FRANCE DECODED

The Island of Samothrace was said to be the sanctuary of the Great Gods. Mystery rites were performed using rituals, icons,liturgy. sacraments and allegories.

8 Gods were adored, these were divided into 3 categories.

The things said, The things shown and The things done. All paled into one event.

The priests of Samothrace promised favours to the Initiated.

Isis and the other mysteries Initiations  always took place at night.

In the Eleusinian mysteries, Samothrace was venerated, blood sacrifices were performed in the theatre of Samothrace, where,in the darkness, candidates were over awed with terrific sounds and noises, while they groped around in the dark amongst the blood of the sacrificed.

Since the first Gods in Egypt, Isis and Osiris, truth has been veiled in symbolic forms using colours and allegories and numbers.

The mathematical disciplines were invented by Pythagoreans who were early Freemasons, they endeavoured to use geometry and diagrams to use as a technology to disclose their intentions  to the wise, not to declare or conceal but to signify.

A Pythagorus maxim states, “ Sacrifice  and adore unshod” And the Y symbol was said to be the path of Vice and Virtue.

One has to wonder if the Paris protest showing many pairs of shoes was a symbolic gesture too.

How strange that the witness testimonies of those in the Bataclan theatre, match everything about this ancient Initiation ceremony.

The statue of Samothrace is situated in the Louvre in Paris, it is known as the Victory of Samothrace or the Nike of Samothrace. Which was created on the island .

and was without a head and had a hand missing, later found but still has missing fingers.

And in the French narrative, the bomber was identified by a finger.

The statue occupied a theatre before being moved to the Louvre, in 1863. Its right arm raised in Victory, described as violent motion and sudden stillness meet. An Iconic description of triumph.The ring finger and thumb were said to have been found later in Vienna.

The first FIFA world cup trophy in 1930 was based on this statue.

(So now we have a link to Football and a Theatre) 

The Prehistoric  era of Freemasonry connects it with the old priests of Samothrace and Syria, Two of the most important of the ancient mysteries were Adonisian in Syria and Cabiric  in Thrace, later known as Samothrace.

Each God had their own secret worship paid to them.

It has already been noted that the symbol of the Nike brand has been constantly shown in many events that include reported attacks, including Charlie Hebdo and Ankara, and others. These trainers were released on the very day of the Paris attacks by Nike.

Around 200BC, a theatre was said to have been built on the Island in which initiates were prepared inside a small, dark  room with a crimson sash. 

We have witness reports at the Bataclan, stating that they were in a small dark room.

Links to Isis and Paris

Paris was once known as Parisis, named after Isis, the most important god of the mysteries of Greece.

The story behind Isis is that her partner and brother was murdered and his body parts scattered, to which she found all but one part, the phallus.

The Eiffel tower is said to be a phallus symbol of Orisis. 

The object of the mystery of Isis and all mysteries is said to be “ Perfect Society”

by restraint, introducing social disorder as a necessity, to purify the troubled problems of man.

8 Gods were adored. 8 bombers were reported. Even the house that was attacked on the 18th was number 8.

   Introduction

This is the data the drug industry do not want you to see.

Here 2 centuries of UK, USA and Australian official death statistics show conclusively and scientifically modern medicine is not responsible for and played little part in substantially improved life expectancy and survival from disease in western economies.

https://childhealthsafety.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/vaccines-did-not-save-us-e28093-2-centuries-of-official-statistics.pdf

Former vice President of Pfizer, Dr. Peter Rost, has blown the whistle on the dangers of the Gardasil vaccine –  and claims that Big Pharma aims to keep people unhealthy. 

Below is a clip taken from the “One More Girl” documentary – a film featuring Dr. Rost in which he reveals how vaccines and Big Pharma drugs are designed to keep people in a state of dis-ease.

Healingoracle.ch reports:  He is the author of “The Whistleblower, Confessions of a Healthcare Hitman.” Considering his work experience, it would be an understatement to say that he is an insider expert on big pharma marketing.

Rest of the Article Here: http://yournewswire.com/pfizer-gardasil-vaccine/

The Doctor Who Beat The British General Medical Council By Proving That Vaccines Aren’t Necessary To Achieve Health

CE | 12 March 2015

What happened when a UK doctor appeared as an expert witness to help two mothers prove in court that their children didn’t need to be vaccinated?

A 3 year court case against the British General Medical Council that ended with the doctor accused having all allegations dropped.

