Introduction

Dear Professor Johansson, first of all allow me to thank you for your availability and kindness to give me this interview and the opportunity for people in Croatia to learn more about the risks of increasing exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields radiation as well as powerfrequency electromagnetic fields caused by the new wireless technology networks and devices. You were one of the leading scientists at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, known as the Nobel Prize Institute, that awards the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine. You have more than 50 years of scientific research behind you, more than 800 published scientific papers, and you are undoubtedly one of the biggest scientific authorities in research of electromagnetic fields effects on human health as well as effects in biology. Therefore, would you be so kind to first introduce yourself and your work to our readers?

Prof. Olle Johansson:

I am a professor, retired from the Karolinska Institute (in Nov 2017, still active), Department of Neuroscience, where I was the head of The Experimental Dermatology Unit, Stockholm, Sweden, and I was also previously at the Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden, upholding positions as an assistant professor, associate professor, guest professor and adjunct professor, in basic and applied neuroscience. The Karolinska Institute and the Royal Institute of Technology are famous for their associations with the Nobel Prizes in Physiology or Medicine, Chemistry, and Physics.

I have a long background in the neurosciences and I have co-authored - together with my supervisor, assistant professor Tomas Hökfelt, and many others, including Nobel Laureates - up to the presentation of my doctoral thesis 143 original papers, reviews, book chapters and conference abstracts, a publication record hard to beat! My doctoral thesis at the Karolinska Institute was entitled "Peptide Neurons in the Central and Peripheral Nervous System. Light and Electron Microscopic Studies". I have participated in more than 300 congresses, symposia and meetings as an invited speaker, and with free contributions and as an invited 'observer' at an additional +220. My studies have been widely recognized in the public media, including newspapers, radio and TV as well as on the Internet, both nationally as well as internationally, and I am a regular interview guest in magazines, journals, tabloids and newspapers, as well as in radio shows, podcasts, webinars, TV programmes, and in the Internet-based news blogs and websites.

My field of research is adverse health and biological effects of artificial electromagnetic fields, such as from cell phone systems, WiFi, tablets, laptops, high-frequency (low-energy) light bulbs, wireless smart meters, baby alarms, DECT phones, powerlines, smart cities, the Internet of Things and the Internet of Bodies, 5G, 6G, 7G, and much more. I am also very interested in accommodating for the people with the functional impairment electrohypersensitivity under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (aka the UN Special Human Rights Act for Persons with Functional Impairments).

Among many achievements I coined the term "screen dermatitis" which later on was developed into the functional impairment electrohypersensitivity. I have published more than 800 original articles, reviews, book chapters and conference reports within the fields of basic and applied neuroscience, dermatoscience, epidemiology, and biophysics, and I am one of the authors behind the original Bioinitiative Report, including the chapters that were published - following peer review - in the journal "Pathophysiology" (2009), as well as the Seletun Statement, The London Resolution, The Benevento Resolution and The Venice Resolution. I have received a number of awards, including the Nokia Consumer Electronics Award, The Grand Environment Award of the Cancer and Allergy Foundation, the SIF Award, Tandvårdsskadeförbundets Pris, and many more.

I have on-going international scientific collaborations with, i.a., Japan, Belgium, Australia, Malaysia, Uruguay, and the USA, and are also currently seeking such collaborations with e.g. Ghana (West Africa) and South Africa.

And now I would like to start with questions for you:

1. The Department of Neuroscience of the Karolinska Institute published in 2011 the Scientific Statement in which scientists urge halt of wireless rollout and, call for new safety standards and warn of the risks to children and pregnant women. In that document states that “The combined effect of cell phones, cordless phones, cell towers, WI-FI and wireless internet place billions of people around the world at risk for cancer, neurological disease and reproductive and developmental impairments“. Could you please tell us more about it?

Prof. Olle Johansson:

For many years, I have been studying the health effects of wireless devices and technologies, such as cell phones, WiFi, and general wireless infrastructure. My research decades ago was instrumental to determine the old CRT computer monitors were biologically harmful and that's why we switched them out for the less impactful flat-screen monitors. I also played a similar role in the protection of pregnant women in front of computers.

Wireless communication is now being implemented in our daily life in a very fast way. At the same time, it is becoming more and more obvious that exposure to electromagnetic fields may result in highly unwanted health as well as biological effects. This has been demonstrated in a very large number of studies and includes a variety of adverse effects as stated above and below.

Because the effects are reproducibly observed and links to pathology can not be excluded, the Precautionary Principle should be in force in the implementation of this new technology within the society. Therefore, policymakers immediately should strictly control exposure by defining biologically-based maximal exposure guidelines also taking into account long-term, non-thermal effects, and including especially vulnerable groups, such as the elderly, the ill, the genetically and/or immunologically challenged, children and fetuses, egg cells and sperm cells, and persons with the functional impairment electrohypersensitivity (which in Sweden is a fully recognized functional impairment, and therefore receives an annual governmental disability subsidy). Until revised exposure guidelines are developed, professional adults responsible for human lives in institutional or group settings, such as schools, offices, residential buildings, government buildings, hospitals, etc., should take heed of the large body of science showing serious risks and minimize these exposures at every opportunity by taking hard-wired, shielded approaches to internet and computer connectivity, as well as to general electricity infrastructure.

Science is providing ever more convincing evidence that the radiation emitted by our wireless telecommunications systems can affect biological systems including humans, wildlife, plants, and bacteria (and also soil bacteria). These biological effects are acting even at very low exposure levels.

The consequences on health and the environment can be all the more serious because:

- exposure is ubiquitous, repeated and/or prolonged,

- radiation from wireless technologies is modulated, pulsed, polarized,

- some individuals may be more vulnerable (fetuses, children, sick patients, people with preexisting conditions), and/or the effects being much more prolonged (fetuses, children),

- exposure is combined with other pollutants, in our air, water, and food (e.g. chemical pollutants).

Damages on health and the environment are already noticeable at exposure levels similar to those currently found in our society, but also at substantially lower levels.

2. Based on the results of two-year research by the its International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the World Health Organization (WHO) declared radio frequency electromagnetic fields a possibly carcinogenic to humans and classified them in Group 2B. IARC classifies Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (who.int) In addition to the electromagnetic radiation from wireless networks and devices being a cancer risk, there are also a numerous harmful effects on health. Could you please tell us a little more about these other risks, which are mostly not discussed in the media or public space.

 Prof. Olle Johansson:

In addition to the above, cellular DNA damage (which may lead to the initiation of cancer as well as mutations that carry down generations), disruptions and alterations of cellular functions like increases in intracellular stimulatory pathways and calcium handling and oxidative stress at the cellular level, respectively, disruption of tissue structures like the blood-brain barrier (which may allow toxins to enter the brain), impact on the vessel and immune functions, and loss of fertility, should be seriously considered as well. And it should be noted that we are not the only species in jeopardy, practically all animals, plants, fungi, and bacteria may be at stake. For the latter, Taheri et al (2017) have demonstrated that the exposure to 900 MHz GSM mobile phone radiation and 2.4 GHz radiofrequency radiation emitted from common Wi-Fi routers made Listeria monocytogenes and Escherichia coli resistant to different antibiotics. (Very similar results have recently been published regarding soil bacteria.) To say these findings are "scary" is a classical English understatement.

All around the world dramatic reductions in pollinating insect populations are noted, for instance in Germany where more than 75% of them are just gone, Canada has lost more than 90% of their honey bees, and the USA more than 90% of their bumble bees. I am particularly concerned about this because I already have a number of papers in my files dealing with this angle; I have even recently written a short commentary based on them: Johansson O, "To bee, or not to bee, that is the five “G” question", Newsvoice.se 28/5, 2019, https://newsvoice.se/2019/05/5g-question-olle-johansson/. I also know that other areas around the world have reported similar huge bee colony collapses, and my strong efforts now are to seek ways to conserve, protect and enhance our pollinators, wherever they reside, and thus conserve, protect and enhance ourselves. If we do not engage, then we certainly may head towards a moment in history where future generations - if any - will ask us "Why didn't you react and act?"

3. In your research, you also dealt with the problem of electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS), i.e. hypersensitivity of individual persons to electromagnetic radiation). Sweden recognized this problem a long time ago and provided protection to such persons with certain lawful solutions. In its Resolution 2008/2211(INI) "Health problems related to electromagnetic fields" in point 28, the European Parliament called on member states to follow the example of Sweden and "recognize persons suffering from electro hypersensitivity as persons with disabilities, in order to provide them adequate protection and equal opportunities.” (Texts adopted - Health concerns associated with electromagnetic fields - Thursday, 2 April 2009 (europa.eu)). Unfortunately, Croatia does not respect this recommendation, doctors do not recognize EHS and as a rule, refer patients complaining of such symptoms to a psychiatrist. Could you please clarify for our readers what is the EHS according to the current medical consensus?

Prof. Olle Johansson: 

Electrohypersensitivity is NOT an illness. It is a relevant, correct and completely right avoidance reaction to an inferior environment. People with the functional impairment electrohypersensitivity are NOT patients, they do NOT have a medical diagnosis, and they should NOT be treated as such. The 'patient' is only the inferior environment, and the 'treatment' comes in the form of accessibility measures, such as distance, shielding, electrosanitation, etc.

Remember that a functional impairment as such never goes under the WHO's ICD (International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems) classifications, only - also in the case of electrohypersensitivity - the symptoms do so, and for electrohypersensitivity they were already in the year 2000 classified as an occupationally-related symptom-based diagnosis (code ICD-10) by the Nordic Council of Ministers. This means that a subjective symptom of a functionally impaired can be treated by a physician, and get sick-leave from their workplace, as well as economic compensation. But the underlying cause still remains only the toxic environment; it is this environment which is the 'patient’ with the 'diagnosis', and with accessibility measures as the 'treatment' (cf. above).

All of this can be found in my 2015 paper [Johansson O, “Electrohypersensitivity: a functional impairment due to an inaccessible environment”, Rev Environ Health 2015; 30: 311–321].

Always remember that persons with functional impairments, like electrohypersensitivity, are NOT here "to teach us empathy or to be considerate". They are not to be dependent on any "passionate" Olle Johansson*. Treating members of the community equally is not something that should be done as a favour; nor is it something that any parliament or government should politely request other citizens to provide others with. No pressure should be needed to have the "Powers" to do their job. Equality is not something to be done “out of the goodness of one’s heart”. It is something one does since it is expected of every citizen because inaccessibility and discrimination are prohibited by international law.

[*N.B. This is NOT a personal "passion" of mine. This is just the current legal framework, and every citizen - by law - must know this.]

4. What advice and recommendations could you give to people suffering from EHS, in order to make their daily life easier in an environment of increasing electromagnetic pollution?

Prof. Olle Johansson:

Demand accessibility measures, such as distance, shielding, electrosanitation, etc., in accordance with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (aka the UN Special Human Rights Act for Persons with Functional Impairments). Such accessibility measures, leading up to that every citizen shall enjoy an equal life in a society based on equality, are within the framework of our conventions, laws and regulations. I repeat from above: "Equality is not something to be done “out of the goodness of one’s heart”. It is something one does since it is expected of every citizen because inaccessibility and discrimination are prohibited by international law".

5. You were one of the initiators for establishing BIOINITIATIVE - an international group of scientists who monitor all published studies related to radiofrequency radiation health effects in order to accurately determine the number and percentage of scientific papers that proved harm compared to those that "found no evidence of harm" https://bioinitiative.org/. Could you please tell us more about it? Which studies have been published or done in addition, and which health risks do they address?

