5g rollout and CFS

[Davsey27]

Hello everyone,

Last weekend I went with my father from
the Atlanta airport apartments where we
Stay down to the Pensacola beach
Florida area.I noticed an improvement in
CFS from like a 3.5 to 5.

What helped wasbathing in the sun and when I swam in near the gulf after being barefoot on the sand getting my heart rate up.I did not crash for the first time in a longtime.unlike brisk walking,jogging or even light weight training in a gym.

I think the further south one goes and
being of one can slowly build a tolerance
to the heat then this has a good effect
on mitochondrial redox as dr kruse says
from what I found.Now with 5g being
rolled out it seems like volunteering on
an organic farm or workaway.info
where it’s more house chores and less
farming seems like the redox from
sunlight won’t be enough in a 5g
environment.

Whereas in the gulf areawhere there is still 4g.I felt some improvement although soon it will be 5g.

I have like 700usd in savings and have
been messaging these volunteer organizations that offer free food and
The lodging in exchange for 5hrs of daily
help.

I was thinking of taking a bus down
to Mexico and sunbathing for a month
or two to where I can get to a 6 and be
able to do volunteering easier in my current state instead of Florida.

Back in Florida I was able to start walking
faster without crashing especially after the time on the beach Since it will be awhile before 5g arrives in Mexico I am considering this.It would be tight with little savings and perhaps when it gets really low from resting and sunbathing.
Never done this type of volunteering so
not sure what to expect

I have been telling the volunteer hosts
that I have cfs and I am improving finding that there is some improvement going down south by likea point hoping that it will incrementally increase.Appreciate any thoughts

Thank you guys and gals

 

[Wishful]

I still haven't encountered any proof that 5G will cause any health effects on humans, but if you want to avoid areas with significant >6Ghz emissions, just avoid dense urban areas. That's the only place where the higher frequencies make economic sense. In rural areas, 5G emissions will not be much different than present 4G emissions, and the service providers will likely drag their feet about investing in new 5G equipment in areas already served by 4G equipment.

 

[Davsey27]

I appreciate your input Mrs wishful

Even with president Trump calling for a
national rollout of 5g to compete with China and other world leaders in telecommunications the less dense rural areas will always be using the current 4g
frequencies.Meaning that if I try to volunteer in rural Florida I don’t have to worry about needing to leave the country due to a rural 5g rollout ?

Dr Kruse spoke with an insider in telecomm who said that it will be everywhere and that mayors in small towns want access

I am having difficulties planning for the
future due to some saying it won’t be deployed in the rurals and others saying that it is nationwide

Thank you Mrs Wishful
I appreciate it

I still haven't encountered any proof that 5G will cause any health effects on humans, but if you want to avoid areas with significant >6Ghz emissions, just avoid dense urban areas. That's the only place where the higher frequencies make economic sense. In rural areas, 5G emissions will not be much different than present 4G emissions, and the service providers will likely drag their feet about investing in new 5G equipment in areas already served by 4G equipment.

 

[Wishful]

The higher frequencies (higher than used for 4G) are needed for higher bandwidth, which is needed in dense urban communities. The higher frequencies are also shorter range, so you need more transmitters (more $ invested) for the same area. Thus, rural operators are unlikely to switch to higher frequencies until the demand on their existing 4G bandwidth is exceeded. They'll talk about upgrading, but unless the government is subsidizing it, I expect rural rollout of higher frequency 5G to be slow.

I doubt that I'll see 5G coverage in my area in less than ten years; maybe even longer.

So, no need to run for cover in a panic.

 

[Saraswati]

I am not happy about 5G and protesting it online and hopefully one day I will get around to calling the city, Vancouver, to ask about it. (I want to sound knowledgeable before I call). But at the same time I don't want to give myself the nocebo effect over it.

Our street lights in the back alley have small round things on the top now which I believe will be part of 5G even though it's not here yet. I really think that we should have a choice in the matter and sort of wish I lived in a rural area!

 

[Wishful]

Street lights often have 'small round things on top', which are light sensors to automatically turn the lights on and off.

I really think that we should have a choice in the matter and sort of wish I lived in a rural area!

You do have a choice in the matter. You're not set in concrete or something are you? You have the choice of living in an urban environment or a rural one. You may not have the choice of where you live and of what others in that area choose to do. You can ask for a democratic vote on 5G in Vancouver, but if more people want the benefits than are afraid of (so far unproven) health risks, that's their choice in the matter. If 5G is implemented, you can choose to move elsewhere, or wear a shielding suit. Lots of choices available.

Was the rollout of 4G any less feared? Did the feared results (everyone getting multiple cancers?) happen? Will there someday be a rollout of 9G, and will the fear of that be any less? There's always opposition to change.

Hmmm, an interesting thought: of all the major "This will be the doom of us all!' predictions, how many proved valid, and of all the major disastrous mistakes (thalidomide, DDT, lead fuel additive, freon, etc), how many had the level of predicted disaster that 5G has? Nuclear energy, for all the fear of it, has probably resulted in fewer deaths and less radioactive pollution than coal energy, per GWh. Asbestos was the miracle fibre when it was introduced. Freon was the 'totally safe' replacement for many hazardous refrigerants, cleaners and propellants.

I wonder if anyone has written a good book about predictions and results in human history.

 

[JES]

I remember from my own childhood in the 90's there was little bit of hysteria going on when mobile phones first appeared. Supposedly your brain was going to fry and end up developing cancer from using a mobile phone for too long. In order to solve this, some companies developed "protectors" mounted between the mobile phone and your head that were supposed to reduce this radiation, but actually in the process the radiation probably increased, as the phone's transmitter had to work harder in order to communicate with the base station.

Anyway back in those days phones were mainly used for calling and sending SMS and playing the occasional snake game. Nowadays when everyone has developed some level of smartphone addiction, it seems people are no longer concerned about using phones. Whatever the danger was in the 90's, one would think it would be exponentially larger today when people are using their smartphones 4-5 hours per day on average. I bet if there was a study out tomorrow that conclusively linked smartphones with cancer, people would still keep using them like before.

 

[Davsey27]

Mrs wishful if something is harmful for even 1 person but fine for the majority ethically speaking should it be legal?

You raise some good points mrs wishful
but before something is rolled out is the burden of proof on us to prove that it is safe or on those that are introducing it to ecological systems?

Thank you Mrs wishful

 

[Wishful]

Whatever the danger was in the 90's, one would think it would be exponentially larger today when people are using their smartphones 4-5 hours per day on average.

Yes, one would expect the anti-EMF crowd to publish stories about how the rates of health problems closely matches the increased levels and duration of EMF exposure over time. I seem to have missed those papers.

Mrs wishful if something is harmful for even 1 person but fine for the majority ethically speaking should it be legal?

You raise some good points mrs wishful
but before something is rolled out is the burden of proof on us to prove that it is safe or on those that are introducing it to ecological systems?

Yes to both questions. Peanuts and shrimp are totally proven to be fatal to some people, but they are still legal products. There's a balance between the benefits for millions (billions?) of people for having those products readily available vs the benefit to the few people of being 100.00000000% safe from contact with those allergens. If a billion people benefit from greater internet access and one person has a health risk from that system, it is reasonable for society to decide that the person at risk has to put up with the inconvenience of wearing shielding or living in a remote region or whatever.

For new technologies with unproven risks, again there's a balance of benefits vs costs. If we insisted on 100.00000000% proof of radio being completely harmless, millions (maybe billions?) of people would have died by being unable to use radio communication to summon help, warn of dangers, become educated, etc. For microwave communications, the governments are basing their exposure limits based on existing knowledge, which is based on existing tests. They know that at some very high level of power, microwaves are dangerous, and at very low power levels, there's no evidence of harm. What they've come up with is a 'best guess' of what's safe balanced against the benefits of society (Okay, and probably bribes from industry too.). If you aren't happy with the level they've set as 'safe', use the democratic process to try to change that, or take measures to protect yourself from what you think is dangerous.

 

[Davsey27]

Yes, one would expect the anti-EMF crowd to publish stories about how the rates of health problems closely matches the increased levels and duration of EMF exposure over time. I seem to have missed those papers.



Yes to both questions. Peanuts and shrimp are totally proven to be fatal to some people, but they are still legal products. There's a balance between the benefits for millions (billions?) of people for having those products readily available vs the benefit to the few people of being 100.00000000% safe from contact with those allergens. If a billion people benefit from greater internet access and one person has a health risk from that system, it is reasonable for society to decide that the person at risk has to put up with the inconvenience of wearing shielding or living in a remote region or whatever.

For new technologies with unproven risks, again there's a balance of benefits vs costs. If we insisted on 100.00000000% proof of radio being completely harmless, millions (maybe billions?) of people would have died by being unable to use radio communication to summon help, warn of dangers, become educated, etc. For microwave communications, the governments are basing their exposure limits based on existing knowledge, which is based on existing tests.

I haven’t seen any existing tests done
On humans on the effects of 4g LTE
on human populations eeg brain waves/
Blood brain barrier let alone 5g

There are no studies done if I am not mistaken on the Effects of daily WiFi and Cell Phone exposure

I would like to see in a controlled setting say a bar where people are typically using their cell phones what effects this would have on the brain and nervous system

Telecommunications is backed by the government and yes as you say bribes.
Major bribes

If you had an acre of land telecomm can
Offer you 3 grand to put up a tower.