Dr. Jayne Donegan, a UK GP, has lived a most fascinating story. It began with her originally being a very strong advocate for vaccinations, but fast forward quite a few years later, and she now not only speaks out against the dangers of vaccinations, but ended up being taken to the General Medical Council with some pretty serious claims by them regarding her professionalism.

After a few stressful years in court against them, Dr. Donegan won her case. But chances are, this is the first you’re hearing of it.

In order for you to get the full account of what happened, it’s best to read her full story. Dr. Donegan gave me her permission to use her account below:

Dr. Jayne Donegan’s Story

Having trained as a conventional medical doctor, qualifying from St. Mary’s Hospital Medical School, University of London, in 1983, all of my undergraduate teaching and postgraduate experience in Obstetrics & Gynecology, Family Planning, Child Health, Orthopedics, Emergency Medicine and General Practice led me to be a strong supporter of the Universal Childhood Vaccination Program. Indeed, I used to counsel parents in the 1980s who didn’t want to vaccinate their children against whooping cough – which was regarded as the ‘problematic’ vaccine in those days.

I used to tell them that there were, indeed, adverse reactions, associated with the vaccine – I was not one of those doctors who would gloss over such unpleasant details – but that we doctors were told that the adverse reactions that might occur after the pertussis vaccine were at least ten times less likely than the chance of getting complications from having the disease, and that, essentially, the point of giving their child the vaccine was to prevent them from getting the disease.

I Used To Think Parent’s Who Don’t Vaccinate Were Either Ignorant or Sociopathic

Indeed, I used to think that parents who didn’t want to vaccinate their children were either ignorant, or sociopathic. I believe that view is not uncommon among doctors today. Why did I have this attitude? Well, throughout my medical training I was taught that the people who used to die in their thousands or hundreds of thousands from diseases like diphtheria, whooping cough and measles – diseases for which there are vaccines – stopped dying because of the introduction of vaccines.

At the same time, I was taught that diseases like typhus, cholera, rheumatic and scarlet fever – for which there are no vaccines – stopped killing people because of improvements in social conditions. It would have been a logical progression to have asked myself why, if social conditions improved the health of the population with respect to some diseases, would they not improve their health with regard to them all, but the amount of information that you are required to absorb during medical training is so huge that you just tend to take it as read and not make the connections that might be obvious to someone else.

It was a received article of faith for me and my contemporaries that vaccination was the single most useful health intervention that had ever been introduced, and when my children were born in 1991 and 1993 I unquestioningly – well, that is to say, I thought it was with full knowledge backed up by all my medical training – had them vaccinated, up as far as MMR, because that was the right thing to do. I even let my 4-week-old daughter be injected with an out-of-date BGC vaccine at a public health clinic.

REST OF ARTICLE HERE    https://atlasmonitor.wordpress.com/2015/03/28/the-doctor-who-beat-the-british-general-medical-council-by-proving-that-vaccines-arent-necessary-to-achieve-health/

The Zika Virus – The Cycle of Legal Eugenics

Here’s how this con job goes and although it repeats itself under different names, year after year (AIDS, SARS, Ebola, mad cow etc etc) most of the uninformed public react as programmed, simply because fear is PROVEN to trigger a narrowing of the mind, a lowering of IQ, a stimulation of the child ego (that looks for an adult to save it) and a reflexive obedience toward perceived authority.

The con job goes like this.
Step 1) poison the population purposely to create disease that does not and would never occur naturally
Step 2) parlay the purposely created disease as being caused by something invisible, outside the realm of control or knowledge of the average person
Step 3) create a toxic vaccine or medication that was always intended to further poison the population into an early grave
Step 4) parlay the vaccine or medication poisoning as PROOF the disease, which never existed, is much worse than anticipated
Step 5) increase the initial poisoning, which is marketed as a fake disease, and also increase the vaccine and medication poisoning, to start piling the bodies into the stratosphere
Step 6) repeat as many times as possible upon an uninformed population because killing a population this way (the art of having people line up to kill themselves with poison……known as a “soft kill” method) is the only legal way to make sure such eugenic operations can be executed on mass and in plain sight.


If you don’t think fake news, fear and reliance on fabricated authority can make people line up to kill themselves and their own children……..you’re not paying attention.”

GLOBAL ALLIANCE FOR VACCINES AND IMMUNISATIONS.
GLOBAL ALLIANCE FOR VACCINES AND IMMUNISATIONS.

Just before the Ebola false pandemic occurred, the Countries involved, named the Mano River Union, (Liberia,Guinea,Sierra Leone and Cote D’Ivore) all attended a meeting with the World bank, UN Security Council and the EU to discuss how to exploit the resources of those four Countries.

{GAVI were highly involved and then months later we had the Ebola false pandemic.}

GLOBAL ALLIANCE FOR VACCINES AND IMMUNISATIONS.

GAVI to which the UK Govt is one of the biggest donors, has on its governing board, many pharma industry representatives, this group sets the price for vaccines, stimulates needs and using public money and money from “donors” is highly involved in the vaccine process.

The pharma industry sell vaccines to other countries, which is paid for by GAVI, the pharma companies can then collect that money back from a special fund called the Advance Market Commitment.

So they can set the price of vaccines involving the same companies that stand to profit, a clear example of conflicts of interest.

Global health organisations like this are complicit in ensuring corporate welfare at the expense of the public and the publics health!

In July 2017, Madagascar had an Economic Development Document drawn up by the IMF. This was to involve the country in the UN,s

Agenda 20/30 to develop its natural resources.

One of the steps for Implementation includes,

“promotion of Innovative financing such as those used by GAVI”.

Six weeks later, Madagascar is reporting a Plague Pandemic!

 

WiFi Experiment Done By A Group Of 9th Grade Students Got Serious International Attention. THIS Is Why…

Researchers from England, Holland and Sweden have shown great interest in the experiment done by 5 girls from northern Jutland in 9th grade.

They did an experiment for a biology test, so brilliant, that it has attracted international attention among acknowledged biologists and radiation experts.

The girls got really surprised by the sudden attention from all around the world.

“It has been such a rollercoaster ride. I still cannot believe it”, says Lea Nielsen, one of the girls.

“It’s totally overwhelming and exciting. It’s just not something you experience every day”. added Mathilde Nielsen, another girl from the group.

It all started because they found it difficult to concentrate during the school day:

“We all think we have experienced difficulty concentrating in school, if we had slept with the phone next to our head, and sometimes also experienced having difficulty sleeping”, explains Lea Nielsen.

So here is what they did:

They took 400 cress seeds and placed them in 12 trays. Then, they placed 6 trays in 2 separate rooms at the same temperature. They gave the same amount of water and sun to all the trays for 12 days.

However, 6 of the trays were put next to two [Wi-Fi] routers. Such routers broadcast the same type of radiation as an ordinary mobile.
After 12 days what the result spoke was clear: cress seeds next to the router did not grow, and some of them were even mutated or dead.

Cress Unexposed
Cress Unexposed
Cress Exposed
Cress Exposed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“It is truly frightening that there is so much affect, so we were very shocked by the result”, says Lea.

Olle Johansson, a renowned professor at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, is one of the impressed researchers.

He will now repeat the experiment with a Belgian research colleague, Professor Marie-Claire Cammaert at the Université libre de Bruxelles.
According to him, this is absolutely brilliant:

“The girls stayed within the scope of their knowledge, skilfully implemented and developed a very elegant experiment. The wealth of detail and accuracy is exemplary, choosing cress was very intelligent, and I could go on”, he says.

He is not slow to send them an invitation to go on the road:

“I sincerely hope that they spend their future professional life in researching, because I definitely think they have a natural aptitude for it. Personally, I would love to see these people in my team!”

 

The Students
The Students

But the experiment proved something really huge. Something the majority of the world does without knowing the consequences.

“None of us sleep with the mobile next to the bed anymore. Either the phone is put far away, or it is put in another room. And the computer is always off”, says Lea.

If your bed is close to a WiFi Router we strongly advise to change the bed’s or the router’s location. And when it is time to sleep, leave the technology where its place is.

Original Source from Outside of The Box

Inventor of Cloud Seeding Created ‘Weather Weapons of War’

Oct 10, 2017 Aaron Dykes

The Real Reason Weather IS Manipulated

While everyone is busy arguing that control over weather doesn’t exist, or that those who claim it does are crazy, conspiratorial nutters, actual history reveals that it not only exists, but was developed for an ulterior motive.

This video provides an interesting bit on General Electric’s Irving Langmuir, his ties to the brothers Vonnegut, and the military’s attempts at destroying the enemy with wicked weather.

In the sources shown in the video, Irving Langmuir and others admit to a) steering hurricanes, b) causing a 1947 and 1948 hurricane to change course, resulting in the coastal destruction of American cities that wouldn’t have been hit by hurricanes, c) seeding clouds, changing ice/snow and rain patterns, d) creating the conditions for floods in the early 1950s which caused destruction and property damage throughout the mid-west, Galveston, Texas, e) seeding clouds in New Mexico that either denied rain to the Eastern coast of the U.S. or overwhelmed other areas with too much rain… and well, much more.

 

US Urged to Study Weather for War Use
US Urged to Study Weather for War Use

Irving Langmuir himself, though he called for using weather as a weapon of war, also cautioned that the military was undertaking weapon experiments that were creating negative consequences for American cities, people, land and crops, and admitted there was nothing he could do to stop it, despite being its progenitor.

Also admitted is the fact that the lessons learned in the 40s and 50s – though leading to a 13 year moratorium on hurricane seeding – were applied to Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia in the late 60s and early 70s under the later declassified Operation Popeye – which sought to alter the course of the Vietnam War by reducing, or impacting traffic along the Ho Chi Minh Trail via drastic increases in rainfall and harsh weather.

SO?! What is happening now, today, and in recent years? Of course, it is not admitted; the issue is deflected; critics are derided as conspiracy theorists, search engines and algorithms de-list, hide and suppress discussions of ‘chemtrails’ and ‘HAARP’ and ‘weather modification.’ However, experiments are taking place – likely covertly for military purposes – and admittedly under the guise of battling global warming/climate change.

How have we reached the point where few in the public are aware of the documented existence of this technology and the phenomenon of weather control? Why is rational or critical discussion of this issue ridiculed or even banned? What is the real agenda at work here?

. . . . AND MORE . . . .

This stuff is documented. In the video above, a great deal of information was found in newspaper archives, as well as internet postings. However, it is also dealt with in academic literature.

Please read (or browse through) the paper “The pathological history of weather and climate modification: three cycles of promise and hype” (PDF) by academic James Fleming, of MIT, for more discussion on a) early episodes of rainmaking and weather modification, b) the period involving cloud seeding by General Electric scientists Irving Langmuir, Vincent Schaefer, and Bernard Vonnegut, et al. and also c) the current wave of climate change modification that remains ongoing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Is non-ionising radiation really safe?

This article was first published in naturalblaze.com February 2017

The telecoms industry and governmental regulators have consistently ignored or avoided meaningful discussion on the cancer risks from using mobile phone and other microwave devices such as DECT phones, smart-meters, etc. Our safety regulators also routinely disregard any form of criticism, particularly the omission of non-thermal biological effects in their regulatory methodology.

The reason why is very simple yet they do not advertise the ‘Achilles heel’ or foundation stone of their regulatory and legal methodology. In fact, all safety legislation in all countries that rely on data from the International Commission on Non-ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) focus solely on non-ionising radiation. Biological or non-thermal effects such as cancer, DNA-breakages, disruption in cellular transport and other adverse biological processes are completely ignored.
I urge the reader to ask their telecoms regulators one very simple question, ‘do you have any legislation relating to consumer safety that specifically mentions non-thermal or biological effects’? Over here in the UK I have looked at the legislation surrounding the use of mobile phone and other microwave technologies from Public Health England (PHE) and cannot find any exposure values or safety information relating specifically to  non-thermal or biological effects. The regulatory framework is concerned with thermal or skin-heating effects and nothing else. Here in Europe, America, Australia and elsewhere, regulators rely on advice and information in setting exposure levels on data from the ICNIRP. The ICNIRP base all their safety data on non-ionising radiation which legally translates to thermal heating effects only.

The ICNIRP and telecom regulators the world over further argue that initiation of biological effects is theoretically impossible because the devices they regulate use non-ionising radiation.  Significantly, note that current-day regulatory advice related to exposure of non-ionising radiation extends up to 300 GHz. This means that the next development of telecommunication devices known as 5G (which operates up to 300GHz) will not be safety tested for non thermal or biological effects. Why? The telecoms industry will argue that because these frequencies are non-ionising, there is no need to test for carcinogenic processes.  The rest of this article will discuss what we need to know about the hidden and forgotten debate surrounding the definition of non-ionising radiation. It is also good to know that all parameters of non-ionising radiation were put in place before the wide-scale rollout of the Internet, WIFI and the proliferation of consumer toys that has led to our present-day electromagnetic entanglements with electrosmog.

The electromagnetic spectrum (see Figure 1) illustrates the division between non-ionising and ionising radiation. The threshold between these two groups of radiation was discussed from the early 19th century onwards within private scientific organisations such as the ICRU (International Committee on Radiation Units), ANSI/IEEE (American National Standards Institute /Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers) and a host of other safety standards setting bodies. Notably, most of these findings were eventually consolidated under another private body called the ICNIRP (International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection). These august scientific bodies were staffed mostly by physicists and engineers with little input from the medical profession. The ICNIRP ‘guidelines’ on non-ionising radiation were formulated in 1988, just prior to the rollout of the Internet.

Historically, it has always been easier to scientifically define ionising radiation compared to non-ionising radiation. This is due to the fact that ionising radiation mostly refers to radioactive substances, principally alpha, beta and gamma emitters. Non-ionising radiation has always been more difficult to define scientifically because it solely relies on the value of the photon energy to define the threshold between itself and ionising radiation. Additionally, we are talking about a photon which can be viewed as a planar travelling wave having electrical and magnetic components. It is difficult to predict the propagation of microwave frequencies because the signal can be reflected, refracted, attenuated or enhanced depending on what is between your head and the mobile phone tower. The significance of both electrical (e) or magnetic properties (h) varies along the electromagnetic spectrum. Towards the low end of this spectrum, biological systems are dominated by magnetic effects because the wavelengths (or dissipation of energy per wavelength) is very dilute. As we move up the spectrum band, wavelengths become smaller with resultant rise in increased electrical characteristics. There is little work that has been carried out to identify the significance of the electrical, magnetic or electromagnetic effects of body exposures to frequencies between 30 kHz and 300 GHz. Instead we rely on safety work carried out during the development of radar. There are several reviews (mostly military) that take a standard view that exposure to microwave radiation is carcinogenic and leads to all sorts of cancers.

To make sense of radiation in general, it is useful to look at what we are already aware of. If we look at the entire electromagnetic spectrum, we can already identify carcinogenic effects from (a) electrical generating systems and (b) overhead pylons and cables and electrical substations. All these processes create very high electrical field voltages and currents with subsequent high magnetic fields. If you live close to these structures you increase the statistical odds you may contract some form of cancer. Eden(2) suggests in his paper published by Cancer Treat Rev (2010) that environmental factors, including non-ionising radiation, contribute to the aetiology of childhood cancers (leukaemia’s). The Dutch government currently has a scheme going on where it is buying up all privately owned properties that lie under high power electrical pylon cables. They understand what is going on in terms of cancer induction and are pro-actively taking issues into their own hands(4).

If we move up the electromagnetic spectrum we discover carcinogenic effects attributed to microwave radiation studies. A snapshot of these studies can be found here. It is useful to understand that exposures to microwave radiation can increase free radicals, decrease DNA repair mechanisms, lead to DNA-breakages and other initiators of cancer. These biological endpoints are all potential initiators of carcinogenesis, similar in function to that found for ionizing radiation. Clearly, if it waggles like a duck, talks like a duck, looks like a duck, it must be a duck. It is becoming more and more difficult for the telecoms industry and its regulators to ignore non thermal effects. Part of the problem we face when presenting this type of data to regulators is that we have to engage the State Machine which is reluctant to change any of its microwave safety advice in light of new developments. This is even more so when the facts between microwave exposure and initiation of carcinogenic processes become ever larger and more significant.

In 2011 the IARC (International Agency on Cancer Research) classified exposure to microwave radiation, as Class 2B i.e. possibly carcinogenic. This warning is based on the fit between the incidence of gliomas (brain tumours) and heavy users of mobile phones. Heavy usage in the year 2000 was defined as 30 minutes per day. Usage for many groups within present-day society easily exceeds this length of time. This agency is the scientific arm of the World Health Organisation. The classification of microwave radiation having the potential to initiate cancer was based on data from a study called INTERPHONE(3). The IARC report itself is 481 pages long and it is by no means a critique of the telecoms industries because it clearly states that “although numerous experimental studies have been published on the non-thermal biological effects of RF-EMF, multiple computational analyses based on biophysical and thermodynamic considerations have concluded that it is theoretically implausible for physiological effects to be induced at exposure intensities that do not cause an increase in tissue temperature”. In other words, it is clear from a first read of this report that the Agency itself accepts the ‘theory’ behind non-ionising radiation. Interestingly, the weight and significance of data from the INTERPHONE study probably led to much heated discussion. Those members of the Agency who stuck to their guns in demanding some form of cancer warning on exposure to microwave radiation are to be commended. Importantly, this is the first bit of light in the whole debate on non-ionising radiation. This IARC Class 2B carcinogenicity warning suggests that, under certain conditions, it is possible to initiate carcinogenic processes for users of mobile phones. Clearly, it is no longer safe to assume that non-ionising radiation is safe. This is an ‘inconvenient truth’ for the telecoms industries and their regulators yet the significance of this cancer-warning has largely gone over the head of consumers. Regulators do not want to talk about mobile phone frequencies, Class 2B cancer warning in the same breath with ‘non-ionising’ radiation. Clearly, their is much more scientific work that needs to be carried out on exposure to microwave radiation. It should be carried outwith an open mind free from the restrictions of the scientific paradigm that ‘non-ionising radiation’ is incapable of initiating carcinogenic processes within the body.

The real problem we all face in this is simply that the Scientific Process itself is not working as it should to resolve any of these issues. Thomas Kuhn, who was a philosopher of Science, stated that ‘any science must be falsifiable’. What he meant by this phrase is that any hypothesis must be provably wrong i.e. the hypothesis should be put to the test until it sinks or passes all tests. Only then can we view it as a scientific theory. Even at this stage of scientific maturity, the theory remains a theory unless or until proven wrong. Science supposedly advances in this way.

The current ‘no cancer effect’ hypothesis put forward by a sizeable chunk of health physicists, the telecoms industries and their regulators is that there is insufficient photon energy within microwave frequencies to eject electrons from the outer orbit of elements or molecules. It is obvious that the current hypothesis needs rigorous testing because it is becoming clearer each day that exposure to microwave radiation is causing adverse biological effects on our body and capable of causing cancer. If for some reason microwave radiation is able to break chemical bonds in several different ways, it is highly likely that these biological changes will lead to carcinogenesis. If the telecoms industry took a leaf out of the life of Dr Bob Becker(6), they may discover a wealth of information related to the functioning of the central nervous system when exposed to artificially-induced electromagnetic frequencies. This work is even more important now because unlike the early 1970s, we are all encapsulated within a sea of electromagnetic frequencies. What effect do all these frequencies have on the body? Is there a ‘cocktail effect’ going on where the presence of one frequency in combination with a second (or more) frequency is able to exert a disproportionate adverse biological effect on the body? Do some frequencies completely swamp the central nervous system to the extent that the entire internal signalling of the body begins to break down? Do we really understand all there is to know about the effect of magnetism on the human body both at the low and high end of the electromagnetic spectrum?

According to Kuhn, the telecoms industry and its regulators should be conducting experiments to falsifiably prove that exposure to microwave radiation does initiate carcinogenic processes. Every single time a paper is looked at by the ICPIRN /IARC /PHE (Public Health England) they argue the scientific protocol is not sufficiently robust or of the wrong type or statistically unsound. Almost all the data on non thermal effects is ignored for one reason or another. When this particular apple falls to the ground – and it will – we approach what Kuhn describes as the ‘overturning of a scientific paradigm’. It will be like a switch going off in the minds and perception of the scientific community. Look for massive changes in the telecom industries and how they do business. The telecom regulators and everyone else involved in this deception of perception will quickly fall by the wayside. Everyone loves mobile phones yet it is the fully informed consumers who will ultimately demand much safer technologies – consumer sovereignty truly is king.

Finally, most ordinary people would say that the chances of catching cancer is down to lifestyle choices, the type of work you do and where you live. The bulk of the scientific community, however, views this as chance, luck or down to the odds your genes randomly mutate. It took a long time coming but a scientific paper published in 2015 sides with the view of ordinary people in these matters and statistically argues that “external factors play a big role (in cancer-causation), and people cannot hide behind bad luck”(6). In other words, many of the fallacies of Big Science are beginning to break down. It is only a matter of time before many of the fallacies behind non-ionising radiation break down as well. Next time you see anything from a government regulatory department that says ‘these devices use non-ionising radiation’ as a form of fluffy appeasement, understand there is a lot in this sentence that has not been said, caveat emptor.

