Carotecnews note:
(This article titled American Health and Prosperity: A National Emergency appeared in our May 2019 Carotec Health Report. We are publishing it on Carotecnews.com because it contains relevant information that regrettably never “took hold” in the alternative media. We warned that 5G could create health problems which might be blamed on a “pandemic”, akin to the Spanish Flu of 1918: “Will this technology kill us? Or, make us more vulnerable to a biological assault reminiscent of the flu pandemic of 1918 which wiped out millions of people?” We also wrote about technological changes which are the subject of stories being promoted by the mainstream media.
On May 5, 2023, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared that the global emergency status for the COVID-19 “pandemic” ended.
However, the crisis is anything but over.
There are so many “things” looming right now at a rapid pace such as the prospect of a digital currency which will end any sense of privacy and likely be the blueprint for big brother telling us how we can spend our “new” money; also, there is still talk of future lockdowns brought on by “climate” calamaties or more questionable outbreaks. We don’t have all the answers but you can count on us to deliver deep dives on societal problems.)
May 2019 by Carole Valentine and James Spounias
In our April 2019 Carotec Health Report, we promised to elaborate on renewed attacks on our personal health liberty as well as other issues not properly addressed by the mainstream or alternative media.
Before we dig into these points, we have to make clear we oppose totalitarianism under any label. We also aren’t married to isms, meaning we know how words like capitalism and socialism are used as weaponized terms to blunt free thought.
When we pay attention to establishment propaganda, we hear purposely incomplete arguments which carefully avoid a meaningful understanding of liberty. This is by design.
Instead of highlighting actual problems which face us, propagandists hurl talking points and isms at each other.
The educational system doesn’t teach students to think but instead to react. Just take a look at the videos posted of what passes as an exchange of ideas at college campuses: controversial speakers are threatened and shouted down rather than debated. The word “triggered” is part of our lexicon, which in practice means a word, phrase or sentence evokes a hostile response in the listener. No matter how unpopular an idea is, isn’t it the province of academia to discuss, debate and dissect concepts rationally? This goes for speakers of all persuasions.
We are told America is the freest country in the world.
The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution are unique in that rights and limitations on government are defined, including the right to own property. The Fourth Amendment makes clear your property is private and to be searched there must be a warrant with cause and the search with particularity; the Fifth Amendment states that just compensation should be given when property is taken. The Seventh Amendment guarantees a right to a jury trial in civil and criminal cases. The right to a jury is supposed to keep government power in check but also allows our fellow citizens to defend violations of common law, including property rights.
The very nature of property rights means that one’s actions cannot harm another and if so, an individual has the legal ability to stop and get damages against the offender.
We have written at length about organic farmers who are ruthlessly sued when GMO seeds drift on their land on the basis that the organic farmer is somehow violating the intellectual property (patent) rights of the GMO seed makers. Why don’t the courts protect the rights of organic farmers who should receive whopping monetary awards for loss and get injunctive relief to stop trespass?
When have you heard the subject of whether we, as human beings, have legally actionable rights to clean air and water?
We don’t mean platitudes; we mean the ability to walk into a court and stop the massive pollution of our country which has detrimental effects on our health.
Talking heads fail to explain what rights we have and how they should be applied.
Today’s propagandists promote left-wing identity politics which means that rights hinge on your racial, ethnic, gender, or sexual orientation status.
Right-wing talking heads fret about corporate interests, repeating the talking point that corporations are people, something their listeners do not understand. A recent example of right-wing and libertarian misplaced outrage concerned Amazon.com’s planned move to build its second headquarters in New York City. The right-wing criticized state and local governments as being antibusiness job killers (socialist) when in reality Amazon didn’t get enough subsidies it wanted. New York was willing to give $3 billion to Amazon in subsidies but did want certain workers unionized. Should the right wing really hang its hat on the fact that a greedy corporation didn’t get enough taxpayer money to build a second headquarters; especially when this particular business takes $20 billion a year from brick-and-mortar business?
What are rights in the context of health?
Do you have the right to stop someone from spraying pesticides or herbicides that poison air and water? Do you have a right to clean air and water?
If you think about it, you do, but, no talking head on the left or right makes it a reverberating daily theme to educate the public. Again, this is design.
How many times has an individual or public interest group been able to protect human health in any court?
