Caveat emptor! A real mix-up of purpose is taking place. It is using everything in its unrelenting power to determine our future...
Spent last week on jury duty. It was a criminal case. The judge went to great length explaining to we prospective jurors the great fundamental right "innocent until proven guilty", and the right of a defendant not to be required to give testimony as stated in the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution.
This constitutional protection is part of our essence and flows from English Common Law. This is not the case in other parts of the world, for example Napoleonic Law, a person accused of a crime is presumed guilty and must prove his innocence.
Due to our proclivity to transfer concepts into other areas of reason, we view positive information of progress with its assurance of safety as presumed fact. If there is any criticism there needs to be proof of harm. Sort of like 5G is safe progress/innocent until proven dangerous/guilty. Proving dangerous is difficult and takes time.
On the other hand, in Europe something as new as 5G network must first prove safety because it is outside the realm of experience. Therefore, 5G is dangerous/guilty until proven safe/innocent. Proving safety is difficult and takes time. So here we have two different approaches.
5G represent wave lengths and not people, persons, or individuals as protected by the US Constitution. However, you would think so by what is called the "promotional spin" used in business to get their product accepted and used long before studies are made on safety.
The "promotional spin" from tele-corporations spins anything and everything, scientific data, future benefits, safety, proclaiming how wonderful life will be affected, morphing into the best, most, latest, and safest. It goes direct to the media and the government spinning its story non-stop.
To mitigate this "spin" science has come up with a new term, "the precautionary principle". It attempts to take the dangerous and safe perspectives and allow testing, data, and accuracy to reveal the existence of safety or harm long before the use and establishment. This takes time, meanwhile the wheels of the tele-corporations are at work getting governmental approval.
Studying 5G network for safety by the government is not happening. Tests have already shown an increase in cancer for firemen at stations using 5G networks, yet this seems to be ignored when huge sums of money come into overshadow harm. The promotional spin is in full tilt throughout media way ahead of the precautionary principle. We are faced with something new and presented as safe with the burden to prove unsafe upon those who suffer harm. 5G is being pushed upon us forcefully by the CTIA. The telecommunications industry is once again determining our new reality whether we want it or not. Beware.