The Truth About 5G

Comments

1

That pole is infused with petroleum products which are way more harmful than 5 G every could be.

2

Chem trails, bro. The fucking Russians.

Get me the fuck out of California please.

3

I don't believe anything that doesn't contain the word "sheeple".

4

Let us also take this opportunity to explain that VISITING WEBSITES IS NOT RESEARCH.

6

1 - Tu quoque logical fallacy.

7

@4 Kinda depends on which websites, and what you're doing to control selection bias, etc etc. There are a lot of legitimate scientific papers on the internet, and there's a lot of new-age gobbledygook at your local library.

You can get misinformation pretty much anywhere, especially if you go looking for it.

8

@5,6 - wow. you guys are smart. thats right, the only way to be exposed to whats in the pole is to chew on it. Just like plastic. You have to chew on it to be exposed to it?
@6 - pointing out things you should be worried about rather than things you shouldn't is not a tu quoque argument.

9

“The [federal] statute also preempts local decisions premised directly or indirectly on the environmental effects of radio frequency (RF) emissions, assuming that the provider is in compliance with the Commission's RF rules.” (FCC)

The poster couldn’t even do a 15 second Google search.

10

Wait until these folks find out about the 100 trillion neutrinos that shoot through the human body every second - somebody should pass a law I tells ya'!

11

Either hippies or bored, middle class housewives with an internet connection.

See also: vaccines

12

@4, True but you can legitimately call it a ' Study '.

13

@8 you shouldn’t worry about the petroleum content of telephone poles either

14

Science bad! Save us oh baby jesus.

15

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-studies-link-cell-phone-radiation-with-cancer/

https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting-products/cell-phones/current-research-results

16

The media has been silent or helping as cellphone companies bury information and call people nutjobs who speak out against cell phones.

I don't think we need to get rid of cell phones but let's stop holding them near our heads and create hands free phones only with ear buds or wireless microphone/speaker.

As far as it being 5G at this stage in modern handheld smartphones it's impossible to just blame 5g because your iphone 11 will have bluetooth and wifi (that supports different frequencies). So much complexity you almost wonder if they do this to make it harder to prove cell phones do cause cancer.

Sure they'll label me a nutjob if that makes me live a little longer I'll carry the title.

17

@16 It's not going to make you live a little longer.

18

These new poles will cause Lesbians to have multiple organisms in their 5G spot.

19

Since all my 4G devices work quite well, I won't be among the lemmings (oops, make that groundswell) rushing out to replace them with 5G devices. When and if one of them fails, I'll think about it. But not one second sooner. I've got more fun ways to spend money, instead.

20

"... vaccines and GMOs, two other technologies that have been overwhelmingly demonstrated to be safe for human health... "

GMOs, in the right hands, perhaps.
GMOs in a madman's hands, who the fuck knows?

And with Billionaires now able to live like Gods,
how many crazy ones might it take?

21

@20 -- GMOs in a madman's hands -- or a soulless Corps'.

22

Where can I get one of those Shiny Hats?!

23

Sadly, tin foil is hard to find these days, as aluminum foil replaced it in most applications decades ago. Aluminum foil -- unlike tin foil -- is perfectly useless as a countermeasure to alien brain-wave technology.

As for the relative toxicities of tin and aluminum, that is left tot he reader as an internet research exercise.

24

Speaking of Toxicity
there's always lead, RonK.
Which one might spiff up
with a little wrap, from Alcoa!

More Roundup™ anyone?

25

I'm astounded The Stranger printed this piece. I would more expect The Stranger to post articles in agreement with the pseudoscience.

26

You can learn everything you want to know about chemicals and utility poles here: http://www.seattle.gov/light/poles/poleodor.asp

The good news is that the current way they treat them is better than the old way they treated them, which I gather was coal tar creosote.

