I believe that we are being poisoned regularly and in multiple ways.
The clearest and most direct route is by injection. The childhood vaccine schedule, which often commences on the very first day of life, is a well established poison program that continues through adulthood and results in well over 100 poisonings by injection if the recommended schedule is followed.
There are many other poisons to mention (like neurotoxic aluminum), but I would like to focus on the electric one, which is largely overlooked. Specifically the amount we are absorbing constantly as well as intermittently. What is has snagged my attention and concern is the repetition of a very consistent message regarding frequency and radiation exposure from electricity/devices/towers/transmitters/etc with which we interact on a daily basis. This message is that there is no proof of harm, and all of these things operate at limits well under the established limits for exposure.
I’ll go ahead and mention the inherent and naturally occurring electromagnetic energy and radiation from the earth and sun. This is not the exposure I am concerned about.
We evolved to exist on this planet. To think that the solar energy can be compared to man-made energy or that sunlight should be mitigated by human imposition I find to be ridiculous and indicative of the incredible hubris of The Science™. I wrote about that specific topic here:
Let’s get this party started by defining some terms 👇
Dirty Electricity
Dirty electricity is a ubiquitous pollutant. It flows along wires and radiates from them and involves both extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields and radio frequency radiation. Until recently, dirty electricity has been largely ignored by the scientific community. Dirty electricity, also called electrical pollution, is high-frequency voltage transients riding along the 50 or 60 Hz electricity provided by the electric utilities. It is generated by arcing, by sparking and by any device that interrupts current flow, especially switching power supplies (alternating current/AC). It has been associated with cancer, diabetes and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in humans. Epidemiological evidence also links dirty electricity to most of the diseases of civilization including cancer, cardiovascular disease, diabetes and suicide, beginning at the turn of the twentieth century.
Exposure to HFVT (high-frequency voltage transients)was associated with increased cancer risks, while preferential removal of 4–100 kHz HFVT from 50–60 Hz ELF circuits was linked to a variety of improvements in health (plasma glucose levels in diabetic patients, symptoms of multiple sclerosis, asthma and other respiratory illnesses, and insomnia), well-being (tiredness, frustration, general health, irritation, sense of satisfaction, mood), and student behavior.
Some common sources of dirty electricity are:
– CFL/LED/Fluorescent/Halogen light bulbs – dimmer switches – plugged in chargers for tech devices – solar or wind inverters – smart meter communications – over-the-wire ethernet connections
I was going to say that this all began with my attempts to opt in to the Smart Meter Opt Out program offered by Georgia Power, but that’s not really accurate. I’ve been thinking about frequency, radiation, and the exponential increase in exposure to all things wireless for a while now. Here are some relevant posts:
In August 1997 the first digital TV transmitter was launched. This autumn the first ‘hot-spots’ for mobile connection to the Internet were also introduced to serve travelling executives in hotels, train stations, airports, some petrol stations, etc. But the real big thing that came into practical use by the whole population was the introduction of the dual-band mobile system.
In my opinion, a reasonable line of inquiry into damage and disease is the exponential increase of human imposed frequency and radiation. I have noticed that this topic is not often welcomed by the mainstream…or in this gulag of dissenters known as Substack. This was surprising to me at first. I mean, I thought that we were trying to solve stuff over here. The longer I am here on SS though, the more I notice that “we” are trying to “solve” things, but only in very curated corners.
I would like to share my journey down this particular rabbit hole and why I have concluded that this is absolutely a topic that deserves consideration.
Here is an example of another message assuring the public of safety:
And here is this message that has been repeated ad nauseum:
So with that in mind, let’s take a look at something everyone is exposed to almost constantly…likely as you are reading these words.
Are you on a laptop or phone?
Is it plugged in?
Do you know how many centimeters your device is from your body right now?
Did you know that these are determinants when considering your level of exposure?
When I discovered that analogue power meters have been replaced with Smart Meters in many areas, I filed it away in my head as something to look into. It took me a while to get around to locating ours, but when I did, I confirmed that it is in fact a Smart Meter. This is what it looks like:
And ours happens to be placed on our bedroom wall, positioned exactly on the other side of my head when I sleep. So this is basically the worst choice for placement. Nobody is RF/EMF deficient, and you’d be hard pressed to find someone that says that a great place to put a smart meter is right next to your head while you sleep. Just like nobody advises you to snuggle with your router or modem.
