County Council seeking views on 5G as part of spotlight review

Photo of laptops on a table

Posted on: 18 November 2019

People across Devon are being asked for their views on 5G, as Devon County Council launches a “call for evidence” on the technology.

The County Council’s Corporate Infrastructure and Regulatory Services Scrutiny Committee is investigating 5G as part of a spotlight review.

Although the County Council has no current plans to make use of 5G in its ICT and is not involved with planning applications for mobile infrastructure, it is running an investigation in response to local concern and wants to hear from people to help inform its findings.

An online questionnaire is now available, inviting members of the public to express their views and asking what evidence or information people feel the County Council should consider in reviewing the technology.

It also asks how informed people feel about the technology and if they feel enough awareness has been raised about the use of 5G.

Camilla de Bernhardt Lane, Devon County Council’s Head of Scrutiny, said: “We want to hear from as many people as possible across Devon regarding 5G technology. The information shared will be used in our Councillor-led spotlight review. While Scrutiny can only make recommendations, this work is planned to help to inform Council policy on 5G technology. This is your opportunity to let our review know your thoughts and what you feel Devon County Council might do to address any concerns you have.”

Anyone who fills in the questionnaire will have the opportunity to be invited to take part in a discussion with the scrutiny group at a later date. Feedback must be submitted by Monday 9 December.

For more information on scrutiny and how it works visit the democracy pages of our website.

74 comments on “County Council seeking views on 5G as part of spotlight review

  1. Rebecca says:

    Devon County Council,

    Please will you re-open this survey?

    I am sure there are many people who missed the chance to complete the survey and share their views on 5G. I live in Devon and would have completed this survey had I known about it. Where was it advertised, if at all?

    There are no studies to show 5G is safe. If there is even a small chance of causing harm, why take the risk? The damage will be irreversible, Keep Devon free from 5G.

    • Hi Rebecca,

      I’m sorry, the survey closed a few months ago and the results have been analysed. It was publicised extensively online and through social media, as well as being picked up by local media. On the basis of the survey we also had a series of focus groups to talk to people more thoroughly about their concerns. The view that you’ve shared was represented extensively.

      The 5G spotlight review is among the Council’s scrutiny work that is currently on hold because of the coronavirus pandemic. It will be up to scrutiny councillors to determine what happens at the point where it is safe to resume. In the meantime, you’re more than welcome to write to the Chair of the spotlight review, Councillor Carol Whitton, via the scrutiny mail box –

  2. Florence Duff-Scott says:

    Dear Devon County Council,

    I implore you not to allow 5G to be installed in Devon. This technology will put our health, and the heath of our children at risk. When this Pandemic is over, when we are free to enjoy all the beauty that Devon has to offer, when we are free to embrace one another and walk together again, when that day comes, please let it be without 5G.

  3. Ovidiu says:

    Common Law Courts presentation on 5G and lawsuit against the UK government

    Also of interest, the resulting CLC court order:

    No doubt many will think and ask: What is CLC? And what is a living man or a living woman? See CLC for more details. Simply put, that is the power we each individually have, because the government is, or should be, for and by the people, not against the people. It’s also the best example of lawful vs. legal. A sovereign being acts lawfully, without harming others. The government relies on legal statues and procedures and thus has no lawful authority over a living man or living woman. None. Again, see CLC for more details.

    Have a nice day! 🙂

    • Peter says:

      A confused presentation. Smart meters and 5GHz wi-fi are happening.

      Note the spectrum slide should show frequencies!

      No 5G emissions/signals from satellites above British skies – we have broadcast TV pointed at us.

      LED blue streetlights can cause permanent retinal damage, systems are easily hackable and weaponised – hacking streetlights?

      Californian wildfires possibly due to increase in volatile compounds caused by 5G – which compounds, and which frequencies in use?

      Remember the village that say they were affected by a new mobile mast, only to be told that the transmitter was not yet switched on.

  4. Peter says:

    Could someone please explain the difference between 4G and 5G when it uses the same frequency bands as existing mobile comms.

    • Ovidiu says:

      Peter, 5G does not use the same frequency bands as 4G. If it did, then the infrastructure to enable 5G would be similar to 4G and it could not be more different. You do raise a good point though: if people are really concerned about radiation, why don’t we all ditch the 4G smart phones as well? It’s a quite valid point when you consider the built in tech used to intrude, so I don’t use the word spy, on the individual. Convenience always has a price and so do smart phones. But 5G is a completely different kettle of fish. 5G signal can’t go through “obstacles”, hence why more mini masts are required.

    • Peter says:

      Initial 5G uses part of the 4G spectrum. 3.5GHz to be used, but wi-fi routers use 5GHz.


      BBC item says ‘5G technology requires a lot of new base stations – these are the masts that transmit and receive mobile phone signals.

      And Is that OK?

      But crucially, because there are more transmitters, each one can run at lower power levels than previous 4G technology, which means that the level of radiation exposure from 5G antennas will be lower.’

    • stefan says:

      Peter, you state, or it is quoted from somewhere else, this

      ‘But crucially, because there are more transmitters, each one can run at lower power levels than previous 4G technology, which means that the level of radiation exposure from 5G antennas will be lower.’

      If you have stated this, then please do point to the research that proves this, because as far as I know there are no such papers that have tested this at any level. What is about to happen is a massive ramp up of wireless waves, making a much more dense wave-blanket effect across the world, and just because the other G’s have been deemed safe, by those pushing this technology (I beg to differ) then I guess its green-light for what ever they please. The information and communication technology industry and Governments are not being responsible here, just like what happens in many other sectors of industry the bottom-line is they only care about the money, and they will say / print anything and use any tactics to make something that they know deep down is not right, even harmful, seem absolutely fine.

      If Governments and the information and communication technology industry will not do the right thing and test this at a biological level, 24 hours a day exposure to the levels of waves that this IoT will create, Then people need to file a combined-lawsuit asking for a world-halt until thorough independent biological studies on living life have taken place.

      And I have an idea of how to possibly make that happen if anyone wants to get together to discuss this.

      I am also quietly confident of what possibly those independent studies if done would show.

  5. Ovidiu says:

    Happy New Year, All! 🙂

    Is there one, just one, comment in favour of 5G on this consultation page? Don’t think so. Just a lot of comments from educated people, people who can see through the illusion and the sales/marketing gimmicks, which is really encouraging to see. A lot of valuable information has been posted in these comments, I for one will save this webpage for later reference.