Not often because the law which has become a boilerplate is a utilitarian rationalization, not a proper application of property rights. The rationale is that some pollution is tolerated because this it outweighed by the jobs, necessities and social good factories provide. In fact, the law uses utilitarian (socialistic) arguments to allow capitalist enterprises to profit. Costs of pollution are put on the people; only in very limited instances are victims able to be compensated for injuries such as those damaged by asbestos.
Can we say with a straight face, we live in a constitutional republic that properly enforces our health rights? Exceptions are the rule and often not on the merits of human health. For instance, the right mocks environmentalists as “wackos”, complaining about how they consider the life of an insect more important than human life. But, the right misses the larger question: the propagandists who feed them talking points do not take human health concerns seriously. There are laws protecting endangered species, not humans and environmentalist activists know it’s often easier to launch a case using this as a legal argument rather than use human health as the basis. The next time you hear someone make fun of these “wackos”, you should realize the joke is on you, your family and the rest of humanity.
You need to think about your health as a human right when the seemingly unstoppable 5G train rolls into your neighborhood.
President Trump is all in for 5G and is even pushing 6G. Those on the left want 5G because they will use this technology to monitor your use of resources, like water, electricity, etc. They are not opposing 5G on health grounds; they may disagree on how it should be used but these disagreements don’t help your health.
We will get into 5G dangers later in this article but for now, you need to understand that the bipartisan 1996 Telecommunications Act made the FCC the sole arbiter of tech safety, so, challenging cellular, wireless, including 4G and 5G in courts is almost impossible.
The bipartisan elite protected the telecommunications industry, putting the safety of the nation’s health into the hands of appointed hacks at the FCC.
Another aspect of the 1996 Act was that the government sold frequencies at rates that were well below true value and you may ask yourself what right government has to own frequencies let alone sell them off—again, these frequencies affect your health. President Bill Clinton, Senator Bob Dole and Representative Newt Gingrich all patted themselves on the back for the 1996 Act.
What would our founding fathers think of what passes as patriotism in the 21st century?
We can’t say for certain but there are purposely false narratives put forth for public consumption. When asked what form of government was established, founding father Benjamin Franklin quipped “A republic, if you can keep it.” If you can keep it, indeed.
If you listen to right-wing radio you would think that the founding fathers thought greed is a virtue and that government should be replaced with corporations. President Thomas Jefferson sharply disagreed with both of these 21st-century talking points when he wrote “the selfish spirit of commerce (that) knows no country, and feels no passion or principle but that of gain.”
On November 12, 1812, in a private letter to George Logan, Jefferson wrote “I hope we shall crush… in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country.”
Jefferson was also a fierce critic of government tyranny as most well know.
This is a point lost in 2019 where the powers that be force one to worship at the altar of big government or corporations. Jefferson knew the dangers of having a too-powerful government and corporations; it wasn’t one or the other.
Jefferson knew the dangers of monopolistic practices which spurred the American colonists to resist British rule and ultimately form a constitution free of King George. One of the seminal events which brought attention to British tyranny is the Boston Tea Rebellion. There was a time when every kid in even the worst public school knew the phrase taxation without representation, a battle cry of the Boston Tea Rebellion.
An entity not often discussed in the Boston Tea Rebellion is the East India Company, which was privately owned and given monopolistic powers by the British Crown. The East India Company was one of the original drug-pushing corporations, having forced opium on an unwilling China to help recoup Britain’s trade deficit. Having its own army, the East India Company was a blueprint for what we criticize today as the ugliest form of corporatism.
It is with some irony we retell these events in 2019 as America is in the grip of its own opiate crisis in which 130 people die every day according to the CDC which some believe is too low of an estimate. But, using the CDC number, we’re talking about 47,450 a year of which the majority die of prescription opiates. It’s so bad that for three years in a row, America is the only first-world country that has experienced a decline in longevity, not seen since the great flu pandemic of 1918.
The Smithsonian in 2018 wrote how America plummeted 21 spots from an unimpressive 43rd to 64th among other countries.
American citizens are also on the verge of losing personal health rights, such as the right to say no to vaccines or to use quality supplements.
Shortly after our March 2019 issue was published, FDA Commissioner Gottlieb resigned his office. Prior to his resignation, commissioner Gottlieb instructed states to eliminate vaccine exemptions or the Federal Government would take action. Hearings were held in the Senate on a resolution to do so and the idea of personal liberty was marginalized. The sentiment during the hearings was to eliminate exemptions making vaccines mandatory. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr, a distinguished attorney and head of the Children’s Health Defense charity, was not allowed to speak at this hearing; instead, a home-schooled boy who just turned 18 years old was given full court press at the hearing and on the major news networks. This young man publicly refuted his mother’s “antivaccine” views.
There has been no reversal of Commissioner Gottlieb’s desire to end vaccine mandates by the interim FDA commissioner Norman “Ned” Sharpless. Government and media propaganda are still in full swing to eliminate vaccine exemptions.
The fact that one or two people are said to have died from measles in the past 16 years is lost in the media-generated hysteria. An honest discussion of infectious disease was not to be had. For instance, there are studies showing that measles does provide protection against cancer and heart disease; by measles, we mean naturally occurring, not measles “immunity” from a vaccine. Vitamin A helps keep measles from worsening into a serious condition so one could just easily call for mandatory checks of vitamin A status and supplementation in those who are immune compromised rather than injecting dangerous vaccines into every person on the chance that it will protect some remote case of an immune-compromised person.
A telling sign of how prophetic Jefferson’s warning was can be gleaned from Yahoo Finance, a mainstream Internet news outlet.
On March 13, 2019, Dr. Raeford Brown, a pediatric anesthesia specialist at the University of Kentucky Children’s Hospital and chair of the Food and Drug Administration Committee on Analgesics and Anesthetics, bluntly stated that Congress doesn’t watch the FDA well enough “because Congress is owned by pharma.”
Brown told Yahoo Finance, “The pharmaceutical industry pours millions of dollars into the legislative branch every single year. In 2016, they put $100 million into the elections. That’s a ton of money.”
Other estimates are higher: total expenditures to the medical industrial complex in 2018 were $280,305,523, according to Opensecrets.org.
Big Pharma’s payoff to Congress has its rewards. Pharmaceuticals have monopolistic patent and claim protection by the U.S. Patent Office, FDA and FTC, which ensures competition is thwarted with your tax dollars. The cost to get a new drug approved is more than $2 Billion, according to Tufts University and the payoff is well worth it when you consider how high drug sales and profits are in the U.S., the biggest consumer of prescription drugs.
Drug company revenue and profits are high, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office “We looked into changes in the drug industry and found that pharmaceutical and biotechnology sales revenue increased from $534 billion to $775 billion between 2006 and 2015. Additionally, 67% of drug companies increased their annual profit margins during the same period—with margins up to 20 percent for some companies in certain years.” The U.S. accounted for $450 Billion of these sales in 2016. One expert’s estimate is that 80% of all drugs are made in either China or India, known for low labor cost and sketchy safety regulations.
In a previous issue, we wrote about the opiate epidemic at length, detailing how coincidental it was that legal and illegal drugs flourished in towns devastated by big box stores such as Walmart.
In another issue on the politics of foods, we also wrote how the agricultural sector was taken over under the guise of modernity, diabolically named The Green Revolution.
There is some pushback.
On August 29, 2018, Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey introduced a bill to put the brakes on the rampant mergers and acquisitions in agriculture.
Sen. Booker’s statement on the bill reads:
U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) today announced the introduction of a bill that would put an 18-month moratorium on large agribusiness, food and beverage manufacturing, and grocery retail mergers and acquisitions. S.3404, The Food and Agribusiness Merger Moratorium and Antitrust Review Act of 2018, is aimed at the unprecedented concentration in the agriculture and food sectors, squeezing small family farmers, driving down wages for workers, and hurting rural communities.
In just the past two years, chemical and seed company acquisitions and mergers have allowed just three companies to control two-thirds of the crop seed and nearly 70 percent of the agriculture chemical markets. Meanwhile, net farm income for U.S. farmers has fallen by more than half in just five years.
“Today, a small number of giant companies control every link of our food chain,” Booker said. “Consolidation has now reached a point where the top four firms in almost every sector of the food and agriculture economy have acquired abusive levels of market power. As a result, the U.S. is losing farmers at an alarming rate, agricultural jobs and wages are drying up, and rural communities are disappearing.”
“These challenges can be mitigated by more active use of our antitrust laws, and allowing an opportunity for U.S. farmers and ranchers to compete in fair and open markets,” Booker continued. “This bill would put a much-needed pause on the largest, most consequential acquisitions and mergers in the food and agriculture sector, and give Congress an opportunity to update our antitrust laws in order to better protect America’s farmers, workers, consumers, and rural communities who are being harmed by the ever-increasing levels of corporate concentration.”
The bill, modeled after a similar proposal introduced 20 years ago by the late Senator Paul Wellstone of Minnesota, would also establish a commission to study ways to strengthen antitrust oversight of the farm and food sectors and recommend improvements to merger enforcement.
We do not believe this bill has been reintroduced in 2019 as of this writing. On January 4, 2019, Janie Hynson and Tyler Whitley, published an article on CivilEats.com, encouraging public support for Sen. Booker’s bill. The authors write “Although there are antitrust laws on the books, they are not working as designed. The farmers we spoke with would like to see Senator Booker’s proposed 18-month moratorium implemented because the failure to enforce those laws is leading to a concentration of power in food production.” It is true that antitrust laws have been on the books for a long time and rarely enforced, mainly due to the false idea that corporate consolidations increase efficiency giving consumers lower prices and more choices. This is laughable.
Our food supplies have been stripped of nature and Jefferson’s warning of greed was prophetic when one considers how chickens are fed GMO soy feed in locked quarters, deprived of light and clean air; given antibiotics to fatten them up; soaked in chlorine and sold in big box supermarkets.
The European Union rejects U.S. chicken because they fear chlorine treatment may not be a powerful enough disinfectant to ensure clean chicken, given the lack of proper hygiene standards in the U.S. This is a pathetic example of how far off track we have become and what most don’t realize is that cheap chicken at your big box store is subsidized with state and federal grants, from the Federal government giving cash to GMO farms to state and local governments giving tax breaks and other incentives for big box supermarkets. Farms are large corporate enterprises that get numerous subsidies from the government; the idea of the independent family farm providing their own chickens to family-owned grocers is long gone.
Apparently, American chicken isn’t cheap enough. In a trade deal with China, President Trump proposed to allow Chinese chicken to be imported into the U.S. in exchange for American beef to be exported to China.
The Washington Post reported in 2017:
The first known shipment of cooked chicken from China reached the United States last week, following a much-touted trade deal between the Trump administration and the Chinese government.
But consumer groups and former food-safety officials are warning that the chicken could pose a public health risk, arguing that China has made only minor progress in overhauling a food safety regime that produced melamine-laced infant formula and deadly dog biscuits.
Chicken from China will not be labeled, and a representative from Qingdao Nine-Alliance Group, the first exporter, did not specify the name brand it’s being sold under. The privately owned chicken company, one of the largest in China, already supplies markets in Asia, the Middle East and Europe.
Exports of poultry, largely chicken and duck, are expected to swell under the terms of a May trade deal that would send more U.S. beef to China and expand Chinese poultry sales into the United States. The U.S. Department of Agriculture recently proposed a rule allowing China not only to cook but also raise and slaughter the birds that it ships here as chicken nuggets and flash-steamed duck breasts.
President Trump has tweeted his enthusiasm about the deal, describing it as “REAL news!” Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue has championed it as a win for American industry, even as he promises that inspectors will stop contaminated meat from reaching U.S. consumers.
“Well the good thing about it is our food safety inspection agency in the USDA does a marvelous job,” Perdue said on CNBC last month. “They’ve looked for years over the equivalence of the inspection.”
Critics are accusing the Trump administration of risking public health to open up foreign markets.
“Taking that processed chicken was a quid pro quo to get China to accept U.S. beef,” said Rep. Rosa L. DeLauro (D-Conn.), an outspoken critic of the agreement. “Trade always trumps public health in the U.S. … It’s outrageous. It says we don’t care about the health and safety of consumers.”
Under current regulations, China may only export cooked chicken products to the United States. And while those products can be processed and packaged in China, the birds must be raised and slaughtered in Canada, Chile, or the United States.
Those rules are based on long-standing concerns about China’s poultry farming and slaughter operations, particularly in regard to avian influenza.
Because cooking kills bacteria and viruses, including the one that causes bird flu, processed poultry is considered “tremendously safer” than raw chicken, said Richard Raymond, who served as undersecretary of agriculture for food safety from 2005 to 2008.
The most significant risk in a cooked poultry product is an environmental contaminant, such as listeria, or a residue or intentional adulterant, such as the melamine that surfaced in Chinese infant formula.
Birds sourced from a USDA-approved country, like Canada or Chile, are guaranteed to undergo the same safety checks during slaughter that they would in the United States.
But Chinese trade negotiators have consistently pushed for better access to the nearly $30 billion U.S. broiler chicken market, particularly for Chinese-raised and Chinese-slaughtered birds. As part of joint economic talks earlier this year, the United States agreed to begin receiving Chinese-raised, processed chicken “as soon as possible.”
The Department of Agriculture has since proposed a rule allowing Chinese-raised chicken into the United States, which could be finalized by the end of the year. A representative of Qingdao Nine-Alliance said the company sent its first shipment in order to “study the procedure and documentation for export to [the] U.S.” ahead of that anticipated liberalization.
In exchange, and as part of the same economic talks, China agreed to lift its 14-year ban on most beef from the U.S., a historic pain point in bilateral negotiations. The ban, which originated after an outbreak of mad cow disease in 2003, has cut American beef producers out of an exploding $2.5 billion export market.
At times, Chinese negotiators have intimated that they would also limit U.S. access to other commodity markets if Chinese poultry was not approved, former USDA officials said. Agriculture is one of the few major areas where the United States maintains a large trade surplus with China.
Rep. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut opposed Chinese chicken import attempts under President Obama and President Trump. In July 2018, Rep. DeLauro wrote Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue demanding an explanation if it was a “responsible decision” for his agency to grant “equivalency to the entire Chinese poultry processing system based on a small number of audits in a limited amount of Chinese provinces?” Rep. DeLauro was concerned about multiple resistance genes found in Chinese chicken. Rep. DeLauro has also raised concerns about lab-grown meat.
This trade deal will bring more cheap unhealthy food to America while lining the pockets of big agriculture.
The power of big corporations never ends. An example of this was in the midst of the 2007 economic crash when the financial sector was bailed out because it was too big to fail. Also, the criminality of the financial sector earned another phrase, too big to jail. Banks, foreign and domestic, as well as select industries, were bailed out by Congress and direct payments by the Federal Reserve Bank, to the tune of trillions of dollars. Professor Skidmore was largely ignored when he reported that $21 trillion was missing from the Pentagon and HUD agencies, with some critics dismissing this as folly, even though, the Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld is on record on September 10, 2001 saying the Pentagon was missing $2.3 trillion.
When you consider how much bailout money was given and the stated losses of government funds, that’s a lot of money handed to the private sector and missing from the government.
In a March 29, 2019 interview, a distinguished Republican congressman stated bluntly that the government picks winners and losers all the time when the host criticized him for favoring a particular industry. The host was taken aback and didn’t nail the congressman’s obvious hypocrisy. It’s dangerous that politicians can be so publicly blunt about corruption. It wasn’t so long ago that they would at least pretend to uphold fairness and the rule of law.
Another racket not addressed much by the mainstream media and often mischaracterized by the alternative media is our prison system.
Americans don’t think about our prison system as a racket but how many Americans have studied the issue? The cost of our penal system is high: in 2017, a public interest group stated the total cost of the prison industrial complex is $182 Billion per year, with $80 Billion of this going specifically to public correction agencies such as prisons, jails, parole and probation.
In 2018, there were 666 people incarcerated per 100,000 in America, putting the U.S. so far above most countries and far above our European counterparts, where most Americans claim ethnic origin. How many people are incarcerated in European countries? We’re talking 141 per 100,000 in the United Kingdom and Wales, 102 per 100,000 in France, 96 per 100,000 in Italy, 82 per 100,000 in Switzerland, and 57 per 100,000 in Sweden. Most American offenders are in prison for non-violent offenses.
Prisons are a boon to government bureaucracy and the private sector. The private sector gets free labor and government contracts. The government employs hundreds of thousands of people, with 428,000 as jailers and corrections officers. Private prisons can sue states when prison populations fall below contracted levels.
People forget about how prison labor affects the labor market (i.e., taking jobs from non-incarcerated Americans). In an article on Ranker.com, the author spells out how prison labor is used by major corporations which means that taxpayers pay to keep prisons full and private corporations pay pennies on the dollar for labor. For those caught up in the Republican versus Democratic dialectic, you should know that 2020 Democratic Presidential candidate Kamala Harris when Attorney General of State of the California defended the use of prisoners who fought fires (supposedly as volunteers). California prisoners were untrained and two died fighting fires. In the Republican South, prisoners were used to clean up the BP oil spill, with no protection, working 12 hours a day, 6 days a week in the hot sun. Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal praised the use of free labor.