I was curious…when did everyone get a Smart Meter and why tf was I 100% unaware of this?
**Spoiler Alert**
The fuckery didn’t get simple.
1985
The groundwork for all of this bullshit really got started in 1985 with the FCC’s OET Bulletin 65, which established the first Radio Frequency guidelines. These were the agency’s earliest comprehensive standards for human exposure to RF energy from FCC-regulated devices and facilities (like broadcast towers and microwave transmitters).
1996
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (signed into law on February 8, 1996) was a landmark overhaul of U.S. communications law, aiming to promote competition and deregulate telecom markets.
Read more about this fuckery The Telecommunications Act here:
In response to the housing crisis/banking fuckery of 2007/2008, everyone really needed the internet and the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) happened. This provided for the expansion of smart grid technologies in the United States. The U.S. government allocated $7.2 billion for broadband 👈.
$4.7 billion to assist in the development and deployment of smart grid infrastructure through the Broadband Technology Opportunities Program (BTOP) and $2.5 billion through the Broadband Initiatives Program (BIP) to bring the grid to the poors rural communities.
ARRA Implementation: BTOP and BIP recipients—telcos, municipalities, and nonprofits—operated under FCC rules for licensing, equipment certification, and network operations.
FCC Action: The FCC streamlined processes to expedite ARRA projects. For example, it coordinated with NTIA to 👉 waive certain telecom rules (e.g., tower siting delays) and certified equipment to meet stimulus deadlines👈(I’m totally getting PREP Act vibes)
Impact: This flexibility ensured ARRA’s tight timeline (most funds disbursed by 2013) aligned with FCC oversight, avoiding regulatory bottlenecks.
Everyone got the internets, which obviously helped with their bankruptcy and homelessness, and by 2015 most homes had been outfitted with smart meters. By 2020 they had become a standard feature of most electrical grids.
Got that? So after the manufactured crisis housing bubble burst, we got the “Recovery Act” that outfitted all the people everywhere with broadband and wireless and smartness.
So naturally I want to know who regulates the broadband and wireless and smart metering stuff…that everyone got whether they wanted it or not because housing crisis and stuff.
Regulates interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and U.S. territories.
But actually the EPAregulates EMF as it relates to public health.
In May 2019, Regulation S.I. 190 of 2019 were signed into law to extend the functions of the EPA to cover public exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF).
Unless we are talking about phones, and in that case, FCC says it’s “primarily” FDA that’s responsible for that regulation….
The FDA, which has primary jurisdiction for investigating mobile phone safety, has stated that it cannot rule out the possibility of risk, but if such a risk exists, "it is probably small."
The effects of electromagnetic fields (EMF) on people have been subject of significant research. This includes the radio frequencies used and envisaged for 5G in mobile communications and other applications. No health effects have been proven at levels below the ICNIRP guidelines for members of the public.
*No health effects*
Oh my goodness, well look at this! I immediately found TWELVE studies showing health effects 👇
However, some uncertainties remain regarding relatively high levels of exposure to radiofrequency (RF) EMF, such as those received from mobile phone handsets in contact with the body or those experienced by some workers in certain work environments (for example, during maintenance of telecommunication antennas). Thus, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), an agency of the World Health Organization (WHO), classified RF in 2011 as possibly carcinogenic (class 2B). This does not mean that RF is in fact carcinogenic but that more research is needed to clarify findings from some studies. This classification was mainly based on studies of long-term, heavy-use of mobile phones (using 1G, 2G and/or 3G technologies). The same 2B IARC classification also includes natural products such as talc powder, pickled food, Aloe vera and Ginkgo biloba, as well as many chemicals (e.g., pesticides, lead). The WHO runs an International EMF Project which monitors new scientific evidence in this regard.
Red Meat 🤣
To make us feel better about the carcinogenic “possibility” of RF, EPA assures us that it’s the same classification as other products like talc (please see talc and cancer here), pesticides (pesticides and cancer here), and lead (lead and cancer here and lead poisoning here). PHEW! What a relief!! 🤣
SOOOOO actually….
It turns out that if we are talking about phones, the FCC 👉 says it’s the FDA👇 that is responsible for mobile phone safety.
In recent years, publicity, speculation, and concern over claims of possible health effects due to RF emissions from hand-held wireless telephones prompted various research programs to investigate whether there is any risk to users of these devices There is no scientific evidence to date that proves that wireless phone usage can lead to cancer or a variety of other health effects, including headaches, dizziness or memory loss.
The FDA, which has primary jurisdiction for investigating mobile phone safety, has stated that it cannot rule out the possibility of risk, but if such a risk exists, "it is probably small." Further, it has stated that, while there is no proof that cellular telephones can be harmful, concerned individuals can take various precautionary actions, including limiting conversations on hand-held cellular telephones and making greater use of telephones with hands-free kits where there is a greater separation distance between the user and the radiating antenna. The Web site for the FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health provides further information on mobile phone safety: FDA Radiation-Emitting Products - Cell Phones.
🤫 Let me whisper this bullshit for you…
According to 👆EPA I mean FDA 👈(via the 👉FCC) there is NO scientific evidence (other than all that evidence I linked above) that proves using cell phones causes cancer, or ill health effects. HOWEVER, they can’t actually “rule out” that whole cancer thing…and I mean, like, if there is a risk it’s probably small and stuff. Gosh, where have I heard astonishingly terrible logic like this before 🤔…
Oh that’s right, from our new NIH directer👇
Anywhoooo…Even though there’s “NO proof”, that cell phones are harmful, FDA is going to go ahead and suggest some precautions you could take. Ya know, just in case…even though there’s no risk.
I would now like to propose changing the FCC FAQ Page to the FCC DOUBLESPEAK page.
Ok, so we are balls deep in bullshit y’all. Oh look, here’s a pangolin!
The FCC's Mission
The Federal Communications Commission regulates interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite, and cable in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and U.S. territories. An independent U.S. government agency overseen by Congress, the Commission is the federal agency responsible for implementing and enforcing America’s communications law and regulations.
“FCC regulates interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and U.S. territories.” That includes antennas, right?
SORT OF! Just depends on the flexibility of your definition of the word “regulate”…
(headings in ALL CAPS and block quotes are directly pasted from FCC FAQ)
DOES THE FCC ROUTINELY MONITOR RADIO FREQUENCY RADIATION FROM ANTENNAS?
👉The FCC does not have the resources or the personnel to routinely monitor the exposure levels due at all of the thousands of transmitters that are subject to FCC jurisdiction. However, while there are large variations in exposure levels in the environment of fixed transmitting antennas, it is exceedingly rare for exposure levels to approach FCC public exposure limits in accessible locations. In addition, the FCC does not routinely perform RF exposure investigations unless there is a reasonable expectation that the FCC exposure limits may be exceeded.
I speak FCC…NO! FCC cannot possibly be expected to routinely monitor all the things that they monitor.
DOES THE FCC MAINTAIN A DATABASE THAT INCLUDES INFORMATION ON THE LOCATION AND TECHNICAL PARAMETERS OF ALL OF THE TRANSMITTER SITES IT REGULATES? (FCC FAQ)
👉The FCC does not have a comprehensive, transmitter-specific database for all of the services it regulates. However, the FCC does have information for some services such as radio and television broadcast stations, and many larger antenna towers are required to register with the Antenna Structure Registration (ASR) database if they meet certain criteria. In those cases, location information is generally specified in terms of degrees, minutes, and seconds of latitude and longitude. In some services, licenses are allowed to utilize additional transmitters or to increase power without notifying the FCC. Other services are licensed by geographic area, such that the FCC has no knowledge concerning the actual number or location of transmitters within that geographic area.
Gah…why the hell would the Federal COMMUNICATIONS Commission keep something silly like a database for the services it regulates?
And FCC cannot be bothered to keep up with ridiculous things like numbers OR locations of all the transmitters.
Oh look, I easily found a map of the cell towers near Atlanta using only my very limited computer skills.
Only 1,792! I wonder how FCC regulates them when they don’t know how many there are or where they are located…
ARE CELLULAR AND OTHER RADIO TOWERS LOCATED NEAR HOMES OR SCHOOLS SAFE FOR RESIDENTS AND STUDENTS?
Other antennas, such as those used for radio and television broadcast transmissions, use power levels that are generally much higher than those used for cellular and PCS antennas. Therefore, in some cases there could be a potential for higher levels of exposure to persons on the ground.However, all broadcast stations are required to demonstrate compliance with FCC safety guidelines, and ambient exposures to nearby persons from such stations are typically well below FCC safety limits.
“Persons on the ground” = CHILDREN in this case. And even though we don’t know how many towers there are, or where they are located, we are sure that they demonstrated compliance. It’s just innocent nearby persons CHILDREN, who BY THE WAY happen to be at increased riskfor radiation damage.
CAN LOCAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTAL BODIES ESTABLISH LIMITS FOR RF EXPOSURE? (FCC FAQ)
In the United States, some local and state jurisdictions have also enacted rules and regulations pertaining to human exposure to RF energy. However, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 contained provisions relating to federal jurisdiction to regulate human exposure to RF emissions from certain transmitting devices. In particular, Section 704 of the Act states that, "No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions." Further information on FCC policy with respect to facilities siting is available from the FCC's Wireless Telecommunications Bureau (see https://www.fcc.gov/general/tower-and-antenna-siting)
If state and local governments notice that the FCC is doing a shitty job, can they step in? Absolutely not, assholes!
GAO prepared a report of its investigation into safety concerns related to mobile phones. The report concluded that further research is needed to confirm whether mobile phones are completely safe for the user.
Just kidding. Scratch the slow clap.
So the GAO recommended that the FCC reassess RF exposure limits. And FCC was like…that’s a hard no for us, bro.
Naturally I wanted to know who the Chairman of the FCC was in 2012 that basically told the Government Accountability Office to fuck off.
Role: Chief Counsel to FCC Chairman Reed Hundt (1994–1997) Genachowski joined the FCC in 1994, appointed by Chairman Reed Hundt, who served from 1993 to 1997 under President Bill Clinton. As Chief Counsel, Genachowski was a senior advisor, providing legal and strategic guidance on FCC policies and rulemaking during a pivotal time for telecommunications regulation.
The Telecommunications Act of 1996 (signed into law on February 8, 1996) was that landmark overhaul of U.S. communications law, that deregulated the telecom markets. Genachowski played a key role in translating the Act into actionable FCC regulations.
After leaving the FCC in 1997, Genachowski transitioned to the private sector, joining Barry Diller at IAC/InterActiveCorp as a senior executive.
He significantly influenced telecom deregulation, spectrum policy, and universal service—foreshadowing his role as FCC Chairman. He returned to the FCC in 2009 as Chairman where he served until 2013.
If you think that the FDA has greasy revolving door, FCC says hold my beer👇
After leaving FCC, Genachowski joined the Carlyle Group. Carlyle’s business model revolves around acquiring, managing, and growing companies, often through leveraged buyouts, and then exiting those investments for profit. Its TMT portfolio has historically included firms reliant on telecommunications infrastructure, broadcasting, and wireless spectrum—sectors where FCC regulations play a critical role. For example, Carlyle’s acquisition of Hawaiian Telcom from Verizon in 2004 for $1.6 billion required FCC approval, as did its involvement in deals like the $27.5 billion Kinder Morgan acquisition in 2006, where telecommunications assets were part of the broader infrastructure play. The firm’s hiring of Julius Genachowski, as a managing director in 2014 further underscores its strategic interest in navigating regulated communications spaces.
As of today, the FCC’s RF exposure limits remain those set in 1996.
In 1996 cell phones looked like this and were definitely not carried in your pocket, worn on your wrist, or surfing the internet 👇.
In 2019 RF exposure limits were briefly revisited and it was determined that the RF exposure limits set in 1996 were in no need of any updating.
Critics, including some scientists, advocacy groups, and anyone with a functional brain, argue the limits are outdated, obviously flawed, and completely evident risks (like long-term low-level exposure all day every day).
The FCC maintains that its standards, developed with input from double speaking crooks interested in lining their pockets while murdering the world “health” agencies and rooted The Science™, still protect the public adequately.
The agency continues to monitor research and could revisit the issue if new evidence emerges. And if there were any new evidence they would totally look into it.
Should we check in and see what the World “Health” Organization has to say?
In May 2011 the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) evaluated cancer risks from radiofrequency (RF) radiation. Human epidemiological studies gave evidence of increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma. RF radiation was classified as Group 2B, a possible human carcinogen. Further epidemiological, animal and mechanistic studies have strengthened the association. In spite of this, in most countries little or nothing has been done to reduce exposure and educate people on health hazards from RF radiation. On the contrary ambient levels have increased. In 2014 the WHO launched a draft of a Monograph on RF fields and health for public comments. It turned out that five of the six members of the Core Group in charge of the draft are affiliated with International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), an industry loyal NGO, and thus have a serious conflict of interest. Just as by ICNIRP, evaluation of non-thermal biological effects from RF radiation are dismissed as scientific evidence of adverse health effects in the Monograph. This has provoked many comments sent to the WHO. However, at a meeting on March 3, 2017 at the WHO Geneva office it was stated that the WHO has no intention to change the Core Group.
Yep that about sums it up. No intention of doing anything about frying the world with electricity and radiation.
I have been working on this post for a better part of a month. My original intention was to share the email exchanges I’m currently having with Georgia Power (Southern Company) to try and get this mother fucking smart meter removed from behind my head where I sleep. I was assured that this would be no problem and I would have an analogue meter in 1-2 business days. This conversation started in September of 2024. On March 6, 2025 they came out and replaced the smart meter with a different smart meter that just doesn’t say smart meter. I was already frustrated. Now I’m also pissed .
Here’s a picture of the new one:
Just for reference, here’s the old one:
So that’s what kicked off this 425 paragraph post.
I have spent weeks looking into how everyone ended up with a smart meter on their house and 5G towers at every corner. This novel energy was imposed on us with an astounding lack of concern. I keep thinking that at some point I’ll stop being surprised by the flagrant disregard for life, but that hasn’t happened yet.
This abundant and novel energy is odorless, tasteless, and invisible to the eye…making it a superb implement of control.
It differs from poison injections and toxic food, which have some semblance of choice. This is not an argument for toxic food and poison injections. Simply an observation. We were given very little choice along the path to SmartGate. I never chose to have a smart meter placed literally directly behind my head. I also never opted for the 5G tower to be installed less than half a mile from my house. And I damn sure didn’t opt for the second one around the corner directly in front of the elementary school. Or the third one that’s adjacent to our neighborhood. We don’t even get an illusion of opting out of those.
It is, at the very least, worth considering how this imposed electric force could be causing or at least contributing to symptomatic illness. Imposed electric force that is “regulated” and “controlled” by agencies that flat out tell us that they DO NOT GIVE A FUCK. Could illnesses that correlate with Public Health “Emergencies” and subsequent declarations and countermeasures be caused by this persistent and constant force?
My last post addressed the neurotoxin aluminum. We are being injected with it. We are eating it, drinking it, and breathing it. Last time I checked, aluminum is a metal. And metal conducts electricity. What happens when we ingest a bunch of metal and then are exposed to constant low(ish) levels of frequency and radiation?
Maybe nothing.
(pssst…I don’t think it’s nothing)
But maybe not.
And the agencies “in charge” clearly tell us how safe all the things that they aren’t looking into, tracking, acknowledging, or updating are. There’s simply no evidence outside the piles of obvious evidence. It’s fucking safe because the FCC I mean the EPA, oops the FDA, never mind…the exposure levels that we set in 1996 are ALL GOOD BRO.
Stop asking questions, ASSHOLE. Just get smart and Trust The Technology Science™ that was freshly updated in 1996.
And I’m sorry if you can’t appreciate that smart meters are perfect pillows.
If you managed to make it all the way through…thank you.
In my opinion the failure (ie unwillingness) to asses the health and safety of wireless pollution should be taken as official conformation that it is all toxic. They knew it was all toxic 70 years ago because that's when they did all the testing, much of it done by the military (much of it done by Nazi scientists during the war). This weapons technology should never have been repurposed as a communications technology in the first place.
They can't do a proper scientific risk assessment now because they know it would fail. Instead they have to rely on weasel words and kooky guidelines and hope the public will just assume it's all safe, which of course they do.
The issue, which is kind of humbling really, is that wireless tech offers the power of gods (omniscience). This power is just as irresistible to the average consumer as it is to the elite technocrats. Neither want to admit the toxic nature of this technology, or their own addition to it.
