Much like the dangers of smoking tobacco at one time, the risks posed by exposure to high levels of EMF have remained on the fringes of our understanding, both socially and within the medical and scientific fields. Those who have long been seeking ways of mitigating the threat have, in many areas across the globe, been part of a silenced minority, while the majority continue to put their lives and the lives of their loved ones at risk each and every day.

What makes EMF so insidious is its invisibility; like a virus, it encourages complacency in those not yet convinced by its existence, all the while wreaking havoc within our bodies no matter who — or what — we choose to believe.

And while this is one of the reasons it poses such a threat in our modern world, perhaps the biggest hurdle between awareness and action is the apparent incompatibility between human progress and innovation, and our continued health and wellbeing. There are many who have chosen to disregard or overlook the mounting evidence that stands against EMF, simply because we are all — to varying extents — reliant upon the technology that is constantly emitting it into our homes, workspaces, shops, restaurants and parks. For those who have not taken the time to learn about protecting their bodies from EMF, admitting the risks entails an either-or situation: either we continue to ignore the problem for as long as we possibly can, or we lose all those commodities and gadgets we require in order to work, socialise, learn, and pass the time.

Of course, this simply isn’t true. EMF protection provides powerful shielding from any source we encounter, whether we are at home or on the move. Our jobs and personal lives needn’t take a hit when we wake up to the dangers around us — so why has it taken the world so long to admit the danger, and seek change?

2020 and the Fifth Generation Cellular Network

 5G and its proponents promise a great many things, from increasing data speeds significantly, to providing a great boon to the development of the Internet of Things (IoT). Countless businesses and industries will benefit from it, and our cell phones will be more powerful than ever before.

Unfortunately, there is a downside, and it is brought to you in the form of EMF-emitting antennae that must be installed no more than around 500ft apart in any area that boasts 5G. This will increase our daily (and, nightly) exposure to EMF significantly, and the risks to our body are devastating.

So devastating, in fact, that communities and individuals the world over are at last beginning to question the integrity of the major players behind 5G. Who does it really benefit? And do those who willingly gloss over — or, worse, attempt to conceal — the risks have our best interests at heart or the cold-blooded requirements of a billion-dollar industry seeking to bend the world to its will to grow larger still?

Opposition to the implementation of 5G has become an international effort; from the US to Europe, the United Kingdom, and Australia, people are pushing back against the unfounded reassurances offered by large scale corporations, and working to ensure that their voices continue to impact headlines.

In February, Switzerland placed a moratorium on the use of 5G due to health concerns, while Belgium has introduced new restrictions that will forestall its introduction. Conversely, the head of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission has stated that local governments have no legal power to interfere with telecom infrastructure, as Switzerland has done.

Why Now?

While 5G represents an unprecedented increase in the amount of EMF we will be exposed to as we go about our lives, EMF — and its ability to cause us significant and lasting health issues — has been at dangerously high levels around the world for many years now. The vast majority of us, for instance, are exposed to cell phone radiation throughout the day and night. With that in mind, why are so many more people realizing the need for effective EMF protection for the home?

Part of the issue is that there is limited scientific literature on the long-term impacts of exposure to the quantities of radiation that currently surround us because we are living within that necessary period of research. Technological progress has excelled rapidly over the last twenty years, and we cannot quantify the ramifications until it is too late.

We are living in a time when the fragility of our collective health and wellbeing are being thrown into stark contrast. And while 2020 may not be a good year to fight back against the false promises of socio-economic advancement, 5G risks a global tragedy of as-yet incomprehensible proportions. If the world fails to appreciate the risks of EMF, then we will soon run out of places in which to shelter our bodies from harm.

Olivia Johns