Prof. Olle Johansson:

The BioInitiative Report is a report on the relationship between the electromagnetic fields associated with power lines and wireless devices and health. It was published online, on 31 August 2007, by a group of 14 scientists, researchers, and public health policy professionals. The BioInitiative Report compiled papers from the scientific literature, divided into chapters, pointing to health as well as biological risks of electromagnetic fields and radiofrequency radiation. Some updated BioInitiative material was published in the journal Pathophysiology, guest-edited by the late professor Martin Blank, and a 2012 version of the report was released on 7 January 2013. The BioInitiative Report has been heavily criticized by certain research groups for its lack of balance, and that it was self-published online, without peer review, however, since the papers referred to practically all are published in peer review-based scientific journals, that type of criticism comes across as scientifically irrelevant and lame. Furthermore, the original version of The Bioinitiative Report comprised 600 pages, a manuscript far more extensive than any scientific journal ever would consider for peer review and formal publication. This overwhelming number of pages has, since then, been further extended, speaking volumes of evidence.

From reading The BioInitiative Report, one may understand that the various wireless systems used for telecommunication, as well as power lines serving the electricity grid, radio, TV, radar, and many more sources of artificial fields, are not proven safe, and that they all have been rolled out without any form of premarketing testing, or strategic health and environmental assessments, thus flaunting the Precautionary Principle of e.g. EU law. They have been rolled out without any public consultation or informed public consent as is normally the golden standard, leaving them with nowhere to escape from this radiation, and with nowhere to hide, thus seriously violating the UN Human Rights Act, the 2007 UN Convention on Human Rights for Persons with Functional Impairments, and the Nuremberg Code from 1947. They have been rolled out without any biologically-based exposure standards, but at the same time - which the Bioinitiative Report is one of many similar reports - they have been rolled out with a massive independent scientific research showing that the already existing man-made electromagnetic radiation from 4G, 3G, 2G, and many other similar sources, is harmful to public health and ecology. They have also been rolled out with a known prize-tag in the form of a huge ecological footprint. This ecological footprint will envelope this planet in an electrosmog blanket from which there is no escape. In this ‘prison’ surveillance and control will be everywhere, and every time, allowing for an electronic ‘1984’ of unimagined proportions, pushing George Orwell’s “Big Brother is watching you” into a chilling reality, far from a democratic system.

(Since these versions were published a number of very important scientific publications have been added, and are continuously added, however, this short interview doesn't allow for a complete coverage of the many thousands of relevant papers found in various peer review-based scientific journals. Therefore, I strongly urge the reader to familiarize themselves with e.g. PubMed and other literature databases for a complete picture of the current state-of-the-art.)

6. Australian scientists from the non-profit organization ORSAA (Oceania Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory Association) conducted a similar study, as well as BIOINITIATIVE, but they brought the results of scientific studies to correlation with funding sources. They found that in the studies funded by governments or independent institutions adverse effects are mostly discovered, while in research funded by industry and regulatory telecommunications agencies have mostly not been found.

The ORSAA research result was published in "Reviews on Environmental Health"magazine. (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325627752_A_novel_database_of_bio-effects_from_non-ionizing_radiation), Could you please comment results of that research as well as the impact of the corporate sector on institutions who create public policies.

Prof. Olle Johansson:

It is, unfortunately, obvious from a number of compilations that money rules - and therefore one has to always be very careful as a reader of such industry-funded documents and critically identify and follow the money. Of course, this makes it very important for public health authorities to never allow or invite any industrial, financial or corporate interests into their work. Governmental work must always be completely independent from any such influence or political pressure - otherwise, at best, it may end badly; at worst very, very badly.

7. You are one of the signatories of the International Appeal by which 266 BioMed scientists from more than forty countries warn the UN, the World Health Organization and national governments on the need to urgently establish measures for protection of population from radio frequency radiation, taking into account rapidly growth of wireless technologies. Could you, please, tell our readers more about that Appeal. ( https://emfscientist.org/)

Prof. Olle Johansson:

I have signed a number of various appeals, as well as written letters of my own, to different levels of our societies, including the UN, the WHO, and many others. To my great disappointment they have practically never answered, so it is very difficult to state an informed opinion about the impact of such appeals (see e.g. Johansson O, Ferm R, " “Yes, Prime Minister” Stefan Löfven, but no! This is not good enough!", Newsvoice.se 3/5, 2020.

https://newsvoice.se/2020/05/stefan-lofven-5g-microwave-radiation/ which is a letter to the former Swedish Prime Minister).

In general, all such appeals are about demanding the identification and implementation of biologically-based exposure standards instead of the current technical ones.

One should always remember that Professor Paolo Vecchia, head of ICNIRP at the time, at a conference at the Royal Society in London, the foremost scientific society in the world, said this in 2008 about using ICNIRP's (ICNIRP = the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) technical exposure guidelines:

"What they are not:

• Mandatory prescriptions for safety
• The “last word” on the issue
• Defensive walls for industry or others"
• (verbatim quote from voice recording)

He strongly emphasized that the ICNIRP guidelines are only technical in nature, and never were intended to be used as safety recommendations for medical issues or biological ones.

Furthermore, it should be noted that only one hygienic safety value ever has been proposed: 0.0000000001-0.0000000000001 µW/m2 – this is the natural background during normal cosmic activities; proposed by myself at a trade union meeting in Stockholm, already in 1997 (i.e. one year before the publication of ICNIRP's 1998 paper), as a genuine hygienic safety value, and since then many times repeatedly presented. (Given the highly artificial nature of the current wireless communication signals, e.g. of their pulsations and modulations, it may actually boil down to 0 (zero) µW/cm2 as the true safe level.) And do not ever believe it is possible to play it “safer” by only somewhat reducing the exposure levels! (cf. Johansson O, “To understand adverse health effects of artificial electromagnetic fields…  …is “rocket science” needed or just common sense?”, In: Essays on Consciousness – Towards a New Paradigm (ed. I. Fredriksson), Balboa Press, Bloomington, IN, USA, 2018, pp 1-38, ISBN 978-1-9822-0811-0). Ironically, this means that even a Precautionary Principle – if it is not firm enough – may not prove precautionary at all. Instead, it could lead to the classical “Late lessons from early warnings” or to my quote “Too late lessons from early warnings”… (Are you prepared to risk that for a set of toys, rather than life necessities..?)

So to believe that one single 6-, 10-, or 30-minute exposure of a fluid-filled plastic doll, in an otherwise completely radiation-free environment, only calculating acute heating effects, will be any form of safety measure is more than naive. It is dangerously naive. And not even the ICNIRP stands behind such risky behaviour!

8. On WHO web site there is an announcement: "There are no major risks to public health arising from several decades of EMF research, but uncertainties remain" with the note "Scientific work is carried out is in cooperation with the International Commission for gainst Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP)". (emf-project-brochure53115869-8825-4852-8800-f9490ec00313.pdf (who.int). According to their Statute, ICNIRP is a "non-profit organization with a scientific mission" with its headquarters in the Bavarian town Neuherberg. (https://www.icnirp.org/en/about-icnirp/aim-status-history/index.html). Two European Parliament Members (Michele Rivasi and Klaus Buchner) in 2020  published ICNIRP Report and exposed the conflicts of interest and corporate pressures for the 5G deployment.. (https://www.michele-rivasi.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/ICNIRP-report-FINAL-JUNE-2020_EN.pdf). The main commission, which makes recommendations for the limit levels of permissible radiation (for the entire frequency spectrum from 0-300 GHz), consists of 12 scientists (ICNIRP | Commission). They deny the existence of non-thermal effects. How do you comment the fact that WHO cooperates only with ICNIRP, and ignores the scientists from EMFScientist.org, who together published thousands of peer-reviewed scientific papers? Do you know any of those 12 scientists from the ICNIRP Commission who are engaged in research on radiofrequency radiation health effects? In your opinion, what is the reason that public health institutions, despite the results of numerous researches, do not talk about non-thermal effects at all?

Prof. Olle Johansson:

Of course, this is - from a scientific point of view - very odd, and needs to be addressed in a scientific sound way. As stated above, policymakers immediately should strictly control exposure by defining biologically-based maximal exposure guidelines also taking into account long-term, non-thermal effects, and not only trust short-term (maximum 30 minutes' use as a single call) thermal effects monitored in a fluid-filled plastic doll 'living' in a completely radiation-free environment, and thereafter calculated using a formula, instead of using a real measurement [cf. Panagopoulos DJ, Johansson O, Carlo GL, "Real versus simulated mobile phone exposures in experimental studies", BioMed Res Internat 2015, Article ID 607053, http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/607053]. As anyone can understand, this 'safety' reasoning has nothing to do with our reality.

9. The EMF Scientist Appeal states that 5G technology should be researched before use. The European Parliament Advisory Body, STOA (Panel for the Future Science and Technology) has the same standpoint. In their document "Health impact of 5G", available at on the website of the European Parliament, states "Implementation of 5G technology without further preventive studies would mean conducting an “experiment” on human population with complete uncertainty regarding the consequences”.

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/stoa/en/document/EPRS_STU(2021)690012      

Which measures, in your opinion, could be taken by EU citizens, to press the relevant institutions to respect these standpoints?

Prof. Olle Johansson:

Ask your elected officials - in public - if they can guarantee that the systems, like 5G, are safe. Only address simple questions, they are the most difficult to answer; always remember that. Also, phrase them so that only simple answers are asked for, like "yes", "no", "I do not know", or a figure/number. Finally, never accept an evasive answer - keep asking the same question again, and again, and... Also, always remember that there are no stupid questions. Only occasional evasive and/or dishonest answers. (Unfortunately, often when I see the general public asking for information, people have a strong tendency to wrap their questions into a lot of background talk; it may even be hard - or impossible - to understand what a person is asking for. So, simplify!)

10. The WHO website claims that 5G mobile networks do not spread the Covid-19 virus (https://www.who.int/multi-media/details/5g-mobile-networks-do-not-spread-covid-19). We can agree that viruses are not transmitted via electromagnetic waves. Whether, according to your knowledge, radiation from 5G networks has harmful effects on immune systems and thus makes it easier to get sick from viruses, including Covid 19 or maybe cause similar symptoms in the body as in vial infections? Could it make cell membranes more permeable, enabling the entry of viruses into the cells, as well as other harmful substances (for example, floating particles from polluted air)?

Prof. Olle Johansson:

This is a very interesting hypothesis, however at this point in time we can only conclude that anything and everything is possible, but we need to further investigate such connections and direct/indirect effects. Impacts on the immune system are very well described [cf. Johansson O, “Disturbance of the immune system by electromagnetic fields — A potentially underlying cause for cellular damage and tissue repair reduction which could lead to disease and impairment”, Pathophysiology 2009; 16: 157-177], as are effects at the cellular, and subcellular level, including the membranous one.

11. In one of your researches, you deal with the influence of electromagnetic radiation on bees.( https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346965709_DOES_ENHANCED_ELECTROMAGNETIC_RADIATION_DISTURB_HONEYBEES'_BEHAVIOUR_OBSERVATIONS_DURING_NEW_YEAR'S_EVE_2019 ). Winged pollinators play a key role in food production. Why are the public media silent about the fact that intensive development of wireless technologies posess a serious threat not only for human health but also for all eco systems on our planet?

Prof. Olle Johansson:

I don't know, and I don't understand this silence. As I stated above, it could lead to the classical “Late lessons from early warnings” or to my quote “Too late lessons from early warnings”…

I repeat from above: All around the world dramatic reductions in pollinating insect populations are noted, for instance in Germany where more than 75% of them are just gone, Canada has lost more than 90% of their honey bees, and the USA more than 90% of their bumble bees. I am particularly concerned about this because I already have a number of papers in my files dealing with this angle; I have even recently written a short commentary based on them: Johansson O, "To bee, or not to bee, that is the five “G” question", Newsvoice.se 28/5, 2019, https://newsvoice.se/2019/05/5g-question-olle-johansson/. I also know that other areas around the world have reported similar huge bee colony collapses, and my strong efforts now are to seek ways to conserve, protect and enhance our pollinators, wherever they reside, and thus conserve, protect and enhance ourselves. If we do not engage, then we certainly may head towards a moment in history where future generations - if any - will ask us "Why didn't you react and act?"

More recently, I have also pointed to the importance of implementing adult laws and regulations solely to protect life on the planet [cf. Johansson O, "The Stockholm Declaration about "Life EMC"", Bee Culture Magazine 2022; May issue: 56-61]. 

The background for this is the fact that thanks to strong regulations and laws, different household gadgets, appliances, and work tools, are not allowed to interact with each other, thus jeopardizing each other’s technical functions. To secure the electromagnetic robustness for this kind of adverse effects, and shielding off interference and/or disturbances, as well as geomagnetic storms, different technologies are tested for so-called “Technical EMC” (ElectroMagnetic Compatibility) demands. Many years ago, in a commentary in the Swedish magazine “Ny Teknik” (“Människan är lika känslig som maskinen” (“The human is as sensitive as the machine,” in Swedish), no. 4, 1997), I launched the idea and new demand that since we protect all our various equipment from radiation interference and damage, we also have to do the same with our own health. In that commentary in “Ny Teknik,” I introduced the concept of “Human EMC.” By 2022, I have taken it one step further and point to the need to establish stringent, law-abiding, hygienic absolute safety exposure standards for all life on the planet: “Life EMC.”

12. How do you comment the Starlink project as well as thousands of satellites that SPACE-X and some other private companies send into orbit around the Earth, in order to establish an Internet connection in every single area on the Earth, including, deserts, mountains and oceans? As Artur Firstenberg writes in his book, there will be “No Place to Hide” on Earth.

Prof. Olle Johansson:

I agree. As stated above: "This ecological footprint will envelope this planet in an electrosmog blanket from which there is no escape. In this ‘prison’ surveillance and control will be everywhere, and every time, allowing for an electronic ‘1984’ of unimagined proportions, pushing George Orwell’s “Big Brother is watching you” into a chilling reality, far from a democratic system." In it, satellites are just one, of many, details of the wireless communication infrastructure. 

The obvious final question is: Do you want it? Do you need it?

This is just a short reply, there is a lot more to cover, but I must limit myself not to flood your electronic desk. 

Esteemed and dear professor Johansson, I thank you very much and look forward to a possible conversation in the near future.

Pridružite se:

WEB STRANICA:
https://arnasebalj.com

Telegram kanal Arna Šebalj:
https://t.me/arnakanal

Chat, grupa
S Arnom i istinom:
https://t.me/arnasebalj

SVJEDOČANSTVA "CIJEPLJENIH" u HRVATSKOJ

https://t.me/+jUM0zkaioNxmZDQ0

Svjedočanstva NE-cijepljenih u Hrvatskoj
https://t.me/+FKt1CiAN8fwyOGU0

FB
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100086873156577

YOUTUBE KANAL:
//youtube.com/@medijskagrupa1?feature=shared">https://youtube.com/@medijskagrupa1?feature=shared