Wikipedia
yes it's jewed and often omits inconvenient truths, but it's still useful as a list of topics to look into
Who are the physicists and skeptics who criticize these as pseudoscience
well she wrote in her own article that it wasn't scientific
"However, none of the observations discussed here prove this linkage. Specifically, the evidence does not confirm causation. Clearly COVID-19 occurs in regions with little wireless communication. Furthermore, the relative morbidity caused by WCR exposure in COVID-19 is unknown"
This guff is basically self published and made to look like a recognised journal publication.
She's got a thing about 5G and bangs on about it everywhere, covid is just this weeks bogeyman that she wants to link it to. Next year it will be cancer or ingrowing toenails.
There is a tendency on the Right to become overally paranoid about everything, to the point where they ignore what is provable and cling solely to the unprovable so as to claim it as their own, and that Big Pharma doesn't want you to know about their 'forbidden knowledge'. Which then turns out to be drinking diluted Chlorine Dioxide to cure autism...
It's the same in Engineering with people ranting on about Tesla and his 'forbidden knowledge', which is basically nothing more than interesting than Apple's wireless phone charger. Or they will sit there winding copper wire around some magnets trying to create zero point energy, whilst babbling gobbledegook to an equally moronic bitchute audience.
It gets a bit tedious because it's never going to go anywhere, and it wastes everyone's time when there are real world problems to solve like jew media and niggers
Is there something it it? Very, very, tenuously. But it's pandering to an audience who still can't get their heads around that a vaccine is going to keep them vastly safer than wrapping their phone in tinfoil. But here we are.
well she wrote in her own article that it wasn't scientific
"However, none of the observations discussed here prove this linkage. Specifically, the evidence does not confirm causation. Clearly COVID-19 occurs in regions with little wireless communication. Furthermore, the relative morbidity caused by WCR exposure in COVID-19 is unknown"
This guff is basically self published and made to look like a recognised journal publication.
She's got a thing about 5G and bangs on about it everywhere, covid is just this weeks bogeyman that she wants to link it to. Next year it will be cancer or ingrowing toenails.
This scientific report supports her:
nope, read the paper
Beverly Rubik, that's her at the top, she wrote it....
.
"However, none of the observations discussed here prove this linkage. Specifically, the evidence does not confirm causation. Clearly COVID-19 occurs in regions with little wireless communication. Furthermore, the relative morbidity caused by WCR exposure in COVID-19 is unknown."
"NLM is not a publisher, but rather collects, indexes, and archives scientific literature published by other organizations. The presence of any article, book, or document in these databases does not imply an endorsement of, or concurrence with, the contents by NLM, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), or the U.S. Federal Government."
"The paper also underwent a biased peer review process conducted by vocal anti-5G advocates"
The authors of the study are an adjunct professor in the mind-body medicine department at Saybrook University and a radiologist not currently affiliated with an academic institution
One of the papers they cited on COVID-19 and 5G said, "The fact is that there is no link between the COVID-19 virus and 5G cell phone technology or 5G base-station communication towers. These are totally different constructs; they are not even close."
The authors of the paper also acknowledge that they only selected sources that supported their theory, ignoring papers that showed negative results. "We did not make an attempt to weigh the evidence," they wrote. Of the over 30,000 research reports on radiofrequency radiation exposure the authors note are available in the literature, they only cited 90. One of them is an anonymously published 2014 paper by one of the authors, which is not peer reviewed. Eight others are authored by the peer reviewers who evaluated their paper.
Of the 10 listed reviewers, two of whom requested anonymity, half are vocal public opponents of 5G. They include vaccine skeptic Ronald Kostoff; Martin Pall, whose own theory about a connection between 5G and COVID-19 was shared on social media by actor Woody Harrelson; and David O. Carpenter, whose efforts at circulating inaccurate data on the health risks of wireless technology stoked fears over 5G. Two other reviewers signed a 2017 petition urging the European Union to stop the rollout of 5G.
(post is archived)