    Hot off the press: “I’m Not Recommending Anyone Use It”, First 5G Rollout Fails To Live Up To The Hype
    Oh, dear. I’ll bookmark this link under Poetic justice. Do what’s right, beneficial and healthy for all of humanity or face the consequences. And this is not a threat, just a universal law, and the wise people know which side to take, think boomerang.

    Stand tall people, big smile on and assume your individual power of choice. We’ll look back on this in a few years and realise what a tremendous power we have collectively to choose better and healthier alternatives for the sake of all humanity, certainly not a globalist program with hidden yet so obvious outcomes for the masses. For all the people pushing out 5G, I wish them all good luck when the boomerang find its way back to them… and it will! 🙂

  6. Holly says:

    The list of potential effects from 5G is as long as the body is complex, but what is already certain is that
    this high frequency radiation will profoundly affect our physical, emotional, neurological, mental and
    spiritual well-being, while destroying our bodies’ protective mechanisms and natural rhythms, as well
    as affecting crops, insects, plants, trees, our environment and our climate.
    Already, over 93,000 people from 187 countries
    have signed the International Appeal
    to Stop 5G. I see there is already a 5G tower given the go ahead in Brixham, right on a playing field of all places…how is this even allowed? 5G is a crime against all humanity, and the evidence against it is being covered up!

    • Rebecca says:

      I am so sorry to hear that. Brixham is a beautiful town and a real draw for tourists. I for one will not knowingly visit ANYWHERE with a 5G-enabled tower. I avoid any generation of mobile mast where feasibly possible. Those of us who do, either through choice or necessity, have fewer and fewer places to go. EHS sufferers and parents wishing to protect their children are being ostracised. Councils have a duty of care to protect the health of ALL their citizens, in particular children, pregnant women and their foetuses, and those disabled by EHS, as per Section 149 of the Equality Act 2010. Not everyone wants constant connectivity. There are a growing number of us who really don’t!

    • Neeson says:

      The greatest crime of all is the purposeful obfuscation of information and ridiculing of those prepared to do their research instead of trusting the very same people and their tactics (government, industry, medicine, industry paid science and mainstream media), that allowed the tobacco industry to prolong their lie for 20 years. Interesting how passive smoking is such an issue now and not passive radiation!

      Parliament should be ashamed of themselves:

  7. Jay Brightwater says:

    Those responsible for allowing any roll out of 5G will be held accountable for the health impact on the people living in the area. It is already happening in Europe and the USA. Following the invitation on October 1, 2019 to the European Parliament of Dr Marc Arazi by MEPs Philippe Lamberts, Michèle Rivasi and Klaus Buchner of the Greens/EFA, and the alert issued to parliamentarians and organisations gathered at this event on the Phonegate health and industrial scandal, a written question was tabled by Michèle Rivasi on October 9, 2019 before the European Commission. Articles 40 and 42 of Directive 2014/53/EU (RED Directive) on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to the availability of radio equipment on the market, lay down the obligations of the economic operator and the Commission as regards corrective measures or withdrawal from the market in respect of equipment which does not comply or which may present a risk. It should be recalled that since 2011, in the light of available studies, the International Agency for Research on Cancer has classified microwave radiation from mobile phones as a “possible carcinogen”. Denial is no longer an acceptable option! More details in this article.

  8. Carla says:

    Experts have all warned that blanketing communities and the Earth with 5G technology ultra-high microwave frequencies is a crazy idea!!.. Not to mention it is a weapons system (DEW). Please forgive me, but have those in authority completely lost their minds, or do we have psychopaths running positions of power?

  9. Katherine Armitage says:

    I am a Parish Councillor in Combe Martin North Devon. I became aware of the dangers of 5G technology from listening to the scientist Barrie Trower and the US Doctor Dr Sharon Goldberg. Since then I have listened to many other people speaking about the dangers of 5G radiation. This has convinced me that this technology is in contravention of the Nuremburg code of Human Rights. The big insurance companies are refusing to insure it, The lack of safety testing of 5G is lacking because it is dangerous. Until it is proved to be safe all councils should be invoking the Precautionary Principle to stop the roll out of 5G. I’ve attended DCC and NDDC meetings to alert the councillors to the dangers of 5G. It is a scandal that PHE and ICNIRP standards are set so high that they will not protect people from the dangerous frequencies of 5G microwave technology.

  10. Charlie Kay says:

    I was born in Devon 53 years ago and still live in this beautiful county. What we are seeing unfolding with the densification of the wireless telecommunications industry and manmade pulse modulated EMF’s is going to have the most devasting impact on this county and elsewhere that we have seen in modern history. One might view this as exaggeration, but after looking at the available evidence, it is in fact a reality. You can’t see it and there is and will be no escape.

    The fifth generation (5G) for wireless communication is about to be deployed worldwide in spite of no thorough studies being made on the potential risks to human health and the environment. The implementation seems to be driven mainly by business interests, not considering mounting public anxiety on the associated risks. Indeed, in the last Devon County Council Cabinet meeting (Dec 2019) following a question from a member of the public it was stated that the council cannot stop the telecommunications companies from upgrading their infrastructure to 5G or densifying the existing networks. The science is without question now. This technology damages health, period, and unlike other class 2 carcinogens (already acknowledged) you cannot escape from being exposed to it. DCC, as our elected representatives, need to find a way to reign in those aspects of industry that our making us extremely ill.

    The decision making bodies such as PHE & the WHO base their decisions and act on expert statements that tend to be biased and formed by a cartel of members; the International Commission of Non Ionising Radiation (ICNIRP) that dismiss current evidence instead of the 1000’s of peer reviewed studies, science based evaluation, that shows this technology to be harmful to insects, pollinators and wildlife, let alone us, especially children. Studies demonstrate that manmade EMF’s cause damage to the eyes (cataracts, retina), immune system and metabolic disruption, cancer, sperm damage, skin damage, collapse in insect and pollinators populations, damage to plants and trees, rise in bacterial resistance and bacterial shifts, foetal damage, heart desease, sleep deprivation, tinnitus, anxiety, depression, behaviour problems, dementia, Parkinson’s, autism and DNA damage.

    Brain cancer is now the biggest killer of children. Why is that?
    With the onset of 4G, cell phone use and industrial Wi-Fi’s in the home and schools brain cancer increased 4 fold in 2018. We have 27 year olds who are now presenting with dementia. There is also a massive increase in autism and ADHD and both are associated with EMR.

    No studies have been done. There is no regulation, no safety standards and no risk assessment. What product goes out into the public sphere without these? We will be exposed to this 24/7, not the 6 minutes that ICNIRP, the NGO that advises PHE and WHO, exposed a full grown man to.

    You will hear from PHE that they don’t pay heed to fringe scientists.
    What have they got to say to the 14 year $30m National Toxicology Programme 2018 (NTP) that was instigated to prove without a shadow of a doubt that cell phones were safe. Oddly, it actually proved that EMF’s are a class one ‘definite’ carcinogen, next to asbestos and tobacco.
    Or the Ramazinni study, a 6 million Euro study that confirmed the results of the NTP, but used levels 6,000 times lower.
    Or the US Navy Report (1971), the Bioinitiative Report (2012), the Yakymenko (2015) Oxidative Stress Mechanism –Meta Analysis Paper, the Volkow (2011) (Increase in Glucose Metabolism).
    I could go on as there are many, many more.
    The reality is that they cherry pick studies and ICNIRP is a revolving door with the telecommunications industry (a captured agency as we say in diplomatic terms) and, indeed, invites people on the board that have proven their loyalty to the industry.

    All we are asking is for you to invoke the precautionary principle until independent studies prove this technology to be safe. We can’t do it. We need you as our representatives to put this moratorium in place for the health of us, not the health of big business (with no morals or ethics apart from the bottom line). I understand it is seductive to receive potential revenue’s when council resources are so lacking, but our safety must take priority. It is not on us to prove that this is harmful, but it is on the industry to prove that it is safe.

    One final question you need to ask: why would a $17 trillion telecommunications industry not instigate ANY independent studies or the insurance industry refuse to accept ANY liability if it was safe?

  11. Graham Long says:

    What a lot of tosh is being posted here – and for those who quote EMF as a clever acronym to demonstrate they know what they are talking about – take note – it actually means Electromotive Force and has nothing to do with “Electomagnetic Radiation”. Surprised the Flat Earth Socety have not yet registered a comment yet!

    • Stefan says:

      EMF can mean both electromotive force and electromagnetic field or EM Field


      Electromotive force is not to be confused with electromagnetic field or EM Field

      Electromagnetic radiation

      ‘In physics, electromagnetic radiation (EM radiation or EMR) refers to the waves (or their quanta, photons) of the electromagnetic field, propagating (radiating) through space, carrying electromagnetic radiant energy. It includes radio waves, microwaves, infrared, (visible) light, ultraviolet, X-rays, and gamma rays.’

      People have concerns with this IoT which includes 5G, and rightly so. The prestigious Ramazzini Institute, that are widely recognised for their cancer studies, and others are recommending that Industry and Governments take a thorough (biological) look at this subject.

      I do not think people on this page are referring to EMF as electromotive force but as electromagnetic field or EM Field, which is directly linked to electromagnetic radiation.

      People are merely trying to have an adult discussion about this subject and help by providing solutions to Industry and Governments for a healthier world environment. Surely this benefits us all.

    • Stefan says:

      You maybe.

      Graham Long, chairman of campaign group Fast Broadband for Rural Devon & Somerset

  12. Andrea says:


    I am highly concerned about the roll out of 5G. I managed in two occasions to speak at the Kingsbridge Council meetings getting the Precautionary Principle on the 8th of October. I suggest Devon County Council follow the example and wait until further research is done to make sure 5G is safe for humans, insects, specially Bees, and environment. 5G hasn’t been tested to be safe, many cases of birds dying and bees around the works due to 5G tests. The world Health Organisation declared Radio Frequencies from WiFi and mobile phones to be ‘Possible Carcinogenic’ and thousands of peer review studies from scientists and doctors from more than 40 countries show the harmful effects on human, animals and plants. They have created an appeal to STOP 5G from earth and space.
    Here the website:
    Here more videos and I formation related with WiFi and 5G:
    It is in your hand to stop this genoside, once 5G is in our lives, nobody will be able to scape from it, nor you or us, this will be the end of our beautiful world, the world of freedom, peace, beauty, nature. The internet of things which is what 5G is all about, will take away our children creativity, the natural way of doing and being, we will have asleep society, and want to clarify that I like technology but I like it safe, by wiring our devices, all in balance is good but this is going to far, we have already a very advance technology, let’s co céntrate in the science of human behaviour, because that’s what the society needs, more love, understanding and care, that’s what make a society strong and happy.

    • Tom Smith says:

      in the U.K., 5G will use the frequencies that have been used by television broadcasts for years. TV transmissions have been turned off or moved to make space for the frequencies allocated for 5G. So any harmful effect would have been seen in the last 40 years or so. We been broadcasting on these frequencies for years.

      Other countries are looking at different frequencies, for example the US

    • Chris Kenny says:

      Tom Smith
      Your comment is completely erroneous and misleading!

  13. Stefan says:

    For your knowledge.

    BBC’s Panorama made a documentary on wireless technology in 2011, showing concern and the need for Governments and Industry to investigate properly. It is approaching 2020, and instead of halting further developments in this technology, by carrying out biological testing, all that has happened is more infrastructure has been built to house more equipment to run this IoT life, which includes 5G.

    This is not protecting the population at all. To carry on increasing this technology when independent science says it is affecting living life is incorrect. And especially when the individual that wrote the safety advice for WHO, saying this technology is safe, worked for the telecommunication industry, both prior and after that report was done.

    You have an answer – fibre optics.
    I am hoping that DCC will take my suggestion and invest in full fibre optics.and start dismantling wireless towers across Devon. This will hopefully lead to other county councils doing the same.

    I also welcome the opportunity to meet with DCC in the near future.

  14. Rona Lohoar says:

    The evidence from microwave weapons experts, Barry Trower and Mark Steel is clear, these emfs are dangerous to life . It is under the control of $ billions industry, the impact on human life and all other life on the planet will be devastating,this must be stopped at all costs

  15. Richard Wilson says:

    I have read much of the official government and WHO publications on the one hand and the increasing number of scientific and medical studies on the other hand related to emf radiation in general and 5G in particular. I am a professional engineering consultant and expert witness used to analysing data. I conclude that there have been no adequate independant medical and environmental (bacteria, insects, birds, plants, etc.) research or studies to show that there are or will be no short, medium or long term negative impact on terrestial ecosystems (including humans). Also, through my wife’s complementry medicine practice I also know of people whose recovery is impeded by emf radiation in their home environment particularly important during sleep. People I have met are obviously “electro-sensitive” and I myself feel the effects of mobile phones close to me, driving under power lines, sleeping close to radio emmitting towers (I travel to cities in Africa and Asia for work) etc. Reduction and amelioration of health impact can be achieved to a limited degree through physical rearrangement, switch-offs, wall and window coverings, plug-in and stand alone devices, etc. As a precautionary principle, we now have fibre optic cable to our house and all devices (TV, laptops, etc.) are hard-wired through use of the mains wiring to mini non-wifi hubs and then ethernet cables. There is no or little inconvenience expereinced with this arrangement. As I understand it, ubiquitous 5G, with all its largely unknown health and environmental impacts, will take away our human rights to freedom to avoid emf radiation in our homes, in workplace and travelling. Related to this I also believe that mobile phones have become a “plague” and seriously undermine human health, particulary of young people from babies to teenagers, both through direct inter-cellular and intra-cellular emf (low power non-ionizing and non-heating effects) but also through psychological impacts of habitual long exposure (which can be up to 6 hours a day I see from TV programmes on the subject!). Richard Wilson MSc Chartered Water and Environmental Consultant. This mail was sent through my wired Internet access, which is safer, faster, and less harmful to health and to the environment.

    • Rebecca says:

      Richard, thank you for your comments. We have hardwired our internet connections at home. Initially, we used passthrough powerpoint plugs but have removed these as they are now considered to create dirty electricity (DE), also harmful to health. Now, we run Cat 6 ethernet cables to both computers/studies and have ditched the plugs. It has the added benefit of creating healthy boundaries around work and living spaces!

    • Peter says:

      What is ‘Dirty electricity’? As a Chartered Electrical Engineer I am not familiar with the term.

  16. Wendy says:

    The fundamental problem here that is being overlooked is that we are currently using safety standards from the 1990s that are obsolete and not fit for purpose to assess the safety of non-ionising radiation – the technology of mobile phones, wifi, cell towers and 5g.

    The safety standards are based solely on thermal affects to heat up tissue, and do not cover any other type of biological damage that occurs below the heating affect. They are set a million times too high for biological protection. Other countries have safety limits of orders of magnitude below ours in the UK.

    If we use these standards we are literally saying “it doesn’t heat you up therefore it is safe”.

    Safety standards do not consider cumulative effects of chronic exposure and exposure from multiple devices and sources at the same time. The standards are set only for acute exposure, for a few minutes, from a single device.

    There are now thousands of studies showing harmful effects below the current safety limits. Here is a link to the Bioinitiative Report 2012 – 2019, that reviewed the data and lists many of these studies.

    The US Environmental Protection Agency confirm the above themselves. They state that exposure guidelines used by the FCC (Federal Communications Commission), IEEE ( Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) and – the one that we use – ICNRP (International Commission on Non Ionising Radiation Protection) – the one that we use – “protect against injury that may be caused by acute exposure that result in tissue heating or electric shock and burn”, but they “did not consider information that addresses non-thermal, prolonged low-level exposures… therefore the generalization by many that the guidelines protect human beings from harm by any or all mechanisms is not justified”.
    See the full US EPA document quoted above (paragraph 3 of their July 2002 letter):

    In 2011 The World Health Organisation (WHO) and The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classed non ionising radiation as a Group 2B Carcinogen. This was based on higher brain tumour rates (glioma and acoustic neuroma – a type of Schwannoma) found in longer-term mobile phone users. Since then the evidence for cancer from non-ionising radiation has elevated.

    We now have a wealth of mechanistic and animal data, thought to be lacking in 2011 and the reason it did not get a higher rating. There are numerous published peer reviewed independent studies that would qualify it as a Group 1 Known Human Carcinogen, putting it in the same category as smoking, x-rays and asbestos.

    There have been numerous published peer reviewed independent studies that would now qualify non-ionising radiation as a Group 1 Known Human Carcinogen, putting it in the same category as smoking, x-rays and asbestos.

    For example, The US National Toxicology Program (2018) found “Clear Evidence” for heart Schwannomas in animals exposed to RF and “some evidence” of several other cancers including glioma. Compounding this, the Ramazzini Institute found Schwannomas again even though they used low intensity far-field radiation like that produced by base stations.

    IARC scientists and many others have called for the reclassification as a Group 1 Known Human Carcinogen, but IARC have not yet reconvened to reclassify it. They have labelled it as “high priority” for reclassification but unfortunately this is likely to take two to four years! Some time after the rollout of 5g.

    We need to act now to hault the rollout of 5g without independant biological safety testing, that uses technology proven to cause cancer and other cellular damage, and relies instead on safety standards that are not fit for purpose.

    • Andrew says:

      I totally agree with you about telecoms companies, tech companies, PHE and Government hiding behind ICNIRP “guidelines”. Part of my submission to my local planning committee meeting a few days ago was: “These ICNIRP guidelines are now 20 years old, the research on which they draw is therefore older still. At the time they were published, people, especially young people, did not have the vast array of devices they now have and are seemingly addicted to. These guidelines have never been updated to reflect the massive advances in this type of technology and are now increasingly seen to be out of date by not referencing the plethora of more recent research which consistently shows links to adverse health issues. So saying that this installation conforms to them does not mean it is safe and cannot be assumed to be factually correct and accurate. It is like saying the Titanic was ‘unsinkable’ because it had a seaworthiness certificate.” The sooner these guidelines are exposed for what they really are, the sooner we can make some peogress

    • Rebecca says:

      Well said, Wendy. In addition, Sarah Starkey’s presentation is important to understand how the AGNIR Report 2012 on which official guidance is based was corrupted to be factually inaccurate, misleading and deliberately omitting reference to harmful effects.

      Add to that, the fact that the government already prohibits (and seeks to prohibit further) the public’s ability to contest installation and upgrades of mobile masts on grounds of health is nothing short of an outrage in the light of the known or potential risks to health.

  17. Zippy says:

    This technology is military spec, weapons grade technology. It uses millimeter mirowaves which cause untold harm to ALL life around it. Since 4g came out we do not now have enough bugs to splat on the windscreens of our cars. When we take out the insects it is natures natural way that all the bigger species above it will follow the same fete in time. It is non sensicle. It also will be very invasive to our very beings, and our every move will be monitored everywhere, even in our homes! Everything from opening the fridge door to going to the toilet will be noted by computer. This is George Orwell’s 1984 in real time. There are no re-run!

  18. Thank you all for your comments so far – they are very much appreciated. Please don’t forget to complete the questionnaire and provide your views at

  19. Lisa Goudie says:

    Who in their right mind would want to increase their risk of getting cancer?
    How is 5G progress when it plays havoc with lives and the biodiversity.

  20. Derdriu Ni Camhoil says:

    An electromagnetic field (EMF) is a field of energy that results from electromagnetic radiation, a form of energy that occurs as a result of the flow of electricity.
    Electric fieldsTrusted Source exist wherever there are power lines or outlets, whether the electricity is switched on or not. Magnetic fields are created only when electric currents flow. Together, these produce EMFs.
    Electromagnetic radiation exists as a spectrum of different wavelengths and frequencies, which are measured in hertz (Hz). This term denotes the number of cycles per second.
    Power lines operate between 50 and 60 Hz, which is at the lower end of the spectrum. These low-frequency waves, together with radio waves, microwaves, infrared radiation, visible light, and some of the ultraviolet spectrum — which take us into the megahertz (MHz), GHz, and terahertz spectra — make up what is known as nonionizing radiation.
    Above this lie the petahertz and exahertz spectra, which include X-rays and gamma rays. These are types of ionizing radiation, which mean that they carry sufficient energy to break apart molecules and cause significant damage to the human body.
    Radiofrequency EMFs (RF-EMFs) include all wavelengths from 30 kilohertz to 300 GHz.
    For the general public, exposure to RF-EMFs is mostly from handheld devices, such as cell phones and tablets, as well as from cell phone base stations, medical applications, and TV antennas.
    The most well-established biological effect of RF-EMFs is heating. High doses of RF-EMFs can lead to a rise in the temperature of the exposed tissues, leading to burns and other damage.
    But mobile devices emit RF-EMFs at low levels. Whether this is a cause for concern is a matter of ongoing debate, reignited by the arrival of 5G.
    In 2011, 30 international scientists, who are part of the working group of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), met to assess the risk of developing cancer as a result of exposure to RF-EMFs.
    The working group published a summary of their findings in The Lancet OncologyTrusted Source.
    The scientists looked at one cohort study and five case-control studies in humans, each of which was designed to investigate whether there is a link between cell phone use and glioma, a cancer of the central nervous system.
    The team concluded that, based on studies of the highest quality, “A causal interpretation between mobile phone RF-EMF exposure and glioma is possible.” Smaller studies supported a similar conclusion for acoustic neuroma, but the evidence was not convincing for other types of cancer.
    The team also looked at over 40 studies that had used rats and mice.
    In view of the limited evidence in humans and experimental animals, the working group classified RF-EMFs as “possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B).” “This evaluation was supported by a large majority of working group members,”

    • Stefan says:

      The real worry about 5G – IoT is the increased use of wireless technology – radio waves – and how science is showing this technology enhances carcinogenic substances. These radio waves are a type of EMR (electromagnetic radiation). Waves from wireless technology has an attract to carcinogenic substances, which enhances the carcinogen(s) making it / them more likely to form a tumorous site(s) in living organisms. The International Agency for Research on Cancer – a body that collects and publishes cancer figures worldwide – has a list of the 116 substances and activities (natural, organic, and man-made) that cause cancer, but I would think there are far more carcinogenic substances around, than what is on this list.

      This is a two step process, the world’s governments must permanently clean industry up. And the population (all of us) going forward should support companies dong things correctly, if we do not then those companies that do not really care about the health of our world and those that live on her, will continue to do harm. We need to rely on governments to protect us, but it seems industry has the upper hand, this certainly needs to be reversed. But to create more toxicity across the world, especially with all that is happening is not correct, now or in the future. It is bad enough dealing with natural and organic carcinogenic substances, but to continually add / increase man-made ones is just irresponsible. Governments and industry can at least get rid of these. Going forward, a suggestion on how to make industry better is for testing on all things to be done at cellular level and how it impacts the human body or living life and the environment where applicable, and that testing times need to be increased significantly (years). Also the processes/methods used in production should be thoroughly investigated to see if these methods create harmful chemical compounds, regardless of their level. I am sure if this was done properly many-many things would be removed from the goods and services market.

      In reference to wireless communication which is showing it enhances carcinogenic substances, governments and industry can do what I have been suggesting in my previous posts – fibre optics.

    • Wendy says:

      Actually there was sufficient evidence of non-ionising radiation causing brain cancer in humans. The reason that it did not get a higher category by the WHO/IARC was because at the time there was thought to be a lack of mechanistic and animal data. That data now exists in numerous published peer reviewed independent studies that would now qualify it to be classed as a Group 1 Known Human Carcinogen, putting it in the same category as smoking, x-rays and asbestos. IARC scientists and many others have called for the reclassification as a Group 1 Known Human Carcinogen, but IARC have not yet reconvened to reclassify it. They have labelled it as “high priority” for reclassification but unfortunately this is likely to take two to four years! Some time after the rollout of 5g.

      If you are interested in the evidence, last year two very important studies were published. The US National Toxicology Program (2018) found “Clear Evidence” for heart Schwannomas in animals exposed to RF and “some evidence” of several other cancers including glioma. Compounding this, the Ramazzini Institute found Schwannomas again even though they used low intensity far-field radiation like that produced by base stations.

    • Stefan says:

      I am on your side Wendy.

      I am fully aware of these studies, I have all the research. I know of RF and what it can do. and I am very well versed in cancer. I am pointing out the most worrying find in all of the research.

      RF (such as that from wireless communications) is showing it has an attract mechanism to carcinogenic substances, which then enhances the carcinogen(s) making it / them more likely to form tumorous site(s) in living organisms. As we are surrounded by organic, natural and man-made carcinogenic substances, this particular study 2018 – from the Ramazzine Institute is absolutely the most worrying, as governments and industry are about to put up infrastructure that will allow us to choke the world in wireless waves.

      There is no point in me listing all the research, it is too much information to write down. I am not here competing, I am here to specifically make a case for Devon County Council, as Devon just like Cornwall have the highest levels of radon, which is why this particular research is so important for South West England councils. In fact it is the most important research find for everyone, due to increased number of carcinogenic substances around, which is why a move to world-wide fibre optics is needed, and the dismantling of a significant number of existing wireless communications towers.

  21. Sally says:

    The fact that it is uninsurable due it’s high health risks is extremely worrying. Lloyd’s bank and others have a clause not to insure it. Please look into this. There are serious health consequences.

  22. Andrew says:

    5G and the ludicrous IoT are the worst thing ever to be forced onto the human population, all to provide yet more money and power to Big Business.
    This technology is designed around machines and therefore the effects on living organisms hasn’t even been considered.
    People have been seduced into buying ever more ‘smart’ devices to the extent that so many are addicted to them, they can barely function without some app telling them what to do or think. and within 12months the ‘all singing, all dancing, must-have device’ is replaced with an ‘even better singing and dancing version’ (more expensive, naturally). Still people fal for the marketing hype.
    The tech companies and telecoms industry use this manufactured demand/addiction as the reason for pushing ever more dangerous levels of radiation into our atmosphere.
    Not many things of real importance come out of the EU, but this: “Resolution 1815 The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment, 27/5/2011” is certainly one.
    Also worth reading is the submission by Prof Martin Pall PHD, Proffessor Emiritus Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences,of Washington State University to EU: 5G Great risk to EU, US & International Health. 54 pages of impeccable research referencing hundreds of other independant scientific research papers. And there is so much more out there if people would just look.
    Can we stop this juggernaut ride to oblivion? We can if we wake up those who cannot see. We can if we use safer (and better) technology. We can if those who are elected to serve us actually started to do just that…
    Don’t lose hope, don’t give up!

  23. karen says:

    This decision is easy,

    Rolling out this untested technology is contravenes the Nuremburg convention.
    It amounts to an experiment on the population.

    Thousands of research papers showing biolgical harmful effects to humans plants and animals from the non thermal effects of EMR are being ignored by Public Health England. We should be regulating and informing the public about exposure to wifi and mobile phones like other countries are starting to do. Half a million people in this country are already unable to work from electrosensitivity. The thought of adding exponential levels of exposure with 5g and the internet of things, 32 000 satellites beaming at us from above is utter madness.

  24. Stefan says:

    Ofcom started consultations, 21June 2019 ‘Initial consultation on the approach to modelling the costs of a fibre network’ across the UK.

    There is no reason not to bring a full fibre optic network across UK so every home, educational facility and business is wired down, stopping any more towers being built and the upgrading of wireless phone technology G’s (generation).

    Install Fibre-to-the-Cabinet (FTTC) exchanges, from here the industry can wire everyone down with Fibre to the Premises (FTTP).

    We need to change the way we communicate, and distance ourselves from being permanently connected to wireless communication networks, with mobile devices. We need to start with the places we spend the most amount of time (home, educational facilities, and businesses). It is the healthy thing to do. Wiring down with fibre optics will mean everyone can use wired communications in the above mentioned places that significantly outperforms wireless communications on every point. There would be no need for mobile phone use either (use landlines and desktop / laptops). I do understand, that there is this ‘attachment relationship’ to mobile phones, but for the places mentioned above, to accommodate these people I am sure it would be easy to create a wired attachment allowing these mobile phone users to connect to a wired device to communicate, making it more healthier for them. Regarding this SMART technology that is made to use wireless communication networks (especially this roll out of smart utility meters) can of course be made wired. This would mean no more wireless communications around us, in the places we spend the most time, which is noted as being a continual exposure to wireless waves.

    People do not consider how far wireless waves travel, and the impact on health on all living life (plants and animals). One of the things WiFi affects is sleep, as does light at night and both these things affects melatonin production (the bodies natural cancer-protective agent). Serum melatonin production that is severely diminished in people is a culprit for tumour formation. How great would it be to not only protect yourselves in your own personal environment, but to protect your neighbours and those around you too. This is possible if industry and governments implement this. Of course whilst waiting people can simply disable the wifi on their equipment (but do make sure your WiFi is permanently disabled, a simply push of a button may seem like WiFi is off, but in most cases it is not) and then connect with ethernet cable.

    Wiring down is to promote health in reference to this IoT (Internet of Things). The way forward is wired, and to limit wireless communications across the world to what is only necessary – to serve a specific task (for example to pass information from one continent to another), and for that infrastructure to be in a remote place. To cover the world (especially in areas we live) and its atmosphere with more infrastructure that houses powerful antennas and receivers for a ‘blanket wireless communication network’ for this IoT is not correct. The governments and telecommunications industry need to start dismantling built towers for wireless communications, not to add more.

    Part of wiring down is the subject of shielded casing. Governments and industry going forward can make sure wiring for all electrical things come with shielded casing to further protect people from electromagnetic radiation from the wires inside cabling (For example we can opt for biological builders in home development). Presently people are being continually exposed to wired things without shielded casing and potent wireless phone technology, both of which impact people’s wellbeing.

    Another point to add wiring down all, homes, educational facilities, and businesses across the world, so that we communicate wired, will be a start to reduce the man-made electromagnetic smog, something I understand contributes to anthropogenic (man-made) climate change. So it is a win win.

  25. Gabriel Millar says:

    5G is not a ramp-up of 4G – it’s a different, more harmful frequency,
    perfected as a military weapon in the ’60’s.
    Several thousand studies corroborate this. And additionsl frequencies
    are about to be added to facilitate global roaming.
    Don’t go anywhere near it!

    • Rebecca says:

      Declassified CIA document of Russian research on the biological effects of millimetre waves:

      Tens of thousands of research studies show harm from non-thermal electromagnetic fields, including RF-EMF from earlier mobile and WiFi technologies, which 5G would incorporate in addition to higher frequencies. Fewer studies have been done specific to millimetre waves as proposed in 5G. However, harm has been shown from military applications and the above declassified CIA document amongst others. No research, to my knowledge, has evaluated the layering of multiple frequencies within the spectrum nor the biological impact from the real life application of how 5G technologies will behave completely differently from previous generations of mobile telecommunications (beam-formed, MIMO, etc). As they are still being developed, we cannot fully know. Hence the need for a moratorium until proven safe.

  26. Jo says:

    No to 5G !!! Its so sad this is even being considered. I thought we were trying to save our planet? Not destroy it further! Money is cruel ……….

  27. Wendy Mason says:

    5G is not for Me!

    If only the facts could be publicised in the big national newspapers I am sure there would be a rapid response again the massive dangerous and negative effects upon an innocent population abd civilisation! Why do people who have the knowledge of these dangers insist on going ahead! In this world it seems like a fight of good v evil! Gods children want to live a healthy happy life! The Adversary seems to create ideas and ways of obliterating all that is good!

    Are you for me or against me is the critical question?

    Which path will you Choose in every critical

    Now us the hour!! Over to you!

    • Andrew says:

      Wendy, the Adversary is all about inverting and corrupting. You only have to look at the symbols – the reversed swastica, the inverted cross. It cannot create, only mutate.
      Everything good is projected as bad, everything bad is displayed as good. Sadly a lot of people fall for the ‘displayed as good’ versions.
      Fight the good fight, as the saying goes…

  28. Chris says:

    We in Devon have to make a stand against this proven dangerous technology. They call it 5G to make you think its just the next improvement in mobile communication. It isn’t. Look at the number of towers that are appearing, ask yourself who is paying for all these to be sited. 5G is one go the biggest threats to human health and it’s being forced upon as. If we turn a blind eye to this, our children will never forgive us. Do the research. Do not consent.