Makes since this is an industry in the billions of dollars

If I want to learn the most about dental health I would go to someone who specializes in dentistry

Same with Non-Native Emf
Would I trust cell phone companies that
have a disclaimer that says to keep that
Cell phone x amount of cm from the ear

Or actual Russian scientists that spent
Extensive hours studying this even more than the American government and have published hundreds and thousands of publications on the effects of emf on Blood brain barrier,lymphocytes,Wbcs
Rbcs and other markers of the immune system

This is very well researched.If I am going to learn about something like this
I would go to those who put in the most
hours.And in this caae
tests done
On humans on the effects of 4g LTE
on human populations eeg brain waves/
Blood brain barrier let alone 5g

There are no studies done if I am not mistaken on the Effects of daily WiFi and Cell Phone exposure

I would like to see in a controlled setting say a bar where people are typically using their cell phones what effects this would have on the brain and nervous system

Telecommunications is backed by the government

If you had an acre of land telecomm can
Offer you 3 grand to put up a tower.

Makes since this is an industry in the billions of dollars

If I want to learn the most about dental health I would go to someone who specializes in dentistry

Same with Non-Native Emf
Would I trust cell phone companies that
have a disclaimer that says to keep that
Cell phone x amount of cm from the ear

Or actual Russian scientists that spent
Extensive hours studying this even morethan the American government and have published hundreds and thousands of publications on the effects of emf on Blood brain barrier,lymphocytes,Wbcs
Rbcs and other markers of the immune system

This is very well researched.

Some European nations ban WiFi in schools due to this knowledge as democratic socialists have issues of their own but in this area they are on top of this.Some nations even have disability for their citizens due to emf sensitivity

Some European nations ban WiFi in schools due to this knowledge as democratic socialists have issues of their own but in this area they are on top of this.Some nations even have disability for their citizens due

They know that at some very high level of power, microwaves are dangerous, and at very low power levels, there's no evidence of harm. What they've come up with is a 'best guess' of what's safe balanced against the benefits of society (Okay, and probably bribes from industry too.). If you aren't happy with the level they've set as 'safe', use the democratic process to try to change that, or take measures to protect yourself from what you think is dangerous.

Would be nice.But there is no democracy When it comes to
telecommunication Leaning towards oligarchy in this area

There haven’t been any tests done
On humans on the effects of 4g LTE
on human populations eeg brain waves/
Blood brain barrier and other biological let alone 5g to my knowledge

The studies done by telecomm lobbyist
concluded that because there were thermal effects on the brain with the old cell phones then it is safe

This is misleading because as well researched in the early 1900s by Russians scientists the effects of emf are have negative effects aside from
Non-thermal effects of living organisms
including plants,animals and humans

There are no studies done if I am not mistaken on the Effects of daily WiFi and Cell Phone exposure

I would like to see in a controlled setting say a bar where people are typically using their cell phones what effects this would have on the brain and nervous system/immune system

Won’t happen because people are more
interested in netflix.Telecommunications is backed by the government

If you had an acre of land telecomm can
Offer you 3 grand to put up a tower.
Makes since this is an industry in the billions of dollars

If I want to learn the most about dental health I would go to someone who put the most hours in ie..a dentist

Same with Non-Native Emf
Would I trust cell phone companies that
have a disclaimer that says to keep that
Cell phone x amount of cm from the ear

Or actual Russian scientists that spent
Extensive hours/days/years studying this even more than the American government and have published hundreds and thousands of publications on the effects of emf on Blood brain barrier,lymphocytes,Wbcs Rbcs and other markers of the immune system
including alterations of DNA

This is very well researched.

Some European nations ban WiFi in schools due to this knowledge and some nations even have disability for their citizens due to emf sensitivity
And they tend to be nations where the gap between the wealthy and poor is less than in the west.

I had a doctor once tell me if cell
Phones are bad than why are they allowing it?

I later pondered on this and thought same reason alcohol and tobacco can be harmful in ways yet profitable

Thank you Mrs wishful

 

[Rufous McKinney]

I have been telling the volunteer hosts
that I have cfs and I am improving finding that there is some improvement going down south by likea point hoping that it will incrementally increase.Appreciate any thoughts

How interesting..I am currently 1800 miles "further south". I feel alot better here, also did a year ago when I spent a month, and also wonder why.

I want to stop this 5G darn it.

I am getting more sun on my skin, more hours looking at the sky out there, and there are no "contrails" at all...

