In several places in your home, a telephone would be a great relief and convenience for you and your family.
For example in your kitchen.
A telephone at this point would save you countless steps every day. .........
[It's probably true when grandparents say: "Everything used to be different and sometimes harder."
And the success story of the telephone is a good example.
It is undoubtedly unique and fascinating.
The first connection across the Atlantic, between London and New York, was made as early as 1928.
As a result, communication technology developed inexorably around the globe.
Until 1960, for example, the switchboard was operated by female telephone operators.
The "Fräulein vom Amt" was a common name for the charming ladies.
Motorola finally introduced a marketable mobile phone in 1983.
As a cell phone or car phone, it was initially seen as a status symbol for important people.
Even the youngest children are now being introduced to the colorful world of mobile
communication in a seemingly playful way.
According to the motto "practice early", trade in the tempting goods is booming.
The smartphone is a small computer, an all-rounder, with an integrated video camera
that delivers high-quality images, as here.
Moving images that can then be sent to grandparents, for example, without any loss of time.
So it's no wonder that the smartphone often plays the main role in the everyday lives of young people growing up.
Life takes place primarily via digital toys.
More and more young people are dreaming of an online career as an influencer with millions of followers.
The smartphone is everywhere and always with us, and society is marching towards complete dependency.
Triggered by the extreme user behavior that is visible everywhere, Hamburg artist Thorsten Kirsch has captured the
phenomenon in his drawings in a cheerful, even satirical way.
His interactive book "Smartphone Zombies Diary" combines milieu studies with appropriate commentary.
As I see it, this is a complete loss of control, which I would only expect from people who consume drugs and alcohol.
And that then became the rule in everyday life, that I was almost taken off my bike, that I was surrounded by people who had this
device - and disappeared, didn't notice me, endangered me, endangered their children, no longer
moved through the world in a socially adapted way.
And then, of course, I actually thought about this topic, this voodoo cult, this zombie existence, this remote control.
An incredible field had suddenly opened up.
I also had to do it out of self-protection, because I actually already had a smartphone myself and really
felt what potential it had to really get me hooked.
Satire or real satire seems to be a suitable formula for dealing with digital madness and the social dilemma.
The interactive book "Smartphone Zombies Diary" also contains audio commentaries from the news world.
Silicon Valley: Doctors compare smartphone addiction to classic addictions such as alcohol or nicotine.
Do we actually still have control over our behavior?
Or have our actions long been externally controlled from wherever?
When it comes to so-called digital education, political mistakes predominate, which are
already being corrected in many countries.
Most recently, tablets were banned from the classroom in China and Sweden.
In September 2023, Der Spiegel called for cell phones off, books on!
Digital learning is detrimental to reading promotion.
Sydney: In 2012, several billion Australian dollars were invested in the purchase of new
laptops for schools following a poor ranking in PISA.
However, the devices were collected again from 2016.
Although they were used extensively, they were rarely used for school purposes.
Similar experiences have been made in South Korea, Thailand, the USA and Turkey.
Meanwhile, the digital world is producing ever more absurd products.
As part of the Internet of Things, the baby diaper reports digitally when it needs to be changed, the
fridge when it needs to be refilled and the digital fork whether we are eating a low-calorie diet.
And let's not forget the super smart water bottle, because it regulates our drinking behavior.
Our preferences are recorded digitally and marketing strategists are constantly designing new apps that tell
us, for example, whether we are combing our hair properly.
Needfull things, useful things, is what illustrator Kirsch calls the blossoms of the digital world. Attention satire.
Meanwhile, the major mobile phone providers are eagerly promoting a fascinating digital future.
5G is the magic word. The fifth generation of mobile communications promises a brave new world.
In the smart city, there will no longer be any social inequality, no conflicts, no
graffiti, no crime, in fact no social world at all.
Living together is now only virtual.
Technically, everything is already possible, including autonomous driving.
It just needs to be upgraded a little, then the technology will have everything under control.
Brussels in the summer of 2023: The Belgian capital is a major construction site in many places.
Like all major cities, Brussels is also upgrading for the future.
After all, according to research, 70 percent of the world's 10 billion people will be living in large cities by 2050.
The installation for the digital monitoring of the masses is in full swing.
The change is visible.
The European Parliament is located in a prestigious glass palace in the center of Brussels.
Parliament TV provides digitally recorded live broadcasts on a daily basis.
There are enough current political issues.
The scandals about obviously bribed parliamentarians, suitcases full of cash and manipulated committee meetings that
last came to light in December 2022 are a thing of the past.
Everything seems to have remained in flux as before.
The media are doing their job.
Just as if the major corruption and bribery scandal here in Brussels had never happened. Business as usual.
Critics are already talking about a culture of impunity.
After all, you can't have what you can't have.
This apparently also applies to mobile communications.
Back in 2020, two MEPs, biologist Michèle Rivasi from the French Green Party and physics professor Klaus Buchner from the German
ÖDP, took a closer look at the International Commission for the Protection of
Non-Ionizing Radiation, i.e. mobile phone radiation.
The Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) has actually been protecting radiation
since the mid-1990s, but unfortunately not consumers.
The Rivasi-Buchner Report uncovers fatal abuses.
The main result was that these people have connections to industry.
So that they are not independent and that sometimes - you always have to specify whether you have such
connections - that sometimes they have not specified them.
In other words, it was a discovery of things that went differently than they should have.
The two politicians have uncovered it.
A private lobbying association with links to the mobile phone industry, which is concerned with consumer protection worldwide
and systematically plays down scientific findings in the process.
These are people who are among themselves. It is actually a group that is there to promote the industry.
And it seems as if the industry has outsourced the setting of standards and limits to a private organization so
that the industry can say: "I'm not the one saying this!"
But of course! It's just that these are people who are dependent on the industry and always refer to the industry.
And when they produce a report, they first present it to the industry to find out
whether the industry is satisfied with the report.
There was another recent study, ours is from 2020.
Now there is another study by other journalists from 2022 that shows exactly the same thing.
As you can see, a genuine, serious investigation - regardless of which country it comes from - reveals that the ICNIRP is not
independent, but is in fact an indirect offshoot of industry.
Furthermore, as a biologist, I am shocked because the ICNIRP only recognizes thermal effects.
This means that when you hold a cell phone to your head, your ear gets warm.
These are the thermal effects, but they do not take into account in any way the athermal effects, which can
influence the nervous system, the endocrine system, etc.
It is really unbelievable that this is not taken into account in a scientific study.