Ranker.com writes “Every day in the United States, over a million people go to work and make as little as two cents an hour or sometimes nothing at all. They’re forced to produce and get punished if they refuse. Today, private corporations are profiting off a new form of slavery: the private prison labor industry is growing at a rapid rate in America, and legislation exists to continually increase the sentencing of prisoners.
The corporations that use prison labor will surprise you. The problem isn’t limited to brands with bad reputations. Starbucks, Victoria’s Secret, Whole Foods, and Nintendo have all used prison workers to increase corporate profits. And if you’ve complained about bad customer service, you might be surprised to learn that many call centers are staffed by inmates.
After the Civil War, the 13th Amendment banned slavery – except among inmates. “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” But with all the problems in the justice system, including mass incarceration, racial bias, and harsh laws that force mandatory minimums and three-strike rules, are America’s prisoners really “duly convicted?”
The United States makes up less than 5% of the world’s population but has nearly 25% of all prisoners in the world. And it gets even worse: the 340% increase in Americans behind bars was funded, in part, by corporations looking for cheap labor. Dozens of respected companies funded the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), which passed the “Prison Industries Act” to expand inmate labor.
Today, even the federal government brags about the “business opportunities” at dozens of federal prison factories across the country. Companies and prisons are working together to force inmates to work for pennies a day just to increase corporate profits.”
Ranker points out that Pfizer, Intel, Boeing, Motorola, BP, ATT, Johnson and Johnson, Cargill, Dell, GlaxoKlineSmith and even Starbucks use prison labor. Walmart does contract with companies that use prison labor.
There’s always much chatter about how undocumented workers take jobs from Americans but no one on either political spectrum talks about prison labor taking jobs from regular (non-incarcerated) Americans.
It’s especially disconcerting when one thinks that most offenders were convicted for non-violent offenses and are living a personal hell in the popularized prison culture.
America is in the midst of crisis, but, if you listen to the mainstream and alternative media, most are misdirecting you from the truth. Why? Most establishment personalities are tied to the corporate-owned media, with a false flavor of left and right. Most of what you hear from talking heads are overheated rants on unimportant issues. Fox News, CNN and MSNBC pay tens of millions of dollars to their hosts to keep you in the dark about things that actually matter to your health, livelihood and rights as Americans.
Devastating news on the health front revolves around the looming technological revolution dubbed the Internet of Things (IOT). The IOT hinges on 5G. All establishment politicians are on board with 5G.
President Trump made it clear in a tweet, “I want 5G, and even 6G, technology in the United States as soon as possible. It is far more powerful, faster, and smarter than the current standard. American companies must step up their efforts, or get left behind. There is no reason that we should be lagging behind . . .”
No establishment politician on the left or right is warning about the health consequences of existing wireless, let alone 5G. Senator Blumenthal of Connecticut did get an industry specialist to admit that no safety studies have been done but this didn’t get any traction by the corporate media or government.
There are a few whistleblowers speaking out against microwave technology which includes Wi-Fi, 4G, 5G, smart meters, cellular telephones and other technologies which negatively impact health.
Dr. Barrie Trower is a former Royal Navy Microwave Weapons Expert and former cold-war captured spy debriefer for the U.K. Intelligence Services. Dr. Trower is a conscionable whistle-blower who lectures around the world on hidden dangers from microwave weapons and everyday microwave technologies such as mobile phones and WI-FI. Dr. Trower has also repeatedly assisted the U.K. Police Federation in their struggle to protect police officers from Tetra/Air-Band radio-communications systems that are harmful to health. Dr. Trower trained at the Government Microwave warfare establishment in the 1960s; worked with an underwater bomb disposal unit that used microwaves and helped debrief spies trained in microwave warfare. When Dr. Trower realized that power densities and frequencies similar to those used as weapons during the Cold War were being used as WI-FI in schools, he decided to come out of retirement and travel around the world free of charge and explain exactly what the problem is going to be in the future.
