Willing to have mast erected by their front door?
I welcome constructive feedback to my letter on 5G on Aug 21, including the response from the anonymous “spokeswoman” hiding behind the façade of the Ministry of Health. Seldomly do individuals take responsibility for the actions, determinations and standpoints of their organisations. Established procedures and protocols are not to be challenged, regardless of the evidence. I would be interested to learn if that same spokeswoman, and her colleagues, would willingly have masts erected beside their front doors?
Among the online responses to my letter was a letter to San Diego County from UC San Diego Professor of Medicine Beatrice Golomb MD, PhD. There are 230 pages, much of which is references. In places it refers to “mysterious illnesses” suffered by staff in embassies in various parts of the world. EMFs have been an ongoing topic of discussion for many years. It is widely held that they have, and still are, being used as “weapons”.
The suggestion by the MoH spokeswoman that “. . . independent monitoring reports commissioned by companies that operate cell sites . . .” is an immediate red flag. Any investigation or research commissioned by parties with a vested interest in the outcome is suspect. Such conflicts should not be permitted under any circumstances.
Let me quote from a recent interview with Robert F Kennedy Jnr, a well-known environmental lawyer: “A few months ago, the highest executives of telecommunications companies went before the Senate and they were asked, ‘Have you ever done any health studies on 5G?’ And they said, ‘No’. They were asked, ‘Have you allocated money to do a health study?’ And they said, ‘No’. And that seems kind of crazy because we know that there are literally thousands and thousands of peer-reviewed publications that associate not only 5G but 4G with detrimental effects on fetal and newborn development, and detrimental effects on young children. Brain tumours and other cancers, DNA damage, altered gene expression . . .”
And our government sanctions the placement of such towers wherever those commercial interests please, without specific tests, against a mass of scientifically-validated red flags, and without the right to challenge those placements.
Footnote response from the Ministry of Health:
Existing research on the possible health effects of radiofrequency (RF) fields applies as much to 5G as to any other radio system in use. Measurements of 5G sites in Australia have shown that exposures are similar to those from 3G and 4G, and very far below health-based exposure limits. 5G is simply a new application of radio technology. Views from a number of NZ experts are available here if readers want more information about 5G and claimed harms: