Big Internet

by

Electromagnetic Radiation Due to Cellular, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth Technologies: How Safe Are We? | Children’s Health Defense

Upset sad woman talking on mobile phone. Cellular mobile radiationBy A. Naran

Conclusion: Wireless devices are harmful to human health. For now, wireless technologies must be avoided as much as possible.

“People should be made aware that the EMR from using day to day cellular, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth devices are harmful to human health. The levels of radiation observed in most cases such as phone calls, internet browsing on laptops and smartphones, using wireless routers and hotspots, Bluetooth smartwatches and smartphones are unsafe when compared with radiation limits determined by medical bodies. According to the current medical literature, various adverse health effects from exposure to RF EMR have been well documented. New and innovative wired solutions which provide the same level of user-friendliness should be encouraged.”

Note: This is a review article about the science on this issue. It is important because it was published in the IEEE journal. The IEEE is the international organization of engineers. The current FCC obsolete guidelines are based on the IEEE recommended guidelines which are thermally based i.e., they are based on the false assumption that unless the radiation changes the temperature in tissue, it is not harmful.

That may be good physics but it is bad biology. When the FCC wanted to adopt the IEEE guidelines, all the health agencies wrote letters objecting the guidelines. Some of them criticized the use of engineers’ recommendations for biological effects when they didn’t even have one medical professional on the committee that developed the guidelines.

by

Facebook Censoring Former U.S. Congressman Ron Paul Based on Bogus Politifact ‘Fact-Check’ | Ron Paul Institute

FalseinformationfoundonJohnnyLibertySocial media behemoth Facebook has just acted to censor and suppress Ron Paul’s latest weekly column, “The Coronavirus Hoax,” based on a hatchet job “fact check” by the notoriously biased “Politifact” organization.

At issue is Dr. Paul’s statement that National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases director Anthony Fauci’s claim that the coronavirus is “ten times more deadly” than the seasonal influenza virus is “without any scientific basis.” Fauci made the claim recently in testimony before the US Congress in a move that significantly ramped up the fear factor in the US over the virus.

The Politifact “fact check” is literally drenched in sarcasm and bias, with Ron Paul being described as “a sometimes conspiracy-minded Texas doctor” and Fauci described as a “universally trusted person.”

For a “just the facts” analysis, that’s a lot of editorializing.

The Politifact hit piece admits that, “It’s not yet known what the death rate from the current coronavirus, COVID-19, will be,” but concludes nevertheless that, “early data indicate it is more than 10 times higher than the death rate for the flu.”

So if you don’t know how can you know?

One reason to question the “scientific basis” of Fauci’s claim is that Fauci contradicted his own statement before Congress in a recent article he co-authored in the New England Journal of Medicine.

If a scientist writes one thing in a scholarly journal and testifies very differently before Congress, does it not raise questions as to the “scientific basis” of the divergent claims?

Here are the two Anthony Faucis. Which one is scientifically based? Both can’t be:

fa

Founded by the Poynter Institute, Politifact is an outfit with a clear political agenda and it is not to promote truth and accuracy in the media. Rather, it is all about suppressing media outlets with which they disagree. It is all about creating blacklists in a McCarthyite push to control the flow of information.

Interestingly enough, major funders of the Poynter Institute include “open society” advocate George Soros along with Charles Koch (both founders and major funders of the “Quincy Institute“).

Soros loves an “open society” as long as it does not in any way challenge his own political biases. If anyone holds different views, he’ll spend millions to shut down debate.

The Poynter Institute is also funded by the United States government itself, via major grants from the National Endowment for Democracy. So here is what happens when you scratch below the surface a bit: The suppression of views like those of Ron Paul which are unpopular among those who control the foreign policy narrative are actually financed by the US government itself.

Do any of our dear readers support the US government taking our tax money and using it to shut Ron Paul up?

How is it that Facebook tries to sell itself as politically neutral, just making sure only facts are allowed through, while at the same time partnering with such a politically biased and unethical organization as Politifact and the Poynter Institute? Is Facebook really about fostering a lively debate or is it about controlling the narrative favored by the Washington elites?

We have fact-checked Politifact’s fact checkers and we find them to be biased, sloppy, and inimical to the values we should share as Americans in favor of open debate.

And Facebook? End your suppression of Dr. Ron Paul’s op-ed on the coronavirus!

Source: Ron Paul Institute

by

The U.S. Wants Smartphone Location Data to Fight Coronavirus. Privacy advocates are worried | NBC News

200318-coronavirus-new-york-oculus-se-1039p_e7dd421e936d5d4b551425cf3f86fb44.fit-1240wJohnny Liberty, Editor’s Note: As Edward Snowden was correct to reveal to the international press (at the sacrifice of his own well-being and freedom) that the NSA had abused their power and broke the law in gathering metadata on every American citizen, giving more power to the government is not a wise move regardless of the reason. Once they have that power, they’ll always have it (and will eventually abuse it). For example, the USA Patriot Act continues to be in force today without a tangible terrorist threat. Your civil liberties and sovereign rights continue to be compromised daily.

By Dylan Byers

Federal health officials say they could use anonymous, aggregated user data collected by the tech companies to map the spread of the virus.

The White House and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are asking Facebook, Google and other tech giants to give them greater access to Americans’ smartphone location data in order to help them combat the spread of the coronavirus, according to four people at companies involved in the discussions who are not authorized to speak about them publicly.

Federal health officials say they could use anonymous, aggregated user data collected by the tech companies to map the spread of the virus — a practice known as “syndromic surveillance” — and prevent further infections. They could also use the data to see whether people were practicing “social distancing.”

Some sources stressed that the effort would be anonymized and that government would not have access to specific individuals’ locations. They noted that users would be required to opt-in to the effort.

The federal effort, first reported by The Washington Post, will force the tech giants to weigh their commitments to user privacy against their desire to help combat a disease that has cost thousands of human lives and upended the global economy.

Full coverage of the coronavirus outbreak

The government officials have held at least two calls in recent days with representatives from the companies, the sources said. Those officials are “very serious” about making this happen, a person at one of the tech companies said.

Similar and more aggressive surveillance practices have already been put to use in China, South Korea and Israel. The moves have set off alarm bells among privacy advocates who fear what the government may do with users’ data.

Facebook already provides health researchers and nongovernmental organizations in some countries with anonymized data to help disease prevention efforts. Laura McGorman, policy lead of Facebook’s “Data for Good” program, said a similar effort could be used “to understand and help combat the spread of the virus.”

But other sources warned that providing the government with greater access to anonymized location data now could lead to the erosion of individual privacy down the line, especially if the government starts to ask for non-anonymized data.

Representatives from Facebook, Google, Twitter, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, IBM and Cisco all took part in the call with White House and federal health officials. Spokespeople for the companies declined to comment on the discussions.

Source: NBC News