  29. Matt Parkins says:

    As a layperson, it is impossible to assess the risk of 5G to us and our environment but, from spending a few minutes reading about the ‘potential’ risks of significantly increased levels of electromagnetic radiation, it is clear that we should go no further until full, independent science is available. We also need to be informed about the results so we can make an informed decision (not to be bulldozed by those with a financial interest in it). It does appear from the evidence so far that there are increased risks of cancer, tumours etc. and, while these possible physical effects are obviously worrying, there are also the ‘potential’ effects on our mental health. We are already experiencing rapidly increasing levels of anxiety and depression (and more) that can be attributed to “too much information” being available. We have to stop and ask, “do we need more?” In my opinion, we need to slow down and reconnect with nature, rather than destroying it in pursuit of profits for the few. We need to take care … of ourselves and our environment.

    • Stefan says:

      Matt says, ‘while these possible physical effects are obviously worrying, there are also the ‘potential’ effects on our mental health. We are already experiencing rapidly increasing levels of anxiety and depression (and more) that can be attributed to “too much information” being available’.

      This is a very good point Matt has made. It is absolutely correct, and is just as important.

      The signifcant rise in suicide from severe, anxiety and depression is another important reason to reduce significantly our ability to connect to the internet wherever we are. As Matt says ‘do we need more’, absolutely not, he is right. People just do not have the capacity to process all of this information, it is causing significant mental health problems.

      This is why I am suggesting governments and industry dismantle existing towers. It is the distribution of time, wiring down homes, educational facilities, and businesses will give people enough internet time in a healthy environment. Taking away towers, this significantly reducing wireless communications will allow people to do other activities without being interrupted by mobile devices, Something that presently locks people continually where ever they are. How possibly can this be healthy? This affects everything including relationships and the way we speak to, or act towards each other in day-to-day activities.

  30. Debbie says:

    Whilst I appreciate the option to comment, I do not feel that this form is well designed.
    For example, question 5 on the ‘benefits’ of 5G, we are asked to put them in order or skip- but there is no real way to skip this question! If you just leave it because you feel there are no benefits, it just looks like you agree with the order of benefits as already listed. There is no clear way to say that you dont believe there are any benefits!!

    I also feel Q8 about the areas of influence is unclear- by asking ‘what do you believe DCC CAN do……. with the options you tick, are we agreeing to them making this decision by saying DCC CAN decide whether to go ahead with 5g? It depends in what context CAN is meant here- is it ‘do we believe they have the
    influence on the final say, or are we subtly agreeing they can ( ie are ALLOWED) to make the decision on our behalf?

  31. mary guyon says:

    From all I have heard and read about 5g and its danger to all life on the planet I think it is extraordinary that every living creature on earth is about to be exposed to such high level frequency radiation, that slowly and surely all life on earth is going to be affected. Why not Fibre Optics as Stephan has described so brilliantly. It is a no brainer it seems to me.

  32. Stefan says:

    Thank you Ovidiu for your kind words.

    The many-many problems the world faces, could be sorted out if Governments and their bodies, Industry and the population came together.

    There are solutions and where there are no solutions I am sure people on this planet can figure things out sensibly.

    Simply, we (the population) are creating a world that is toxic, and seem to be in a hurry to distance ourselves further from natural.

    Wireless communications is just one of the problems the world faces, but this one is not hard to solve. It already has a solution that simply needs to be implemented. Fibre optics is far faster than any of the wireless G’s (generation) and it is far more secure. In reference to living organisms, the environment and its ecosystems, it is a no-brainer, fibre optics will not cause the health conditions that wireless communications have contributed to, and will continue to contribute to going forward.

    It is noted from experts in this field that fibre optic cables do not emit any electromagnetic radiation from the cable itself, so shielded casing is not even needed, therefore this cable becomes a true exception. This would mean costs for laying fibre optics are further reduced. The amount of money that will have to be spent on installing infrastructure for 5G can simply be used for laying fibre optics across Untied Kingdom.

    Devon County Council has the chance here to be the first county in England to opt for fibre optics fully, to stand strong with the people of Devon in protecting us and our environment.

    Regarding the proposed benefits stated on DCC’s questionnaire

    Faster upload and download speeds for day-to-day use.
    The production of new jobs.
    Increased connectivity for rural areas.
    Improvements to the healthcare industry.
    Improvements in VR technology.

    Fibre optics will solve all of the above, it will out perform in speed, connectivity, security, production of new jobs, and the most important point is, it will be healthy. Problem solved.

    And please remember, this Internet of Things (IoT), which AI, SMART, RFID chips, Brain Computer Interface Technology and all the other weird developments fall under, and which wireless communications plays a vital role in, will not increase peoples lives like some science fiction eureka movie moment on living forever, it will absolutely decrease your life.

    • ElizaBee says:

      Excellent words, fully agree.

    • Stefan says:

      More information for you.

      Planning regulations are being changed (underway) to allow 5G masts to be erected near existing masts without the need for planning permission. This means no prior approval is needed, enabling existing sites to be upgraded for 5G without any opposition at the planning permission stage.

      The current rules prohibit structures over 25 metres on public land. And It was there for a good reason. A BBC interview with the Digital Minister states the Government wants to relax the rules so bigger towers can be built so more equipment can be housed. The Digital Minister also stated ‘We are committed to securing widespread mobile coverage and must make sure we have the right planning laws to give the UK the best infrastructure to stay ahead,’

      This ‘right planning laws’ mixed with ‘to give the UK the best infrastructure to stay ahead’ is a play on words, making people think we will be behind other countries (technologically). It is simply a ‘money’ rush to this IoT for Governments and Industry, and relaxing laws to push this through at what ever the collateral cost. I am sorry but everything needs planning permission. To change laws which now means no one has a say, and specifically allows 5G to bypass the planning stage, is disconcerting. Simply the law is being relaxed because people are starting to question this, and rightly so. UK Government states if there is a need they will build it, which means it comes down to us (the public) to think this through for the future generations.

      As I have stated before the answer is fibre optics. It is unbelievable this is still being discussed. All that needs to happen is for this to be implement at government level, and I would think the generations coming will thank us for doing this.

    • Stefan says:

      Thank you ElizaBee for your kind words

    • Stefan says:

      In reference to, ‘planning regulations are being changed which will allow 5G masts to be erected near existing masts without the need for planning permission. This means no prior approval is needed, enabling existing sites to be upgraded for 5G without any opposition at the planning permission stage’.

      If there are any lawyers reading this, and want to help, please can you kindly let yourself be known, so we can connect, Something is not right here, everything needs planning permission even if it is upgrading, because it will be different to the original drawings / plans, on which the planning permission was granted in the first instance.

