The Faulty Logic Behind 5G
Part 2: The Emerging Health Risk of Electrosmog
By: Jack Sturman, News/Opinion Writer
Part 2: The Emerging Health Risk of Electrosmog
By: Jack Sturman, News/Opinion Writer
Bioelectromagnetics is the field of study focused on how electromagnetic waves ranging from 0 Hz to 300 GHz can affect living systems. Electromagnetic waves are often emitted by man-made sources including extremely low frequency EMFs from power lines and radiofrequency EMFs from cell phones and computers. The Hungarian SMOG-P nanosatellite is the smallest ever to be sent up into orbit with a 5*5*5 diameter and was sent into space in December of 2009 with the support of the Budapest University of Technology and Economics. The researchers were measuring electrosmog to create the first electrosmog map of the Earth with 2000 measurements, which were taken over the course of six months. Electrosmog is according to the European Environment Agency, the "pollution caused by electric and magnetic fields generated by power lines, electrical equipment, mobile and cordless phones, radar, electrical household appliances, microwave ovens, radios, computers, electric clocks, etc." The BME developers were aiming to convince the European Space Agency to acknowledge the harmful impact of Anthropogenic EMFs on the environment. This article will explore the health effects of Anthropogenic EMFs from prenatal in utero exposure, with localized changes in brain structure and function. This article will also explore the potentially harmful impacts on wildlife of RE-EMF radiation emitted from telecommunications infrastructure, which could expand with the implementation of 5G.
The primary mechanism by which electrosmog can affect human beings is through oxidative stress. Oxidative stress is an imbalance between reactive oxygen species (ROS) and antioxidants. The reactive oxygen species can damage protein, DNA, and tissue contributing to the onset of cancers, ADHD, diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, asthma, etc. The BERENIS Report in January 2021 from the Swiss expert group on electromagnetic fields and non-ionizing radiation now admits that "EMF exposure, even in the low dose range, can lead to oxidative imbalance." The BERENIS Report also states that the "very young and elderly individuals can react less efficiently to oxidative stress induced by EMF," along with immunocompromised people. The report states that this could lead to severe health effects in these vulnerable subpopulations. The findings of the report contradict the existing dogma in the regulatory bodies of the ICNRIP (International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) and FCC (Federal Communication Commission), who continue to claim a lack of evidence for a non- thermal health effect from EMF.
The first risk of EMF radiation I would like to explore has been the site of frequent debate in the scientific community: whether or not cell phones have adverse effects on the brain. The National Institute of Health backed a study in 2011 to research whether or not cell phone use impacted brain activity measured with the marker of brain glucose metabolism in 47 healthy volunteers. The participants had two cell phones, which were placed over their ears and in the treatment condition the right phone was turned on, while the cell phone on the left was turned off. The research team of Volkow et al found increased blood glucose metabolism in the orbitofrontal cortex and temporal gyrus in the brain closest to the antennae. Therefore, EMF radiation from cell phones was found to be absorbed in the brain tissue. The Harvard Medical School admits cell phone radiation frequencies are within a range that could alter brain activity. The review of Wallace and Selmaoui in Environmental Research found about 77 percent of studies reported an effect of cell phones on alpha wave activity, which typically would be involved in restfulness, relaxation, and meditation. The research on adolescents and preadolescents has found an adverse effect on figural memory and nonverbal intelligence with a higher brain dose of RE-EMF radiation from cell phones. The research of Schoeni et al in 2015 found in a prospective cohort study of 439 Swiss adolescents that lower figural memory scores were associated with higher RF-EMF brain and whole body dose, while they were not associated with duration of gaming and text messages. Foerster et al in 2018 in Environmental Health Perspectives reported a statistically significant negative association between operator-reported data on mobile phone use and reductions in figural memory. The verbal memory scores were significantly lower based on operator-reported data with left/no ear preference, while figural memory scores were significantly less with right ear preference. The research of Guxens et al in January 2021 in the International Journal of Hygeine and Environmental Health found significantly lower non-verbal intelligence with a higher RF-EMF brain dose in Dutch and Spanish preadolescents.
