Rolling out 5G is a breach of human rights.

The UK population has never been informed of the hundreds of peer-reviewed published scientific papers with clear evidence of the biological damages caused by radiofrequency radiation at non-thermal levels.

Perhaps this is because advisory groups tasked specifically to inform the public have conflicts of interest and their published information is usually substantially out of date.

Human Rights:

There are clear human rights violations, particularly for vulnerable groups. In essence, many of these also apply to any individual who does not consent to exposure in their home, place of work or public building and yet is being given no choice. People all over the world are making their unwillingness to be exposed abundantly clear via protests, letters and where there is resource, legal actions.

At its core, this is an issue of consent and there can be no defensible argument for forcibly exposing those who do not consent. That is a breach of the Nuremberg Code as well as numerous Human Rights.

The ‘Rights of a Child’ and unborn children are currently also being contravened by these exposures and parents who strive to protect their children currently have no avenue to achieve this without complete public isolation. Indeed, they may even be unable to prevent their children’s exposures in their own property given the penetration of EMF over large distances and through walls. There are adults and children who have severe acute symptoms and in some cases, they can prove life-threatening. Additionally, the extreme measures some are forced to take to avoid exposures (such as primitive camping for example) can also lead to lack of access to medical care, social support, isolation from basic necessities such as food, water and shelter and to hostile exposures such as extremes of temperature.

It is noteworthy also that as individuals prove they have been harmed by RFR exposures, (which is certainly already happening), there is also likely no insurance coverage, which enhances the injustice of this situation. Following an in-depth analysis of the scientific literature and thorough risk assessment, underwriters consider risks of RF to be ‘high impact’.

Governmental bodies could therefore be forced to ‘self-insure’. This would present the very unethical situation that the taxpayer could ultimately pay for health damages incurred by exposures that they never consented to and in many cases actively refused.