  33. Ovidiu says:

    I am really pleased to see so many comments from people who understand what 5G is. If you are still using a microwave, then forget it. You’ll probably fall for the “benefits” of 5G too.

    Personally I will not buy into 5G products. If old/current smartphones will become obsolete, as is expected, because they won’t work with 5G (a very nice ploy to get the customer to upgrade, more profit for the tech companies, right?) and if 4G were to be decommissioned, then I will do away with my smartphone altogether and be better off for it. By the way, do you know the word smart also means to burn? Still want a “smart phone”?

    I’m all for fibre optics in a shielding case as Stefan so eloquently describes.

    DCC Corporate Infrastructure and Regulatory Services Scrutiny Committee, could you promote Stefan’s suggestion as an alternative? Alternatively, I’d like to flip the review back on you guys. You prove that 5G is beneficial for human health, the environment and cyber-security. If (and it’s a very big if) you can do that, then it’s going to be a no brainer for the people you are supposed to protect and look after. But of course, you won’t be able to do that, as you can’t prove as true something that is fundamentally false.

  34. Thank you everyone for your comments so far. Please do remember to complete the questionnaire and provide your views at

  35. Anouska says:

    This point blank terrifies me. I do not want this poison around me or my family. We should have a choice as to whether to expose ourselves to this technology, not have it forced upon us.

  36. Natalie Marcus says:

    5G, along 2G, 3G & 4G are technically’stealth-like-weapons’ that people do not yet fully understand the true extent of its harm. 5G will be using a whole range of GHz (gigahertz), operating from sub-GHz up to 100GHz. The ‘Active Denial Technology’ that the military use, to control crowd dispersion, operates at 95GHz, need anymore be said! It’s a consciously omitted pollutant, that needs to be stopped. I hope our councillors are able demonstrate understanding, compassion and the will to protect those whom they profess to protect.

    • Andrew says:

      Natalie, as a result of submissions made to them by concerned citizens (ordinary citizens, not hardened activists) Wells City Council in Somerset voted to adopt the Precautionary Principle when considering any future 5G projects / applications. They thus join Glastonbury, Frome and Shepton Mallet councils in Somerset who have done the same. Keep plugging away, councillors have loved ones and families the same as us. They will be affected just the same.

  37. Tim Thomson says:

    Let’s examine this exercise for a moment, and put aside abundant and recent scientific evidence unequivocally finding that high frequency microwave radiation is significantly damaging to most life forms. And ask the question why is Devon county council allowing a period of only two weeks for this survey?

    Let us also ask ourselves why this survey asks people to identify with a long list of positive outcomes of 5g whilst not suggesting any of the numerous and well known negatives.

    This is a tick box exercise weighted to the pro 5g position. its lamentable that such a crucial matter is being played around with by the council. We need mor e honesty from the people we pay to work for us.

  38. Ellie’s says:

    I’m concerned that no prolonged independent studies have been carried out. There are enough scientists expressing concern about 5G to ring alarm bells

  39. Jenny Rain says:

    Get 5g if you want skyrocketing cancer for babies, the elderly, pets and wildlife first, all other adults to closely follow.

    • Stefan says:

      Independent research from a prestigious institute (which I can supply) is showing that wireless communications do not cause cancer directly, but instead, there is a bond (attract) between waves (from wireless communication) and carcinogenic substances. The research to date shows conclusively that the carcinogenic substance (the one(s) used) are enhanced considerably when exposure to waves from wireless technology is present, making the carcinogenic substance more likely to form tumorous site(s) in living organisms. The data shows a significant increase in the number of rats (Sprague Dawley) with tumours, and an increase in cancer types, the locations of tumours, and the development speed after being exposed (lifelong) to both the carcinogenic substance and waves from wireless communication.

      This was compared to two (2) other life long (birth to natural death) studies. Rats that were exposed only to waves from wireless communication and those that were exposed only to the carcinogenic substance, in both cases there was no increase in rats with tumour – formation, type, location, or development speed other than what was logged from history and expected to happen. These birth to natural death studies are telling us something important and I would think that the need to investigate further is wise. Whether this means all carcinogenic things, which could mean organic (like viruses), natural (like radon or UV radiation), or man-made substances (those coming from the chemical industry, for example the products from the agrochemical industry – pesticides, herbicides and fungicides) is something that has to be found out quickly. Studies should also focus on all electromagnetic fields to see if they enhance carcinogenic substances.

      Why the need to continue down this path of turning our world into a toxic environment is something Governments, Industry and us (the population) have seriously got to ask ourselves. There are alternatives and the population can support those companies that are doing things correctly. In reference to 5G, it is the population that is driving this. Our data usage has skyrocketed, half the population use streaming services and all of us do online activities, but even so, there is an answer, and this is fibre optics with shielded casing, there is no need to put in 5G which will use new spectrum bands in higher frequencies ranges utilising sub-millimetre and millimetre waves. The casing is important as this protects us from the electro-radiation from the wiring inside. All wiring needs to have this shielded casing on. Governments and the telecommunications industry need to be responsible and lay shielded cable fibre optics, so that homes, educational facilities, and businesses are all wired down fully. The idea of increasing the amount of wireless signals including those coming from this wireless smart meter roll out is surely not in the interests of all living organisms (plants (food) and animals – this includes humans) because the research is showing waves from the wireless communications enhance carcinogenic substances which significantly increase tumour development, research is telling us to reduce the amount of wireless signals around us. For knowledge – wireless communications was created solely for emergency calls in remote places and this is where we need to roll wireless communication back to, because it is possible to create plug in connections (that are wired) for people on the go with mobile phones devices.

  40. Stewart Johnston says:

    I have been investigating the effects of 5G microwave radiation for a few months now, and from what I have learned it is dangerous to the welfare of all life, It seems 5G has been created for machines not people with no independent safety studies whatsoever. Public health England who I understand advise our councils including ours in Devon on these matters are in my opinion at the very least negligent by firstly, Ignoring the calls from hundreds of totally independent scientists to call a halt to 5G , and secondly by putting the interests of Big Business before the safety of the people of this country. I do hope common sense prevails and we wake up to this danger before it is to late.

  41. Stuart Raith says:

    If the telecommunications industry’s plans for 5G come to fruition, no person, no animal, no bird, no insect and no plant on Earth will be able to avoid exposure, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, to levels of RF radiation that are tens to hundreds of times greater than what exists today, without any possibility of escape anywhere on the planet. These 5G plans threaten to provoke serious, irreversible effects on humans and permanent damage to all of the Earth’s ecosystems.

Posted in: Community | DCC Homepage | Environment