Related concerns: "A detailed examination —likely the most exhaustive ever attempted— of the environmental effects of non-ionizing radiation has been published in Reviews on Environmental Health. “Effects of Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Fields on Flora and Fauna” is in three parts.
Related concerns: "A detailed examination —likely the most exhaustive ever attempted— of the environmental effects of non-ionizing radiation has been published in Reviews on Environmental Health. “Effects of Non-Ionizing Electromagnetic Fields on Flora and Fauna” is in three parts.
Taken together, the three papers run over 200 pages in the journal and include more than 1,000 references. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/reveh-2021-0050/html is part 2.
Re the farmers themselves in 2021, a court ruled that the FCC's decision not to review and update its radio frequency exposure guidelines was arbitrary. capricious, and not evidence based. []," the agency demonstrated “a complete failure to respond to comments concerning environmental harm caused by RF radiation.” https://ehtrust.org/in-historic-decision-federal-court-finds-fcc-failed-to-explain-why-it-ignored-scientific-evidence-showing-harm-from-wireless-radiation/
"It’s possible for electric companies to install modern transformers that provide some protection against the kinds of surges created during a solar storm," https://potsandpansbyccg.com/2024/05/22/solar-storms-and-broadband/
instead, we got smart meters, because the wireless industry is drunk on surveillance.
Thank you for the great coverage.