This is a scientific fraud!
It's actually a scientific fraud because you don't take all the elements into account.
There's a revolution on the way: a European journalists' association called "Investigate Europe" sums it up like this:
Is mobile communication dangerous? The scientific community is divided.
Some experts say it is safe, others have serious concerns.
In 2011, the WHO classified the electromagnetic fields of cell phones as possibly carcinogenic to humans.
And studies published in 2018 showed that when rats were exposed to such fields, this
increased their risk of certain types of cancer.
Even among those who believe the technology is safe, many concede that more research is
needed. And there are almost no studies on 5G.
The telecommunications companies themselves have pointed out that electromagnetic signals can pose a health risk.
So why are the European Commission and our governments turning a blind eye?
They cite guidelines drawn up by transnational scientific bodies.
But Investigate Europe has discovered that these bodies are closed clubs.
Persons with dissenting opinions will not be invited to participate.
And many of the scientists involved have received funding from companies that have a direct interest in the introduction of 5G.
There is no such thing as a risk-free society.
Other things we consume are also bad for our health - from alcohol to junk food.
But if you don't want a hamburger, you can simply do without hamburgers.
With 5G, there is no alternative.
So! As the Commission did not want to carry out a health and environmental impact assessment via Parliament, two studies
were commissioned: a health study and an environmental study.
The health study was carried out by the Ramazzini Institute in Italy and the environmental
study by scientists at the University of Ghent.
Parliament has made the choice.
We have said that we want independent institutes.
The results were presented to Parliament.
In the case of STOA, it was, roughly speaking, a committee in parliament that brings
together all the people who know about science.
And so STOA and its effects on our health were presented.
The director of the Ramazzini Institute has shown that certain frequencies relevant to 5G have an impact on health.
In the form of gliomas, brain tumors, DNA strand breaks, etc.
We now have proof of this: As far as the environment is concerned, it is stated that
there is no study at all on millimeter waves.
But we have indicators, for example in the case of insects - because 5G involves radiation beams -
that these radiation fields can destroy our insects.
So there are indications that there are not enough studies at these millimeter
frequencies to be able to say: There are no problems.
The Ramazzini Institute near Bologna in Italy:
This historic building has housed the Ramazzini Institute's cancer research center since it was founded in 1971.
An internationally recognized center of excellence known for its many outstanding contributions to research into
environmental, occupational and chemical causes of cancer.
The Institute is respected worldwide for its integrity and scientific independence.
The results of long-term studies conducted at the Ramazzini Institute's Cancer Research Center have demonstrated
the carcinogenicity of vinyl chloride, benzene, formaldehyde and oxygenated gasoline additives, among others.
This research had an enormous impact on environmental and occupational medicine, triggering the introduction of
prevention programs and the establishment of health standards.
Protecting public health through prevention has always been the main objective of the Ramazzini Institute.
And the independence of his cancer research center has made it possible for science and
truth to prevail against special interests.
The Cancer Research Center was dedicated to Professor Cesare Maltoni, the founder of the Ramazzini Institute, in 2005.
Dr. Fiorella Belpoggi, her successor as Director of the Institute, had participated in many trials in the USA
thanks to her expertise as a key witness for the prosecution.
Most recently, she investigated the cancer risk associated with high-frequency radiation from cell phones - a hot topic.
Dr. Fiorella Belpoggi welcomes us to her private residence.
She spent virtually the whole of 2022 in hospital, her life in danger after a routine heart procedure.
The great lady of cancer research is back and is sure to be heard from again.
For her, the scientific results - both of her years of research on almost 2500 laboratory rats and the
STOA study conducted under her leadership - are clear:
Electromagnetic fields, EMF, are certainly not harmless.
High-frequency magnetic fields are possibly carcinogenic.
And I assume that when the International Agency for Research on Cancer reviews all the new work that is
available, the final verdict will be: "Probably carcinogenic!"
But there is another aspect that is very important from a health point of view.
This is the fact that radiofrequency certainly has an effect on the reproductive system.
That's for sure!
There are many studies, and the majority of these studies are sufficient to say that
radiofrequency radiation affects the quality of sperm.
I think this is very important in terms of public health, because we need to reproduce.
Otherwise we will be finished as humanity.
All these aspects are not taken into account to the extent that they deserve. ...
They are virtually ignored. And that's a shame, because we have data.
We produce data.
And independent laboratories have produced this data.
This is very, very, very important, because in our case, for example, the study was financed by citizens, by
residents of the Emilia Romagna region - partly by institutions, the regional government, our voluntary donors.
It is an independent investigation, very well conducted.
No one has criticized the study design.
The radiation dose was comparable to that to which we humans are exposed, and the
monitoring of the exposure system was of high quality.
So this study is not to be criticized, as someone has claimed, it is not.
I have been working in this field for 45 years and I know very well how a long-term biopsy is and must be carried out.
And I can confirm that our study was conducted very well.
We humans are already exposed to radiation as embryos and so are our experimental rats.
Previous exposure is the reason we have seen this type of rare tumor, because brain tumors and schwannomas are rare tumors.
But if you expose individuals - animals or humans - from the embryo onwards, you can observe the growth
of this tumor before death from other causes occurs.
In the human population, we now have a problem because we have no control group.
All people are exposed everywhere in the world.
So how can we compare data?
This is probably the reason why we do not have a statistical increase in these tumors in the human population.
Because we cannot compare with zero exposure, but only with constant exposure, which is now common for everyone in the world.
That's a big difference.
Parallel to the Ramazzini study, the government-funded "National Toxicology Program" (NTP) in the USA produced astonishingly
similar results to those of Fiorella Belpoggi's research team.
The head of the study at the time felt compelled to combine the worrying results with an urgent appeal.
Because of the widespread use of cell phones, even a smaller increase in risk would have serious public health implications.
And in the meantime, instead of telling people, "If you're worried, here's what you can do," health authorities need
to promote precautions, especially for children and women.
This is because the risks could be greater in children due to the greater penetration and the sensitivity
of the developing brain to tissue-damaging substances.
So what is the lesson here?
We should no longer assume that any current or future wireless technology, including 5G, is safe without proper testing.
Because it is unethical not to carry out tests.
What people don't know is that the real problem at the moment is the cell phone, which nobody is afraid of.
They are afraid of mobile phone masts, but not of their own phones.
They wear it near the testicles, and we know that these can be affected by radiofrequency radiation.
We know when we hold it close to our ears that the brain is right there.
We need to inform people better about the technology.
Before we spread these technologies everywhere, everyone should know what risks they pose to health.
Because that way we can avoid riots, burning poles, creating fear and problems that don't need to be there.
But we can also avoid people holding the phone near the brain if they know it's very dangerous.
Information is therefore the basis for dealing with dangers correctly.
The European Parliament commissioned a technology assessment from Dr. Fiorella Belpoggi.
After evaluating over 800 studies, the demands on politicians were clear:
5G expansion stop, independent research and honest and comprehensive public information about the health risks.
This has disturbed many MPs, and through the STOA report there are now people who are asking similar questions to us.
But there are people, one of the vice presidents in particular, who said, "Why are you asking these
questions? We need to move the business forward!"
So that was disturbing because it contradicted what the Commission said.
Instead of asking other scientists for a report, attempts are being made to silence the Ramazzini Institute.
The tactic is to destroy anyone who resists or asks questions or shows that there is an impact on the environment.
They cannot stand any contradiction.
And that is very dangerous, for democracy, but also for our lives today, whether we are talking about
pesticides, electromagnetic radiation or medicines.
Science is being manipulated by the lobbies.
This is how it works: you buy scientists and have them sign articles that are not their own.
In the case of Monsanto, for example, these are papers drawn up by Monsanto and signed by academic scientists.
They are being bought. Industry has taken control of science.
Science is there to find out the truth, and of course studies can also be criticized.
But instead of producing counter-opinions to show why they disagree with the Ramazzini Institute's
studies, they do not do so, but discredit the person.
The economist Professor Christian Kreis has devoted several books to the subject.
Ultimately, however, it's the same as Otto Waalkes made the joke back then:
"Science has established that smoking is not harmful after all," Dr. Marlboro drew.
I laughed about it even as a teenager.
Logically, Dr. Marlboro conducts a study: Smoking is not unhealthy.
And today, of course, you don't write Dr. Marlboro underneath or Swisscom under the study that promotes.
They leave out who has promoted.
You take a renowned institute that is sponsored by a telephone company, among others.
This is almost part and parcel of science today.
And then they get a study that is very benevolent.
And they will find it difficult to refute them, because scientists are very careful to ensure that what they do is accurate.
That they don't make technical mistakes.
The craftsmanship of these studies is excellent.
I could just use this same toolbox, this same device, with a completely different question.
And then I would come to completely different conclusions.
The trick is actually that we always hear tenths of truths or fifths of truths and
certain things systematically fall by the wayside.
And then we have a scientifically sound, unambiguous study, a clear scientific result.
And we are led to believe that it is science and that science has established this.
Well, they were scientists, of course.
But this is abused on a massive scale because the other side is not given a chance to speak - and deliberately so.
Professor Kreiß used to be an investment banker and knows what he is talking about.
For 25 years, he has dedicated himself to exposing manipulation and the methods used to destroy critical scientists.
If you look at the history of science, you only need a few cases.
It's enough if you beat one, two or three in public and finish them off, then the others will think twice.
But these are really the highlights, so that when very uncomfortable scientists appear, they are dealt with.
The first step is actually to ignore it.
That's the very best thing - just don't report it.
But if you can no longer ignore them, if they are too good or too public, then as a last resort you simply defame them.
No more on the matter: "play the man, not the ball."
So it's not about the matter at hand, it's about trying to make the person who said it look lazy -
like in soccer, because he plays soccer too well.
They can't get him away.
There are some very prominent examples of this in the history of science over the last 50 or 70 years.
But they are not that common now.
Because all it takes is for a few of them to be "told off" for the others to think twice
about messing with a major industry opponent.
So most of the procedures are much, much more subtle, even at the pre-selection stage.
People who make statements that are really critical of economics and politics, young
academics, they don't really come up at all these days.
So they don't really need to "wipe the slate clean" anymore.
When the first scientific studies on possible health risks were due for publication in the mid-1990s, things got uncomfortable.
A team led by Professor Henry Lai from Washington University had found so-called DNA strand breaks in animal experiments.
The precursor to cancer was clearly visible under the electron microscope.
One conclusion is that radio wave fields can damage DNA.
Of course, if the DNA is damaged, the cell tries to repair the damage, but errors occur
during this process that lead to genetic mutations.
And of course this can lead to the development of cancer.
The scientific findings, which were threatening from the point of view of the first cell phone manufacturer Motorola,
were presented in an industry-friendly way by the master manipulators of the lobby agency Burson/Marsteller.
They presented their client Motorola with the so-called "War Game Memo", a strategy paper with instructions on how the
study could be trivialized and the scientists discredited.
For example, the Lai study should first of all be doubted, as it only appears as an individual study.
In this context, the paper referred to examples from the past in which scientists were discredited because
their results could not be repeated by other research teams.
Furthermore, the industry itself will take care of reproduction and is commissioning a corresponding study
within its own ranks to verify the results of the Lai study.
As soon as this industry result is available, it will be published.
The first time I saw any of this was the attacks on Henry Lai - how a single scientist was truly
attacked by a powerful multi-billion dollar industry.
He was even attacked before he even got around to publishing the study on DNA effects.
And they were excellent studies. And yes, that basically destroyed his scientific career.
Yes, and that is exactly what is happening time and time again in the USA and Europe.
The highly respected specialist journal "Microwave News" spoke of "war gaming" for the first time.
And investigative journalists are still coming across this historical phenomenon and its consequences today.
We looked at the industry's misinformation and propaganda campaigns that have convinced the public
over the last 25 years that cell phones are safe.
And the way they did it is the science of "wargaming", as the whole thing is titled in an internal Motorola memo.
They financed industry-friendly and attacked critical and independent scientists, and they
put their own people on the advisory boards.
All in all, this has led to the message - spread by the mainstream media - telling us that cell phones are safe enough.
The powerful industry association CTIA commissioned a man they deemed industry-friendly
enough to achieve the appropriate study results.
The physician and lawyer Dr. George Carlo founded WTR (Wireless Technology Research) with industry money.
When he found alarming health risks and brazenly published them, he felt the power and war game strategy of his clients.
In many cases presented by the WTR, in terms of the findings and their meanings, this was presented differently by the industry.
When we held a press conference, the industry held one of its own and then told the media: "That's
what they said, but that's what they actually meant.
Anyone researching the topic of mobile communications and possible health risks cannot avoid the World Health Organization (WHO).
The powerful United Nations agency covers 194 countries and has a hand in all relevant health issues.
The WHO could not ignore the discussion as to whether cell phone radiation could possibly be harmful to our health.
After all, she is pursuing a noble vision:
Health is a fundamental human right.
Everyone has the right to the best possible state of health.
The Australian Dr. Mike Repacholi was regarded as the key witness of the mobile phone critics because he had seen an
increased development of cancer in mice exposed to cell phone radiation in his study published in 1995.
Now the man was sitting at the WHO and asking his study question - wargaming himself, so to speak.
My study involved mice that were predisposed to lymphoma.
And we discovered a steady growth of lymphomas due to the radio wave signals.
We then spent six months trying to find out what we had done wrong because we simply couldn't explain it.
And we still can't do that today.
He finds a problem, but still can't figure out where the problem comes from - and therefore there is no problem.
The corresponding linguistic usage was standardized and prescribed worldwide.
Cell phone users simply want to know if it is safe to use a cell phone.
From all the knowledge we have - and we now have a large amount of ongoing research - we can say:
We have found no evidence that these phones are not secure.
Dr. Mike Repacholi felt very confident.
After all, he was the official mobile voice of the WHO, but he made mistakes. The dear money.
The money that comes from the industry has to go into a separate pot before it is given to the WHO.
And so it was that the good man was finally exposed - as an advocate and trivializer paid by the industry.
He then retired from the WHO and has been working behind the scenes as an industry consultant ever since.
During his time as project manager in Geneva, he had done a great job.
The mobile communications growth sector conquered the world at a rapid pace.
While it took twelve years to reach the first billion cell phone connections worldwide, the second took
only three years, the third billion two years and so on.
Today, there are more cell phone contracts in the western world than inhabitants. Mission accomplished.
We have to look at the whole thing again in the light of our findings.
So knowing that the radio waves can have massive effects on the brain and nervous system, can damage our cell DNA, can cause
oxidative stress which is linked to a number of chronic diseases, can cause hormonal reactions - and also that reproductive
effects can occur which in turn can cause devastating damage.
And my prediction is that 5G will exacerbate all these effects.
And then there's cancer, which is of course a huge problem.
In the sum of the facts described, 5G is particularly frightening.
Now, as you may know, the plan is to install many millions of these new antennas without
having carried out a single biosafety test.
And that is absolutely insane.
The highest civil court in the USA, the Superior Court in Washington, D. C., has been hearing
so-called brain tumor cases for over 20 years.
This is the biggest compensation case of all time.
Some courageous lawyers have taken up the fight against Goliath and are supported by Dr. George Carlo.
Former industry researcher Dr. George Carlo is advising the plaintiffs' attorneys, the lead law firm Morganroth & Morganroth.
She held the cell phone antenna to her head and that's where the tumor grew.
It was a fast-growing tumor.
The doctors said they had never seen anything like it: A tumor that grows so quickly.
If the plaintiffs are proven right, it will be expensive.
"We are asking for 150 million dollars per case."
Why so much?
"These are serious injuries that have caused a great deal of damage: Loss of income, medical
and hospital costs, but also pain and suffering.
These categories are very serious injuries.
We are also demanding special compensation for the deliberate actions of the mobile phone industry.
We accuse them of deliberately misleading both plaintiffs and consumers by claiming that there were no harmful
health effects from mobile phone use - even though they knew full well that this was not true.
We are therefore also claiming special damages for the deliberately inflicted pain and suffering."
US television reported on this.
Here you can see an x-ray of Michael Murray's brain.
The white mass on the right is the cancerous tumor that was removed.
Murray was a service technician at Motorola.
Do you have any doubt that your work with cell phones caused your brain tumor?
I have no doubt at all that cell phone use at work is the cause, because I always held it to my left ear.
In addition, Michael Murray often tested the cell phones for hours at maximum transmission power with a signal amplifier.
These ensure that the cell phone is operated at maximum power.
And like many others, Michael Murray believes that profits are more important to the mobile phone
industry than responsibility for the common good.
I think they know. They must know.
The brain tumor cases are reminiscent of Big Tobacco.
The industry cannot, indeed must not, admit to such a problem.
If they admit this as a company, then they may have millions or billions in lawsuits for damages.
That doesn't work at all, they are ruined.
In this respect, there is simply structural untruth.
Because if they tell the truth, they may lose their livelihood.
So the economic existence perhaps even more so.
In this respect, this economic system plays in a direction that simply tempts or almost forces us to do
so: In some areas, I'm not allowed to tell the truth.
Because if something has gone wrong or has been harmful, then you can't say so.
In the sense that the economic sanctions, but even the justiciable sanctions, are simply far too great.
And that's why this phenomenon is now not just in the mobile communications sector, not just in the
radiation sector, but is now pervading all sectors.
And something like mobile communications - which is so commonplace for everyone - would of course
be fatal if there were any kind of uncertainty.
In other words, consumers are being lied to. And this is spreading far and wide.
Due to the industry-driven trivialization and denial of the health risks of mobile radio, clever lobbying and
industry-friendly appointments to key strategic positions, most doctors are probably
also inclined to follow the no-problem slogan.
But there are holistic physicians, such as the head physician at the Swiss Mountain Clinic, Dr. Petra Wiechel.
Her clinic in Castaneda in the canton of Graubünden is digitally stress-free thanks to a
low-radiation environment designed for staff and patients.
There are no radio mice here.
There is a big announcement here in advance that we don't have WLAN in the sense of having it at every
point in the clinic, only via a network connection.
That we ultimately do not allow cell phones unless you are making calls outside the clinic.
You can do this however you like.
And we still have the nice landline phones, where I always say to patients: Why don't you use that?
Now you can still see it.
And if you set your cell phone to flight mode, you are already a little more protected.
But none of this will be possible on this scale later on.
And people simply learn to understand that.
And so we have stopped here, that we actually still have a relatively protected environment
in which a body also gets the chance to heal.
If I may use the word healthy or heal, we don't even use the word medical anymore.
It's often not even about that anymore. And we can't do it from the outside anyway.
But if we give the body back a certain power of self-regulation, then we can observe incredible things.
However, the standard is digital upgrading in hospitals.
However, the resulting increase in radiation exposure is not even questioned.
A reduction in radiation could have a positive, even health-promoting effect for both patients and all employees.
I would like to see more awareness. But maybe we'll learn about the damage here too.
That's what makes us very sad today, and where we say: "Man, you must be a doctor to look at what's happening here.
Not so long ago, we were treating so many tumor diseases here that we were seeing two or three Parkinson's
patients, neurodegeneration and autoimmune diseases every week.
And now please don't all stand there and say hmm. No, it's homemade and it's the summation.
It's not that and it's not that.
It is what one life can no longer compensate for.
And the topic we are discussing today is a fire accelerator for me.
No wonder more and more people are suffering from so-called EHS, electrohypersensitivity.
A phenomenon not recognized as a disease in classical medicine, on the contrary.
The digital upgrade seems to be progressing recklessly and with fatal consequences for an increasing number of people.
That is often the greatest humiliation for these people, not being understood and not being taken seriously.
The many, many electro-hypersensitives who then ultimately have no chance of getting any kind of real help.
And that's nice, what I can model for them, where I can slowly build a better foundation for them, give them back a better
ability to regulate and make them more adaptable to life again.
That's all it is.
And that has actually worked quite well here over the years.
And, of course, to take a deep breath, to be a little more protected from life out there.
That's why I think it's really nice that there's nothing more here than just infinitely beautiful
life, nature, peace and quiet and a look into my life:
How does it just work for me from one perspective.
It's getting tight for the highly sensitive people among us.
And only slowly, as recently in Holland, is electrohypersensitivity being recognized.
So far, this has not been the case in Germany.
If you just take it from the facts, about five percent of the population say they are electrosensitive.
Subjectively, you can question it, but medically relevant damage is present in slightly less than one percent.
Although, of course, it is always denied that this is due to radio radiation.
But this is a section of the population that cannot simply be neglected.
In this respect - I apologize for the harsh word - I think it is a crime to say what is
happening here: we are not interested in the people.
Kesari Reber is a successful meditation teacher from Munich.
She is one of the extremely sensitive people that Professor Klaus Buchner spoke to.
It began in typical fashion.
So I was at a meditation seminar for about three weeks and came back and suddenly felt
unusually unwell in my apartment. Really weak.
And then I went shopping in a health food store around the corner, just two streets away, and suddenly
realized in the health food store: Oops, what is that?
I'm suddenly fine here again.
So my strength was suddenly back and I was like, what is this?
And then I just walked along all the streets here to my home and realized that my knees always
crack at a particular point and I get really weak.
And then I just walked from all sides and looked, what is that?
And didn't see it at first.
Until at some point, two weeks later, I realized that a cell phone mast had been built on another roof at the back.
But then I knew: Ah, okay, that seems to be the problem.
When I moved house, I also had my first router and switched it on. I didn't even know what WLAN was at
the time and I got a really bad headache, really bad.
I just fled, ran out of my apartment and still had an extreme headache hours later.
And then I realized: Ah, there's a little button on the router that you can turn on and off.
Then WLAN is on or it's off, and headaches are there or not.
And then I had a partner back then who was a scientist, who did lots of experiments with me and always tested me.
Do I notice that, do I not notice that and so on. And yes, that's how the whole thing started.
The environmental engineer and building biologist Dr. Dietrich Moldan is increasingly being asked by people
who don't really know where their problems come from.
His measurements with high-precision devices can help to determine the cause.
He is aware of a fatal flaw.
Due to the denial of the manifold problems associated with mobile phone radiation, electrosensitive
people are often sedated with psychotropic drugs.
I sought medical advice. They just said: Oh, why don't you go to the psychiatric clinic next door?
Yes, that really was the answer.
And yes, of course, it can be psychological if I see it now: Ah, there's a cell phone mast there - then I might be afraid of it.
But when my symptoms disappear, are completely gone, when I'm in a good place - without knowing what is or isn't a good place.
Because you can't necessarily see it in the place, so it can't be psychological.
Because she could no longer bear life in the big city, Kesari Reber moved to Mohrenweis, a
small Bavarian village between Augsburg and Munich.
Over the years, she has created a cozy paradise for herself and has turned her greatest talent
into a profession, teaching the art of meditation.
We were actually looking explicitly for a place with very, very little radiation.
We actually have no cell phone reception here.
So you can't actually make calls with your cell phone here in the house.
Which is wonderful for me and of course for everyone who wants to come and experience it.
Out of the exposure?
Will this still be possible with the widespread construction of transmitters that is taking place?
We now have a huge mast nearby - and three such masts are to be erected here for 4,200 people.
Latent exaggeration, I would say.
It is important to know that it can happen to anyone.
That he tolerates cell phone radiation all the time, or at least thinks he tolerates it well.
And suddenly, from one day to the next, the barrel spilled over inside.
And suddenly you feel bad.
Dietrich Moldan, who holds a doctorate in engineering, has been working as an environmental analyst since 2002.
Its customers include numerous building owners, authorities, cities and municipalities, industrial companies and
commercial enterprises as well as planners and architects, but also doctors and alternative practitioners.
The measurements in the area of electromagnetic fields can help to find practical building biology solutions for healthy living.
I see the concern of building biology in the fact that in future we will have to contend with a massive increase
in the number of people who do not know why they are ill and who are a burden on the health system.
In my opinion, there is simply a lack of education here, which building biologists alone cannot provide.
But that the legislator or the health insurance companies provide information somewhere: Pay attention, reduce.
But if you look at the news - the information leaflets from the health insurance companies - there
are few warnings about electrosmog, on the contrary.
I can still remember how the Techniker health insurance company used to say: Bring us a new
customer and we'll give you a DECT phone for free.
Carelessness and unfortunately often our ignorance in dealing with wireless communication
is often the cause of various health problems.
Because Kesari Reber is aware of her electrosensitivity, she drew various conclusions.
Well, we definitely don't use WLAN or DECT phones or anything else here in the house.
In other words, I still have an old wired mouse that doesn't radiate and a wired keyboard without Bluetooth.
The phone is completely analog.
Sometimes there are also some with cables that have a triangle here, like an antenna.
It does not have this, it is radiation-free.
And what I also have: WLAN and Bluetooth switched off on the computer.
In other words, we really try to leave out everything we can.
Great! So I'm thrilled.
What I want is practically radiation hygiene.
Not the renunciation of technology, but simply - you can use technology if you use it consciously.
Let me take the example of when you come home in the evening and drive your car into the garage.
You don't leave the engine running to drive back to work the next day.
And it's exactly the same here. Switch off what is not necessary.
And you've done without DECT here, you've done without WLAN.
Bonn. Telekom draws attention to the health risk of radio radiation.
On page 21 of the 61-page operating instructions for Telekom Deutschland's Speedport WLAN router,
you will find the following safety instructions:
The integrated antennas of your Speedport send and receive radio signals, for example to provide your WLAN.
Avoid setting up your Speedport in the immediate vicinity of bedrooms, children's rooms and recreation rooms
in order to minimize exposure to electromagnetic fields.
Another digital dilemma is known from brain research:
The mechanisms of addiction and the resulting dangers for our children.
In an impressive lecture, Prof. Dr. Gertraud Teuchert-Noodt took the audience on a journey into the brain at the
5G Congress of the Competence Initiative at the end of 2019 in the Electoral Palace in Mainz.
Your conclusion?
When the over-acceleration starts from the visual cortex or below the hearing end, this circuit is strengthened.
Opiates are ramped up and cannot be brought down again.
We know the special features of opiate receptors.
So it doesn't matter whether I give too much alcohol to the child or give alcohol at all
every morning, or give the tablet every morning.
It doesn't matter whether it's a substance or a seemingly ideal drug.
The child swings up and becomes dependent.
It cannot fail to happen. It is an automatism.
I can't say: Well, a little bit, I can watch it digitally for an hour a day.
It is not possible!
Back to nature, to exercise, to play, instead of being online all the time.
The use of tablets and smartphones is changing the mental, social and emotional lives of our children.
The situation is already appalling and we need to change it.
Yes, they need to wake up.
Yes, I see an opportunity. I see a chance that the current generation of children will fail like this.
At the age of eight or nine, we are already hearing the first failure alarm reactions that they can no longer hold the stylus
correctly when they come to school - because they have only been using the touchscreen and have not practiced the precision grip.
They have to do this through children's games, through finger games, through building blocks, through laying Lego bricks.
All these fine-motor pre-formulations must be skillful.
The precision grip is then automatically there and the child picks up the stylus correctly with a precision grip.
And if they can't do that today because they were only using the touchscreen and are using the stylus like that, then
that's a delay in which I as a therapist have to get involved.
Where children increasingly appear in classes with this pathological syndrome, I have to use therapists - en masse.
And it's been clear for a long time that they can no longer speak properly either.
You have to give them extra tuition so that they can keep up with the language at all.
These are deficits of the highest degree, which have long made us aware that something has been going
wrong since television has been in our living rooms.
Because the children automatically look at the TV and can't understand it - but they sit there and are quiet.
And that they then take this TV puppet to school, where the teacher stands in front of me as a TV puppet.
The dilemma with our children seems to be slowly getting around.
Scandinavian countries are already making drastic corrections.
State recommendations to ban them are being made and Germany is discussing them - after all.
What will happen to our nature if we continue to recklessly upgrade our technology?
Here, too, there is a lack of independent scientific evidence.
A beekeeper reports on his experiences.
For the last three years or so, we have been experiencing here in the northern Black Forest, within a width of 20 kilometers
from Karlsruhe to Pforzheim and then from Wurzach in the direction of Stuttgart, that bees are simply gone in November.
And not just individual colonies, but here in the beekeeping association here in Neuhausen - 90 percent
of the beekeepers really have lost all their bees.
And there are beekeepers who have been beekeeping for 50 years and have never experienced anything like this.
I spoke to someone on Sunday who has lost a few colonies.
When he checked in November, they were all gone.
It is interesting that down there, where the bees would normally lie - if it is or was
a bee disease - there is no bee to be seen.
So for me personally, the conclusion was clear that there was something in addition to
all the other problems we have with the bees.
And it is precisely this radiation that is now having a massive effect on the bees. Similar to glyphosate back then,
the bees lose their orientation in flight and then can't get back into the hive and die somewhere outside.
They fly three kilometers.
What do the transmitters do to our trees?
For almost 20 years, a dedicated doctor has been investigating this question, and slowly even skeptics are taking her seriously.
Since 2005, I have observed tree damage together with other people in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations.
This was prompted by visits to long-term sick residents living near mobile phone base stations.
We were particularly concerned about the onset of crown damage on one side.
Damage that started on the side facing the transmitter.
This was the reason why we then documented trees at many transmitters, accompanied by measurements.
Here is an example.
You can see two lime trees, the one on the side facing the transmitter, which is at the
back, has lost many leaves on the right-hand side.
If you look closely, the branches are already dead - and these lime trees still have leaves
on the side facing away from the transmitter.
On the younger lime tree on the right you can also see the difference that on the right the tree is light in the
upper area, on the other side it is even more densely leafed.
An alarming number of trees in the vicinity of two transmitters have been marked red, i.e. cleared for felling.
Dr. Waldman-Selsam has documented the fact that mobile phone radiation could be responsible for tree damage so
impressively and continuously that her work is now being discussed internationally among experts.
The doctor never tires, and for good reason.
We have been to over 1000 transmitters and documented them.
That's what motivates me so much.
We found tree changes at each transmitter that cannot be explained by other factors, but
which indicate a connection with the transmitter.
And the fact that you can find it at every transmitter and that at the same time - if you then go into
the radio shadow - you can find healthy trees again.
So to this day, even now in October, when I walk along in Hamburg or wherever, I don't find
healthy trees, but densely leafed ones in the shade.
And many people are now noticing this contrast.
It was simply the case until now, that was practically the shortcoming, that the experts
never considered the transmitters until now.
That's why they were often at a loss, but never asked: Does the station do it?
Because they didn't even look where the transmitter was.
And now, if you take that into account and look at maps showing where the transmitters are registered and where the main
directions of radiation are, then many experts start to wonder.
How do we get out of the digital dilemma?
Some clever minds would certainly have something to offer.
Here we have all the elements needed to establish an Internet connection with Li-Fi , i.e. without radio radiation.
First of all, here is a ceiling light that is connected to the Internet; and which emits light in the
invisible part of the spectrum that the eye cannot see.
And so the information that comes from the Internet is transferred to this key, which will soon
be so small that it will fit into a cell phone.
And here we have the computer. This computer is in flight mode.
It is not connected to any WLAN network. This computer is therefore radiation-free.
When I want to carry out a search, I enter a keyword and of course realize that there is no Internet access on this device.
I now simply connect the Li-Fi receiver.
The PC will now communicate with the Internet via this small receiver.
The receiver sends a light to the ceiling light to tell it to connect me to the Internet.
Now that the PC is connected to the Internet, I make another search query.
I can access the Internet and watch a video - for example "Understanding Li-Fi".
In a few seconds we can see the speed of the connection.
We can also do a speed test.
Mute the sound to avoid being disturbed.
And when we start the Li-Fi connection speed test, we're at almost 75 megabits per second
with a single light - and we're in flight mode.
So I have an Internet connection without radio radiation at a speed of 80 megabits per second.
This means that I can surf the Internet and search for information without being exposed to any radio waves.
The work on optimizing the technology continues.
After Prof. Dr. Suat Topsu was able to present a marketable Li-Fi system back in 2008, he traveled the world from Paris -
as an ambassador of light from the city of love, so to speak.
Suat Topsu was already a professor of physics at the age of 28, and went on to win several innovation awards.
But the absolute breakthrough with his lighting technology solution is still missing.
In 2022, he took a break and has been running a historic boat on the Seine with a friend ever since.
The family man recharges his batteries. A down-to-earth job in a wonderful setting helps him.
He is aware of his difficult mission, as his innovation puts him in competition with a seemingly overpowering
industry that successfully relies on risky technology.
Why should those who are upgrading at great expense correct their policy?
The trigger is that people say: Yes, radio radiation is dangerous.
The question is: what is an acceptable level so that it remains safe for a lifetime?
So that it is not dangerous for a person throughout their life?
When I had the idea with the Li-Fi to use the lighting that has always been with us - from the sun to light
bulbs - I thought to myself: Now we have alternatives.
You can criticize, but it's better to come up with solutions, because then there are no more objections.
And voilà, you can do it differently.
There are technologies that can be used to solve the challenges facing humanity.
It needs the will, it needs a real political and economic will to change. And that is what is missing today.
It's not the technology.
Prof. Wilfried Kühling is a highly competent expert in the field of environmental protection.
He has been working in this field for decades and is increasingly focusing his work on electromagnetic fields - for good reason:
If you look into the subject, you realize that there is a general attack on life, on the life processes themselves.
Because the cell structures are affected, the cell functions are addressed, changed, because the nerve cells
communicate via electricity, the brain waves are addressed.
And a change in evolutionary states is taking place practically everywhere.
And if you imagine the processes that take place, the effects that are produced, chromosome damage and other things - then you
wonder how evolution is supposed to continue if a person now has such a drastic effect on these life
processes that have shaped them over millions of years.
Prof. Kühling also sees a great opportunity in lighting technology.
Although the big three - Apple, Samsung and Qualcomm - currently share three quarters of the radiation-oriented WLAN
market, solution-oriented research is also underway in Germany.
Prof. Kühling believes in a radio turnaround and is optimistic.
My impression is that the companies have long been working on using the light frequencies further.
Because they offer precisely these advantages for the future massively increasing communication, these tremendously
increasing amounts of data that will be transmitted.
They have forecast annual growth rates of over 80 percent, and it is already known that one of the large operating companies joined
forces with the world's largest lighting company years ago.
I think a lot of things are in the drawer and will certainly have a breakthrough one day.
Büren an der Aare - a picture-book Swiss town not far from the capital Bern.
Since around the fall of 2023, this idyll has been a source of good news for mobile communications critics.
Former professional skier Christian Oesch and architect and spatial planner Daniel Laubscher are attacking the authorities
and the industry, organizing legal action and taking them to court, and informing the Swiss public
that the newly erected 5G antenna systems are a sham.
Yes, I have news.
- Let's hear it.
Federal Court - our complaint has been received and will be accepted.
Now we want to know.
I believe that the cantonal enforcement authority has now provided proof that they are systematically corrupt.
We can show them that now.
These antennas do not emit less radiation, as is always claimed by the enforcement authority.
They radiate more strongly. We have now been able to demonstrate this.
And together with the Swiss association WIR, we have now shown that in Switzerland in general, but only in the canton of Bern
alone, 386 antennas in 127 municipalities illegally emit too much radiation by using more
transmitting power than they have been authorized for.
We share this with society, with those affected.
This has now also led to advertisements.
So that we can ask these municipalities to initiate proceedings to restore the legal situation.
That means switching it off and seeing whether it can be approved at all.
But logically, there is now great resistance from the mobile network operators, because then the network would collapse.
And they are still fighting back and want to go all the way to the Federal Supreme Court, even though the Federal Supreme
Court has already ruled on this legal issue several times.
But that is the right.
Being right and getting right are two different things and simply require patience, courage and also the
necessary finances so that you can really fight for your rights.
Since the discussion about the new 5G generation of mobile communications began in 2019, there have been
organized protests, especially from nature-loving Switzerland, such as here in the capital Bern.
But when individual cantons politically demanded a moratorium, a freeze on expansion,
the national government called it off again.
Economic interests were obviously more important to them than the concerns of the citizens.
Since then, the non-profit association has been trying to shake the Swiss awake with consumer protection-oriented
information and lectures, to inform them about their rights to radiation protection and to encourage them to protest.
Both partners are tirelessly active and successful.
Every presentation we give, Daniel and I together, we always upload the slides to the event.
Everything is always there on our website, with full transparency, so that people can follow every step of
the way, and they can research every source themselves.
We want the 'don't believe us', make sure yourself with your own research and confirm that for yourself too.
And I think we have made very, very great progress there in the last three or four years,
so that people can make sure for themselves.
We have really been able to start a very, very big wave in Switzerland.
I hope that the work we can do here in Switzerland and with these first success stories that have really been confirmed by
the courts, that this can also be transferred internationally.
The concept that we apply here in Switzerland can also be applied everywhere, up to and
including America and Australia and so on.
A look at the website reveals another ally in the "Gigaherz.ch" network.
This has existed since the beginning of mobile radio criticism and education, i.e. for a good 30 years.
Together they are now strong.
But in this day and age, people who don't say yes and amen to everything often have a hard time even within their own ranks.
Corona has primarily caused a split in society.
So there was only good and evil. The media also moralized.
So, you were either a supporter or an opponent.
But it was almost impossible to convince the other party with objective, scientific arguments.
Because I had to listen to a lot of things back then, from "swearers", conspiracy theorists and I don't know what else.
Although we were always able to prove it, but it wasn't judged at all.
And the courts and the media have run roughshod over it.
Yes, the Laubscher, he's just an opponent.
But I've always said: I use mobile phones almost every day because I'm also dependent on them.
But I am committed to preventing more and more and more radiation, more and more data being transmitted faster and faster.
And that's exactly what 5G is supposed to do - transmit a hundred times more data, a hundred times faster.
It's not me saying that, it's dear Swisscom.
And then it simply becomes dangerous for people and is harmful to their health.
I have already noticed there that this is such a polarization or polemic.
