Many organizations/sites sharing warnings about the wireless health threat have names like 'such-and-such for responsible technology.' Or 'safe technology.' Or 'safer.' This article endeavors to show that the physics and biophysics of it indicate that all such and similar names are deceptive.
Clearly problematic also is disproportionate focus on human concerns. The worst threat by far is to the ecosystem, which 4G wireless is now collapsing. Even though environment is acknowledged in warnings, emphasis remains on humans. This backwards priority suggests a dangerous disregard for, or lack of, complete understanding.
I won't say the misguided cautionary campaign, including the opposition to 5G per se, is ALL deliberate controlled opposition, but wittingly or not, these entities flirt with terminal disaster by perpetuating the threat. They suggest we can dance with the devil (a reined-in 4G), but 'OMG,' 5G must go! Well, the principles of physics are not forgiving. 2G-4G is a quite sufficiently
terminal nightmare.
Wireless technology obviously exists within the context of technology per se. One thing is certain about most of that, regardless of benefit: It's toxic. Somewhere along the line from the mining of hard resources (extractivism), to manufacture, use, and disposal, it's chemically/energetically toxic to planet/biosphere. Wireless encompasses that entire line. Of ecosystem, smaller species, such as insects,
already massively declining, are most susceptible to the radiation. Of humans, fetuses and kids. Tacit: we agree to poison the kids for money, convenience and comfort.
Comment: