Dr Murray May of Canberra writes an email to Minister:
Paul Fletcher Australian Liberal Party politician serving as Minister for Communications and Arts since 2019
From: Dr Murray May
Sent: Friday, 6 September 2019 3:40 PM
To: Paul.Fletcher.MP@aph.gov.au
Subject: public communications on the safety of 5G: where is the evidence?
Dear Minister
I read in an SMH article by Jennifer Duke today that the government “promises Telstra public support on 5G safety”. One clip reads as follows:
[Telstra network engineering executive Channa Seneviratne, speaking to The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age at Telstra’s enterprise-focused Vantage event in Melbourne, said Mr Fletcher had been shown scientific evidence that there were no major health concerns when it comes to 5G.
From a science-based point of view we’ve been able to demonstrate that the [radiation emissions from] 5G are of the same order as 4G and 3G and WiFi.]
Could you please send me the research showing the safety of 5G radiation? I am not aware of any study supporting such safety.
In the USA, both Democrats and Republicans have asked similar questions and failed to receive any evidence of research demonstrating safety.
For example, Senator Richard Blumenthal comments at the following link:
“There has been even more limited research with respect to the health ramifications of 5G technology, and the FCC has thus far failed to adequately explain how they have determined 5G is safe.”
A large group of scientists expert in this field (247 signatories at this point) has called for a moratorium on the rollout of 5G until the potential hazards for human health and the environment have been investigated by scientists who are independent from industry. www.5gappeal.eu/ The appeal begins:
“We the undersigned, scientists and doctors, recommend a moratorium on the roll-out of the fifth generation, 5G, for telecommunication until potential hazards for human health and the environment have been fully investigated by scientists independent from industry. 5G will substantially increase exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on top of the 2G, 3G, 4G, Wi-Fi, etc. for telecommunications already in place. RF-EMF has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment.”
The research which exists suggests considerable reason for concern.
For example, Israeli scientists have shown the higher frequency millimetre waves intended for use with 5G could be a risk for human skin, with sweat ducts in the skin acting as antennas. They have sounded an alarm. Non-thermal biological impacts on the eye are certainly possible which could unleash an epidemic of eye disease. I have attached a couple of relevant articles, and a letter from Beatrice Golomb, Professor of Medicine at the University of California.
ARPANSA subscribes to an outdated model that does not recognise “non-thermal effects” and is not committed to a precautionary approach. Further, ARPANSA “does not accept any liability for any injury, loss or damage incurred by use of or reliance on the information provided on [its] website”.
I look forward to your advice listing studies showing the safety of 5G and in particular mmWave band frequencies. The research I have seen to date suggests anything but safety. Given ARPANSA’s disclaimer quoted above, I think that the government can certainly expect legal action to be taken for irresponsible assurances given to the public. Various moratoriums have already been applied worldwide, as in Brussels and parts of Switzerland for example.
Regards
Dr Murray May
Canberra.
