The Precautionary Principle

... but only when it suits
Precautionary principle

The Precautionary Principle

What is the Precautionary Principle?

Legislation contains what is known as the Precautionary Principle which can be summarised as follows. 

When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically. 

This is meant to be a safeguard to enable timely action during the early stages of discovery of something that has potentially widespread adverse implications.  Unfortunately for both human and animal health and the environment, it would appear that there is an unwritten proviso that goes something like this …

but is subject to a blanket veto with concurrent cover up by vested interests and their lobby groups where taking precautionary action would cause financial profits of large multi-national corporations to suffer.

Maybe the proviso sounds a bit harsh or suggestive of yet another conspiracy theory, but when it comes to electromagnetic (EM) pollution there are overwhelming facts that have been researched and highlighted by some of the most eminent scientists in their field.  They have been, and are being ignored by virtually all individual Governments and collectives such as the EU, around the world with only a few exceptions, and even then, only in certain situations. Since 1997 there have been 37 documents/petitions signed by many different Doctors and scientists who have called for independent research and restrictions on EM radiation.  How many were you aware of?!

Zero Testing

You may find it shocking to discover that mobile phones were never tested for safety before being licensed for sale. Neither has 24/7/365 exposure to all the various telecommunications frequencies - neither individually nor cumulatively.  We are all taking part in a massive experiment that much research to date indicates will not turn out well.  This is a bigger scandal than the Tobacco Industry cover up of the dangers of smoking. Non-smokers suffered with second hand smoking, but at least you could see it and smell it and move away from it by choice. EM pollution cannot be sensed unless you are electro-sensitive. Even then it is almost impossible to escape. 

Carcinogenic

EM pollution has been classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a branch of the World Health Organisation, as a Class 2b possible carcinogen in the same category as car exhaust fumes.  You wouldn't knowingly choose to sit in a room that was constantly fed with car exhaust fumes yet we are being subjected to equivalent non-stop EM radiation.  It is reasonable to think that a Class 2b categorisation would be enough to trigger the precautionary principle but this has not occurred. More recently, following some large scale studies in the USA and Italy, some scientists have called for EM radiation to upgraded to a Class 1 known carcinogen.  The WHO were supposed to consider this reclassification but have so far failed to do so.

Some countries have taken steps based on a scientific review of the evidence to safeguard some of the more vulnerable members of their population.  France has banned the use of WiFi in Primary Schools, as have some other towns and districts in a few other countries and in public libraries too.  City-wide WiFi was rejected by San Francisco in the early noughties - well before the vast increase in EM exposure that we have today.  In 2016,  Prof Olle Johansson of the Karolinka Institute in Stockholm, stated that we were then exposed to a quintillion times the natural background exposure we evolved in, ie 1,000,000,000,000,000,000 times!!    If there were doubts back then, how much more should we have them today?   These decisions to restrict WiFi weren't taken lightly and without sound scientific reason… and still the precautionary principle is ignored everywhere else.

Since 2016, there have been even more 4G masts, and now 5G masts being erected at an accelerated pace.  This work was given priority during the first UK lockdown despite the fact that there is evidence that EM radiation adversely suppresses our immune response.  Hardly what you want in the face of a supposed pandemic.  The UK Government is looking to extend the legislation that allows mobile telecoms companies to bypass local planning regulations to the point where YOUR house could be used to site a cell mast on.  There is yet another public consultation on it that finishes tonight 14th June 2021 at 11.45pm, unless there is an extension. You can respond here​​​​​​ ​https://consult.communities.gov.uk/digital-infrastructure-planning/technical-consultation-on-permitted-development-ri/

Bogus Safety Regulations

Of course there are Safety Regulations that are supposed to cover EM radiation.  They are based on the SAR scale of measurements. However the SAR scale and safety limits were set based on an assumption that EM radiation has to have a thermal (heating) effect before it can cause biological effects and harm.  This assumption has been categorically proven to be wrong for decades.  Biological effects happen at much lower levels without a thermal effect, yet the Safety Regulations ignored the pre-existing evidence and everything that has been added to date.  The "safety" levels do NOT reflect the true science, and the precautionary principle remains ignored.

Dr. Martin Pall, Professor Emeritus of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences at Washington State University is a published and widely cited scientist on the biological effects of electromagnetic fields. He submitted a substantial paper to the EU Commissioners a few years ago now, in which he reported on the various ways in which EM radiation disrupts our cells.  These include damaging DNA, increasing intra-cellular calcium which initiates a cascade that leads to inflammation and disruption of voltage-gated channels in cell membranes.  Foetuses, babies and children are more adversely effected; partly due to their smaller size and therefore deeper penetration of harmful EMFs, but more importantly due to the greater disruption of stem cells involved in growing.  Some of these changes are permanent and not reversible.  EM pollution has been implicated in ADHD, Autism Spectrum Disorder, various cancers and diseases with a background of chronic inflammation.  Poor concentration, headaches, brain fog and various non-specific symptoms are all common effects that many of us do not attribute to EM radiation but instead put down to stress from “modern” life.  When fertility is widely recognised to be on the decline it is no surprise that EM radiation has been implicated and Dr Pall has gone as far as to predict that it will ultimately sterilise the human race.  Despite this report from an established expert, the precautionary principle has not been triggered.  The Telecommunications industry denies there is any harm but has failed to produce any independent scientific research to support their position and even had to admit under oath when asked by a Senate Committee hearing in the USA that safety studies have not been done.  

Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity

According to how much different countries recognise EM radiation as a potential harm, between 3% and 8% of the population are considered to suffer from electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS).  Until only last year many Drs denied that EHS was a condition and blamed it on psychosomatic effects.  Now that there is research showing defintive changes in the brain, Drs must now recognise EHS.  How many Drs are aware of this research and have changed their stance accordingly? People with EHS are considered disabled and are unable to function normally as a result of EM radiation. It has been estimated that over half of the population exhibit symptoms of some kind as a result of EM radiation ... and still the precautionary principle has not been invoked, and yet increases in the placement of new masts don't just go unchecked, but are actively facilitated.

So what are the implications for business?  In the recent past many more people worked in offices with high levels of technology and WiFi and required people to use the office telephony system using iDECT and/or mobile phones.  With more people now working from home, the equipment has moved back to people's homes where the more vulnerable children are now exposed to both home and office equipment.  Where does the responsibility to protect employees (and now their families too) lie?  Is it enough to rely on the legislation that we know is based on a scale and assumption that has been proven beyond doubt to be outdated and wrong? Will employees be able to make future claims against present employers for failing to take adequate precautions to protect them against EM radiation generated within their work environment (whether in the office or at home) that has increased risk due to the presence of EMF-generating technology?

Whilst causing ill health is of course concerning, business considerations should also consider the reduction in performance that adverse reactions to EM radiation can cause.  Lost days through poor immunity and resultant illness, poor memory and concentration, brain fog, headaches and tired eyes etc that lead to mistakes, delays and poor decisions are all constant drains on productivity.  Business now relies on such digital technology and it is ever increasing.  What can be done to regain lost productivity and safeguard employees, whilst at the same time heading off potential future legal action?  The same symptoms are often blamed on Sick Building Syndrome which up to now has focussed on air quality from a respiratory perspective.  In many cases of SBS that are investigated, no definitive cause is identified.  EM radiation is completely overlooked because work places are within SAR levels so are assumed to be safe, despite the known science and failings of SAR, and despite the cross-over of symptoms. Sticking our heads in the sand over harmful EM radiation is not helping productivity or health and it isn't going to go away. 5G promises to be considerably worse because it adds another layer on top of what we have already and with Smart technology is likely to be not just a fraction of what we have already on top, but multiple times our current exposure, in addition....

Proven Solution

The good news is that there is proven technology that has been researched in a collaborative venture between French and Russian expert scientists in this field.  They have developed a range of products that help mitigate the adverse effects as it is impossible to shield the body from EM radiation unless people live and work in a Faraday cage, which is itself unhealthy and impractical because our health needs the natural EMfs we evolved in.  Special expensive paints to stop EM radiation unfortunately would also prevent the technology within the room communicating as intended and would do nothing to protect from EM radiation generated within the space either.

Mitigating for the adverse effects is the best that can be achieved.  Compensating Magnetic Oscillators (CMOs) are passive devices that therefore do not emit their own EM radiation.  They are activated by the polluting EM radiation and emit a hyper low non-polarised signal that reinforces normal body regulatory signals to maintain function.  They prevent increased intra-cellular calcium and maintain proper function of voltage-gated channels as well as normalising other parameters, such as melatonin, the sleep hormone.  The technology has been tested and published in peer-reviewed papers which demonstratee a return to normal levels of stress markers that rise when people are exposed to EM radiation.  In one experiment involving nearly 1000 people, 35% of non-specific adverse health symptoms such as headaches, eye strain etc disappeared over the course of the experiment.  The CMO technology has also shown a positive response in ants that were disabled by a nearby WiFi router which demonstrates that the positive benefits are definitely more than placebo.  It also reinforced research indicating that EM radiation adversely impacts animals.

The French Health Products Safety Agency has stated that CMO technology can be described thus

"CMOs are an excellent way (...) to effectively protect us from the uncertain but likely harmfulness of electromagnetic waves "

- AFSSAPS French Health Products Safety Agency

Prof. Marc Henry, teacher-researcher and Professor at the University of Strasbourg where he teaches chemistry, materials science and quantum physics has tested CMO technology and has given it his unsolicited praise and backing.

If you would like more information on EM pollution and/or CMO technology please visit www.comosytems.co.uk for UK, and Ireland or www.comosystems.com for other countries, or message me directly. 

We are happy to provide individual consultations and advice you on how best to protect your workforce, your family and yourself.

If anybody considers that this article is OTT and scaremongering then I suggest you watch the following YouTube video taken from a United Nations meeting.

In a future blog I will go into the science behind the adverse effects of EMFs, including what was discovered about exposure for 5G frequencies in Russia as far back as the 1970s.

Share:

Related Posts

What Contradictions?!

What Contradictions?!

Rabbit holes

Rabbit holes

Generational Effects

Generational Effects

War Criminal Boris

War Criminal Boris

This new website

This new website

Slowly slowly catchy monkey

Slowly slowly catchy monkey

Jib-Jab Repercussions

Jib-Jab Repercussions

NWO History

NWO History

Detention!

Detention!