Former Metropolitan Police officer Paul Birch spent 24 years in the police. In this interview from the premium section of the Sceptic, he gives a first-hand account of how the police went woke – embracing EDI, virtue-signalling and “community policing” – and why that’s been such a disaster…
Donate to the Daily Sceptic to access our premium content. Follow Laurie on X. Subscribe to Paul’s Substack here. Subscribe to the Daily Sceptic YouTube Channel here. Produced by Richard Eldred. Filmed at the Westminster Podcast Studio.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
I’m far more concerned about people becoming completely brainwashed by government propaganda via their 3/4/5G devices. Look at the last four years, for crying out loud.
Never mind all the Obsessive Compulsive Disorders, neck ache, and complete inability to concentrate on anything for longer than 30 seconds after all the instant gratification.
Even mature adults find it hard enough to moderate the use of smartphones. But the children?
On point, the strength of “radio frequency” (i.e. electromagnetic) radiation of all frequencies blasted at us from our own sun is thousands of times higher than any 5G mast. And if anyone says,
“Yes, but the sun is natural!”
I say,
“Yes, so is extreme sunburn!”
100% agree with your comments regarding the impact on people of internet connected devices. I was thinking the other day that their negative impact is similar to drugs and alcohol. I don’t want them banned though – just wish people would use them more healthily (including me).
Come on, Sceptics: seventeen of you need to elaborate!
Safe and Effective™
No evidence for…
… because we’re not looking.
Yet again Gillian presents us with a few anecdotal stories and no quantitative blind trials.
This is a further case of scaremongering.
5G istallations are widespread now and have been in common use for a number of years.
Where are the epidemics of cases?
There won’t be any, because all of this RF energy even at mm wavelengths is non-ionising, a photon at these frequencies does not possess sufficient energy to break the chemical bonds in molecules inside the body.
Thermal effects are small, the only part of the body at risk of thermal damage is the crystalline lens in the eye, because it has no blood supply to carry heat away.
Thermal effects are dependent on frequency, power and the dielectric and thermal characteristics of the exposed materials. It’s more complicated than blood supply.
Wireless/cellular devices have a warning of minimum distance the device should be from the body e.g. a wireless speaker or home hub can be 30cm. The manufacturers recognise the risk albeit in small print.
You may have noticed trivial warnings on all sorts products. This is not an admission of danger based on scientific analysis but an insistence by their lawyers that they have disclaimers. You may have seen the dire warnings of the danger of placing plastic bags over your head.
You might find these devices are scientifically analysed to determine whether they meet regulations for RF exposure.
I used to work in mobile telephony manufactuing and my office wes next door the the RF testing lab. We called it measurement not analysis. and it was engineering not science.
I think you might be surprised at how unscientific estimations of exposure were, involving a lot of wet fingers in the air.
Thanks for the example that testing takes place to measure exposure and that it is clearly more complex than just blood supply otherwise it wouldn’t be a case of “unscientific estimations”.
Floors, walls, ceilings, carry electrical wiring all of which emits EM radiation, as do appliances and devices and cars.
The Earth is bombarded with EM radiation from Big Lamp in sky belong Jesus, as well as Space, along with Cosmic Rays which include particulate radiation.
What with that and ‘additives’ and ‘chemicals’ in and on our food – it’s amazing any of us survive beyond the age of 12 months.
I sense agitation yet I haven’t made any comment on the article, just responded to comments.
You’re welcome to correct what I have said but an argument based on all frequencies and power levels of EM radiation having the same effect or risks regardless of distance from the source isn’t a very good one.
Hello again Tyrbiter, did you read the review paper I cited in a previous discussion regarding the adequacy/inadequacy of considering only thermal effects.
Here’s the link again:
https://www.spandidos-publications.com/10.3892/ijo.2021.5272
There is a very helpful explanation of why simplifying the extremely complex interactions of manmade RF emissions with cellular processes to consideration only of thermal effects is inadequate.
It also cites many other papers addressing these issues. I hope you will find these will help you to come to a better understanding of the issues involved.
“Will our Government finally take note of the findings of respected scientists and heed the appeals for a moratorium on 5G for the sake of both human and environmental health, or will its goals continue to be to “blanket the country with the fastest most reliable wireless coverage available”
———–
As they’ve demonstrated so clearly over the past 4 years, they don’t give a 4X for human and environmental health. As far as they’re concerned 5G is essential to carry out their planned programme of surveillance and control of every aspect of our lives, so I think we all know what the decision will be.
Respected scientists – they from the Covid will kill millions, safe & effective snake-oil, global climate boiling crowd?
More nonsense.
I am unconvinced, sorry.
These appear to be studies of people who are worried about the radiation. And most of the symptoms measured by the study are completely subjective.
Look at the details given of the first study:
“A couple had lived in their apartment for 10 years under a 3G and 4G mast without obvious health problems and, when they heard that the mast was to be upgraded, arranged for measurements to be taken beforehand.”
So they were clearly worried about it.
If you ask people to look for subjective health problems after masts are erected, having told them you are doing a study into health effects of the masts, it is no surprise when they report such symptoms!
My thoughts exactly
And what of the effect on birds ?
Lets place some new 5G towers to test the theory, lets say on the Houses of Parliament and Buckingham Palace, and outside the UK on the EU building in Brussels, Bill Gates house, etc
Such an serious important topic. Why did thy relax the planning laws to rollout these at a rapid rate of knots over the plandemic period? Its not like we need more connectivity in this world. In fact we need the opposite.
Its not simply profit, nor simply to gain more cancers to treat more people. Its far far more sinister. Anyone familiar with all Juan Enriquez’s videos on Ted Talks?