Category Archives: Cancer

Fake News vs Media Freedom and Alternative Truths

Media freedom houses the implied agreement to freedom of speech not only enshrined in Constitutions, but as a birthright.  Below I have provided a range of links to articles to awaken awareness to the reasons why freedom of speech underlined by truth is critical for humanity’s development.  The last article is the Freedom of the Press Foundation’s critique of Donald Trump.  I have just checkout out their board, and I am confident, they are bonifide journalists.  So I take on board their critique but remain open to questions in respect of Trump’s critiques.  

https://freedom.press/about/board/

The key is to keep an open mind and trust yourself, as you have inner guidance that will show you what is true and what is not. If you are still enough you will recognise a lie spun sprouting great principles as often the wolf comes in sheep’s clothing offering a good but underneath that is another agenda. So stay discerning of information but do not become cynical as the world is full of good intentions and negative and it is the yin/yang of life. It creates the clash of ideas, religions, civilisations and ideologies. This clash shakes up truth, as is its job.  In the future there will be inquiries into mass deception and mind control.

This blog is in the public interest.  

As you independently research you come to realise how much is not told in the so-called free press.  On the other hand there are shining lights in the media who risk life and limb to bring the story to the public’s attention.  However, media freedom can be caught up in the propaganda to justify restricting freedom of speech.  On the other hand the media have to be accountable for not revealing important information in the public interest. Compounding this issue is the online reality that is being forced on every person on the planet due to the ambitions of Silicon Valley partnering with equity financiers, like the Rothschilds, who have a vested interest in power and control given their lineage. Is this in the public interest to have an IT industry empowered by financiers to maximise profits of world business and at the same time remove privacy given influence in governments? There are also major questions around radiation and biological impacts (e.g. cancer, DNA), depopulation, targeting individuals, restricting information (them and us, type of information), rule by algorithms (filtering news and educational content), mind control (repeated messages), access to iPhones (private conversations), 5G mm waves and health impacts and the loss of felt humanity? 

What I have found is when money is NOT involved we have a chance at finding some light in the darkness of vested interest, politics, egoic defence and brand image risk management protection.  Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely is a truism. Money is power in our world (so it is believed) and people will obey when money talks. Yet the real power in this world is love of truth and each other.  Community bonds are powerful as well but minimised. Truth is the real gold in our world and it is the real liberator from falsehood and deception. Truth, when accurate, empowers people to make their own decisions. The real leadership is within every person when they decide for themselves. That is what life gave them from birth, the power of self determination. This is inherent within human rights or what I tend to say, the right to be human.

I personally found the Guardian here in Australia a good source and investigative journalists from the ABC. However, the ABC is likely to be sold off by the Liberal Party as a leak revealed at their national conference. I noted that Nine Entertainment now owns The Age.  Peter Costello, former Liberal Treasurer is the Chairman of the Board.  If that is not a conflict of interest, I don’t know what is!  We have Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation and subsidiaries owning the majority of the media in key markets across the world. It is evident it has a right wing leaning. As a US citizen he is supportive of US interests not the Australian people. Yet he is the unannounced king maker to whom many make pilgrimages to in order to be validated for power.  Where is the media critique and community action around this clear bias. 

No-one should have any concentration in the media. They definitely should not have political affiliations or biases as a group.  Media must be absolutely clear of bias and constructed in the format of peace journalism, where both sides are shown and questions asked, so the community learns to think for themselves.  A profile of Rupert’s empire is as follows:

Links: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch

Peter Costello is the Chairman of Nine Entertainment. The question for the public is, should ex-political figures still aligned with politics be able to have control over media given vested interests?

https://www.news.com.au/finance/business/media/unbelievably-sad-fears-for-fairfax-legacy-as-183yearold-firm-bought-by-nine-entertainment/news-story/fe7db7b5f5d1ef1940e2cd10ac93cf93

This story below I just found which features Tim Costello, brother of Peter Costello. Tim and Peter were often at logger heads as he is a priest and Peter, a former Treasurer.  One speaking morals the other speaking money. This article talks to the corruption of Crown Casino. I note a little media item where the current Victorian government are looking into this. 

I’ve had inspiration around Crown Casino.  I note the word ‘Crown’ these days and the shields, symbols that reflect power, I feel the links to established power and endorsement. Interestingly, I interviewed Edward de Bono (famous Lateral Thinking expert) at the hotel at Crown. He was quick to say to me he wasn’t at the Casino, just staying at the hotel. Back then I had no idea, I am slowly waking up now.  

This article highlights why media freedom is essential and the importance of reporting on corruption as the public outcry does have power and is heard, alone we are ignored. The public has to find the truth if they want to be empowered to create change in its image not other’s with vested interests. This grows more important as our ecology collapses reminding us of our own imbalance.  It is true that knowledge with wisdom empowers.   Here is the article on the Crown Casino: https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/the-troubled-birth-of-crown-casino-we-were-warned-20190808-p52fa1.html

The links below will definitely not appear in the mainstream media. This provides insights into the different styles of reporting. Independent reporting is revealing what has been hidden by information control in the mainstream media. However, the internet freedom (whilst we still have it) is essential to being out the truth so that people can make balanced decisions, given their money is spent in ways they have no idea about. Those in positions of power must be held to account and those orchestrating false information must be tried.  Deception, PR spin, falsifying media items (video, written) in order to influence public opinion undermines democratic principles and freedoms (real freedom). The purpose of democracy is underlined by the implied ‘We the People’ and it is to represent not enslave the world community. I recall giving my poem ‘We the People’ to Kristine Keneally (shadow Minister Home Affairs). Later that day I recall her saying there would never be a Charter of Rights for the people. That is etched into my mind.  MP Andrew Wilkie tried to pass a Bill of Rights for Australians on 24 March 2020.  This was not passed. Questions should be asked.  Rights arise when values decline this is why democracy (in its true sense) is under threat with increasing secrecy, non disclosure, changes to discrimination laws, weakening of regulators, costly legal action and most notably media ownership – buying up the press by those seeking to ‘shape’ views rather than respecting diversity and allowing the publics differences to shape the future on the basis of debate, informed discussion, critiques and real needs in order to understand what is true and what is not and what is needed and what is not. As public money is channeled in the direction of influence not the greatest need. Critical thinking is essential if people are to be led out of the infotainment, electronic addictions, distractors and mainlining cultivated information to fulfil the needs of specific economic and financial interests.  

It is real freedom from fear that enables discernment. I turn off the television, I don’t listen much to radio and I inform myself using instinct, intuition, intellect, feeling and the love of truth to guide my words and actions.  My only interest is peace as harmony. I dreamed I was teaching peace and this changed my life from a market analyst to peace maker.  I was a community journalist in public radio for a few years. I was seeking to find my voice and allow other voices to be heard. Surveillance happened after I aired Scott Ritter (senior weapons inspector, Iraq) and Major Douglas Rokke (depleted uranium expert, Pentagon). I had no knowledge of the murky, smoke and dagger world of intelligence. Today I have become wiser. 

Peace will only arise from inner peace which resolves inner conflict (untruth) as realisation (ah ha) informs as the real shape changer.  This is how personal growth happens, you awaken bit by bit to the truth of what is really going on. You cannot go back to the uninformed unconscious life that just believes what it hears, reads and sees.  I no longer believe in most of it.  I am disillusioned but in a good way. I refer to my life similar to the ‘philosophers stone’ where questions open pathways to truth, intent is important. As I reach for truth I find myself changing as I grow in awareness.   I am open to being wrong, but ultimately I have felt the awakening and I come into a feeling of  ‘knowing’. This knowing is ‘I know I don’t know’ which opens my mind. It is the real wisdom, which is no about knowing it all but awakening to the illusion of it.  Below is further links I found by following a gentle search for truth.

This excerpt is from an article I believe is in the public interest and is the basis of control in our world. I remember Fiona Barnett saying once paedophilia is solved and those involved brought to justice much of the evils of our world will disappear. I felt truth in that. However, having said that by all means you critique the article and find your own truth, as I believe we all have to work it out ourselves. This article provides an insight as a contrast to the mainstream media. You would never find this article on the front page of a popular newspaper. I present it with a noteworthy quote which awakens to the underbelly of power:

“The ‘mass hysteria’ and ‘false memory’ bromides disseminated by the establishment press obscure federal and academic connections to the mind control cults, which are defended largely by organized pedophiles, cultists and hired guns of psychiatry.”

Refer: https://constantinereport.com/mass-media-concealment-of-the-nazi-style-mind-control-atrocities/

I suspect this is the main driver of misinformation embedded in the intelligence community.  I have concerns about Home Affairs or Homeland Security, the latter called ‘shadow government’ by former CIA Kevin Shipp. When intelligence is blended with an internal intelligence capability it raises real concerns about false flag operations, fake stunts to cause terror, holographic imagery and the very real concern of cults in positions of power. The Bush Administration is a case in point and the links to the Skull and Bones, KKK and CIA Whistleblower assertions of 911 as a CIA operation It further raises questions about COVID-19.

There has to be critical thinking. I don’t necessarily subscribe to the Trump narrative but I do think there is truth in what he is saying. It is not for the media to get defensive at the critiques but investigate as intelligence merges with the media as part of information control (counter=terrorism techniques).

Whistleblowers are coming out and revealing what the mainstream media is not revealing. For example ex CIA whistleblower:

Montgomery maintains that the data on the hard drives prove the existence of THE HAMMER and prove that Brennan and Clapper engaged in illegal domestic surveillance, despite the existence of safeguards that were already in place.

MONTGOMERY, ‘THE HAMMER’ SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM WHISTLEBLOWER, BECAME THE DEEP STATE’S ENEMY NUMBER ONE AFTER EXPOSING THE TRUTH

 

The last article is from Freedom of the Press Foundation online.  It is a critique of Trump. However, I see some truth in his tweets. He is definitely taking on the established media and those infiltrated by vested interests. Yes he is crass, yes a misogynist, yes a deal maker, ball breaker, but interestingly, he is taking on the power elites.  Why? he is not in the club. He doesn’t give a toss what anyone thinks, he plays by his own rules. He is a leader as he makes his own decisions. Yet there would still be room for critique with him in that he hasn’t revealed the whole truth, yet he is leaking out questions, particularly about COVID-19.  The question is are people giving thought to what is the truth of COVID-19?

https://freedom.press/news/trump-crisis-mode-tweets-his-2000th-attack-press/

Freedom of the Press Foundation

 

Trump, in crisis mode, tweets his 2000th attack on the press

Stephanie_Sugars_Headshot

Reporter, U.S Press Freedom Tracker

KM

Managing Editor, US Press Freedom Tracker

PFT_2kTweets_Blog.jpg
 

Illustration/Kelsey Borch

As the COVID-19 pandemic continues to upend daily life, President Donald Trump accelerated smearing the press on Twitter, reaching 2,000 negative tweets about the media in a string of insults and accusations on April 11, 2020.

According to our analysis of more than 19,400 of Trump’s tweets, 2,000 means that he has, on average, tweeted negatively about the press more than once a day for the past 4 ½ years. While the president’s rate of tweeting about the media has varied over those years, a noticeable uptick occurred as the severity of the new coronavirus progressed throughout the United States, and his administration’s handling of the global health crisis came under increased criticism.

The 2,000th tweet came on a Saturday, as part of a series of posted and deleted tweets, criticizing the coverage of no fewer than five outlets and accusing most of bias, if not outright corruption. The 2,000th tweet:

2000 Tweet PFT_2000

The U.S. Press Freedom Tracker maintains a searchable database tracking Twitter posts in which Trump mentions media, individual journalists or news outlets in a negative tone since he declared his candidacy in June 2015.

In January, we wrote that Trump’s anti-press tweeting had begun ramping up last year around his official reelection campaign launch, and that he was following the same “playbook” of attacking the press on Twitter that he used during his first campaign. Those Twitter mentions, however, dropped dramatically after the impeachment inquiry began in September 2019 and stayed relatively low through the end of the year.

As concerns about the new coronavirus took hold in the U.S. in early 2020, Trump’s negative media tweet rate began accelerating to a pace not seen in the previous 5 months. It rose from 5.6% of his overall tweets in January to 11.2% in March. During the week of March 23 — when the U.S. began to lead the world in confirmed cases — Trump criticized the news media in nearly one in every five tweets.

2000 Tweet PFT_Graph1

The Nation’s First Virus Death, and an ‘Enemy of the People’ Tweet

On March 1, Trump referred to a sweeping number of print and broadcast news outlets as “The Enemy of the People,” a term he first used shortly after taking office but which had seen less use in the previous six months.

The tweet came one day after the U.S. recorded its first coronavirus death, that of a Washington state man in his 50s.

The Times, The Washington Post, MSNBC, ABC, CBS News and more, he tweeted, “headed” the “Fake News Media” and were a source of national disgust and embarrassment.

2000 Tweet PFT_EoP

A week later, on March 8, he used the term again, singling out only the Times. A few days later, on March 11, the World Health Organization declared COVID-19 a pandemic, or global epidemic. On March 13, Trump declared a national emergency.

Over the course of the month, Trump tweeted a total of 447 times. Of those, 50 tweets used a negative tone about the press — nearly the same amount as in January and February combined.

Trump’s anti-press tweets predominantly focused on the media’s coverage of the pandemic and his administration’s response. Trump repeatedly condemned the use of unnamed sources, alleged that the media was deliberately dramatizing the outbreak to hurt the economy and his reelection chances, and asserted that outlets should unite with him in the face of the crisis, rather than continue covering the outbreak and response critically.

Of the 50 tweets, half targeted the media as a whole, with terms like “Enemy of the People” and “LameStream Media,” and descriptions of the media as “corrupt,” “dishonest” and “hopeless.”

2000 Tweet PFT_LameStream

Twenty tweets targeted specific news outlets, with MSNBC and the Times attacked the most often, and used demeaning “nicknames” like “MSDNC” and “DeFace the Nation.” Five individual journalists — representing four outlets — were also targeted by name.

Rachel Maddow and Joe Scarborough of MSNBC, Chuck Todd of NBC, Maggie Haberman of the Times and Chris Cuomo of CNN, all familiar targets of the president on Twitter, were each singled out. Cuomo announced he tested positive for the coronavirus on March 31.

2000 Tweet PFT_Fredo

During his fourth year in office, 14.2% of Trump’s negative tweets about the media have targeted individuals, questioning their legitimacy, ethics and objectivity, as well as insulting their physical appearance or demeanor and assigning them demeaning nicknames.

By comparison, he targeted individual journalists in only 7.5% of tweets in his first year in office and 8.6% of tweets in his second year.

2000 Tweet PFT_Graph2

Press Briefings Return: In-Person Insults Mirror Those on Twitter

On Feb. 26, the same day White House press briefings resumed after a more than year-long hiatus, the president tweeted, “Low Ratings Fake News MSDNC (Comcast) & CNN are doing everything possible to make the Caronavirus [sic] look as bad as possible, including panicking markets, if possible.”

Trump tweeted multiple assertions that the media was continuing in its “war” against him in spite of the virus, and that the press briefings — this time with Trump leading them instead of a press secretary — were “reaching millions of people that are not being told the truth.”

2000 Tweet PFT_Press Conferences

The president targeted ABC via tweet four times in 2020 — all in March and April — including calling the outlet an “Enemy of the People” and “Fake News.”

In the briefing room, the attacks on journalists were personal. When ABC’s Chief White House Correspondent, Jonathan Karl, asked during an April 6 briefing about a report from the Department of Health and Human Services inspector general, Trump quipped, “You’re a third-rate reporter.” Karl is also the president of the White House Correspondents Association.

Trump had used the same insult in a tweet targeting the Times’ Maggie Haberman on March 27, as well as in reference to Vanity Fair’s Gabriel Sherman on March 11, though the president didn’t name him.

When PBS NewsHour reporter Yamiche Alcindor asked during a March 29 COVID-19 briefing about the president refuting governors’ needs for equipment, he replied that her question was “snarky” and her approach always “getcha, getcha, getcha.”

On April 5, Trump targeted Alcindor on Twitter, writing that she was “a very biased journalist.”

PFT_2k_live briefing.jpg

President Donald Trump takes questions during an April 6 coronavirus task force briefing at the White House with Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and Vice President Mike Pence. In this briefing, Trump responded to a question by ABC’s Jonathan Karl, in the second row of seats on the far right, by calling him a ‘third-rate reporter,’ an insult he also uses on Twitter.

REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

The 2000th Tweet: A Milestone of Attacking the Press

Through early April, Trump and the Coronavirus Task Force held press briefings almost every day, and by April 11, Trump had insulted or denigrated the press in nearly one in six of his tweets.

On Twitter, Trump referred to CNN as “a JOKE!,” the Wall Street Journal as “Fake News!” and singled out the Post and the Times, asserting that advertising is “WAY down” either because they are “Fake News” or because “the Virus is just plain beating them up.”

2000 Tweet PFT_Advertising

On April 11, as Trump posted his 2,000th negative tweet about the media, the U.S. led the world in confirmed COVID-19 deaths, surpassing 20,000.

Trump posted a burst of eight tweets that day, a single-day amount not reached since September 2019.

All but one of the tweets targeted specific outlets. The president repeated his refrains about “MSDNC,” the “failing” Times and the “Amazon” Post, and criticized the Journal’s Editorial Board. Trump also disparaged Fox News, tweeting that watching it on weekend afternoons is “a total waste of time.” The tweet followed a report about equipment shortages at the Department of Veterans Affairs and coronavirus-related veteran deaths.

2000 Tweet PFT_Fox

Three of the tweets targeting the Times were nearly identical, with the first two posted and deleted within minutes of each other. The third, which was the milestone-reaching tweet, was posted two hours later. In it, the president called the Times “Fake News,” “Failing,” and questioned its use of anonymous sources in an article linking New York coronavirus cases to Europe, not China.

The day’s string of tweets struck on multiple recent themes, with the president criticizing coverage of the pandemic and implying corruption in the newsroom.

Trump also delegitimized the standard news practice of granting sources anonymity, asserting on Twitter that anonymous sources are fabricated in order to hurt his administration. Nearly one in four of his anti-press tweets in early April — and one in ten in March — denigrated the media’s use of unnamed sources.

Undermining Coverage in a Time of Crisis

Language eroding public trust in the news media, while a hallmark of the president’s administration, has increased on Twitter in tandem with the spread of the coronavirus in the U.S. and criticism of the government’s handling of it.

Trump complained about media bias in a majority of his 2,000 negative tweets, accusing the media of conspiring against him and refuting the accuracy of their reports.

From the first confirmed U.S. coronavirus case on Jan. 20, through reaching the milestone tweet on April 11, Trump tweeted negatively about the media 113 times. In those 83 days, at a time when the public increasingly sought news from established outlets, Trump intensified his criticism of individual reporters and the media’s coverage.


Explore the database

As the president continues to communicate through Twitter, The U.S. Press Freedom Tracker continues to track the rhetoric using this live database.

Read more about Coronavirus

Here’s how to share sensitive leaks with the press

Thinking about securely leaking information to news organizations? This guide will show you how.

How journalists can work from home securely

Both the newsroom and individual journalists must make some changes to work from home securely.

Government transparency cannot be a coronavirus casualty

Government agencies from the local to federal level are failing to live up to their legal transparency obligations even as the stakes for access to relevant information are at an all-time high.

“THE AGE OF DISRUPTION” ‘a Perfect Storm’ goes Viral

In the public interest.

I felt to explore the disruption. It led me to the Australian Treasurer Josh Frydenberg.  His speech is about digital disruption.  I contemplate in the midst of the Coronavirus we all have to go online.  Yet the virus is called mild I think people are sensing this perfect storm.

Perfect Stormnoun a detrimental or calamitous situation or event arising from the powerful combined effect of a unique set of circumstances:
a perfect storm battering corporate pension plans.

Yet the Prime Minister on the 15 March 2020 at his press conference stated the virus is mild…

“…But the truth is that while many people will contract this virus that it’s clear, just as people get the flu each year, it is a more severe condition than the flu, but for the vast majority, as I said last week, for the majority, around 8 in 10 is our advice, it will be a mild illness and it will pass. “ Prime Minister Scott Morrison..

Excerpts from Josh Frydenberg speech below:

“This perfect storm – decades in the making – has delivered what now seems like the overnight arrival of something that was previously inconceivable: artificial intelligence and machine learning...

In simple language, machines are providing insights and recognising patterns by rapidly processing data which allows predictions, and in many cases decisions, to be made….As companies adapt to this era of disruption, business transformation has become the order of the day....

This is where ensuring our education system, including early childhood, schools, VET and universities effectively respond to this challenge will be critical. Problem solving, data science and creative thinking are among the capabilities that will be in demand in this new work environment...

The services sector which makes up around 70 per cent of the Australian economy compared to around 60 per cent three decades ago, tends to by its nature to have lower levels of productivity. Services are more labour intensive and less likely to see capital substitution. However, with the maturation of emerging technologies this could change

Moreover, the nature of the services offered by both Google and Facebook allow them to collect an unprecedented amount of personal data, which is then monetised by providing advertisers with highly targeted opportunities…

While the opportunities are boundless, with McKinsey suggesting that automation technologies could add up to $4 trillion to the Australian economy over the next 15 years, the threats are also real

So how much and how quickly our productivity increases from here will depend in part on how governments, employees and employers respond to this changing technology landscape...

Our goal – which I am confident that we can achieve with the right policy settings across both the public and private spheres – is to ensure that when these technologies become part of our everyday life they will contribute to a more prosperous, secure and harmonious future for all Australians.

A few questions:

Should we as Australians or anyone in the global community have a vote on whether we want this digital future that gathers our data and knows everything about our lives ?

Who truly benefits – the community or global IT business?

What about public needs, wants and rights to privacy?

What about the vulnerable and the homeless?
How will they survive in disruption? To-date clearly the money to house every person is there but not actioned. What of the treatment of those vulnerable in detention centres? Who truly cares?

Will this imposed future be democratic and foster happiness in our society or will our lives be automated and focused on the cryptocurrency of inclusion and exclusion?

What of breaching ecological tipping points given economics is about growth not balance?

Lastly, and most importantly, what are the health impacts from electromagnetic frequency (EMF)?

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the cancer agency of the World Health Organization (WHO), in 2011 concluded that EMFs of frequencies 30 KHz – 300 GHz are possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B). 

Refer links:

https://www.gaia.com/article/5g-health-risks-the-war-between-technology-and-human-beings

https://ehtrust.org/wp-content/uploads/Scientist-5G-appeal-2017.pdf

There needs to be a broader discussion to ascertain if this adverse health impact is true. Does it create a major health problem greater than the coronavirus?

The Hon Josh Frydenberg MP
Treasurer
Federal Member for Kooyong

SPEECH

“THE AGE OF DISRUPTION”

SIR ZELMAN COWEN ORATION

VICTORIA UNIVERSITY, MELBOURNE

29 August 2019

***CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY***

It’s a great privilege to deliver this oration in Sir Zelman Cowen’s name and I want to thank the Cowen family and Victoria University for the opportunity.

As Glyn Davis and Peter Dawkins wrote in The Australian just a few days ago, Victoria University is one of only a small number of dual-sector universities providing a highly innovative and quality education both in the tertiary and vocational streams.

With the wave of new technology challenging our traditional methods of learning and the institutions that provide it, it is only appropriate that the Sir Zelman Cowen Centre is hosting key stakeholders for an important upcoming discussion about the future of universities.

As a Vice-Chancellor, Provost and Dean, Sir Zelman was a great educator and reformer, always appreciating the wonders of learning and curious about the future.

He would be proud that the Centre in his name is promoting this important debate.

Sir Zelman Cowen was a giant of a man and a dear friend and mentor.

I will never forget his generosity of spirit and his intense loyalty as a friend as we sat together each weekend for many years talking about his life and the changing world in which we lived.

While never a meeting of equals, he ensured age was no barrier to friendship, always putting me at ease.

He never needed to demand respect or command obedience but by virtue of his very nature and being, he simply earned it.

He was always proud of his immigrant background and his Jewish faith and he never sought to distance himself from his heritage during his long and distinguished career.

He is an inspiration to many.

And as our nation’s nineteenth Governor-General, he brought a touch of healing to the country and set a standard that is the benchmark for those who have followed.

He was always above the rancour of partisanship – earning respect from all sides, devoting his life as he did to public service.

But for all that Zelman achieved in public life, he knew none of it would have been possible without the support of his wife of sixty years, Anna.

Their marriage was a true partnership based on eternal love and respect, and I want to thank Anna for being here today, pass on our best wishes for a speedy recovery after a recent fall, and thank her for her enduring friendship.

It would be remiss of me as well not to plug her recent brilliant book titled My Vice-Regal Life which published her personal diaries from the Cowens’ time at Yarralumla.

Like Zelman, Anna possesses a sharp wit and a great sense of humour.

For example, recording on one occasion an investiture by Sir Zelman where he was waving a sword wildly around, saying after the event that it was remarkable that they didn’t have to pick up peoples’ ears from the floor!

This evening I ask you to lend me your ears as I share some thoughts on an issue that affects the future of all of us – namely that we are living in the age of disruption.

The world has seen nothing like it. Big data, artificial intelligence and the explosion in connectivity.

It is the fourth industrial revolution.

The first being the use of steam to mechanise industries and the Dickensian conditions it created in the factories of England in the 1800s.

The second saw the arrival of electricity and the third the development of the computer and with it the proliferation of information technology.

This fourth revolution is different in both nature and scope.  Developing exponentially rather than in a linear fashion.

It is less about disseminating information to the wider public, as was the case with the invention of the printing press, but more about algorithms and data as new building blocks to fundamentally change the way we do thing across every sector of the economy.

From energy to education, health and hospitality, mining and manufacturing and even to administration and agriculture.

While the opportunities are boundless, with McKinsey suggesting that automation technologies could add up to $4 trillion to the Australian economy over the next 15 years, the threats are also real.

Cyber security, privacy concerns, competition issues, the integrity of the future of our tax base and the future of work are among them.

A little less than a century ago John Maynard Keynes gave a famous lecture entitled ‘Economic possibilities for our grandchildren’ where he predicted an era of progress where by 2030, technology would not only boost incomes and ultimately solve the production problem, but also reduce the need for labour to a 15 hour work week.

So far he been broadly right on incomes and production, but as for his concept of ‘technological unemployment’ society has found new ways to productively deploy labour in response to the age of disruption.

Our task today as the French Noble Prize winning economist Jean Tirole has pointed out, is to anticipate the challenge that has come with the digital revolution so we can adapt to it as we have done with previous revolutions, rather than merely endure them.

Against this backdrop, I want to talk about three things tonight:

  • First, how this digital disruption is playing out and how it will continue to evolve;
  • Second, the implications of this for the Australian economy; and
  • Third, how the Government is responding to these developments.

*  *  *  *  *

Disruption that is unfolding around us

The ability to deconstruct information into bits – ones and zeroes – and seamlessly duplicate and distribute this data through a network of networks has led to an explosion of connectivity and facilitated the rise of the digital economy.

More than half the world’s population are using the internet, and as at December 2018, the United Nations estimated there were some 5.2 billion active mobile broadband subscriptions globally.

Network effects, which occur when the usefulness of a service grows exponentially with the number of users and providers, are flourishing now – and at a scale never seen before.

For example in Australia, there are now more than 80,000 active drivers using the Uber platform, supplying services to around 4 million Australian customers.

Two sided digital platforms are allowing unprecedented numbers of buyers and sellers to come together and interact.They are empowering consumers to make better choices about the products and services they purchase, including a more personalised matching to an individual’s preferences.

These platforms are enabling unused capacity to be filled and utilised more efficiently.

Today we are seeing play out before our eyes the combined effects of:

  • a massive increase in digital data;
  • the growing force of computer power;
  • the ascent of new platforms;
  • new organising principles of powerful algorithms;
  • the development of advanced analytical tools and techniques; and
  • unprecedented ease of connectivity between people.

This perfect storm – decades in the making – has delivered what now seems like the overnight arrival of something that was previously inconceivable: artificial intelligence and machine learning.

In simple language, machines are providing insights and recognising patterns by rapidly processing data which allows predictions, and in many cases decisions, to be made.

For example, Qantas has partnered with the University of Sydney’s Centre for Field Robotics to create a new system called ‘Constellation’ which brings together a database with a decade of weather patterns and combines it with aircraft capability to map out the optimal flight path.

Qantas believes that by sending its aircraft into the strongest jet streams, the system can reduce its fuel bill by $40 million a year and reduce its CO2 emissions substantially.

With greater connectivity and growing networks the so-called Internet of Things is also coming into its own.

Cheaper and more widely available broadband along with huge advances in Wi Fi and sensor technologies has meant that more and more devices and equipment can be connected to the internet.

Business equipment, vehicles, household appliances and wearable devices can communicate with each other and generate data.

For example, your mobile device can be used both remotely or automatically, to change the temperature settings in your house, such as through the air-conditioning system to respond to the movement in electricity prices through the day.

This saves customers money and improves the reliability of the system.

We are now only at the very nascent stage of the Internet of Things and the upward trend in data generated will accelerate into the future.

A super-connected world, combining billions of people with artificial intelligence, online transistors and real life data sets the scene for a process of constant change and improvement.

*  *  *  *  *  *

As companies adapt to this era of disruption, business transformation has become the order of the day.

For many companies this means devising new digital strategies, new business models and more.

As reported in The Economist last year, of America’s 20 most valuable non-tech firms, 14 have a digital dimension to their strategies.

The message is every firm needs to adapt and look for new opportunities.

Mining

In Australia we’re seeing a big transformation in our world leading mining companies.

Rio Tinto for example has recognised that its future success cannot solely rely on traditional mining mindsets and its legacy asset bases.

It is leading the way internationally with autonomous mining operations in the Pilbara.

Autonomous long distance trains, autonomous haul trucks and autonomous drill systems – all monitored from a control centre located 1,500 kilometres away in Perth.

Its ‘Mine of the Future’ programme will allow assets to be networked together across all components of the mining value chain.

Machines talking to machines will help reduce variability through the system and improve both safety and productivity.

Today’s mining engineers – and those into the future – will be equally specialised in data analytics and artificial intelligence, as they will be in their knowledge of ore bodies.

Autonomous vehicles

Disruptive technologies like autonomous vehicles are likely to profoundly reshape mobility within cities – they will fundamentally change the way people get around and will shape how cities grow into the future.

General Motors has said it is committed to introducing an autonomous ride sharing service to several big cities in the United States and is aiming for a future of zero crashes, zero emissions and zero congestion.

As with other digital technologies there will be powerful network effects at play.

Of course when it comes to autonomous vehicles, there has been a great deal of promise.

But we should remember Amara’s Law – that we tend to overestimate the impact of a new technology in the short-run, but we underestimate it in the long run.

Healthcare

With a growing and ageing population, there is tremendous upside potential from technology innovation in the health care sector.

As the Productivity Commission has noted, the health sector is very good at generating and storing data, but less effective at translating this data into useful information.

The expanded use of health information and digital technologies – including e health records – can help establish a better evidence base, deliver better quality care, reduce medical errors and streamline administration and overall healthcare efficiency.

Data that allows performance monitoring and comparison of government activities in the healthcare space is a fundamental starting point for improving the delivery of those activities to the community.

At an individual level, data collected through personally controlled devices such as smartphones and health monitors have huge potential to assist medical practitioners and patients.

Looking back over the twentieth century the advancements in health technology have been astounding, for example the introduction of magnetic resonance imaging machines, DNA mapping and antibiotics.

Advances in artificial intelligence are adding to these. For example, we don’t just have MRI’s, we can now use machines to help interpret MRI’s.

Financial Services and Digital Currencies

Australia’s financial sector is also experiencing a wave of innovation-driven disruption with the emergence of the ‘fintech’ sector, using data and latest technology to design and offer better and bespoke products and services.

For example, it is facilitating the development of new payment products with financial services firms having begun to collaborate with technology firms, including most notably Apple’s agreement with the major banks to allow their customers to use Apple Pay.

Closely related to disruption in financial services has been the development and substantial interest in virtual currencies or cryptocurrencies as they are better known.

As the Reserve Bank Governor Phil Lowe has noted, as people’s needs change and technology improves so too does the form that money takes.

Already in Australia we have seen a significant shift to electronic payments with the proportion of cash transactions made by households falling from around 70 per cent in 2007 to 37 per cent by 2016 – with Australians enthusiastic adopters of ‘tap and go’ payments.

The Reserve Bank’s New Payments Platform launched in early 2018 has leveraged digital technologies to improve payment services – allowing Australians to settle their bills in seconds, 24/7 with instant settlement and funds availability.

Cryptocurrencies are designed to mimic cash transactions allowing peer-to-peer transfers of value, without the need to know or trust the other party in the transaction or for any central body to act as an intermediator.

For all of the noise around cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin, the reality is that they are not currently being widely used for everyday payments.

However Bitcoin’s creation and that of the new Libra currency still in development by Facebook has been instigated through the development of blockchain technology.

These are developments that regulators are watching closely.

It is worth remembering that Governments exist to provide essential public goods and money is one of these very important public goods, providing a store of value, a unit of account and a medium of exchange.

*  *  *  *  *

The implications of digital disruption for the Economy

The underlying characteristics of digital technologies – and their application – are having profound impacts on the economy.

These impacts spread across jobs; competition, productivity; and of increasing focus, the tax base.

The future of work

The future of work looms large in the transition to a digital economy as it has done with the previous three industrial revolutions.

Technology has always led to a shift in the types of jobs and skills required.

This does cause people concern as they feel more insecure, not just about their job today but also the future job prospects, including for their children.

This can play out in two ways with the rise of automation and robots taking what would otherwise have been the work of people and the existence of the gig economy which sees workers on short-term contracts or undertaking freelance work paid for a service as opposed to being a permanent employee.

This could include everything from ride share drivers, freelance journalists, self-employed independent contractors and a myriad of services like bookkeeping.

This on-demand workforce is made available by platforms like AirTasker, Freelancer and Uber.

The gig economy which is still emerging may provide for some people greater flexibility, job entry opportunities and satisfaction to workers on the one hand, but on the other, raises challenges around the regulatory framework and its enforcement and the constancy and security of employment.

In each of the industrial revolutions, there has been a shift in the makeup of the workforce.

The question that still remains unanswered for the future of digital revolution is will technology complement and augment the capabilities of workers leading to higher productivity, higher wages and higher output as has been the case with the arrival of the three previous revolutions?

This is where ensuring our education system, including early childhood, schools, VET and universities effectively respond to this challenge will be critical. Problem solving, data science and creative thinking are among the capabilities that will be in demand in this new work environment.

Technology’s impact on productivity

For all of its promise, the digital revolution has been slow to show up in the measured productivity figures as might have been expected.

As I said earlier this week in a speech to the Business Council, there seems to be three main factors at play.

First, as the OECD has found, while innovations are clearly occurring giving benefit to some firms, they have not spread as widely to other firms across the economy as one would hope.

There is a clear gap between those at the frontier and the rest. Many firms appear to be waiting for technologies like Artificial Intelligence, autonomous vehicles or the Internet of Things to mature before they adopt them.

Second, for some technologies it takes time for the full benefits to be seen. This was the case for electrification which arrived in the United States in the 1890’s but took 30 years for factories to reconfigure their processes to enable them to maximise the gains.

A corollary today is the effective use of machine learning which requires a new approach with the right data sets, skill technicians and analysts as well as a regulatory framework fit for purpose.

And third, there is a long run structural shift in the Australian economy towards services as incomes rise.

The services sector which makes up around 70 per cent of the Australian economy compared to around 60 per cent three decades ago, tends to by its nature to have lower levels of productivity.

Services are more labour intensive and less likely to see capital substitution.

However, with the maturation of emerging technologies this could change.

So how much and how quickly our productivity increases from here will depend in part on how governments, employees and employers respond to this changing technology landscape.

*  *  *  *  *

How is the Government responding?

At a time of significant technological disruption, questions arise as to what role the government should play and to what extent will it need to impose new regulations?

As with many things governments do, this is all about getting the balance right and exercising judgement around the trade-offs that inevitably arise.

Too much regulation and the incentive to invest will be stifled, while too little regulation and consumers may not trust the products and new services that result.

Digitisation is having an impact in areas which are firmly within the realm of governments.

This includes intellectual property rights; privacy; competition law; employment law; regulation; taxation and cybersecurity.

Governments recognise their obligation to their citizens to ensure their interests are protected as are those of the community as a whole.

As digital revolution rolls on, people need to have confidence in the system’s underpinnings.

Again, as Jean Tirole has observed, social acceptability of digitisation depends on us believing our data will not be used against us; that online platforms will respect the terms of our contracts them; and that their recommendations will be reliable.

*  *  *  *  *

In this regard, I wanted to briefly mention tonight three areas of policy reform which fall within my remit as Treasurer and are directly related to the regulatory framework underpinning the growing digitisation of Australia’s economy.

There are the implementation of the Consumer Data Right; the ACCC’s Digital Platforms Inquiry; and reforms to ensure Australia’s tax system is able to meet the challenges of a more digitalised economy.

The Consumer Data Right

Earlier this month the Government passed through Parliament an important piece of legislation – the Consumer Data Right.

This law gives consumers new rights to their digital data.

It creates a new lens through which to view personal data – as a valuable asset that is being created and can be utilised.

Consumers will have a right to access information currently held by businesses about the transactions they enter into as consumers.

Importantly it will also allow consumers to request their data to be transferred to third parties which should help reinvigorate competition be it on someone’s mortgage, electricity bill or mobile phone plan.

At the most basic level, accessing this information will help consumers compare and switch products and provide them with scope to better manage their budgets.

More broadly, today one of the barriers to competition is the availability of information.  Companies who have collected huge data sets on their customers have a substantial competitive advantage over other businesses trying to compete in the same space.

The consumer data right regime will go some way to addressing this.

The initial application of the law will be to the banking sector with the regime extended in future to the telecommunications and energy sectors.

Eventually we would like to see the Consumer Data Right extended across the economy.

*  *  *  *  *

Digital Platforms Inquiry

Last month the Government released a ground-breaking report prepared by the ACCC into digital platforms.

It examined the impact on competition, privacy and consumer outcomes arising from the significant market power of the leading search engines and social media platforms, and in particular Google and Facebook and their influence on the media and advertising market.

The report makes it clear that the digital platforms are an important innovation that have fundamentally changed the way the media content is produced, distributed and consumed.

However the ACCC found that Facebook and Google have grown rapidly over time to become the dominant players in important online markets in Australia, giving them immense market power.

For example, for every $100 spend by advertisers on online advertising, excluding classifieds, $47 goes to Google, $24 to Facebook and $29 to other participants. The market is worth nearly $9 billion annually in Australia, and has increased eight-fold since 2005.

Google and Facebook are dominant with 98 per cent of online searches on mobile devices are with Google and Facebook having approximately 17 million Australian users.

The scale of the advantage of incumbents is enormous.

Moreover, the nature of the services offered by both Google and Facebook allow them to collect an unprecedented amount of personal data, which is then monetised by providing advertisers with highly targeted opportunities.

Our legislative and regulatory framework did not and could not anticipate such a new paradigm – a paradigm which poses a real challenge to regulatory authorities the world over.

The Government is currently consulting on the report’s recommendations but has accepted the ACCC’s overriding conclusion that there is a need for reform – to better protect consumers, improve transparency, recognise power imbalances and ensure that substantial market power is not used to lessen competition in media and advertising services markets.

I expect that the Government will provide its final response to the report before the end of the year.

*  *  *  *  *

Digital Tax

The digitalisation of economies is also having far reaching implications for tax systems, both in Australia and around the world.

The current international tax framework applying to companies is based on the location of physical assets, labour and capital, the source of income and the residence of taxpayers and less from where businesses are deriving value from user data or user generated content.

This framework – developed in the 1920s – could not have envisaged the extent to which businesses would become globalised and digitalised.

Today, most major digital businesses are able to access markets via technology without necessarily having a physical presence in that market, allowing them under existing tax rules to pay a lower effective rate of tax then what may apply to other companies.

For example, in 2016-17, despite Google having around $1.5 billion of revenue in Australia, they only paid $33 million of tax on a taxable income of $177 million.

Their effective rate of tax is around 18 per cent, with large deductions before they even get to their taxable income.

Addressing these issues is by no means straightforward and is imposing challenges both for Australia and globally.

While other countries like France and the United Kingdom have sought to introduce a direct tax on digital services, our preference is to work with other countries to achieve a consensus-based solution through the OECD and G20.

We have an ambitious goal of reaching such a consensus by the end of 2020.

*  *  *  *  *

Conclusion

In an increasingly competitive and globalised economy, we need to recognise the unprecedented scope and speed of technological change.

It is creating both challenges and opportunities, as it changes every aspect of how we live and how we work.

We cannot stop technological change nor we should we try to.  Rather we need to effectively adapt with a clear sense of what is important to us.

As Mark Weiser wrote in the Scientific American back in 1991, ‘The most profound technologies are those that disappear. They weave themselves into the fabric of everyday life until they are indistinguishable from it.’

Our goal – which I am confident that we can achieve with the right policy settings across both the public and private spheres – is to ensure that when these technologies become part of our everyday life they will contribute to a more prosperous, secure and harmonious future for all Australians.

If Zelman was here today, this is not only what he would hope for but what he would use his great capacity to help achieve.

Ends.

Refer further link re: background Sir Zelman Cowen:

Sir Zelman Cowen Forest in Israel

 

Should Australia Shutdown 5G to Strengthen Immune Systems Against Coronavirus?

In the public interest.

Below is an article below is from Physicians for Safe Technology. 

This link is about the coronavirus and 5G in Wuhan Province weakening immune systems.  The key question is:  Should we SHUTDOWN 5G now to ensure immune systems are not compromised to make sure we can eradicate the virus.

Did the 5G rollout in Wuhan damage the innate cellular defense cells of the population, putting the people at risk of complications and death from coronavirus?

The article below is written by:

Joel M. Moskowitz, PhD, is director of the Center for Family and Community Health in the School of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley. He has been translating and disseminating the research on wireless radiation health effects since 2009 after he and his colleagues published a review paper that found long-term cell phone users were at greater risk of brain tumors. His Electromagnetic Radiation Safety website has had more than two million page views since 2013. He is an unpaid advisor to the International EMF Scientist Appeal and Physicians for Safe Technology.

Key excerpts from below:

[5G] Millimeter waves are mostly absorbed within a few millimeters of human skin and in the surface layers of the cornea. Short-term exposure can have adverse physiological effects in the peripheral nervous system, the immune system and the cardiovascular system. The research suggests that long-term exposure may pose health risks to the skin (e.g., melanoma), the eyes (e.g., ocular melanoma) and the testes (e.g., sterility)…

240 scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on the biologic and health effects of nonionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal, which calls for stronger exposure limits...

Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.”…

…adverse physiological effects in the peripheral nervous system, the immune system and the cardiovascular system. The research suggests that long-term exposure may pose health risks to the skin (e.g., melanoma), the eyes (e.g., ocular melanoma) and the testes (e.g., sterility). Since 5G is a new technology, there is no research on health effects, so we are “flying blind” to quote a U.S. senator5G will require cell antennas every 100 to 200 meters, exposing many people to millimeter wave radiation. 5G also employs new technologies (e.g., active antennas capable of beam-forming; phased arrays; massive multiple inputs and outputs, known as massive MIMO) which pose unique challenges for measuring exposures.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/we-have-no-reason-to-believe-5g-is-safe/

We Have No Reason to Believe 5G Is Safe

The technology is coming, but contrary to what some people say, there could be health risks

Credit: Bill Oxford Getty Images

The telecommunications industry and their experts have accused many scientists who have researched the effects of cell phone radiation of “fear mongering” over the advent of wireless technology’s 5G. Since much of our research is publicly-funded, we believe it is our ethical responsibility to inform the public about what the peer-reviewed scientific literature tells us about the health risks from wireless radiation.

The chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) recently announced through a press release that the commission will soon reaffirm the radio frequency radiation (RFR) exposure limits that the FCC adopted in the late 1990s. These limits are based upon a behavioral change in rats exposed to microwave radiation and were designed to protect us from short-term heating risks due to RFR exposure.  

Yet, since the FCC adopted these limits based largely on research from the 1980s, the preponderance of peer-reviewed research, more than 500 studies, have found harmful biologic or health effects from exposure to RFR at intensities too low to cause significant heating.

Citing this large body of research, more than 240 scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on the biologic and health effects of nonionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF) signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal, which calls for stronger exposure limits. The appeal makes the following assertions:

“Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.”

The scientists who signed this appeal arguably constitute the majority of experts on the effects of nonionizing radiation. They have published more than 2,000 papers and letters on EMF in professional journals.

The FCC’s RFR exposure limits regulate the intensity of exposure, taking into account the frequency of the carrier waves, but ignore the signaling properties of the RFR. Along with the patterning and duration of exposures, certain characteristics of the signal (e.g., pulsing, polarization) increase the biologic and health impacts of the exposure. New exposure limits are needed which account for these differential effects. Moreover, these limits should be based on a biological effect, not a change in a laboratory rat’s behavior.

The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RFR as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” in 2011. Last year, a $30 million study conducted by the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) found “clear evidence” that two years of exposure to cell phone RFR increased cancer in male rats and damaged DNA in rats and mice of both sexes. The Ramazzini Institute in Italy replicated the key finding of the NTP using a different carrier frequency and much weaker exposure to cell phone radiation over the life of the rats.

Based upon the research published since 2011, including human and animal studies and mechanistic data, the IARC has recently prioritized RFR to be reviewed again in the next five years. Since many EMF scientists believe we now have sufficient evidence to consider RFR as either a probable or known human carcinogen, the IARC will likely upgrade the carcinogenic potential of RFR in the near future.

Nonetheless, without conducting a formal risk assessment or a systematic review of the research on RFR health effects, the FDA recently reaffirmed the FCC’s 1996 exposure limits in a letter to the FCC, stating that the agency had “concluded that no changes to the current standards are warranted at this time,” and that “NTP’s experimental findings should not be applied to human cell phone usage.” The letter stated that “the available scientific evidence to date does not support adverse health effects in humans due to exposures at or under the current limits.”

The latest cellular technology, 5G, will employ millimeter waves for the first time in addition to microwaves that have been in use for older cellular technologies, 2G through 4G. Given limited reach, 5G will require cell antennas every 100 to 200 meters, exposing many people to millimeter wave radiation. 5G also employs new technologies (e.g., active antennas capable of beam-forming; phased arrays; massive multiple inputs and outputs, known as massive MIMO) which pose unique challenges for measuring exposures.

Sign up for Scientific American’s free newsletters.

Sign Up

Millimeter waves are mostly absorbed within a few millimeters of human skin and in the surface layers of the cornea. Short-term exposure can have adverse physiological effects in the peripheral nervous system, the immune system and the cardiovascular system. The research suggests that long-term exposure may pose health risks to the skin (e.g., melanoma), the eyes (e.g., ocular melanoma) and the testes (e.g., sterility).

Since 5G is a new technology, there is no research on health effects, so we are “flying blind” to quote a U.S. senator. However, we have considerable evidence about the harmful effects of 2G and 3G. Little is known the effects of exposure to 4G, a 10-year-old technology, because governments have been remiss in funding this research. Meanwhile, we are seeing increases in certain types of head and neck tumors in tumor registries, which may be at least partially attributable to the proliferation of cell phone radiation. These increases are consistent with results from case-control studies of tumor risk in heavy cell phone users.

Advertisement

5G will not replace 4G; it will accompany 4G for the near future and possibly over the long term. If there are synergistic effects from simultaneous exposures to multiple types of RFR, our overall risk of harm from RFR may increase substantially. Cancer is not the only risk as there is considerable evidence that RFR causes neurological disorders and reproductive harm, likely due to oxidative stress.

As a society, should we invest hundreds of billions of dollars deploying 5G, a cellular technology that requires the installation of 800,000 or more new cell antenna sites in the U.S. close to where we live, work and play?

Instead, we should support the recommendations of the 250 scientists and medical doctors who signed the 5G Appeal that calls for an immediate moratorium on the deployment of 5G and demand that our government fund the research needed to adopt biologically based exposure limits that protect our health and safety.

The views expressed are those of the author(s) and are not necessarily those of Scientific American.

Rights & Permissions

ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)

Joel M. Moskowitz

Joel M. Moskowitz, PhD, is director of the Center for Family and Community Health in the School of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley. He has been translating and disseminating the research on wireless radiation health effects since 2009 after he and his colleagues published a review paper that found long-term cell phone users were at greater risk of brain tumors. His Electromagnetic Radiation Safety website has had more than two million page views since 2013. He is an unpaid advisor to the International EMF Scientist Appeal and Physicians for Safe Technology.

Is 5G a Weapons System and Causing Cancer?

In the public interest.

Do your own research. I will post information that I perceive as beneficial to the public. I cannot validate claims as I do not have the knowledge. However, 5G must become a public debate to find out the truth in the interests of public safety. I have posted a Senate Inquiry here in Australia that appears to have not looked at the health issues. I regard public heath as the most important investigation not the roll out. I am alarmed that not enough has been done to ensure health and safety.

Mark Steele states that SMART means
Secret Militarised Arms in Residential Technologies.

References from the video below:

The Secret History of Silicon Valley was mentioned. Refer presenation: https://web.stanford.edu/group/ree/archives/archive08/usa/presentations/Secret_History_Stanford_Sierra_REE

Glioma is a tumour which causes brain cancer. https://www.abta.org/tumor_types/glioma/

International Agency for Research on Cancer
https://www.iarc.fr/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.pdf

Excerpt:

IARC CLASSIFIES RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AS
POSSIBLY CARCINOGENIC TO HUMANS


Lyon, France, May 31, 2011 ‐‐ The WHO/International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer1, associated with wireless phone use.

Medical Diagnostic Radiation Exposures and Risk of Gliomas
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3151669/

Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread neuropsychiatric effects including depression

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0891061815000599

Mark Steele is stating it is a breach of human rights.

Two videos on 5G below.

Dr Deva Davis warns of mobile phone wireless radiation damaging health and cancer

In the public interest.

This is a growing global health risk to the public.

Dr Deva Davis is a US expert speaking at the University of Melbourne about iPhone radiation. She indicates she is glad Australia is not the US. Yet it appears we are following the US model. She indicates that in the US Tom Wheeler he was the Executive Director for 10 years of the Cellphone Telecommunications industry. The studies have been inadequate.

In Australia MP Paul Fletcher who was in Optus prior to entering Parliament and an advocate for deregulation of Telstra. From 1996 to 2000, he worked as Chief of Staff to Minister for CommunicationsRichard Alston, a Liberal Party politician. Fletcher joined Optus in 2000 and worked as Director of Corporate and Regulatory Affairs until 2008. He then founded Fletchergroup Advisers, a strategy consultancy focusing on the communications industry.[7] He also wrote a book entitled Wired Brown Land? Telstra’s Battle for Broadband that was published in 2009, discussing Telstra‘s bid to operate the Australian Government’s proposed National Broadband Network.[8]He is active in Smart Cities advisor groups and was the Minister for Minister for Urban Infrastructure and Cities. He is currently serving as Minister for Communications and Arts.

For those promoting this technology with the knowledge it harms human health and with plans to amplify radiation cell towers, satellites may find themselves in law suits in the future if they do not protect the public interest. Dr Davis brings up the fear of litigation in the telecommunications industry. She believes there needs to be an independent fund into research and training as it is evident studies are biased when funded by industry. The issue is pathological greed and the apathy of the public who do nothing. The former depends on the apathy of the latter.

Dr Deva Davis indicates there are serious health effects and experts issue precautionary advice given cancer developments and that it is a probable carcinogen. there is a higher incidence of brain cancer in studies. If using iPhones before aged 20 there is 4 to 8 x more brain cancer after they had past 10 years. Where is the evidence she says? Brain cancer takes a long time to develop. When bomb’s fell at end of WWII no increase in brain cancer in survivors until 40 years had past. It took 40 years.

My cousin has just been diagnosed with aggressive brain cancer and she places her phone upto her brain. My aunt (her mother) tells her to stop doing it and she won’t believe that her cancer is likely caused by her iPhone given her work in sales required her to use the iPhone. She is a grandmother, a beautiful person who will die in the short term from cancer. I go and visit to support my aunt as she lost my uncle just prior to my dad’s death last year. She is in despair about her daughter. I ask why do those in authority not care about the health of citizens? That is where I feel despair.

Dr Davis indicates the iPhones impact children’s brains more than adults and affect thinking. They impact sperm.

The World Health Organisation indicated in 2011 that additional research should be done but are not doing it.