Discussion Is the coronavirus a government plot to control and cull the population?

[epic]

We actually have very little idea about the exact effects of 5g radio waves.
Those towers pump out a ton of high frequency radio waves and we have no idea about the long-term or medium-term effects.
Sure you'll see 'they're safe' slogans in all the major news outlets, but they're all owned by the same people who monopolize the telecommunications industry.
You can't trust mainstream news media. Too much filtering, too many vested interests, too much propaganda.

5g is non-ionizing radiation which means 5g doesn't have enough energy to knock off electrons from atoms and change the molecular structure that's why they don't harm any bodily tissues. In fact visible light is more ionizing than 5g (as you can see in the image) and our bodies encounter it at every moment with no harm.

 

[esse_est_percipi]

5g is non-ionizing radiation which means 5g doesn't have enough energy to knock off electrons from atoms and change the molecular structure that's why they don't harm any bodily tissues. In fact visible light is more ionizing than 5g (as you can see in the image) and our bodies encounter it at every moment with no harm.

But:

We Have No Reason to Believe 5G Is Safe

The technology is coming, but contrary to what some people say, there could be health risks

blogs.scientificamerican.com

"Since the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) adopted these limits based largely on research from the 1980s, the preponderance of peer-reviewed research, more than 500 studies, have found harmful biologic or health effects from exposure to RFR (radio frequency radiation) at intensities too low to cause significant heating.

Citing this large body of research, more than 240 scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on the biologic and health effects of nonionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) signed the international emf scientist appeal, which calls for stronger exposure limits. The appeal makes the following assertions:

Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life."

 

[TheQ22]

What we do now is largely irrelevant. There are forces at play here that are far larger than governments or trans-global conspiracies. There is one reliable way this virus will recede. It's transmission will be curtailed. How? Well, what causes it to spread so fast?
And it's just a tiny part of a much larger narrative that is even more inevitable.
The tragic thing is that we will blame it on different countries and their governmental policies, but that is mostly irrelevant too. They could have made any decision; the pattern is way bigger and stronger than the details will allow. This was always going to happen and the powers that be are just fannying around trying to make a profit out of it.
Which is exactly what you'd expect of the species that got us into this predicament in the first place.
Facebook and Amazon and Apple and Microsoft and insurance companies selling us junk we don't need.
Rome is burning, but's that's alright.
And just on viruses specifically, this is one virus. Have you any idea how many others are out there waiting to be transmitted into the human populace via habitat encroachment from agriculture?

The more I see the pattern in recent events, the less I want to comment on anything, though I still do ofc, I'm only human and have an opinion like everyone else. I just know it's irrelevant.
There was a turning point and it passed quietly, as things in continuum are liable to do. It happens with a drawn out whimper, not a bang.
I'll not turn away from the fire, nor will I stop making an effort in my own small way to extinguish it, but that doesn't stop me from looking at the wall of flame fast approaching and thinking: "Shit."

Yes, and also in the meantime the polticians see it as an opportunity to knock the shit out of each other trying to score useless brownie points.

 

[epic]

But:

We Have No Reason to Believe 5G Is Safe

The technology is coming, but contrary to what some people say, there could be health risks

blogs.scientificamerican.com

"Since the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) adopted these limits based largely on research from the 1980s, the preponderance of peer-reviewed research, more than 500 studies, have found harmful biologic or health effects from exposure to RFR (radio frequency radiation) at intensities too low to cause significant heating.

Citing this large body of research, more than 240 scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on the biologic and health effects of nonionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) signed the international emf scientist appeal, which calls for stronger exposure limits. The appeal makes the following assertions:

Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life."

That was an interesting article. I am now less sure about my position than I was before but I'm still skeptical . There are also studies which have found no link between cancer and low frequency radiation. One study looked into 5000 people with brain tumors and cancers and found no increased usage on their cell phones. Another study compared all of the people in Denmark who had a cell phone subscription between 1982 and 1995 (about 400,000 people) to those without a subscription to look for a possible increase in brain tumors. The most recent update of the study followed people through 2007. Cell phone use, even for more than 13 years, was not linked with an increased risk of brain tumors, salivary gland tumors, or cancer overall, nor was there a link with any brain tumor subtypes or with tumors in any location within the brain. Also logically,only ionizing radiation can mess up with chemical structure of tissues not low frequency radiation. Having said that, It's not a close and shut case as I thought before .
Source: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/cellular-phones.html

 

[TheQ22]

That was an interesting article. I am now less sure about my position than I was before but I'm still skeptical . There are also studies which have found no link between cancer and low frequency radiation. One study looked into 5000 people with brain tumors and cancers and found no increased usage on their cell phones. Another study compared all of the people in Denmark who had a cell phone subscription between 1982 and 1995 (about 400,000 people) to those without a subscription to look for a possible increase in brain tumors. The most recent update of the study followed people through 2007. Cell phone use, even for more than 13 years, was not linked with an increased risk of brain tumors, salivary gland tumors, or cancer overall, nor was there a link with any brain tumor subtypes or with tumors in any location within the brain. Also logically,only ionizing radiation can mess up with chemical structure of tissues not low frequency radiation. Having said that, It's not a close and shut case as I thought before .
Source: https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/cellular-phones.html

There's more correlation between suicides (especially in younger people) and social media use than there is in cancer and cell phone use.

Yet no ones gunning to get FaceCrap banned.

 

[esse_est_percipi]

I am now less sure about my position than I was before but I'm still skeptical

I don't have a definite position either.
Sometimes those kinds of studies have vested interests too, since they may be financed or commissioned by telecommunications corporations themselves.
So although I think the studies you mentioned probably are neutral and honest, I'm not certain of anything.

 

[epic]

There's more correlation between suicides (especially in younger people) and social media use than there is in cancer and cell phone use.

Yet no ones gunning to get FaceCrap banned.

Lol