5G IN MERTON WELCOMES YOU

ABOUT

Our Roots

We started in 2019 by holding a public meeting at which about 380 people including councillors and borough officials attended.

We aim to:

Explain what 5G is
Spread awareness of the roll-out of 5G in Merton and indeed the whole of the UK.
Communicate our concerns and what it means for people in terms of their health, environment, privacy and communities
Provide news of any updates in the campaign locally and nationally.
Encourage enough people to raise their voices so they cannot be ignored.

Back to top/Main menu

5G-HANG ON, IS THIS A GOOD IDEA?

Behold the vision!

Source: DCMS- Next Generation Mobile Technologies: An update to the 5G

WHAT IS 5G ACTUALLY?

All you need to know is unlike previous generations of network it

will be deployed in the millimetre-wave spectrum with cells operating frequencies at or above 24 GHz.
Can send signals as a directed beam, not possible with the previous generation of networks

If you're into being a bit techie...

Unlike those previous generations of mobile network, 5G is unlikely to be defined by any single form of technology. It’s often referred to as "the network of networks" for the way it will bind together multiple existing and future standards, including current advanced LTE (4G) networks. On a more general level, however, it will increasingly be defined by the use of higher radio frequencies. It's meant to deliver faster download speeds and lower latency meaning it is more responsive to user input, for instance during game-play.

Apart from 24 GHz, government also intends to start work on making 66-71 GHz band available.

Other spectrum bands are also planned to be used for 5G: 700 MHz being suitable for providing coverage over a wide geographical area and 3.4 GHz, which has a much shorter range but can support faster data transfers than 700 MHz.

The technology to allow for the propagation of beam formed or collimated signals is massive multiple input multiple output (mMIMO) antennae. This is makes the hardware of 5G expensive and much more energy consuming.

There is no accepted calculation of safe exclusion zones for 5G as there were for previous generations. Though exclusion zone diagrams/information is required when applications for wireless telecoms infrastructure are submitted to the council we have not seen one ever supplied. We question this but have not received any explanation.

WHEN'S IT HAPPENING?

According to The Department of Digital Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) there is broad consensus that commercial rollout of 5G in the UK should begin by 2020, with competition likely to drive the mobile market to initially provide enhanced mobile broadband services.

Digital connectivity part of the government's industrial strategy. DCMS says it wants the “UK to become a world-leading digital economy that works for everyone.” 5G is a big part of this, so let's say they are pretty keen on it.

STEPS GOVERNMENT IS TAKING TO ACHIEVE THIS:

Extending mobile coverage to 95% of UK geography.
The Government’s 5G Testbeds and Trials Programme- tax-payer funded R&D basically
Working out how private investment in 5G can be encouraged/made easier
Working with Local Government to make sites available for deployment of infrastructure and to deliver the levels of connectivity which reflect the need of local areas (not defined) via the Local Connectivity Group
Developing future-focused spectrum policy to help ensure that spectrum is allocated in a way that supports the Government's mobile ambitions
New cross-government, barrier-busting task force (don't mess!), which will be working with industry, local authorities and Ofcom to address barriers to the deployment of digital infrastructure.

WHY AM I READING THIS AND WHAT'S THE PROBLEM YOU ANNOYING KILL-JOY?

Our health, mainly, oh and privacy.

My concern was sparked by the U.S. senate hearing on 6 Feb 2019, Richard Blumenthal asked wireless industry representatives whether there are any health implications of 5G, which due to its much shorter wavelength frequency will require potentially millions of transmitters to be added closer to homes, schools, workplaces (currently there are 200,000 4G transmitters in the US).

Earlier in Dec 2018 he requested studies to be provided on the safety of the technology to be demonstrated. Nothing was provided. The industry representatives confirmed to the senator that there has been no funding of independent studies and no independent industry-backed research has taken place regarding the safety of 5G for the public. Blumenthal concluded “we're flying blind in terms of health and safety is concerned”.

The UK Health Protection Agency rode to the rescue when I was hoping for some good news. In April 2012 it published “Health Effects from Radio frequency Electromagnetic Fields, Report of the independent Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation” It found that there was no consistent evidence that warrants concern.

The American Cancer Society (ACS) also says fears around radio frequency waves (yep including 5G) are largely baseless:

“Cellphones work by sending signals to (and receiving them from) nearby cell towers using RF waves. This is a form of electromagnetic energy that falls between FM radio waves and microwaves. Like FM radio waves, microwaves, visible light, and heat, RF waves are a form of non-ionizing radiation. They don’t have enough energy to cause cancer by directly damaging the DNA inside cells. RF waves are different from stronger (ionizing) types of radiation such as x-rays, gamma rays, and ultraviolet (UV) light, which can break the chemical bonds in DNA,” the ACS explains. “At very high levels, RF waves can heat up body tissues. But the levels of energy given off by cellphones are much lower, and are not enough to raise temperatures in the body.”

This is echoed by industry which says 5G is harmless because it is below the thermal threshold, i.e the waves do not heat our body. Recent studies have been done on the health effects of RF below the thermal threshold and negative results have been found in the studies.

In 2016 the largest study to date on mobile phones and cancer, the $25M National Toxicology study in the US found a link between mobile phone radiation and cancer. Scientists found the increased risk at radiation exposure levels similar to what’s deemed safe by the U.S. government. In the rat study, the mobile phone radiation raised levels of brain cancer and a rare heart tumour, there was clear evidence for the latter-malignant schwannomas (the document by the way only reviewed these 2 aspects of heath risk). Risk increased with higher radiation exposure.

Yes, more research needs to be done before we can definitely say mobile phone radiation causes cancer in humans. The question is, should we be exposed to ever higher levels in the meantime? This study looked at RF emitted by 2 and 3G mobiles, it didn't include the additional exposure of 4 and 5G.

The 2012 assessment of the UK Health Protection Agency that “ there was no consistent evidence that warrants concern.” is now on shaky ground. The Ramazzini Institute (RI) study in 2017 also found results consistent with the NTP study: An increase in the incidence of very rare highly malignant tumours—schwannomas of the heart. It also reported a decrease in litter weights in the RFR exposed groups . These effects are now considered a reproducible finding. Again, these findings occurred at non-thermal levels, the RFR exposures were at levels the U.S govt considers allowable, yet a statistically significant increase in malignancies was found.

OUR RIGHT TO PRIVACY

Internet of things (IoT) will collect a vast amount of data on your household, in real time, wireless transmissions are relatively easily hacked, automated cars will be networked, what about hacking issues there? Cell towers at close proximity from one another will scan everything which is passing through the array and therefore has the capability build up an electronic picture.

Privacy and Freedom Erased by 5G Infrastructure Enabling AI driven Smart Cities.

This vivid speech was delivered on 25th September 2019 by PM Boris Johnson at the UN. This is the transcript.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon is part of the UN delegation present. He was receptive to concerns about man-made EMR when he met with BEMRI.org

"Transparency is for those who carry out public duties and exercise public power. Privacy is for everyone else."

Glenn Greenwald

WE'VE BEEN FLYING BLIND UP TO 4G, SO WHAT'S THE PROBLEM NOW?

5G's requirement for a huge number of transmitters and our government's strategy for at least 95% 5G connectivity in the UK, represents a massive step change in EM radiation. At the moment, there is an option to move away or some distance from a transmitter, with 5G that wont exist. The allocation of high frequency wavelength to 5G means it can't travel far. So antennas will be placed every 10-12 houses and with 5G internet of things (IoT) where fridges and smart meters etc are sending and receiving signals that is a substantial increase in RF-EMF to all citizens and it will be added to 3 and 4G & WiFi. The studies mentioned show it has a cumulative effect over time.

WHAT TO DO?! WHAT TO DO?!

What are your skills, what do you enjoy doing? Try to channel that into helping to bring sanity.

Talk to your friends and family. Listening is more important than talking I've found. What are they interested in? Trees, animals, family health, tech, food, privacy, democracy, community and friends? Talk to them with this in mind. Some knowledge on how people receive information https://reachingpeople.net/. Some of my notes.

Get to know the topic and know what is going on around it. Read the 5G and the Precautionary Principle and the history showing how we got here. After reading them both and watching the 5G A Trojan Horse video you will know more than 99.9% of people (including scientists). Be savvy/aware of how the issue is being muddied, (very reminiscent of how the smoking debate in relation to health was messed with, so there was needless prolonged uncertainty around it).
Object Object Object! We have an 80% success rate and we aren't alone. Scour the planning section of your borough website for applications. Here's a video showing you how. Put details in a flyer and distribute them to around. Great info to help you put together your objection can be found at https://rfinfo.co.uk/mast-objection/.
Let MPs and your local councillors know about the issue and the concerns raised by Senator Richard Blumenthal, Dr Joel Moskowitz, a public health professor at the University of California, and the 270 doctors and scientists from the International Society of Doctors that: “The deployment of 5G, constitutes a massive experiment on the health of all species” . Here's quite a packed letter, you can adapt it for your needs.

I've noticed a tendency of senior officials using a faux certain and authoritative tone to make inaccurate statements, they also try to put people on the spot but if you know the info, are comfortable in your mind about it then you'll storm it!

No independent testing has been done, the effect on our health is unknown.

Eric Van Rongen, Chair of ICNIRP [self-proclaimed international commission on non-ionizing radiation protection, but actually just a German NGO], the organisation whose non-transparent pronouncements on the international limits at which phones can emit radiofrequency are strangely adopted by UN bodies, calls 5G “a public health experiment”, stating that “It will be necessary to gain more information about the exposure and any health problems that might come from an effect of that exposure”. This is the body from which the UK government takes its lead.

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

On learning that Montreal would serve as a “living laboratory” designed to test 5G technology (50-60K antennas planned for Montreal), Guy Boulianne calls it a criminal act and calls for a people’s movement to oppose the deployment of 5G in Montreal and elsewhere. François Croteau, Director of the “Smart” city project, said that this “urban laboratory” would “enable the different branches of public health, federal and provincial, to come in and do analyses to see the potential impacts on public health”, adding that the studies conducted to date on the subject had been “contradictory”.

Lloyds of London, whose business relies on precaution will not insure against 5G wireless claims. Lloyd’s November 2010 Risk Assessment Team’s Report compares these wireless technologies with asbestos, in that the early research on asbestos was “inconclusive” and only later did it become obvious to anyone paying attention that asbestos causes cancer.

Any kind of transmitting wireless antennas such as those on cell towers, should not be near homes, schools, parks or hospitals. We need to switch to wired communications, reducing the need for wireless connections. Wired communication is higher quality, less vulnerable to cyber attacks and safer for human health because wired technology does not have radio frequency exposure.

Cece Doucette is very clear on wireless in schools well-informed, clear, does not browbeat:

https://youtu.be/fxvkX4OeBpk & https://youtu.be/IoFI_8-Yt0g

We ourselves are electromagnetic, our cells (communicate and reproduce electromagnetically, our heart and brain are electromagnetic). We, nor our local representatives should be bullied, pressured or ignored by central government's “barrier-busting task force”

The government has already introduced planning reforms in England which include a significant relaxation of restrictions on the siting and installation of small cells that will support both 4G and future 5G rollout.

So far government has:

legislated for additional permitted development rights for taller mobile masts;
removed the threshold for placing small cell antenna on commercial buildings/structures to support mobile rollout.
brought into effect new building regulations which require all new buildings and existing buildings undergoing major renovations to have infrastructure capable of delivering superfast broadband greater than 30Mbps;

Back to top/Main menu

SOURCES OF ENCOURAGEMENT

The problem is being recognised as shown by the video above, there is a lot of info in it but helpfully a transcript is available. People are seeing both sides and are independently reaching the same conclusions. Some local areas are keeping 5G cell towers out of their communities. City council members of Mill Valley in Northern California passed an ordinance in September 2018 to keep 5G transmitters from being deployed in residential areas.

After firefighters began exhibiting health problems, The International Association of Firefighters began opposing installing cell towers on fire stations in San Francisco.

Dr. Gunnar Heuser, who orchestrated a pilot study on firefighters at a station with cell towers said the symptoms included “problems with memory, problems with intermittent confusion, problems with weakness.”

In the UK, Steven Thomas, ably supported by seasoned and knowledgeable campaigners has been taking Cheltenham Borough Council to task over planning permission for a 15m tall 5G mast being approved in the town's conservation area. The mast would have been erected 17m away from the nearest residential buildings, with the top of the mast being the same level as some homes. He found that the Mobile Broadband Network Limited (MBNL) compliance manual shows that this is well within the ICNIRP safety exclusion zone. Typically a mast exclusion zone is 50m and requires a 9m vertical clearance. He also found the mast was near a retirement home a resident of which had raised a concern that he had a pacemaker, ICNIRP guidelines state that people who wear medical devices or implants can be affected by frequencies lower than threshold limits. The council failed to take these points into account, allowing the mast to go ahead saying "prior approval was not required", despite the fact all new ground-based masts require prior approval by the government.

So Steven took the Council to judicial review in the High Court on the basis that it failed to assess material planning considerations in its decision-making process. Relying instead on a defective ICNIRP certificate, issued in the name of a non-existent company.

The judge did not think the outcome would be any different had the council acted lawfully. He did agree though that the council was in error for failing to take into account the effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) for people wearing medical implants. Unfortunately the judge also said "there is no rule or policy that meant councils have to check exclusion zones". This despite knowing there were residents living inside the exclusion zone. It contradicts the council and judge's fiduciary duty of care to prevent avoidable harm, injury or nuisance. He also ruled the defective ICNIRP certificate as being a "clerical error" despite providing evidence of hundreds of such cases up and down the country! What failed to be addressed was the council's declaration of "no prior approval required" was invalid and unlawful.

Both sides tried to appeal the decision, however the Court of Appeal only decided to entertain the council's appeal, Beverly restricting Steven's arguments. The council lost the appeal in regards to failing to take into account the effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) for people wearing medical implants in February 2025 and spent £100,000 of tax payers' money in the process.

Steven then tried to take the case to the Supreme Court, but it refused to hear the case, giving no reasons. It is worth noting that while 5% of cases ever get heard there, the rest are dismissed on papers. A leaflet was then produced by affected residents summarising the struggle above, highlighting £100,000 was spent of their money by the council fighting the case. This resulted inaction significant number of people writing to both the council and Clarke Telecom (the telecoms consultancy firm that stated the site was fully ICNIRP compliant) to express their anger at what happened. When challenged to produce evidence of this compliance, there was no response. On 4th December 2025 Clarke telecom stated the operator (telecoms company) would not be building the mast.

People power had won the day – a huge result for truth and justice, showing the effect of what can happen when the legal and political process is relentlessly held to account and enough people come together and put pressure on the decision-makers.

What this victory illustrates is that when institutionally captured and corrupt legal and political process lets the people down,

the public shaming of these corporate institutions in the court of public opinion can and does work.

VIDEOS & MUSIC

Settle back with a cuppa and share if you like them

A Short Guide to Cell Phone Safety | Travels & Traditions