed consent from all participants [and] for an experiment, a portion of the population would have to be unexposed, for control purposes.”
Outside of those Smart Cities and Intelligent Communities though, I would suggest, we can find sufficiently 'green' zones (where there is no coverage, or just a basic carrier signal), and people more willing to distance themselves from ‘connected’ technology. I must draw your attention to the following: https://globalemf.net/
Outside the EMF smog zones (which, ironically, are considered ‘green’ by the net zero folk) you will find people, living fulfilling lives, removed from the SMART district’s ambient radiation. These zones must be preserved, for many reasons, not the least of which is the fact that society must have a long-term, control group.
It's funny that all those elected representatives (Provincial, Regional, Municipal) and their tech-company corporate stakeholders — the ‘Zero Vision’ ‘safety’ gang, and the ‘Net Zero’ evangelists — get all excited when it comes to CO2 emission controls (controls and monitoring of any kind) but EMF ‘smog’. . . What's that?
Oh. No. . . Totally harmless! Nothing to see here. . . Meanwhile, an IoT, EMF-induced brain tumour will likely take people out long before the ‘Global Boiling’ happens, or they get run over by a car.
Please consider joining an ongoing study, and collecting data for yourself. I will share more of my own (2021 - 2022 amateur EMF survey) on my regular mailing list. Before I wrap up here though, let me return to the anecdote I mentioned at the beginning of this piece.
A friend in Hamilton, Ontario, shared the following. During the lockdown his favourite canoe launch to Cootes Wilderness was closed. The sign that was posted explained it was now a protected area for turtles laying eggs. Nearby though, was a newly installed Cell Phone tower, and that day the technicians were on site. My friend wandered over and offered one of the workers a cigarette. They chatted. “That looks like a lot of power you’re hooking up,” my friend commented. “Yeah,” the technician replied. “These transmitters shouldn't require a fraction of this power. . . It's almost like they plan to really ‘amp’ this up some time.”
This is a very short summary of the conversation of course (as I’m running out of space here). I'd certainly never thought about this before. I was late in my own resistance to 5G, because phone technology not something I have/had much interest in (as my flip phone attests). I am asking questions now though.
Or so the commentator in this video suggests. Not so long ago, I would have scoffed at this myself, but now we see how much radiation the small transmitter in a phone is capable of producing, powered by just a tiny battery. It doesn’t take a huge leap of the imagination to envision what these towers might be capable of. You can find this video online if you wish, and others like it of course, and before anyone says: Ah, but that’s crazy talk. Where are the scientific studies to say these towers couldn’t actually ‘nuke’ - the surrounding neighbourhood at least? To the contrary. There’s no shortage of military studies on ‘directed-energy weapons.’ Here’s the first thing that came up with just one search: ‘Defense Primer: Directed-energy weapons.’
The burden of proof now lies with our representatives — Municipal, Region and Provincial — as the Feds, and those who profit from this technology, are clearly not looking out for our interests. Of course, I’ll be called a ‘conspiracy theorist’ for even suggesting directed-energy weapons might be a thing, but we know now that leaders in their field even are regularly ‘character sabotaged’ if they publicly contradict the narrative of bought-and-paid-for government ‘experts.’
From Wiki, for instance:
‘Barrie Trower is a pseudoscientist, conspiracy theorist, and crank who believes that microwaves and related technologies are a major threat to public health. He is frequently cited by other conspiracy theorists and cranks, especially the paranoid crowd that believes that electromagnetic. . .’
As someone who worked for the military developing these weapons, his commentaries are perhaps worth listening to (fact check for yourself of course). When criticism is this disparaging, I would suggest, we’re probably ‘over the target.’
So what do we do?
Resist in every way possible. For some of us that entails more trips to Council, to fight the 'Intelligent Community' (and all that comes with this). On a personal level, the most powerful thing anyone can do, is to stop (or drastically reduce) the use of this technology. Start by deleting all bank apps (for reasons I’ve discussed in earlier posts). We have clear reasons now why you might want distance yourself from your phone, or even get rid of it entirely. Your health should be your number one concern.
I've said many times, no one would put up with a treacherous friend, who eavesdrops on every conversation, and reports every detail of your life to those who traffic in your information (for whatever reason). Of course, that's what a SMART phone is: Self-Monitoring, Analyzing and Reporting Technology.
In addition to this, it now looks as if this treacherous friend is punishing (even trying to kill?) those deemed guilt of ‘wrong think,’ who seek answers to inconvenient questions. You can call this conspiracy theory if you wish, but we know most of this is well documented fact, and what other explanation is there for those numbers, with spikes as high as 20 V/m. Keep in mind the warning above: ‘Note Peak levels are more important than average levels.’
We are at a critical moment in time.
Shortly after a trip to Geneva in 2005 (to discuss a large commission painting) I met a scientist from CERN. She had been there in the early nineties, and had one of the first 100 email addresses issued. We became quite close friends and actually spent a lot of time together back in Toronto. We were having dinner with friends one night, and talking about the Internet (among other things). “David,” she said, “this is military technology. You don't think they let us use it for our benefit, do you?”
We really need that Digital Charter, Dr. Leslyn Lewis speaks of (in an earlier Substack), and we need to set some ground rules of our own.
François-Philippe Champagne's ‘Voluntary Code of Conduct’ on the ‘Responsible Development and Management of Advanced Generative AI Systems’ for instance (announced this Sept, 2023), is not sufficient. The Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry must know, of course, that no company profiting from this technology will conform to any code of ethics, let alone one that is voluntary. This is the era of Surveillance Capitalism, and information is their stock in trade.
We’ve opened a few new cans of worms here, and I must expand on all of these. The stories are interconnected, and things are unfolding at an accelerating rate.
Thank you for your continuing interest and support.
David
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/5g-is-coming-how-worried-should-we-be-about-the-health-risks/
Is the mainstream media waking up?
David, I appreciate your research and your words so much! You inspire me. I have always known that microwave's were a no no and have not used one in over 25 years. The phone is definitely a problem.