The negative health effects of microwave technology have been well-known for a long time. Dr. Trower points out that the first reported case of microwave or radio wave sickness was first reported in August 1932 with the symptoms of severe tiredness, fatigue, fitful sleep, headaches, intolerability and high susceptibility to infection. By 1971, the U.S. Naval Medical Research Institute (NMRI) referenced 2300 research articles listing in excess of 120 impairments and illnesses attributed to radiofrequency and microwave radiation. Under the Freedom of Information Act, extracts from published U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) Documents confirmed the NMRI research and stated: “If the more advanced nations of the West are strict in the enforcement of stringent exposure standards, there could be unfavorable effects on industrial output and military functions, in order to protect industrial profit and military function, and to avoid litigation from military employees.” It was suggested that governments in the West chose a safety level compatible to industrial output and military function. The governments that adopted the thermal level only denied and still to this day deny any adverse effect from sub-thermal levels, according to Dr. Trower.
What are some of the health effects of this pre-5G technology? There is a plethora of extensive, well-researched documents from around the world highlighting impairments and illnesses caused by microwave radiation. These papers (in their thousands) discuss adverse health outcomes caused by low-level (below thermal) microwaves as arrhythmia, heart attack, cell death, diseases of the blood, interference to bone marrow, brain tumors, DNA damage, altered calcium level in cells, reduction in night-time melatonin, suppression of the immune system, arthritis, rheumatism, skin problems, lymphatic diseases, vaginal discharge, vascular system disease, tinnitus, leukemia, childhood cancer, sleep problems, mental problems involving depression, irritability, memory loss, difficulty in concentrating, headache, dizziness and fatigue, suicidal tendencies, miscarriage and infertility, according to Dr. Trower.
Talking heads use children as props to advance their own interests but who is telling you about the effect of microwave radiation on children? Dr. Trower explains that “children are not merely small adults. They are physiologically and neurologically immature; their systems have not yet formed. Microwave radiation alters the blood-brain barrier so that toxins leak into the brain. This can cause neurologic and psychological damage amongst many other problems more easily in children. A child’s immune system, which fights off infection, takes 18 years to develop. Additionally, 122 layers of protein – myelin – insulate the electrically generated signals used by the nervous system to control muscles and organs. These layers of protein take 22 years to develop. Microwave radiation has been shown to affect protein synthesis. This could lead to muscular dystrophy-like symptoms in later life.”
Dr. Trower warned of this in 2011—years before the announcement of 5G which will make matters worse.
Dr. Ronald Powell, Ph.D. (Applied Physics, Harvard University 1975) is another whistleblower who speaks against 5G.
Why is 5G so especially outrageous to the public?
5G would greatly extend FCC’s current policy of the MANDATORY IRRADIATION OF THE PUBLIC without adequate prior study of the potential health impact and assurance of safety. 5G would IRRADIATE EVERYONE, including the most vulnerable to harm from radiofrequency radiation: pregnant women, unborn children, young children, teenagers, men of reproductive age, the elderly, the disabled, and the chronically ill. 5G would likely rely on the 1996 Telecommunications Act to continue to deny state and local governments and municipalities the right to bar the installation of wireless technology on environmental/health grounds. This Act may be the greatest offense to the local rule of all time. 5G would likely rely on the FCC’s current outdated, excessively permissive, and thus widely criticized, radiation-exposure guidelines that enable many parties to make false claims of safety for wireless products. Those guidelines are based primarily on a 30-year-old analysis by the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), many years before the emergence of most of the digital wireless technology in use today. And the FCC’s proposed move to 5G would offer no further study of safety, even though the new study by the National Toxicology Program at NIH has already found those same FCC guidelines unprotective. 5G would set a goal of irradiating all environments, including the insides of homes, whether single-family homes, townhouses, or apartments, ending any remnant of the notion that “your home is your castle” in which you are supposed to be safe and to have a measure of control of your environment. Specifically, the proposed 5G technology would blast through walls and cribs just as the current wireless technologies do. The result would be to drive even more people out of their homes than are already being displaced by the current wireless technologies. 5G would force cell antennas onto residential streets, bringing the radiation threat even more up close and personal to the public. 5G would bypass all current biomedical studies endeavoring to determine if radiofrequency radiation is a factor in the explosive growth of major health conditions — such as autism, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and Alzheimer’s disease — that are ruining the lives of so many people, from their youngest years to their oldest years. 5G would increase the prospect for the continued explosion of health care costs, with a further worsening of the national debt, and with no clear assignment of responsibility to the providers of the harmful radiation. In short, 5G would continue to export to society the costs of the harm that wireless products cause. 5G would totally ignore the rapidly growing international biomedical research literature that demonstrates that radiofrequency radiation adversely affects human health at levels far below the current FCC exposure guidelines. And the adverse impact on animal, insect, and plant health, too, would continue to be ignored. 5G would continue to dismiss, as too expensive, the tremendous potential of wired technologies (especially fiber optics) to provide higher data rates, greater cyber security, and greater safety for human health, as if those benefits should be excluded from any cost comparisons with wireless technologies.