You were then simply a "swearer", a bad one, or you were a good one.
And today, unfortunately, this is increasing even more, if you demand the right, the written valid
law, you are very often also called "right-wing".
The one has nothing to do with the other.
But that's an observation I've made, that you're being pushed into a political corner again - and I'm politically independent.
If it is to be factual policy, then evidence-based science and not science.
Rather, I am trying to show that we really are being systematically lied to by the enforcement authorities.
And it's difficult to prove this to the courts, because the burden of proof is on you.
Well, if social development continues like this, the word conspirator will mature into a distinction.
These two gentlemen certainly don't lack stamina.
Architect Laubscher has already completed the legendary 100-kilometer run in Biel several times.
A housing estate in northern Bavaria. Single and multi-family houses are located in the vicinity of a
mobile phone base station mounted on the roof of a house.
A common picture everywhere in Europe.
An international group of renowned scientists set themselves the task of investigating the extent to which residents
living closer to the transmitter are exposed to higher health risks than those who live some distance away.
All test subjects from the settlement were fitted with so-called heart rate variability (HRV) measuring devices .
A 24-hour ECG and HRV analysis are used to record the status of the autonomic system.
Tests and measurements were carried out in a specially erected tent near the transmitter and phases of high and
low emissions were simulated with radiation shielding.
A novelty in this study, entitled "Athermal biological effects of electromagnetic fields on the autonomic
nervous system and gene integrity", was the use of blood samples taken from all test subjects.
Seven hours after they were taken, the samples were at the renowned institute of Professor Igor
Belyaev at the Cancer Research Institute of the Slovak Academy of Science in Bratislava.
His research team used the most sensitive cell biology methods available worldwide.
The results are likely to be a scientific milestone in the correction of the handling of electromagnetic fields.
We are examining the chromosomes here. We record the chromosome metaphyses.
After all metaphyses have been recorded, I export them to my computers and analyze for each metaphysis
how much dicentricity and how many rings are present.
Based on the frequency of aberrations , we can recognize whether damage is present or not.
In conclusion, the cell biological investigations of the chromosome structure showed that changes in the
genome are possible after years of above-average exposure .
The increase in chromosomal aberrations observed in group V, i.e. the exposed group, indicates chromosomal
abnormalities that have most likely accumulated over the years.
Professor Belyaev summarizes the most important point of the study as follows:
The analysis of the total number of chromosome aberrations revealed an extremely high, statistically significant difference
between the exposed and non-exposed group: chromosome aberrations occurred almost twice as frequently in the cells of
the exposed group as in the cells of the non-exposed group.
The ATHEM-3 study is causing a great deal of discussion worldwide.
The researchers based the observed rates of chromosome damage on the regulations of the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) and found that the usual limits were exceeded by a factor of 7.6.
ATHEM-3 could be the basis for a new era.
[Prof. Dr. Christian Kreiß: Dear fellow citizens, look, question, don't look away, also look at the unpleasant things, as far as
you can bear it - and then draw the consequences and then change.
My hope relates to knowledge and to the question: "What is the meaning of my life?"
We can already see, even among young people - even if they like to play with their cell phones, etc. - that many people are
asking themselves right now what the meaning of their lives is.
My hope is that we will get back to the essentials.
... to ban WLAN from homes, ban DECT phones and all that, but to do it through lighting technology.
And where it is not possible - outside - to carefully plan the radio radiation so that we get to 100 microwatts.
That is my goal and it has even been legally proven that it has actually been confirmed as a goal by the courts.
My dream is for science to return to the past and for scientists to once again become doctors
who know something and pass on their knowledge.
So I have the confidence and really the hope that there are scientists who are now looking into the
matter very quickly and that it will be recognized.
It inspires me too, this confidence.
Yes, it's clear that we should finally start using technologies sensibly, that we should use our devices
sensibly, that we should use technologies that are not harmful.
My dream is that technologies and innovations will actually enable social and human progress.
I always say that innovation should enable humanity to go beyond the limits it has today into the unknown - but
with respect for nature and not to obscure the future.
Li-Fi is a technology that can really enrich connectivity.
You learn a lot, you are networked with each other and you can use connectivity without radio radiation, without risk.
And so my dream is that it will actually happen.
This technology will be used sensibly for progress. For the progress of humanity.
We are simply observing a worldwide increase in critical illnesses, sleep problems and
cancer rates, which will increase in the future.
You have to think about the cause and be able to research and name the things that lead to this whole development.
And unfortunately this is ultimately ignored by saying: What are the symptoms and what can a symptom do?
It has always been clear that we need to find the causes and not cure the symptoms.
My dream is, I always try to tell my family, I didn't really want to.
I never really wanted to tackle the subject.
My dream is that I will no longer have to plow it because justice and the law will prevail.
That's my dream - and then 5G the way they want it is not possible.
So I dream about that.
But sometimes I'm not sure if it's really just a dream or what the chances are.
I haven't given up hope yet.
My dream is that everyone around the world will really understand better what mobile communications really are.
And how this is personally noticeable when we have the cell phone on our head and how we use the device here.
It will be very, very important that everyone understands: This is not just a device, it really is a weapon.
And we need to know how to handle a weapon.
And with this, I really want to add as much as possible.
As quickly as possible so that people understand how dangerous this actually is.
Especially when we think that we are giving the phone, the cell phone to a child and using
it as a kind of babysitter. That's terrible.
It makes a lot of sense to set out to understand the dangers of life, to take them seriously
and please: always start with yourself first.
Because I can minimize a lot of stress - which I also put on my body - very, very well if I understand what I'm doing to myself.
You know, I'm thinking further now: I'm thinking about what we eat, I'm thinking about the tattoos, I'm
thinking about the handling, of course, the hygienic and healthy handling of this mobile phone.
Can I bear to slow down for a while? Can I stand to have cell phone-free days?
That would be a gift to life and a gift to yourself.
And I believe that if we are allowed to develop this love for ourselves, and that is what we are here for - we
doctors - then we can take people with us in this awareness.
It's not about forbidding, it's about this past life and taking it into your own hands.
Because it's really starting to feel unpleasant to stand there and say:
It affects children, it affects young people today, it affects adults.
We bring diseases to the fore that don't belong there, if at all, in a person's life.
I think the only thing we can do is to send them to hell.
But, ... can I say that in an interview?
I don't know what else we could do.
You know, the political system is corrupt. The media is almost completely corrupted.
So what should we do? We have to protect ourselves.