Below is an email I sent to Spark regarding 5G. Continue scrolling to see their response. Discussion paper here
Firstly, my apologies for taking some time to get back to you. Given the thought you clearly put into your email to share your concerns, I wanted to ensure we addressed your concerns properly and it’s taken me a few days to confirm some aspects with Spark’s EMF experts.
As a company we take the safety of our customers (and indeed of all New Zealanders) very seriously when it comes to all areas of our business activities and operations. This includes having a dedicated staff member who is responsible for ensuring Spark’s EMF compliance and alongside this we engage with a number of independent experts, who continually test and monitor our network.
We are aware that there are many views on the safety of Electro Magnetic Fields (EMF) arising from radio frequency waves, and conducting research online will uncover vastly differing opinions, reports and official studies. Let me outline our position and our activity in this area.
Internationally, we look to the World Health Organisation (WHO) as the primary body that reviews and monitors EMF. The position, supported by the WHO, is that there is no clear evidence from the thousands of scientific studies undertaken to date that mobile phones or base stations (i.e. cell sites) present risks to human health. The European Commission’s Scientific Committee agrees with the WHO findings. Investment and studies have increased in the past 20 years as mobile telephony has become widespread. For almost 70 years, scientists have examined non-ionising radio frequencies for any indication of risks to human health, and leading independent scientific bodies continue to review all the available evidence.
I note your concern about the WHO classifying EMF produced by mobile phones as possibly carcinogenic to humans. This categorisation sits alongside many other commonly used items like coffee, processed meat, pickled vegetables, and some sunscreen ingredients. “Possibly carcinogenic” is a lower level than other categories used by WHO - there are separate lists of those items that are categorised as ‘known carcinogens’ and those that are “probable carcinogens”. The WHO also states that many studies have been performed over the last two decades to assess whether mobile phones pose a potential health risk. To date, no adverse health effects have been established as being caused by mobile phone use and this is why their status is listed as ‘possible’.
In New Zealand, the Ministry of Health Interagency Committee monitors research into EMFs, and reports to the Director-General of Health. The Committee reviews local and international research and makes recommendations whether New Zealand Standard remains appropriate for protection of Human health. See: https://www.health.govt.nz/our-work/radiation-safety/non-ionising-r...
The New Zealand standards for exposure to EMF from radio transmitters follow international recommendations. Spark designs all its mobile cell towers to comply with National Environmental Standards (NES) including radiofrequency standard NZS2772. Based on our continuous and robust testing obligations, Spark’s cell towers transmit at around 1-2% of the New Zealand standard. You can find evidence of our independent test results published on the Ministry of Health’s website here: https://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/pages/spark-cells...
In your email you have indicated that your primary concern is around the high frequency millimetre waves frequencies that are intended to be used as part of the provision of 5G services. The effect of millimetre waves has been documented and incorporated in existing exposure standards as these frequencies have been used for many years in other applications (e.g. dish antenna for point to point communications) – so this is not a new technology or exposure.
The key global body for determining EMF exposure standards is the IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers). A revision of the relevant IEEE exposure standard is currently underway and includes a review of millimetre wave in its research. We are waiting for this to be published (we expect a draft will be circulated publicly later this year) and we will continue to monitor and adhere to the standards if and when any change is required.
As discussed in our 5G Briefing Paper, the first spectrum bands likely to be made available in New Zealand for 5G are at similar frequencies to mobile technologies already in use. The existing New Zealand exposure standard covers all these frequencies, and research published since the standard was adopted still supports the limits set in the standard. Measurements at test sites suggest that exposures from 5G transmitters will be similar to those from the current technologies. As happens already, if demand increases then more sites will be needed, each covering a smaller area. As they cover a smaller area, they will need less power and based on international models we expect that exposures should be no greater than around existing sites.
You also raised concerns about the image of a child in our 5G whitepaper using a cell phone. You will note we have ensured the child is using a ‘hands-free’ kit, which is the official health recommendation for children aged under 12.
I trust that this response provides you with the information you were looking for - and assures you of our ongoing commitment to ensuring EMF safety and adhering to global and local standards. We will continue to seek independent advice from qualified experts on the health and safety of electromagnetic fields and other non-ionising radiation types and any future scope of work will include further consideration on this topic.
It appears all the evidence in the world won't change their agenda. Good on you, will write too.
Thanks Ngaire and maybe you should attach the children dying in schools
No surprises there then
I've received more or less the same "template" generic response from a variety of corporate entities on a range of concerns over the years.
"Blah blah blah, we'll juggle the data to suit the agenda and keep the profits flowing,
The Big Eyeball On Top Of The Pyramid"
Good one Greg for sending in the letter. A disappointing but expected response. Their shareholders would have it no other way. Theres no point pursuing it further likely.
BUT the only way I can see it getting to mainstream media is thought he hearts of parents perhaps. Like this story of the children OMG that’s soooo awful.
I noted that my home schooled son was in college for 3 days on a hol programme, he looked terrible at the end of the second day my suspicions’ is wifi- I took the meter and low readings were emitting of course. I would hate to see it in a classroom when all the ipads were in action, poor unaware children. Im sure the parents would have a fit (if somehow they could be made aware and actually believe some of this evidence)???? Or better still like the kids I was teaching health too – get to the parents via them….
What about the Bees and other life that will suffer from this- how could we make them aware of what’s coming?
Also I feel the biggest thing is to make an alternative option easy to access, solutions is the only thing that may change these schools minds….???
I wonder what Sue Grey is doing now? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fAHA1FtPaw0 Perhaps she has a few ideas… or maybe shes worn down from it all?
Catch up soon
just makes ya wanna grab em by the scruff of the neck and start shaking them until the rocks fall out of their ears
This basically the same drivel we got back in the nineties wen we took Telecom to court to stop them putting s cell tower near our home, kindergarten and two schools.
Not much has changed.
WE ARE the experiment I have no doubt about that.
Speaking ethically persons being experimented on are supposed to give their consent.
It makes no sense to impose anything at all other than a natural environment on any life form without permission.
So much of what is imposed nowadays has not been done with our consent.
The freedom of people to choose is the biggest issue here. And There is no proof that it won't harm. Is that a reason to risk it ? Crazy stuff alright.
So true Aroha. People are quick to forget that this issue has been forced on us for quite some time now. A slow insidious cancer that is bit by bit, infecting our bodies, our minds and our environment. And now it's getting steroids!! Hang in there Aroha. We will win this fight.
...sadly not before a lot of 'collateral damage'
5G is a Globalist initiative.They are in charge now.
Only the military "deploy"....so true. Thanks George.
Awesome letter to Spark about the dangers of 5G EMF frequencies. Great work. At least we know what their official stance is, filled with standard jargon and half truths that we see as the standard response from all corporate entities that are causing harm to human health and the environment. The more people that write to them with their concerns, based on solid evidence of harm from scientific studies, the less they can dismiss and fob them off with this propaganda
ask them why the country who invented 5G,Israel....will never have it deployed there.