Example 5

I am writing to lodge my objection to planning reference 21/00966/PRIOR on two grounds.

1) 5G is a Polluting Technology and, as such, should be rejected on material planning grounds.

2) 5G uses new frequency allocations and modulation schemes that pose significant safety concerns for wildlife, the environment and human health.

The 2015 International EMF Scientist Appeal – https://www.emfscientist.org/ – which has been signed by 255 EMF scientists from 44 nations and which drew from published peer-reviewed research on the biologic and health effects of wireless radiation states:

“Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include 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 plant and animal life.”

These concerns indicate likely harms to both humans and to the natural ecosystem.

This planning application must be rejected until the scientific consequences are fully understood and a full and transparent public debate on the risks has taken place.

I write as a resident of Gloucester who has friends who live within the footprint of this proposed installation.

%d bloggers like this: