[ Envirowatchers ] [ Main Menu ]
15948
From: pamela, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Lloyds Insurers Refuse to Cover 5G Wi-Fi Illnesses
URL: https://principia-scientific.org/lloyds-insurers-refuse-to-cover-5g-wi-fi-illnesses/
|
Lloyds Insurers Refuse to Cover 5G Wi-Fi Illnesses Published on February 12, 2019 Written by phibetaiota.net Lloyds of London, one of the world’s premier insurance groups, is refusing to insure health claims made against 5G wireless (“wi-fi”) technologies. How curious that Lloyds of London has excluded from their policies any negative health effects caused by wi-fi technologies. Now, WHY would Lloyds leave all that money on the table if these technologies are so safe? And, why are other insurance companies following Lloyds’ lead? If you think that following-the-money provides insights, you’ll probably conclude that something VERY BIG is embedded in this decision. Here’s some background (including links): The FCC and other government regulatory bodies, in collusion with the big telecomm industries, are ferociously pushing smart meters, 5G and the Internet of Things. This roll-out is not only happening in the US, but all over the world. The giant telecomms gush enthusiastically about how EVERYTHING will be connected OMG!! We’re gonna have Incredibly high-speed connectivity so your little girls and teens can, at supersonic speed, upload pix of their latest nail-polish jobs or cute puppy videos to FaceBook, Pinterest, etc., etc., for their friends to gasp and giggle…..and, of course, click “like” and forward these to their friends…. again, all at warp speed. It’s pretty clear that this whole “play” by the giant telecomms is seen by them as a financial windfall – for them. And, via their lobby groups, it’s seen as a windfall for all the politicians who support this agenda. Politicians will be rewarded in the usual manner – pricey junkets to exotic places, elegant dinners, campaign contributions and, of course, cushy “golden parachute” jobs for those wi-fi supportive ex-politicians within the telecomm industries, or within their lobby groups. In short, crony business as usual. BUT WAIT!! ….There’s a tiny but growing wrinkle in this rosy scenario of sugar plums dancing in the heads of these telecomm leaders. Specifically, Lloyds of London, one of the world’s premier insurance groups, is refusing to insure health claims made against wireless technologies. And, other insurance companies are following Lloyd’s lead in this. If you follow the money, this is HUGE. After all, if these wi-fi techno-toys are so safe, why is Lloyds leaving all this additional money on the table? Well, Lloyd’s November 2010 Risk Assessment Team’s Report gives us a solid clue: the report compares these wireless technologies with asbestos, in that the early research on asbestos was “inconclusive” and only later did it become obvious to anyone paying attention that asbestos causes cancer. Keep in mind that Lloyd’s Risk Assessment study of wi-fi was published over 8 years ago. Even back then, however, their Risk Assessment Team was smart enough to realize that new evidence just might emerge showing that the various wi-fi frequencies do cause illness. The result? Lloyds opted to exclude coverage for wi-fi related illnesses. And then, PG&E followed close on, slipping in its own legal clauses (just as it was rolling out smart meters) that claim no liability for wi-fi related health damage. The schools who opt to put in wi-fi are responsible, according to PG&E, and any other organizations that opt to have PG&E put wi-fi in their buildings are the responsible parties Today, MANY more recent peer-reviewed scientific studies show a range of serious damage caused by these wi-fi frequencies. 5G brings a quantum leap in damage – to DNA, to cell mitochondria, and much more. Fortunately the global public is waking up. Conversations are in the air about a global class-action lawsuit vs. the SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS WORLDWIDE who are recklessly ignoring the Precautionary Principle in their promotion of advanced wi-fi technologies. In part – goes the growing conversation – the lawsuit will be based on the Nuremburg Principle of “informed consent.” After all, what’s going on is a tiny handful of people are pushing a huge experiment on what will be billions of people, all without have gotten their informed consent … and without insurance for those who are electromagnetically sensitive – a growing group to watch. These unfortunate individuals are our “canaries” in the coal mine. Pay close attention. This whole issue is about to become a whole lot more interesting. Why Does Lloyd’s of London Exclude EMF Coverage – EMF and Your Health Series #4 After years of listening to cellular phone companies assure us that WiFi and cell phone transmission is safe, why did Lloyds of London, a company who will take risks when other insurers won’t exclude EMF injuries? Are they expecting an avalanche of health claims related to EMF? What Does Lloyd’s of London Know that We don’t know? We think Lloyd’s underwriters must be reading the research findings from major publications like the BioInitiative Report. Included in this report are summaries of research publications between 1990 -2014 on the biological effects of radio frequency and cell phone radiation. The research news is chilling. Prolonged exposure to EMF causes cellular malfunction, the formation of free radicals which then leads to a multitude of health issues. There are many physicians who now believe EMF effects underlie ALL medical issues. This report was created by 29 authors from around the world, including 10 with medical degrees, 21 PhDs and 3 masters degrees. More than 100,000 people visit their site annually (http://www.bioinitiative.org). No longer can public officials pretend EMF is harmless. The cat is out of the bag! Schools May Foot the Bill with WiFi Injuries Lloyds is dumping the blame back on schools. In their insurance waiver, they state clearly that it is schools responsibility to inform parents and teachers if WiFi is being installed in their schools. Parents for Safe Schools and other groups want to know why schools are not acknowledging the proven health effects of EMF? By allowing WiFi to be installed in the schools, they are acting as if WiFi is a safe technology. For many individuals, animals and plant life, serious health consequences occur with daily exposure to EMF. more at link |
15952
From: Alan, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Lloyds Insurers Refuse to Cover 5G Wi-Fi Illnesses
URL: Is 5G A CIA Plot?