The effects of prenatal exposure to ELF-EMFs and ELF-EMFs has also been thoroughly explored with a consistent association to inattention, hyperactivity, and ADHD. The research of Divan et al (2008) published in the journal Epidemiology found that prenatal and postnatal exposure to cell phones were associated with a 1.8-fold increase in behavioral problems in 7-year old children. The research of Birks et al in 2017 found an increasing trend in five birth cohorts including 83,884 mother-child pairs showing a trend of increasing hyperactivity and inattention problems in offspring from prenatal cell phone use at the age of seven. Mothers who lacked cell phone use during pregnancy were found to have lower behavioral problems in their children overall including both hyperactivity/inattention and emotional deficits.
The EMFs emitted from cell towers and our digital devices have also been researched for their potential harms to trees, the magnetoreception of birds and bees, and wildlife. Magnetoreception is how animals navigate based on detecting Earth's magnetic field. Emerging evidence suggests that energy infrastructure including 5G networks could interfere with this sense. The research of Shepherd et al in Scientific Reports found that exposure to ELF-EMFs from high voltage power lines reduced their potential to learn about smells in their surroundings (olfactory learning) and feeding at the ground level below power lines, which the researchers posit could harm bee populations. The research of Greenberg et al in Environmental Entomology also found that exposure to high-voltage power lines contributed to queen loss and colony failure. The simulations of Thielens et al found that 5G networks would drastically increase absorption of EMFs 390-570%, which could exacerbate bee loss in a time when the beekeeping industry is at the brink of collapse. The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences published research in 2009 showing that proximity to high-voltage power lines predicted disorientation of ruminants (i.e. cows and roe deer). Waldmann-Selsam et al found in their study of trees in Germany “high-level damage in trees within the vicinity of phone masts" and that the sides of the trees facing the phone masts were significantly more likely to show damage. The review on electrosmog and species conservation in Science of the Total Environment found "chronic exposure to electromagnetic radiation, at levels that are found in the environment, may particularly affect the immune, nervous, cardiovascular and reproductive systems." The Department of the Interior also wrote a letter to the Department of Commerce in 2014 arguing the placement of communication towers should take into account bird habitats and the potential hazards of radiation.
The precautionary principle should be applied to the implementation of 5G and the construction of base stations. The harms of mining for 5G materials to the environment and human rights should be enough to advocate against the implementation of the technology. But the classification of both ELF-EMFs and RF-EMFs as Group 2B carcinogens coupled with mounting evidence that EMFs emitted by digital devices can induce oxidative stress merits additional caution. Although evidence as of now is far from conclusive, were MM waves from 5G to have a deleterious impact, this would have far-ranging public health and environmental implications.
The primary mechanism by which electrosmog can affect human beings is through oxidative stress. Oxidative stress is an imbalance between reactive oxygen species (ROS) and antioxidants. The reactive oxygen species can damage protein, DNA, and tissue contributing to the onset of cancers, ADHD, diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, asthma, etc. The BERENIS Report in January 2021 from the Swiss expert group on electromagnetic fields and non-ionizing radiation now admits that "EMF exposure, even in the low dose range, can lead to oxidative imbalance." The BERENIS Report also states that the "very young and elderly individuals can react less efficiently to oxidative stress induced by EMF," along with immunocompromised people. The report states that this could lead to severe health effects in these vulnerable subpopulations. The findings of the report contradict the existing dogma in the regulatory bodies of the ICNRIP (International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) and FCC (Federal Communication Commission), who continue to claim a lack of evidence for a non- thermal health effect from EMF.
The first risk of EMF radiation I would like to explore has been the site of frequent debate in the scientific community: whether or not cell phones have adverse effects on the brain. The National Institute of Health backed a study in 2011 to research whether or not cell phone use impacted brain activity measured with the marker of brain glucose metabolism in 47 healthy volunteers. The participants had two cell phones, which were placed over their ears and in the treatment condition the right phone was turned on, while the cell phone on the left was turned off. The research team of Volkow et al found increased blood glucose metabolism in the orbitofrontal cortex and temporal gyrus in the brain closest to the antennae. Therefore, EMF radiation from cell phones was found to be absorbed in the brain tissue. The Harvard Medical School admits cell phone radiation frequencies are within a range that could alter brain activity. The review of Wallace and Selmaoui in Environmental Research found about 77 percent of studies reported an effect of cell phones on alpha wave activity, which typically would be involved in restfulness, relaxation, and meditation. The research on adolescents and preadolescents has found an adverse effect on figural memory and nonverbal intelligence with a higher brain dose of RE-EMF radiation from cell phones. The research of Schoeni et al in 2015 found in a prospective cohort study of 439 Swiss adolescents that lower figural memory scores were associated with higher RF-EMF brain and whole body dose, while they were not associated with duration of gaming and text messages. Foerster et al in 2018 in Environmental Health Perspectives reported a statistically significant negative association between operator-reported data on mobile phone use and reductions in figural memory. The verbal memory scores were significantly lower based on operator-reported data with left/no ear preference, while figural memory scores were significantly less with right ear preference. The research of Guxens et al in January 2021 in the International Journal of Hygeine and Environmental Health found significantly lower non-verbal intelligence with a higher RF-EMF brain dose in Dutch and Spanish preadolescents.
The effects of prenatal exposure to ELF-EMFs and ELF-EMFs has also been thoroughly explored with a consistent association to inattention, hyperactivity, and ADHD. The research of Divan et al (2008) published in the journal Epidemiology found that prenatal and postnatal exposure to cell phones were associated with a 1.8-fold increase in behavioral problems in 7-year old children. The research of Birks et al in 2017 found an increasing trend in five birth cohorts including 83,884 mother-child pairs showing a trend of increasing hyperactivity and inattention problems in offspring from prenatal cell phone use at the age of seven. Mothers who lacked cell phone use during pregnancy were found to have lower behavioral problems in their children overall including both hyperactivity/inattention and emotional deficits.
The EMFs emitted from cell towers and our digital devices have also been researched for their potential harms to trees, the magnetoreception of birds and bees, and wildlife. Magnetoreception is how animals navigate based on detecting Earth's magnetic field. Emerging evidence suggests that energy infrastructure including 5G networks could interfere with this sense. The research of Shepherd et al in Scientific Reports found that exposure to ELF-EMFs from high voltage power lines reduced their potential to learn about smells in their surroundings (olfactory learning) and feeding at the ground level below power lines, which the researchers posit could harm bee populations. The research of Greenberg et al in Environmental Entomology also found that exposure to high-voltage power lines contributed to queen loss and colony failure. The simulations of Thielens et al found that 5G networks would drastically increase absorption of EMFs 390-570%, which could exacerbate bee loss in a time when the beekeeping industry is at the brink of collapse. The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences published research in 2009 showing that proximity to high-voltage power lines predicted disorientation of ruminants (i.e. cows and roe deer). Waldmann-Selsam et al found in their study of trees in Germany “high-level damage in trees within the vicinity of phone masts" and that the sides of the trees facing the phone masts were significantly more likely to show damage. The review on electrosmog and species conservation in Science of the Total Environment found "chronic exposure to electromagnetic radiation, at levels that are found in the environment, may particularly affect the immune, nervous, cardiovascular and reproductive systems." The Department of the Interior also wrote a letter to the Department of Commerce in 2014 arguing the placement of communication towers should take into account bird habitats and the potential hazards of radiation.
The precautionary principle should be applied to the implementation of 5G and the construction of base stations. The harms of mining for 5G materials to the environment and human rights should be enough to advocate against the implementation of the technology. But the classification of both ELF-EMFs and RF-EMFs as Group 2B carcinogens coupled with mounting evidence that EMFs emitted by digital devices can induce oxidative stress merits additional caution. Although evidence as of now is far from conclusive, were MM waves from 5G to have a deleterious impact, this would have far-ranging public health and environmental implications.
Works Cited
Aldad, Tamir S., et al. “Fetal Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure from 800-1900 Mhz-Rated Cellular Telephones Affects Neurodevelopment and Behavior in Mice.” Scientific Reports, vol. 2, no. 1, 15 Mar. 2012, 10.1038/srep00312. Accessed 14 Dec. 2020.
Baker, Allison. “Cell Phones and the Brain: Can We Tell Whether Cell Phones Are Harmful?” Science in the News, 29 Apr. 2011, sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2011/issue92/. Accessed 13 Apr. 2021.
Balmori, Alfonso. “(PDF) Electrosmog and Species Conservation.” ResearchGate, Aug. 2014, www.researchgate.net/publication/264424901_Electrosmog_and_species_conservation. Accessed 13 Apr. 2021.
Birks, Laura, et al. “Maternal Cell Phone Use during Pregnancy and Child Behavioral Problems in Five Birth Cohorts.” Environment International, vol. 104, no. 104, 1 July 2017, pp. 122–131, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28392066/, 10.1016/j.envint.2017.03.024. Accessed 13 Apr. 2021.
Cabré-Riera, Alba, et al. “Association between Estimated Whole-Brain Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields Dose and Cognitive Function in Preadolescents and Adolescents.” International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, vol. 231, no. 85, 1 Jan. 2021, p. 113659, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33221634/, 10.1016/j.ijheh.2020.113659. Accessed 13 Apr. 2021.
Divan, H. A., et al. “Prenatal and Postnatal Exposure to Cell Phone Use and Behavioral Problems in Children.” Epidemiology, vol. 19, no. 6, 2008, p. S94, journals.lww.com/epidem/fulltext/2008/11001/Prenatal_and_Postnatal_Exposure_to_Cell_Phone_Use.285.aspx, 10.1097/01.ede.0000339821.50023.c9. Accessed 13 Apr. 2021.
“Electrosmog — European Environment Agency.” Www.eea.europa.eu, www.eea.europa.eu/help/glossary/gemet-environmental-thesaurus/electrosmog. Accessed 13 Apr. 2021.
Federal Office for the Environment. “Newsletter of the Swiss Expert Group on Electromagnetic Fields and Non-Ionising Radiation (BERENIS).” Www.bafu.admin.ch, www.bafu.admin.ch/bafu/en/home/topics/electrosmog/newsletter-of-the-swiss-expert-group-on-electromagnetic-fields-a.html. Accessed 13 Apr. 2021.
Foerster, Milena, et al. “A Prospective Cohort Study of Adolescents’ Memory Performance and Individual Brain Dose of Microwave Radiation from Wireless Communication.” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 126, no. 7, July 2018, p. 077007, 10.1289/ehp2427.
Schoeni, Anna, et al. “Memory Performance, Wireless Communication and Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields: A Prospective Cohort Study in Adolescents.” Environment International, vol. 85, no. 85, 1 Dec. 2015, pp. 343–351, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26474271, 10.1016/j.envint.2015.09.025. Accessed 1 Apr. 2020.
Shepherd, S., et al. “Extremely Low Frequency Electromagnetic Fields Impair the Cognitive and Motor Abilities of Honey Bees.” Scientific Reports, vol. 8, no. 1, 21 May 2018, 10.1038/s41598-018-26185-y. Accessed 9 Feb. 2020.
Thielens, Arno, et al. “Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure of Western Honey Bees.” Scientific Reports, vol. 10, no. 1, 16 Jan. 2020, 10.1038/s41598-019-56948-0. Accessed 19 Oct. 2020.
Volkow, Nora D. “Effects of Cell Phone Radiofrequency Signal Exposure on Brain Glucose Metabolism.” JAMA, vol. 305, no. 8, 23 Feb. 2011, p. 808, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3184892/, 10.1001/jama.2011.186
Baker, Allison. “Cell Phones and the Brain: Can We Tell Whether Cell Phones Are Harmful?” Science in the News, 29 Apr. 2011, sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2011/issue92/. Accessed 13 Apr. 2021.
Balmori, Alfonso. “(PDF) Electrosmog and Species Conservation.” ResearchGate, Aug. 2014, www.researchgate.net/publication/264424901_Electrosmog_and_species_conservation. Accessed 13 Apr. 2021.
Birks, Laura, et al. “Maternal Cell Phone Use during Pregnancy and Child Behavioral Problems in Five Birth Cohorts.” Environment International, vol. 104, no. 104, 1 July 2017, pp. 122–131, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28392066/, 10.1016/j.envint.2017.03.024. Accessed 13 Apr. 2021.
Cabré-Riera, Alba, et al. “Association between Estimated Whole-Brain Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields Dose and Cognitive Function in Preadolescents and Adolescents.” International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health, vol. 231, no. 85, 1 Jan. 2021, p. 113659, pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33221634/, 10.1016/j.ijheh.2020.113659. Accessed 13 Apr. 2021.
Divan, H. A., et al. “Prenatal and Postnatal Exposure to Cell Phone Use and Behavioral Problems in Children.” Epidemiology, vol. 19, no. 6, 2008, p. S94, journals.lww.com/epidem/fulltext/2008/11001/Prenatal_and_Postnatal_Exposure_to_Cell_Phone_Use.285.aspx, 10.1097/01.ede.0000339821.50023.c9. Accessed 13 Apr. 2021.
“Electrosmog — European Environment Agency.” Www.eea.europa.eu, www.eea.europa.eu/help/glossary/gemet-environmental-thesaurus/electrosmog. Accessed 13 Apr. 2021.
Federal Office for the Environment. “Newsletter of the Swiss Expert Group on Electromagnetic Fields and Non-Ionising Radiation (BERENIS).” Www.bafu.admin.ch, www.bafu.admin.ch/bafu/en/home/topics/electrosmog/newsletter-of-the-swiss-expert-group-on-electromagnetic-fields-a.html. Accessed 13 Apr. 2021.
Foerster, Milena, et al. “A Prospective Cohort Study of Adolescents’ Memory Performance and Individual Brain Dose of Microwave Radiation from Wireless Communication.” Environmental Health Perspectives, vol. 126, no. 7, July 2018, p. 077007, 10.1289/ehp2427.
Schoeni, Anna, et al. “Memory Performance, Wireless Communication and Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields: A Prospective Cohort Study in Adolescents.” Environment International, vol. 85, no. 85, 1 Dec. 2015, pp. 343–351, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26474271, 10.1016/j.envint.2015.09.025. Accessed 1 Apr. 2020.
Shepherd, S., et al. “Extremely Low Frequency Electromagnetic Fields Impair the Cognitive and Motor Abilities of Honey Bees.” Scientific Reports, vol. 8, no. 1, 21 May 2018, 10.1038/s41598-018-26185-y. Accessed 9 Feb. 2020.
Thielens, Arno, et al. “Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure of Western Honey Bees.” Scientific Reports, vol. 10, no. 1, 16 Jan. 2020, 10.1038/s41598-019-56948-0. Accessed 19 Oct. 2020.
Volkow, Nora D. “Effects of Cell Phone Radiofrequency Signal Exposure on Brain Glucose Metabolism.” JAMA, vol. 305, no. 8, 23 Feb. 2011, p. 808, www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3184892/, 10.1001/jama.2011.186