Everybody has become Gollum, clutching their precious smart devices. Taking away a teenager's phone or a technocrats' ability to surveil the masses in real time has the same effect as taking away Gollum's ring. They all lose their minds.
We've nw reached a point in human progress where our very survival may depend on us all choosing to reject new technology just as often as we embrace it. That's never really happened before. Until now we've just embraced everything (wheel, spade, steam engine, washing machine, sporks etc) and it has mostly been a net positive for society.
Now we're going to have to gather up all wireless tech and throw it into the volcano (or whatever happened in Lord of the Rings).
IMHO that's the only sensible option. I don't believe it can be made safe. The toxic radiation (the pollution) IS the carrier signal itself, so eliminating the pollution makes the technology stop working. This is why wireless communication is the stupidest technology ever invented.
But I fear as public awareness grows the response will be more promises to study it, asses the health risks, set new guidelines etc. This will just kick the can down the road forever...
It's much more sensible to just be done with it. Make a clean break. Nobody felt the need for wireless in 1995 and we were all much happier, healthier and freer back then. I actually feel rejecting this tech and choosing to live without wireless communications would mark the start of a new chapter for humanity, a kind of 'next level' for civilisation and humans as a species - where we make the conscious choice to prioritise quality of life and health above reckless and incessant technological progress/ industrialisation/ profits.
'Just because we can doesn't mean we should'. This should be the motto for the 21st century.
The only other alternative I can see is to stay in denial and blame the effects of EMF pollution on 'viruses' and 'climate change' so we can carry on terraforming the planet ...
What I’ve learned over the years is there is no such thing as a regulatory agency in any industry. All they do is provide cover for the govt and big business to continue to commit crimes against we the people.
Great post!
In my opinion the failure (ie unwillingness) to asses the health and safety of wireless pollution should be taken as official conformation that it is all toxic. They knew it was all toxic 70 years ago because that's when they did all the testing, much of it done by the military (much of it done by Nazi scientists during the war). This weapons technology should never have been repurposed as a communications technology in the first place.
They can't do a proper scientific risk assessment now because they know it would fail. Instead they have to rely on weasel words and kooky guidelines and hope the public will just assume it's all safe, which of course they do.
The issue, which is kind of humbling really, is that wireless tech offers the power of gods (omniscience). This power is just as irresistible to the average consumer as it is to the elite technocrats. Neither want to admit the toxic nature of this technology, or their own addition to it.
Everybody has become Gollum, clutching their precious smart devices. Taking away a teenager's phone or a technocrats' ability to surveil the masses in real time has the same effect as taking away Gollum's ring. They all lose their minds.
We've nw reached a point in human progress where our very survival may depend on us all choosing to reject new technology just as often as we embrace it. That's never really happened before. Until now we've just embraced everything (wheel, spade, steam engine, washing machine, sporks etc) and it has mostly been a net positive for society.
Now we're going to have to gather up all wireless tech and throw it into the volcano (or whatever happened in Lord of the Rings).
IMHO that's the only sensible option. I don't believe it can be made safe. The toxic radiation (the pollution) IS the carrier signal itself, so eliminating the pollution makes the technology stop working. This is why wireless communication is the stupidest technology ever invented.
But I fear as public awareness grows the response will be more promises to study it, asses the health risks, set new guidelines etc. This will just kick the can down the road forever...
It's much more sensible to just be done with it. Make a clean break. Nobody felt the need for wireless in 1995 and we were all much happier, healthier and freer back then. I actually feel rejecting this tech and choosing to live without wireless communications would mark the start of a new chapter for humanity, a kind of 'next level' for civilisation and humans as a species - where we make the conscious choice to prioritise quality of life and health above reckless and incessant technological progress/ industrialisation/ profits.
'Just because we can doesn't mean we should'. This should be the motto for the 21st century.
The only other alternative I can see is to stay in denial and blame the effects of EMF pollution on 'viruses' and 'climate change' so we can carry on terraforming the planet ...
https://odysee.com/@CoronaStudies:3/CS-BIRDS-pt1:8
What I’ve learned over the years is there is no such thing as a regulatory agency in any industry. All they do is provide cover for the govt and big business to continue to commit crimes against we the people.