Will this technology kill us? Or, make us more vulnerable to a biological assault reminiscent of the flu pandemic of 1918 which wiped out millions of people? We do not want to be hyperbolic but the risks of 5G are too great not to consider even if the powers that be were completely naïve or indifferent to known health effects. They aren’t.
What people may not understand about 5G is that transmitters have to be placed everywhere—literally in every neighborhood, street and corner. Elon Musk, known for Tesla Motors, owns Space X, a rocket company that was authorized to launch thousands of satellites into space by the FCC in late 2018. Musk is promising to spread 5G all over planet Earth.
5G doesn’t only have negative health effects. It will provide the infrastructure for spying and disrupt the economic structure to levels not seen in our lifetime. This technological shift is troubling enough because the corporate sector is chomping at the bit to use this technology to rid America of millions of decent-paying jobs in virtually every economic sector.
It’s true that, yes, the robots are coming.
A new study by the McKinsey Global Institute estimates that between 400 million and 800 million of today’s jobs will be replaced by automation by 2030. The report states that the middle class will be affected most and that underdeveloped countries may not experience huge labor disruption because the cost of technology may be higher than third-world labor. This means that European, American and 1st world Asian labor forces will be devastated. But, the report ends with the platitude that this technology will probably create more jobs without explaining how displaced workers will find comparably paid jobs.
Robots are already being used in automobile factories, Amazon warehouses, surgical applications, self-driving cars, and other areas. Reports of robots replacing bartenders at the MGM Casino in Las Vegas prompted children of MGM employees to speak out the impact on their families if their parents lose their jobs to machines. As of this writing, MGM is going forward with the plan even though there was some pushback.
Long-distance truck drivers and related businesses, such as truck stops and motels, constitute about 3.5 million decent-paying jobs in a $168 billion industry. Tech experts are fairly close to replacing virtually all long-distance truckers with robotic technology and corporate executives are gleeful about the billions of savings they will reap at the expense of millions of jobs. 5G is essential for the final nail in the coffin of human-driven trucks. Self-driving trucks won’t pay taxes, buy things and support families but that’s not a concern for the bottom-line corporate elite or government lackeys.
Trucking is but one example. Radiologists may be replaced because technology can discern many more shades of gray and access millions of scans versus the hundreds of shades a human eye can discern and thousands a trained MD can reference. Call centers, too, will be defunct as artificial intelligence is getting frighteningly real; how many times have wondered if you’re talking to a person or a machine? Banks and insurance sectors will soon cut thirty percent cuts of their workforce.
The list goes on.
The health aspects of all wireless radiation and especially soon to be implemented 5G are deadly.
The impact of our looming job loss and further concentration of wealth is an absolute disaster in the making. We already see the sign of times: as of March 23 2019, 8 New York City cab drivers have committed suicide, which is attributed to the high cost of taxi cab medallions and competition from Uber and Lyft, tech alternatives originating from Silicon Valley. You may recall advertisements for Uber and Lyft as a means to be an independent business person, but you weren’t told that the real plan was to have self-driving cars replace the human drivers used to build their businesses. So, Uber and Lyft will be next on the chopping block. Clever, huh?
You don’t need statistical proof to know that the American standard of living has been in decline for a long time and is worsening: the middle class is not thriving and more people are dropping into poverty. Unemployment is said to be low but wages have wages not increased in decades. The very rich are getting extremely rich. nothing to the average American.
It’s time for all Americans to tune out distracting propaganda and focus on real issues which affect our health and prosperity. We do not have solutions for the economic impact of technology; however, we warn of it in light of the fact that American longevity has declined three years in a row due to suicides and opiate deaths—this is a true national crisis. Going from a pathetic 43rd to 64th in longevity in one year should make the point that American health is a national emergency.
We need to stop allowing the powers that be to divide us.