|
Woo CT Pseudo scince of the highest order If the supposed "electromagnetically sensitive – a growing group to watch" want money for their condition (you might want to cash in Pam) then try going for the Million dollar Challenge or similar Is 5G A CIA Plot? There is a well-established principle in journalism that if a headline asks a question there is always a simple answer. But before we get to that I'd like to look at where I got the idea that 5G might be a CIA plot. It was on a bus shelter in Archway, North London. As I spend much of my life worrying about explaining 5G it was a shock to see a flyposter addressing it and I was amazed that anyone might be strongly opposed to it. Indifference perhaps, I once drove round that very Archway roundabout with Jeremy Corbyn as my passenger and completely failed to engage him in a conversation about 5G. "In my day we only had CB radio" he told me. So as I rode my Boardman Hybrid Pro up to the bus shelter I stopped. Gawped and neatly detached one of the two leaflets blu-tacked to the glass. Let's look at the claims, those that New Scientist would call Fruitloopery. "Substantial evidence and studies exist to prove that 5G millimetre waves are dangerous to humans and our environment as well as to birds and bees". Er, no it doesn't. Yes, you can show that a high power 28 GHz beam can do damage but not at the power levels being proposed for 5G. To make the claim above would be like saying "It's been proved that loud noises can cause permanent hearing loss so we should ban all orchestras". "Those most at risk include the unborn, children, the infirm, the elderly and the disabled". I've been following the rubbish talked about the dangers of mobile phones for thirty years and this is an oft-repeated lie. It has its basis in the Stewart Report of 1999. What the report said was that although we've looked really hard and not found any signs that there might be any harm from mobile phones, if there are any gaps in our knowledge it may be that young children are more vulnerable. The only health issue Stewart actually identified was from people driving while using a mobile phone. The addition of the infirm, elderly and disabled is, however, a new one on me. Disabled is such a broad brush it's a strange inclusion. Lauren Steadman is clearly disabled, yet one of the fittest people you'll encounter. "Published studies show that current wireless exposure already causes cancers, alters brain development and contributes too [sic] many of our health problems" No, they don't. At least not anything published anywhere with a smidgen of credibility. The mobile phone has been the most accepted piece of technology in the history of mankind. There are more mobile phones in use than there are people on the planet. People are more likely to own a mobile phone than own a toothbrush. We've had the "current wireless exposure" in the mass market at 900 MHz since 1985 and at 1800 MHz since 1994. Despite all these billions of people and decades of use there is no evidence of ill-effect. Millions has been spent looking for detrimental effects of exposure to mobile phones and none found. I was chosen at random - not as a journalist or as someone in the industry - to take part in a cohort study which follows people over decades and asks about their phone use and health. Every few years I get emailed a link to a survey to fill in. I was asked as an early user of Orange. As far as I know the research is still on-going but that's the point. Governments do take this research seariously and it's failed to find anything. "Living near phone masts cause head aches, memory problems, dizziness, depression and sleep problems as well as life threatning cancers yet Govt's are preparing to install small cell towers and wireless facilities everywhere including on streetlights and utility poles as well as covering the whole country with small cell towers between 100 to 300 metres apart and directly in front of our homes." Deep sign. No, no, no. There might be some illogical psychosomatic effects, that because people believe that the cell site near their home is affecting them it actually is, but in terms of direct medical harm this is a fiction. There is a bit which is almost correct in that there are plans for lots of small cells, but small cells and cell towers are different things. "Small cell tower" is an oxymoron. It's the mobile phone networks planning the small cell installation not the government, and as for covering the whole country we can only wish that were true. It rambles on in a similar vein. I'll leave you to read the rest of it but I have done a bit more fact-checking. I can't find anything about Lloyds of London and 5G other than a note about the sharing economy and a call for less government regulation. Yes, the CIA invests in technology, I bet they buy a lot of stationary and toilet paper too. You can hardly say that Andrex has been weaponised as a result. The leaflet embraces the usual non-sequitur arguments of the desperate and finally resorts to employing facts which have nothing to do with the arguments they are making. I particularly like the mention of Professor William Webb and I suspect the comments come from a very polarised reading of his excellent book The 5G Myth. In it and in a couple of debates I've attended and in conversations we've had he does indeed say that 5G is not the answer to connectivity. But what he argues for is not just fibre optic cables - although everyone agrees we need more of those - what William Webb proposes is substantially more spending on 4G and upgrading of wireless internet infrastructure. This is completely contrary to the views of the leaflet so it seems odd to cite William as a reference. Indeed when I showed him the leaflet William told me "Of course, there are always detractors for almost any new technology, and health concerns around mobile phones have been a feature for at least 30 years now - still without any proof. For all its flaws, the criticisms levelled here against 5G are, as you'd imagine, rather ridiculous. It's amusing that to find out more you're encouraged to visit a website...which most will do using their mobile phone!" For even more Fruitloopery you might be amused to visit the author's website or facebook page. You'll dsicover a rich seam of "truths" about chemtrails and vaccines. At the start of this piece I said there is a well-established principle in journalism that if a headline asks a question there is always a simple answer. That answer is always "No". |
15954
From: pamela, [DNS_Address]
Subject: btw Alan/Nasirah
| I was showing Llyods of London doesn't cover wireless anything... read my reply, another article showing it doesn't cover wireless. Don't change the subject of my thread. |
Responses:
None
15953
From: pamela, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Lloyds Insurers Refuse to Cover 5G Wi-Fi Illnesses
|
Looks legit to me, Lloyds of London and other Insurance company's do not cover 5G or other wireless By B.N. Frank This isn’t breaking news: High Risk Insurer, Lloyd’s of London, won’t cover any-wireless radiation hazards. This includes cell phones, cell towers, digital and wireless utility “Smart” Meters, and other wireless devices and infrastructure. Click here to review their policy. much more at link |
Responses:
[15955]
15955
From: Alan, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Lloyds Insurers Refuse to Cover 5G Wi-Fi Illnesses
|
"High Risk Insurer, Lloyd’s of London, won’t cover any-wireless radiation hazards. This includes cell phones, cell towers, digital and wireless utility “Smart” Meters, and other wireless devices and infrastructure. Click here to review their policy.| D'oh so Lloyds don't cover and never have done 5G, 4G, 3G, 2G 1 G and 'cell phones, cell towers, digital and wireless utility “Smart” Meters, and other wireless devices and infrastructure. " Microwave ovens (though I did advise many moons ago a chap with learning difficulties not to rest his head near microwave oven as he liked to hear the ping - apparently a few years later he did had a stroke... Hazard a guess because there's no evidence that there's a widespread problem - Emphasis evidence based - and suddenly you have a bee in your bonnet about 5G and satellites that have been orbiting and rader mapping since the 60s and 70s. Have you personally been effected by mobile phone, wireless transmissions as you seem to say that 'anything and everything' effexts you so how you differentiate between quakes, volcanoes, kittens meowing the world over and 5G satellites? because if you can prove you can then you can earn the easiest million dollars you've ever earnt in your life. Please Pam research what evidence based means and implactions of it on your CT woo beliefs. |
Responses:
None
15949
From: Angelina, [DNS_Address]
Subject: Re: Lloyds Insurers Refuse to Cover 5G Wi-Fi Illnesses
| Many thanks for posting these links on 5G. |
Responses:
None
[ Envirowatchers ] [ Main Menu ]