About the Author
Dr. Ellis Evans underwent a significant spiritual awakening in 2014 in which many things in his mind fell like pins. One of the fruits of his awakening was an increased sensitivity to microwave radiation which is real and can be felt adversely within various organs of the body. He has a website dealing with these issues: http://www.emfguru.co.uk  He is also a spiritual counsellor for those undergoing deep spiritual awakening including spiritual emergency. His website can be found here: http://www.hellostarseeds.net

 

 

On September 13, 2017, more than 180 scientists and doctors sent an 11-page Appeal for a moratorium on the roll out of 5G in the European Union.

The reason for the appeal is “RF/EMF has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment,” but 5G has not been investigated fully for potential health hazards and environmental impact by INDEPENDENT scientists, rather than industry scientists who apparently would rubber stamp 5G similarly as the other generations of telecommunications updates have been.

According to the Appeal, 5G is effective only over short distances and is transmitted poorly through solid materials.  Because of that inefficiency in transmission, a tremendous number of antennas or cell towers will be needed to implement 5G service.

One key paragraph jumped out for me:

With “the ever more extensive use of wireless technologies,” nobody can avoid to be exposed. Because on top of the increased number of 5G-transmitters (even within housing, shops and in hospitals) according to estimates, ”10 to 20 billion connections” (to refrigerators, washing machines, surveillance cameras, self-driving cars and buses, etc.) will be parts of the Internet of Things. All these together can cause a substantial increase in the total, long term RF-EMF exposure to all EU citizens.  [CJF emphasis]

Unfortunate as it is, there are no studies for long-term RF/EMF exposures to humans that I neither know about nor have found in my research.  That deliberate omission seems to be the most incriminating aspect of probable collusion on the part of “consensus science,” which apparently motivates and propels microwave technology, the industry and, in particular, its professional associations that impact microwave ‘policy’ at the United Nations, World Health Organization and its IARC, and the U.S. Federal Communication Commission.

“[N]umerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines,” including  “increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plants and animals.”

The Appeal notes:

 The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the cancer agency of the World Health Organization (WHO), in 2011 concluded that EMFs of frequencies 30 KHz – 300 GHz are possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B). However, new studies like the NTP study mentioned above and several epidemiological investigations including the latest studies on mobile phone use and brain cancer risks confirm that RF-EMF radiation is carcinogenic to humans.

The scientists and doctors point out the Precautionary Principle, adopted by the EU in 2005, states:

When human activities may lead to morally unacceptable harm that is scientifically plausible but uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that harm.

Unfortunately, in this writer’s opinion, the Precautionary Principle has been negated for all intents and purposes by medicine and science in favor of corporate profiteering, “consensus science” and downright falsified or ‘vintage’ research, plus marketing strategies to promote less-than-accurate facts regarding pharmaceuticals, microwave technology and much of the “smart” meme.

Under “Safety Guidelines,” the Appeal emphasizes how industry is protected, but not human health:

The current ICNIRP “safety guidelines” are obsolete. All proofs of harm mentioned above arise although the radiation is below the ICNIRP “safety guidelines”. Therefore new safety standards are necessary. The reason for the misleading guidelines is that “conflict of interest of ICNIRP members due to their relationships with telecommunications or electric companies undermine the impartiality that should govern the regulation of Public Exposure Standards for non-ionizing radiation…To evaluate cancer risks it is necessary to include scientists with competence in medicine, especially oncology.”  [CJF emphasis]

The current ICNIRP/WHO guidelines for EMF are based on the obsolete hypothesis that “The critical effect of RF-EMF exposure relevant to human health and safety is heating of exposed tissue.” However, scientists have proven that many different kinds of illnesses and harms are caused without heating (”non-thermal effect”) at radiation levels well below ICNIRP guidelines.

The problem apparently is ICNIRP seems to be running the show “science-wise,” while it’s really behind the times, especially since ICNIRP refuses to accept non-thermal waves and adverse effects, which 32 percent of industry-funded-research proved they exist!  Talk about Neanderthals!  What rock has ICNIRP been under all this time?

The Appeal offers five recommendations the European Union ought to follow, especially “to study the total and cumulative exposure affecting EU-citizens.”  Cumulative exposure is KEY to any study whether it is assessing a chemical or a pollutant, which microwave EMFs/RFs truly are.  They create “electrosmog.”

The Appeal has 7 pages of signatories from around the globe, including 23 from the USA.

Let’s hope a similar Appeal is presented to the U.S. Federal Communication Commission, which apparently is totally off-base regarding its safety recommendations.

Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.

By Catherine J. Frompovich