Barbara Gittings, keramika

VEČERNJI EDIT,
PRIJE ŠETNJE PO KIŠI


Iz članka sa ove adrese


https://telecoms.com/503608/youtube-changes-rules-to-ban-5g-conspiracy-talk-from-platform/


kopiram cijeli tekst:




YouTube changes rules to ban 5G conspiracy talk from platform
Jamie DaviesWritten by Jamie Davies 07 April 2020 @ 18:56

Google-owned YouTube has altered its community guidelines to ensure all conspiracy theories which suggest 5G is the cause or an accelerator of COVID-19 are removed from the platform.

Under the previous guidelines, such content would be labelled as borderline and therefore would be removed from the recommendation engines. YouTube would stop short of eradicating the content from the platform completely, there are of course free-speech complications, but these rules have now been amended.

All content which makes claims linking 5G as a cause of the coronavirus or suggests the mobile technology somehow aids the spread of the virus will be banned from the video platform.

This might be considered a violation of rights by the idiotic conspiracy theorists or the gullible fools who would believe such dribble, but it is fake news and should be treated as such. The communications infrastructure is far too important in combatting COVID-19 and for the recovery efforts, that everything possible should be done to protect it, including tackling misinformation campaigns.

The change in approach from YouTube was perhaps inspired by a weekend which saw dozens of telecoms masts, the very communications infrastructure used by emergency services, attacked by simpletons, some of whom believed the virus was a hoax to cover-up the ill-effects of radio frequency radiation. Others believed 5G suppresses the immune the system and a few have suggested the virus is somehow using it to communicate or transfer to new hosts.

The claims are amazingly ridiculous, on par with the escapades of Spongebob Squarepants, though there are still some in society who listen and are subsequently inspired into criminal action.

Representatives of the social media fraternity are due to sit down with UK Government officials to discuss the dissemination of misinformation. This might have spurred YouTube into action, though videos on its platform which encouraged violence and vandalism would of course have gotten executives twitchy.

This of course will not be the end of the ridiculous theories which cause damage to society, and we suspect there will be other ways for the tinfoil hat army to find their daily fix of fantasy, but at least YouTube is not going to be assisting the ludicrous adventures of delusional nincompoops.

Should content fall into either of the categories below, it will now be removed from the YouTube platform.

Content that disputes the existence or transmission of COVID-19, as described by the WHO and local health authorities
If any content suggests that COVID-19 does not exist or that the symptoms are caused by 5G (or not caused by anything other than the virus) are now in violation of our policies. In addition, claims that taking the COVID-19 test will lead to contracting the virus are also in violation of our policies

Kare u tekstu 'there are of course free-speech complications, but these rules have now been amended.' dakle, ili pričaš što smiješ, ili nemoš pričat.





Onda:

https://www.newsweek.com/small-town-bans-5g-high-speed-network-due-health-concerns-5g-dangerous-1463974



članak:


SMALL TOWN BANS 5G HIGH-SPEED NETWORK DUE TO HEALTH CONCERNS—BUT IS 5G DANGEROUS?
small town in England has halted the planned rollout of 5G wireless technology over fears about the health effects of the high speed network, but scientists largely believe the fears to be unfounded.

According to a report from the Daily Mail, residents of Totnes, England expressed concerns about the new high speed network planned to be imminently installed in the area. Over 1,600 of around 8,000 Totnes residents apparently signed a petition in support of "more safety research," and against the rollout. The local town council temporarily banned the technology as a result.

"Tumors are increasing and it isn't down to better diagnosis," anti-5G campaigner John Kitson told the paper. "There is increasing evidence of a link to high-frequency radiation."
"Everyone is talking about how 5G will allow driverless cars, amazing Wi-Fi speed and the internet of things such as fridges linked to the web," Kitson claimed. "And yet proper research on this technology has never been carried out."
Claims that 5G poses a health risk have been dismissed by many, including what appears to be the vast majority of experts in the field. On Twitter, U.K. Under Secretary of State for Digital and Broadband Matt Warman commented on the story by pointing out that the radiation used in mobile networks is only as dangerous as "talcum powder or pickled vegetables," in accordance with a 2011 declaration by the World Health Organization (WHO).
Scientists also dispute the notion that evidence supports the existence of 5G health risks. Wireless technology has been in existence for decades, and studies of the previous generations have not concluded the radio waves involved pose any serious health risks. But with each new rollout of technology, new claims about health risks also seem to appear.

Those who believe there are serious risks often cite a 2018 study by the U.S. National Toxicology Program, which concluded that male rats exposed to high levels of radiation of the type found in 2G and 3G mobile networks experienced a slightly elevated incidence of tumors.

However, experts point out that the rats in the study were exposed to four times the amount of radiation that is allowed for humans, and a very small increase occurred in only male rats. Extrapolating these results, which have not been duplicated, to a human population and concluding that humans are at risk seems questionable at best.

Of course, radiation can cause serious damage to a person's health, but scientists say understanding the different kinds of radiation are key to understanding the risks involved. Ionizing radiation is the type that is able to damage cells. Though 5G produces higher frequency radiation, the millimeter wave technology used in 5G produces non-ionizing radiation. This type of radiation is not believed to be capable of damaging tissue or cells, and millimeter waves are unable to penetrate skin. Therefore, claims that the higher frequency radiation found in 5G means higher health risks are less believable when the type of radiation is taken into account.

While some will likely continue to make claims that 5G poses a threat, and even attempt to block the technology from becoming implemented, the likelihood of a significant health risk is low when considering scientific evidence and expert opinion on the matter. The likelihood of 5G not becoming widely available also seems low.





Onda


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7544239/5G-campaigners-force-Devon-council-pause-installation-new-high-speed-network.html


Članak:

Town’s war with 5G: Devonshire officials 'ban' installation of new high-speed network after campaigners demand further research into its effects on health
5G is supposed to enable the fastest speeds and most reliable connections
However, campaigners in Totnes, Devon, claim it is a serious health hazard
They have persuaded officials to stop installing the high-frequency network
By IZZY FERRIS FOR THE DAILY MAIL

PUBLISHED: 22:50 BST, 6 October 2019 | UPDATED: 01:03 BST, 7 October 2019


The push to roll out the latest 5G mobile technology across the country has hit a snag – from angry residents in a quiet corner of Devon.

The next generation of mobile internet connectivity is supposed to transform our lives by enabling the fastest speeds and most reliable connections on smartphones and other devices.

But campaigners in Totnes claim it is a serious health hazard and have persuaded local officials to declare a moratorium on installing the high-frequency network.

Although the decision has no force in planning law, campaign leader John Kitson claims the action by Totnes town council is a warning to ministers that they cannot bring in 5G without further research into its effects on health.

It comes just days after Chancellor Sajid Javid announced a Ł5billion Government package to support the rollout of broadband, 5G and other high-speed networks aimed at reaching the hardest-to-reach 20 per cent of the country.

Mr Kitson, 38, who left the recruitment industry to become a full-time 5G activist, said: ‘Everyone is talking about how 5G will allow driverless cars, amazing wi-fi speed and the internet of things such as fridges linked to the web.

‘And yet proper research on this technology has never been carried out.

‘Telecom companies, Public Health England, the World Health Organisation – they all say no adverse effects on human health have been established during use of existing 3G and 4G networks.

‘But there have been thousands of peer-reviewed scientific papers which raise concerns.

‘More than 250 scientists have urged the EU to halt the rollout of 5G because it means a huge increase in electromagnetic radio frequencies on top of the existing network.

‘I don’t want to stop the march of technology. I want it made safe.’

He became concerned about the effects of electromagnetic frequencies following the death of his mother from a brain tumour.


'Tumours are increasing and it isn’t down to better diagnosis,’ he said. ‘There is increasing evidence of a link to high-frequency radiation.’

The campaigners say residents are taking their message seriously and more than 1,600 have signed a petition for more safety research.

Activist Rosi Gladwell, 70, claims she is sensitive to electro-magnetic waves, so she uses a meter to measure electromagnetic radiation – and even wears an ‘anti-signal hood’ at some sites where she says signals are high, such as airports.

She said: ‘There is huge concern about this technology. No one is being properly informed.

‘We are immensely grateful to town councillors for approving the moratorium. It takes a lot of courage to stand up to government.’ Local business coach Julie Harrison, 55, is giving talks to companies in Totnes and claims the Government message that 5G is just ‘the next step’ is misleading.

She added: ‘There is evidence that 3G and 4G are not fine. But this is completely different technology. The antennae are going to be attached to lampposts. They are going to sit outside children’s bedrooms, for goodness sake. The industry has not done meaningful research. Of course, there are billions of pounds at stake.’

Architect Jonathan Burns, 63, said the telecoms industry was glossing over ‘bio-effects on people’.

Totnes mayor Jacqi Hodgson, a Green Party county councillor, said: ‘Our concern is that there will be a much higher blanket of radiation all around us.’

Despite reassurances from the Government, the campaigners are not convinced. In June, former digital minister Margot James insisted ‘a considerable amount of research has been carried out on radio waves and we anticipate no negative effects on public health’.

But a US Senate science committee was told this year that wireless network operators did not know of any independent scientific studies on the safety of 5G. Senator Richard Blumenthal said: ‘We’re kind of flying blind as far as health and safety is concerned.’








Onda;


https://www.ft.com/content/848c5b44-4d7a-11ea-95a0-43d18ec715f5


članak:

Switzerland halts rollout of 5G over health concerns
The country’s environment agency has called time on the use of all new towers


Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
https://www.ft.com/content/848c5b44-4d7a-11ea-95a0-43d18ec715f5

Switzerland, one of the world’s leaders in the rollout of 5G mobile technology, has placed an indefinite moratorium on the use of its new network because of health concerns. 

The move comes as countries elsewhere around Europe race to upgrade their networks to 5G standards amid a furious rearguard diplomatic campaign by the US to stop them using Chinese technology provided by Huawei. Washington says the company, which is fundamental to most European networks’ upgrade plans, presents a grave security risk.

Switzerland is relatively advanced in Europe in adopting 5G. The wealthy alpine country has built more than 2,000 antennas to upgrade its network in the last year alone, and its telecoms providers have been promising their customers’ imminent 5G coverage for most of the past year. 

However, a letter sent by the Swiss environment agency, Bafu, to the country’s cantonal governments at the end of January, has now in effect called time on the use of all new 5G towers, officials who have seen the letter told the Financial Times. 

The agency is responsible for providing the cantons with safety criteria against which telecoms operators’ radiation emissions can be judged. Under Switzerland’s highly federalised structure, telecoms infrastructure is monitored for compliance and licensed by cantonal authorities, but Bern is responsible for setting the framework.

Bafu has said it cannot yet provide universal criteria without further testing of the impact of 5G radiation.

The agency said it was “not aware of any standard worldwide” that could be used to benchmark recommendations. “Therefore Bafu will examine exposure through adaptive [5G] antennas in depth, if possible in real-world operational conditions. This work will take some time,” it said.

Without the criteria, cantons are left with little option but to license 5G infrastructure according to existing guidelines on radiation exposure, which all but preclude the use of 5G except in a tiny minority of cases. 

Several cantons have already imposed their own voluntary moratoria because of uncertainty over health risks. 

Swisscom said that Bafu’s assessment process would not halt its ongoing work to build out 5G infrastructure, even if it meant that it would not be able to be used at full capacity. The operator said it could still achieve high speeds for customers of up to 2Gb/s without the full use of new masts.

Swiss law on the effects of radiation from telecoms masts is broadly in line with that of European peers, but specifies the application of more stringent precautionary measures in certain cases. New 5G communications technology means individuals are exposed to more concentrated beams of non-ionising radiation, but for shorter periods. Bafu must determine which legal standards to apply to this.

Swisscom, the country’s largest mobile operator, said it understood “the fears that are often expressed about new technologies”.

“There is no evidence that antenna radiation within the limit values adversely affects human health,” the company added, pointing out that 5G is run on frequencies similar to the current 4G standard, which has been subject to “several thousand studies.”

The company said Switzerland’s regulatory limits were “10 times stricter than those recommended by the World Health Organization in places where people stay for longer periods of time”.

Switzerland already has a notable anti-5G lobby, with recent protests against its rollout in Bern, Zurich and Geneva.

The Swiss Medical Association has advised caution on 5G, arguing that the most stringent legal principles should be applied because of unanswered questions about the technology’s potential to cause damage to the nervous system, or even cancers. 

Five “popular initiatives” — proposals for legally binding referendums on 5G use — are already in motion in Switzerland. Two have already been formalised and are in the process of collecting the 100,000 signatures needed to trigger nationwide votes that if successful will amend Switzerland’s constitution.

One will make telecoms companies legally liable for claims of bodily damage caused by radiation from masts unless they can prove otherwise. The other proposes strict and stringent limits on radiation emissions from masts and will give local residents veto power over all new constructions in their area.








Onda;

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/we-have-no-reason-to-believe-5g-is-safe/


Članak:

The technology is coming, but contrary to what some people say, there could be health risks

By Joel M. Moskowitz on October 17, 2019

The telecommunications industry and their experts have accused many scientists who have researched the effects of cell phone radiation of "fear mongering" over the advent of wireless technology's 5G. Since much of our research is publicly-funded, we believe it is our ethical responsibility to inform the public about what the peer-reviewed scientific literature tells us about the health risks from wireless radiation.

The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently announced through a press release that the commission will soon reaffirm the radio frequency radiation (RFR) exposure limits that the FCC adopted in the late 1990s. These limits are based upon a behavioral change in rats exposed to microwave radiation and were designed to protect us from short-term heating risks due to RFR exposure.

Yet, since the FCC adopted these limits based largely on research from the 1980s, the preponderance of peer-reviewed research, more than 500 studies, have found harmful biologic or health effects from exposure to RFR at intensities too low to cause significant heating.


Citing this large body of research, more than 240 scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on the biologic and health effects of nonionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal, which calls for stronger exposure limits. The appeal makes the following assertions:

“Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.”

The scientists who signed this appeal arguably constitute the majority of experts on the effects of nonionizing radiation. They have published more than 2,000 papers and letters on EMF in professional journals.

The FCC’s RFR exposure limits regulate the intensity of exposure, taking into account the frequency of the carrier waves, but ignore the signaling properties of the RFR. Along with the patterning and duration of exposures, certain characteristics of the signal (e.g., pulsing, polarization) increase the biologic and health impacts of the exposure. New exposure limits are needed which account for these differential effects. Moreover, these limits should be based on a biological effect, not a change in a laboratory rat’s behavior.

The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RFR as "possibly carcinogenic to humans" in 2011. Last year, a $30 million study conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) found “clear evidence” that two years of exposure to cell phone RFR increased cancer in male rats and damaged DNA in rats and mice of both sexes. The Ramazzini Institute in Italy replicated the key finding of the NTP using a different carrier frequency and much weaker exposure to cell phone radiation over the life of the rats.

Based upon the research published since 2011, including human and animal studies and mechanistic data, the IARC has recently prioritized RFR to be reviewed again in the next five years. Since many EMF scientists believe we now have sufficient evidence to consider RFR as either a probable or known human carcinogen, the IARC will likely upgrade the carcinogenic potential of RFR in the near future.

Nonetheless, without conducting a formal risk assessment or a systematic review of the research on RFR health effects, the FDA recently reaffirmed the FCC’s 1996 exposure limits in a letter to the FCC, stating that the agency had “concluded that no changes to the current standards are warranted at this time,” and that “NTP’s experimental findings should not be applied to human cell phone usage.” The letter stated that “the available scientific evidence to date does not support adverse health effects in humans due to exposures at or under the current limits.”

The latest cellular technology, 5G, will employ millimeter waves for the first time in addition to microwaves that have been in use for older cellular technologies, 2G through 4G. Given limited reach, 5G will require cell antennas every 100 to 200 meters, exposing many people to millimeter wave radiation. 5G also employs new technologies (e.g., active antennas capable of beam-forming; phased arrays; massive multiple inputs and outputs, known as massive MIMO) which pose unique challenges for measuring exposures.


Based upon the research published since 2011, including human and animal studies and mechanistic data, the IARC has recently prioritized RFR to be reviewed again in the next five years. Since many EMF scientists believe we now have sufficient evidence to consider RFR as either a probable or known human carcinogen, the IARC will likely upgrade the carcinogenic potential of RFR in the near future.

Nonetheless, without conducting a formal risk assessment or a systematic review of the research on RFR health effects, the FDA recently reaffirmed the FCC’s 1996 exposure limits in a letter to the FCC, stating that the agency had “concluded that no changes to the current standards are warranted at this time,” and that “NTP’s experimental findings should not be applied to human cell phone usage.” The letter stated that “the available scientific evidence to date does not support adverse health effects in humans due to exposures at or under the current limits.”

The latest cellular technology, 5G, will employ millimeter waves for the first time in addition to microwaves that have been in use for older cellular technologies, 2G through 4G. Given limited reach, 5G will require cell antennas every 100 to 200 meters, exposing many people to millimeter wave radiation. 5G also employs new technologies (e.g., active antennas capable of beam-forming; phased arrays; massive multiple inputs and outputs, known as massive MIMO) which pose unique challenges for measuring exposures.

5G will not replace 4G; it will accompany 4G for the near future and possibly over the long term. If there are synergistic effects from simultaneous exposures to multiple types of RFR, our overall risk of harm from RFR may increase substantially. Cancer is not the only risk as there is considerable evidence that RFR causes neurological disorders and reproductive harm, likely due to oxidative stress.

As a society, should we invest hundreds of billions of dollars deploying 5G, a cellular technology that requires the installation of 800,000 or more new cell antenna sites in the U.S. close to where we live, work and play?

Instead, we should support the recommendations of the 250 scientists and medical doctors who signed the 5G Appeal that calls for an immediate moratorium on the deployment of 5G and demand that our government fund the research needed to adopt biologically based exposure limits that protect our health and safety.


Joel M. Moskowitz
Joel M. Moskowitz, PhD, is director of the Center for Family and Community Health in the School of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley. He has been translating and disseminating the research on wireless radiation health effects since 2009 after he and his colleagues published a review paper that found long-term cell phone users were at greater risk of brain tumors. His Electromagnetic Radiation Safety website has had more than two million page views since 2013. He is an unpaid advisor to the International EMF Scientist Appeal and Physicians for Safe Technology.







Onda;

https://www.telecompaper.com/news/slovenia-government-delays-decision-on-5g-licences--1329243
može se čitati ako se pretplatiš,
dajem drugi link:

https://www.euractiv.com/section/all/short_news/ljubljana-the-us-warns-against-5g-security/

Članak:

LJUBLJANA – The US warns against 5G security
By Zeljko Trkanjec | EURACTIV.hr 27. sij 2020.
Robert Strayer, the US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Cyber and Communications, said that the government and the private sector should take care when choosing the providers of equipment for the development of 5G network and services so that it could protect itself against cyber attacks and data insecurity in a timely fashion.

Strayer criticised China for not ensuring sufficient protection of both data and users of equipment made there. According to Stryer, 14 countries see China as the actor who “performed the largest intellectual property theft in the history.”

With the advent of the 5G network, which will offer plenty of useful public services, the security aspect is becoming more and more important, not only for governments and operators but for all people, Strayer said.

Simultaneously, The Clean Blue Sky Society, with a coalition of societies and civic movements against 5G, organised a public rally in Ljubljana on Saturday against the establishment of 5G technology.

According to them, it is being introduced in Slovenia without testing for human safety and without environmental impact assessment. (Željko Trkanjec | EURACTIV.hr)





I TAKO DALJE


komentare zadržite za sebe, ovo su članci iz novina dostupni , za sada, putem googla svakome