![\"Young](\"http:\/\/www.tomgrimshaw.com\/tomsblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/Young_Buck-300x169.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Researchers have published a three-part, 150-page review of how wildlife could be harmed by the non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) produced by\u00a0wireless<\/a>\u00a0infrastructure, raising questions about the environmental safety of the technology as\u00a05G<\/a>\u00a0begins to blanket the United States.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019ve known for a while now, through a number of scientific studies, that cellular radiation is harmful to wildlife as well as people,\u201d said epidemiologist Devra Davis.<\/p>\n Davis is the founder of\u00a0Environmental Health Trust<\/a>, an organization that has drawn attention to the possible risks of 5G, Wi-Fi, and similar infrastructure for human health as well as wildlife.<\/p>\n Environmental Health Trust didn\u2019t produce the new review, which included researchers from the University of Washington and Johns Hopkins University. A spokesperson for the organization told The Epoch Times via email that it drew attention to the research in a\u00a0recent filing<\/a>\u00a0with the FCC.<\/p>\n \u201cWe have more than enough research to trigger new regulatory action to protect wildlife. The FCC should have done a full review of the environmental impact of 5G network deployment before streamlining hundreds of thousands of 5G cell towers across the nation,\u201d the spokesperson said.<\/p>\n FCC officials didn\u2019t immediately respond to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.<\/p>\n The court also noted that the FCC didn\u2019t adequately respond to the Department of the Interior when it raised the issue of environmental harms\u2014specifically, the effects of EMF from communication towers on migratory\u00a0birds<\/a>.<\/p>\n In recent weeks, airlines\u00a0warned<\/a>\u00a0that the nationwide rollout of 5G by AT&T and Verizon could interfere with planes, particularly the\u00a0Boeing 777<\/a>. The concerns\u00a0prompted<\/a>\u00a0those wireless companies to hold off on launching 5G near airports.<\/p>\n Part one<\/a>\u00a0of the review examined how environmental EMF has radically increased in recent decades.<\/p>\n Part two<\/a>\u00a0looked at some of the many organisms affected by EMF, with the authors noting that \u201ceffects have been observed in mammals such as bats, cervids, cetaceans, and pinnipeds among others, and on birds, insects, amphibians, reptiles, microbes, and many species of flora.\u201d<\/p>\n Part three<\/a>\u00a0focuses on EMF exposure limits, and the prospect for new regulation.<\/p>\n Asked about the possibility of industry pressure, a spokesperson for the Environmental Health Trust directed The Epoch Times to a 2021\u00a0review<\/a>, \u201cLost opportunities for cancer prevention.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThis eloquent review gives insight into missed opportunities for cancer prevention exemplified by asbestos, tobacco, certain pesticides and now RF radiation. The authors highlight how economic considerations were favored instead of cancer prevention. \u2018A strategy to sow doubt on cancer risks was established decades ago and is now adopted and implemented in a more sophisticated way by the telecom industry regarding RF-EMF risks to human beings and the environment. Industry has the economic power, access to politicians and media, whereas concerned people are unheard,\u2019\u201d the spokesperson said.<\/p>\n Davis thinks the time to act on 5G is now.<\/p>\n \u201cWith 5G coming to neighborhoods across the country, the levels of wireless radiation will significantly increase,\u201d Davis said. \u201cWe do not have the luxury of time to continue to debate this issue with the wireless industry. Adults, children, pets, wildlife, and our environment are all vulnerable.\u201d<\/p>\n Representatives of the Wireless Industry Association (WIA), a major trade association for cell phone tower builders and wireless providers, didn\u2019t immediately respond to a request by The Epoch Times for comment.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, a spokesperson for a 5G advocacy organization, 5G Americas, pointed The Epoch Times to its\u00a0webpage<\/a>, \u201c5G and Health.\u201d The webpage doesn\u2019t appear to include any information about the dangers, or lack thereof, of 5G to wildlife.<\/p>\n When asked whether 5G Americas had any additional information or perspectives on 5G and wildlife, the spokesperson declined to comment further, stating that the \u201c5G and Health\u201d webpage included all the commentary the organization intended to provide.<\/p>\n\n\nIn August 2021, the D.C. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of Environmental Health Trust in its petition against the FCC. The court found the FCC hadn\u2019t done enough to address evidence linking radiofrequency radiation to negative health effects unrelated to cancer, even at levels below the FCC\u2019s existing exposure limits.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\nIn recent years, discussion of the potential dangers of wireless radiation and, more specifically, 5G, has sometimes met with scorn from the corporate media. Citing online speculation that the COVID-19 epidemic was caused by the rollout of 5G, <\/span>CNN<\/a>\u00a0titled a 2020\u00a0<\/span>article<\/a>\u00a0\u201cWhy conspiracy theorists think 5G is bad for your health and why experts say not to worry.\u201d<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n