Former Microsoft Canada President Frank Clegg raises alarm over 5G health risks, urging stricter regulations and increased public awareness.
At a Glance
- Frank Clegg, former Microsoft Canada President, expresses concerns about 5G health risks
- Studies link RF radiation to infertility, cancer, and DNA damage
- Clegg criticizes FCC guidelines as outdated and insufficient
- Thousands of doctors and scientists call for a halt to 5G deployment
- Court ruling mandates FCC to reconsider its guidelines based on current scientific evidence
Former Tech Executive Sounds Alarm on 5G Health Risks
Frank Clegg, the former President of Microsoft Canada and current CEO of Canadians for Safe Technology, has emerged as a vocal critic of the potential health risks associated with 5G technology. Drawing on his extensive experience in the tech industry, Clegg is now advocating for stricter regulations and increased public awareness surrounding the rollout of 5G networks.
Clegg’s concerns stem from a growing body of scientific research that suggests wireless radiofrequency radiation, which will increase with the implementation of 5G, may have serious health implications. These potential risks have led thousands of doctors and scientists worldwide to call for a halt to the deployment of 5G technology, viewing it as a new form of environmental pollution.
“5G will increase ambient levels of wireless radiofrequency radiation. Peer-reviewed research has demonstrated a myriad of adverse effects from wireless radiofrequency radiation including increased brain cancer, DNA damage, oxidative stress, immune dysfunction, altered brain development, damaged reproduction, sleep changes, hyperactivity, and memory damage.” – Frank Clegg, Former President of Microsoft Canada
Outdated Regulations and the Need for Reform
A key point of contention in the debate over 5G safety is the current regulatory framework. Clegg and other critics argue that the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) guidelines, which date back to 1996, are woefully outdated and do not reflect current scientific understanding or technological advancements.
This critique gained significant traction on August 13, 2021, when a landmark ruling in the case of Environmental Health Trust et al. v. FCC found that the FCC had violated the Administrative Procedure Act. The court determined that the FCC’s 2019 decision not to update its 1996 exposure limits failed to address several critical factors, including long-term wireless exposure impacts, children’s unique vulnerabilities, and testimonies from individuals claiming injury from wireless radiation.
“the FCC order fails to acknowledge evidence of negative health effects caused by exposure to RF radiation at levels below the limits set by the Commission’s 1996 guidelines, including evidence of cancer, radiation sickness, an adverse effects on sleep, memory, learning, perception, motor abilities, prenatal and reproductive health and children’s health.”
Global Implications and the Call for Safer Alternatives
The court’s decision mandating the FCC to reconsider its guidelines based on current scientific evidence has far-reaching implications. Many countries rely on FCC guidelines, meaning this ruling could potentially influence global standards for wireless technology safety.
Clegg and other advocates are not calling for an outright ban on technological progress. Instead, they are urging the pursuit of safer alternatives that can offer the advantages of 5G while prioritizing human health. This approach involves a more thorough examination of the potential risks associated with wireless technologies and a commitment to developing safer solutions.
“Thousands of doctors and scientists are calling to halt 5G because of the increase in radiofrequency radiation- a new kind of environmental pollution.” – Frank Clegg, Former President of Microsoft Canada
The Path Forward: Awareness and Action
As the debate over 5G safety continues, Clegg and other advocates emphasize the importance of public awareness and engagement. They encourage individuals to educate themselves about the potential risks and to take proactive steps to protect their health. The Environmental Health Trust, for example, offers downloadable safety cards designed to raise awareness and provide practical tips for reducing exposure to wireless radiation.
Ultimately, the goal is to foster a more informed and nuanced conversation about the future of wireless technology. By bringing attention to potential health risks and advocating for more rigorous safety standards, Clegg and his fellow activists hope to ensure that technological progress does not come at the expense of public health.
Some say 5G signals are dangerous & could lead to health risks. Fact is, #5G works on higher frequencies, but it’s not going to microwave your next meal. In this video, we review the evidence & facts on 5G safety. #5Gsafe #5GFacts pic.twitter.com/uvmRATvl16
— Huawei (@Huawei) August 20, 2020