27

@16, according to all the "research" in the 90's we were all supposed to have died from cell phone caused brain cancer by now. I just checked and we haven't. The rate of brain cancer isn't even up.
I get that holding a wireless device next to your head or standing next to a microwave oven can cause us some anxiety since there's electrical thingies doing magical things we can't see, but the actual science just doesn't show any real health risk. Take the precaution if it makes you feel less anxious, but don't spread nonsense and voodoo for the rest of us.

28

Wow, I manage a 5g project for a local carrier and I was surprised at how this article is slanted. Am I really reading the stranger? Based in fact, nice work!

29

Katie you scientific sycophant. Are we not allowed to question science? The science that brought the world DDT and plastics? You seem to lack critical thinking skills and should refrain from opining about the science you seem to worship.

Looking at GMO's only in terms of their direct impact to human health is misleading. There is also the ecological impact of having factory farms plant GMO crops so they can spray herbicides like RoundUp to kill all the weeds on the farmland. Industrial farming as such is contributing to the decline of bees by killing off wild flowers (weeds) in farmland. Granted other scientific "discoveries" like neonicotinoid pesticides are also contributing to the decline of bees. In any event the collapse of the ecosystem would be profoundly detrimental to human health.

Then there is the social justice element to GMO's. Agribusiness corporations genetically alter crops so their seeds are sterile and cannot be saved and planted to produce new crops. This forces farmers (including in poorer developing countries) to buy new seeds from agribusiness corporations year after year.

Questioning and resisting GMO crops (by for example exercising consumer choice in the marketplace and choosing non-GMO products) is not only a matter of questioning and resisting the consumption of Franken-foods, it is also a matter of questioning and resisting agribusiness corporations more concerned with profits than environmental and social justice.

More to the point of your article in which you not only suck up to science but to technology as well: You tout the benefits of next generation wireless networks as if the problem with the world is that we cannot download internet content fast enough (was this a paid advertisement?) You then denigrate those who question the safety of this technology when it seems reasonable to questions whether filling the airwaves with electromagnetic radiation intense enough to transmit data that fast might have a human impact. Just because 3G and 4G networks are safe doesn't mean that 5G networks are safe. Just because scientists were ignorant of the environmental impact of DDT didn't mean it was safe.

In any event your advertisement neglected to mention another substantial contentious issue with 5G technology which is that the corporate friendly FCC auctioned off this wavelength of the spectrum without adequately considering the impact on existing infrastructure, namely that weather radars use almost the same wavelength to detect water vapor in the atmosphere and thereby forecast weather. Many are concerned that building up 5G networks will compromise our weather forecasting infrastructure. It is misleading to say the least to pronounce the "truth" about 5G without referencing this issue. But maybe you are ignorant of it. But then maybe you shouldn't write a misleading article about 5G.

You may think you are being clever by oversimplifying issues like GMO's and 5G networks, and then denigrating those who can think critically enough to question the priests of science; but you are in fact obfuscating complicated issues that humans need to contend with, and are thereby serving the forces of darkness, whether you intend to or not.

31

@29 -- Thanks for that, Pneu.

@30 -- "You [Katie] got lots of clicks and drew out weirdos to ramble on about GMOs."

Mellow Muffy, your EZ dismissal of any possible Side Effects on the Planet (or its inHabitants) is duly noted by 'our' Corporate Overlords. And roundly applauded.

Btw, just like Roundup™,* I was already here.

*are YOU (and your Progenies?) Roundup Ready™, Mellow Muffy?

32

@24 -- Lead foil might be effective against kryptonite, but not alien brain wave shenanigans.

FWIW, an old USENET contact of mine insisted the only effective countermeasure was a hat constructed of tin foil and egg salad.

33

@24 -- sounds like your olde usenet contact may
have been pulling your leg. How'd it work?

Btw, lead 'foil,' Ronk? I'm talkin' lead flashing --
tri-cornered for maximum Deflection.

Haven't I always said, if it's Good Enough
for Superman, it'll probably work for me?

Say, that reminds me -- I miss
Monsatan.

34

@34, not @24