We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are Connor sheppard please sign in and let everyone know.

Questions based on the tests you did on 5G technology

We're waiting for Connor sheppard to read recent responses and update the status.

Dear Public Health England,
Im emailing to ask a couple of questions based on the tests you did on the 5G technology. Please answer the following questions below:
1. Can you tell me what kind of tests you performed on the New 5G technology?
2. What did the results, based on health concerns, did you found out about through using 5G technology for different kinds of devices/items?

Please contact as soon as, I hope you stay well during this difficult time,

Yours faithfully,

Connor sheppard

FOI, Public Health England

Dear Connor Sheppard,

We acknowledge receipt of your email and request for information, which will be treated as a request for information under statutory access legislation.

Please note that requests under the Freedom of Information Act and the Environmental Information Regulations (EIRs) will receive a response within 20 working days from the day following the date of receipt of your request.

If the request is for your personal data, your request has been handled as a data subject access request (SAR) under Article 15 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), then we will respond  within one month of the receipt of the request.

Public Health England (PHE) is responsible for providing guidance and advice to government and front-line services for all aspects of public health.  It is a designated Category 1 responder organisation under the Civil Contingency Act and this specifically includes the COVID-19 response, providing clinical expertise and wider public health advice and guidance across national and local government, the NHS and third sector.  As such, you may experience delays when making statutory information access requests during the pandemic.

We will aim to address all requests promptly and within the required response timeframes.  However when we are unable to meet the response timeframe we will keep requesters updated on a revised expected timescale for a response to their request. The Information Commissioner recognises this position in its recent guidance, see link: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/dat...

Public Accountability Unit
Public Health England
[Public Health England request email]
Tel: 020 8327 6920 
www.gov.uk/phe   Follow us on Twitter @PHE uk

show quoted sections

FOI, Public Health England

2 Attachments

Dear Connor Sheppard

Please find attached Public Health England's response to your request.

Kind regards,

FOI Team
Public Accountability Unit
Public Health England
[Public Health England request email]
www.gov.uk/phe   Follow us on Twitter @PHE uk

show quoted sections

Connor sheppard

Dear Public Health England,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Public Health England's handling of my FOI request 'Questions based on the tests you did on 5G technology'.

[ Response from PHE failed to identify the types of tests performed on the new 5G technology leading to the conclusion that the tests performed were guessed rather than performed correctly efficently and effectively to ensure Public Safety within the European Unions EMF guidelines]

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/q...

Yours faithfully,

Connor sheppard

FOI, Public Health England

1 Attachment

OFFICIAL
Dear Mr Connor Sheppard

Please find attached Public Health England's response to your request for an internal review of EIR Case 181.

Kind regards,

Freedom of Information Team
Public Accountability Unit
Public Health England
www.gov.uk/phe Follow us on Twitter @PHE uk

show quoted sections

Connor sheppard

Dear Public Health England,

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

I am writing to request an internal review of Public Health England's handling of my FOI request 'Questions based on the tests you did on 5G technology'.

[ They refuse to explain what tests were performed on the 5G technology and it's been long over due since their recent reply. I am now concern end the the tests performed on the new technology is nothing more but a hoax and may have put in their reports that it does follow EU EMF guidlines. Please investigate this ]

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/q...

Yours faithfully,

Connor sheppard

Bartholomeus Lakeman left an annotation ()

PHE’ statement ‘The use of 5G radio waves are not new and have been transmitted into the environment for a range of purposes over many years’ = untrue: With 5G there is a ‘symphony’ of various technology of radio waves (3, 4 & 5G) including millimetre waves which run not in a continuum manner but in an intermitting and in a pulsating manner. It’s by the later manners which multiply the possibilities and the amount of information to service users and to its exposed living beings.

The ICNIRP and SCENIHR only measured EMF thermal effect over a period of 6 minutes, and that only on mammals. The ICNIRP failed to measure the effects of these intermitting, pulsating, and millimetre wave manners. It failed to measure EMF non-thermal effect on living organisms, and that over a substantial period; and it stopped on the moment it being long enough to measure damage, it failed to measure said intermitting and pulse manner and 5G’ Millimetre waves; and it failed to measure EMF’ harm effect on insects: whilst insects do take a position in the eco-system that is far more important and critical than that of mammals. And they failed to measure EMF effects on cell biology.
This despite that there are 8 very well-reviewed documented Effects of Non-Thermal EMF Exposures: (i) Increases in intracellular calcium ([Ca2+]i) levels following EMF exposure (14 reviews) causing blood dyscrasia and coagulation: which block the uptake of oxygen. (ii) Cancer causation (35 reviews). (iii) 3 types of cellular DNA attacks causing mutational changes in humans and animals (19 reviews). (iv) Reproduction decline (by EMF doses well within our current safety guidelines) (16 reviews). (v) Neurological/neuropsychiatric effects (23 reviews): (vi) Apoptosis/cell death (13 reviews): (vii) Oxidative stress/free radical damage (17 reviews). (viii) Widespread endocrine effects (11 reviews).
Then there are other reasons why it’s obsolete for PHE and Ofcom to rely on ICNIRP guidelines: ICNIRP is based in Geneve, where as in other Swizz cantons, and in its nearby countries (e.g. Belgium, S. Italy, and in several states in Germany) there is a mortarium on 5G whereas the ICNIRP has never proved that 5G is safe. And in a Feb-2019 US Senate hearing, the wireless industry was forced to admit they have no safety studies on 5G, and don't plan to do any. Because the ICNIRP and other official guidelines on 5G have nothing to do safety levels for living organism; it is that the telecom industry would jeopardize this position if they would do a study. Idem for said reason there is no Insurance company willing to insure 5G.

Ofcom’s study on 5G health safety levels is floored; it found frequency bands up to 6 GHz, which is outside the scoop of the ICNIRP guidelines, and it did not measure 5G impact on health; and likewise said industry, Ofcom has an invested interest in the 5G roll out; as does the Defence Department and its Industrial partners.
The publications of the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology are only based on reviews from those who have or had a stake or interest in said industry. Moreover, ICNIRP, SCENIHR, Ofcom and PHE have no safety study on 5G.

The Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks (SCHEER) rates the potential effects on wildlife of increases in electromagnetic radiation from 5G a maximum 3 in terms of scale, urgency and interactions with other ecosystems and species, stating that “The lack of clear evidence to inform the development of exposure guidelines to 5G technology leaves open the possibility of unintended biological consequences”.
A research team at the Swiss Tropical and Public Health Institute says that radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) may negatively affect an adolescent’s brain from cellphone exposure, causing potentially harmful effects on his or her memory performance. The authors say having the device close to one’s head lead to the greatest amount of radiation exposure.
Higher Masts or antennas will cover larger areas and so exposing and subjecting more living organism to the harm of 4G- 5G. No one is checking if the carrier is operating within so-called “safety” limits, leaving the Government and Industry wide open for legal challenge. Leading independent experts recently presented at a 3 meeting in Germany and at the European Parliament. Dr Marc Arazi provided evidence (SAR tests reports from approved laboratory) proving that it is not possible to trust the mobile industry who knowingly overexposed the public to microwave radiation well beyond the so-called limits with 9 out of 10 mobile phoned failing the “safety” standards following testing by a French Government Agency in 2012 in real use (at contact to the body): https://www.phonegatealert.org/en/dr-ara...
Belgian Environment Minister announces that Brussels is halting the 5G rollout, saying, “The people of Brussels are not guinea pigs whose health I can sell at a profit.” It turns out that there is now no methodology to effectively measure the radiation of MIMO antennas, which have the characteristic of varying field in time, space and intensity, unlike antennas used for 2G, 3G and 4G, which emit radiation of constant intensity and space. Celine Fremault therefore asserted that, as this technical obstacle was not resolved, she would not go further in the legislative process.
An EU report admits that 5G is a massive experiment, lamenting that “it is not possible to accurately simulate or measure 5G emissions in the real world” and stating that “complex interference effects … may result, especially in dense urban areas.”
The radio waves used by 5G are in breach of the COE 1815 Resolution and the European 2016 guidelines.

Because of abovementioned facts, the PHE is under the obligation to conduct on 5G an independent -and on cell-biology level- safety study.

FOI, Public Health England

OFFICIAL
Dear Connor sheppard

We acknowledge receipt of your email, which will be treated as a request for an internal review, following your requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

Please note we aim to complete your internal review within 20 working days from the day following the date of receipt of your request.  We will notify you if we anticipate the internal review taking longer than 20 working days.    

Kind Regards

FOI Team
Public Accountability Unit
Public Health England
[Public Health England request email]
Tel: 020 8327 6920 
www.gov.uk/phe   Follow us on Twitter @PHE uk

show quoted sections

FOI, Public Health England

2 Attachments

  • Attachment

    653 IR Linked to case 361 181 Refusal to provide explanation on tests per.pdf

    140K Download View as HTML

  • Attachment

    Freedom of Information request Questions based on the tests you did on 5G technology.txt

    1K Download View as HTML

Dear Connor Sheppard,

Please find attached Public Health England's response to your request.

FOI Team
Public Accountability Unit
Public Health England
[Public Health England request email]
Tel: 020 8327 6920
www.gov.uk/phe Follow us on Twitter @PHE uk

show quoted sections

We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are Connor sheppard please sign in and let everyone know.