I am in a city. There is diesel.

But the food here is 1000s of times better. And people are happier, just much happier and its quite evident.

Funny- I feel like my mitochrondria are firing more. Wow...Thank you mitos.

 

[Davsey27]

I remember from my own childhood in the 90's there was little bit of hysteria going on when mobile phones first appeared. Supposedly your brain was going to fry and end up developing cancer from using a mobile phone for too long. In order to solve this, some companies developed "protectors" mounted between the mobile phone and your head that were supposed to reduce this radiation, but actually in the process the radiation probably increased, as the phone's transmitter had to work harder in order to communicate with the base station.

Anyway back in those days phones were mainly used for calling and sending SMS and playing the occasional snake game. Nowadays when everyone has developed some level of smartphone addiction, it seems people are no longer concerned about using phones. Whatever the danger was in the 90's, one would think it would be exponentially larger today when people are using their smartphones 4-5 hours per day on average. I bet if there was a study out tomorrow that conclusively linked smartphones with cancer, people would still keep using them like before.

Some have described this as a transhuman agenda of artificial intelligence,robots,self driving cars
5g satellites in space as ellon musk
would want

Less self expression,more conformity

I think the theme is that these oligarchs
want you to be disconnected from self and become a mindless drone

When you continually destroy trees to create more and more stuff when the population is already close to peak capacity you forget about the ecosytem
and Believe that mankind is the center of the universe

Thankfullly there are good people out there as well

I think Orwell was right

 

[Rufous McKinney]

You raise some good points mrs wishful
but before something is rolled out is the burden of proof on us to prove that it is safe or on those that are introducing it to ecological systems?

Using a different example, I recently learned that yes, in fact the FDA did not conduct their required mandatory safety studies for vaccination of pregnant mothers. So the shot my daughter got: violated every rule. I learned this via a Freedom of Information Act Request, submitted by attorneys. FDA could produce NOTHING to show that safety had been studied AS REQURIED.

So go ahead humans, keep experimenting on yourselves, your bodies, and all the other bodies.

 

[Davsey27]

How interesting..I am currently 1800 miles "further south". I feel alot better here, also did a year ago when I spent a month, and also wonder why.

I want to stop this 5G darn it.

I am getting more sun on my skin, more hours looking at the sky out there, and there are no "contrails" at all...

I am in a city. There is diesel.

But the food here is 1000s of times better. And people are happier, just much happier and its quite evident.

Funny- I feel like my mitochrondria are firing more. Wow...Thank you mitos.

I am glad to here you are feeling better
and i understand that cfs is something that can be complex

Curious what city are you in if you don’t mind sharing?

 

[Rufous McKinney]

When you continually destroy trees to create more and more stuff when the population is already close to peak capacity you forget about the ecosytem
and Believe that mankind is the center of the universe

There is a great book, a fictional story called Ishmael, by Daniel Quinn. It speaks to this issue quite remarkably.

And then, to feel better, I love Hank Wesselman's experience described in- SpiritWalker.

That 5G won't mean a hill of beans, later on.

 

[Rufous McKinney]

Curious what city are you in if you don’t mind sharing?

Oaxaca

 

[Murph]

I also feel much better in warmer,m sunnier climates.

I don't think our ilness has anything to do with 4g or 5g. I got sick back before 3g.

 

[Peterz]

5G Space Appeal
https://www.5gspaceappeal.org/the-appeal

 

[Wishful]

There are no studies done if I am not mistaken on the Effects of daily WiFi and Cell Phone exposure

I assume that there have been many studies on that. The government had to base their 'safe levels' on some sort of scientific studies. My guess is that many of the studies showing no health effects simply didn't get published because they aren't considered interesting enough. Any study, no matter how badly done, that shows health risks will probably get published in the health scare magazines and other popular media.

If there were serious health hazards from EMFs, it should be easy to prove. The fact that there aren't any conclusive studies proving harm convinces me that it's safe at the present levels.

I don't think our ilness has anything to do with 4g or 5g. I got sick back before 3g.

I think it was mostly 2G in Vancouver in 2001. Just checked: 3G was first introduced in eastern Canada in 2006, well after I developed ME. I've lived in a low-EMF location since 2002, which didn't affect my ME. So no, cell towers weren't a factor in my ME either.

Yes, but my symptoms get worse after a trip into town, where several cell towers are located! Is that proof of EMF sensitivity? Nope. I have the same increase in symptoms when I drive the same sort of distance in low EMF areas, so it's the driving that's a problem. My truck shields me significantly from EMFs anyway.

 

[Rufous McKinney]

I got sick back before 3g.

Thats funny!

I got sick playing spin the bottle at 10 and never won a single round!