The 5G Transparency Project BOP

18/06/2026

Did you know hundreds of scientists called for a pause on 5G rollout?

Back in 2017, a group of scientists and medical professionals launched what became known as the 5G Appeal.

Their request was simple:

Pause the rollout of 5G until potential health and environmental effects had been more thoroughly investigated by scientists independent of industry interests.

By 2024, the appeal had been signed by hundreds of scientists and doctors from around the world.

Some of the concerns raised included:

• Long-term cumulative RF/EMF exposure
• Potential biological effects beyond heating
• Increasing exposure from wireless devices and infrastructure
• The need for more independent research

Does this prove 5G is harmful?

No.

But it does show that concerns about wireless technology are not limited to "conspiracy theorists" or people who don't understand science.

Scientists themselves continue to debate these issues.

As a community group, we're not claiming to have all the answers.

We're simply asking whether enough research has been done before continuing the rapid expansion of wireless infrastructure.

You can read the appeal for yourself here:

https://www.5gappeal.eu/

What are your thoughts?

Scientist 5G appeal call for 5G roll out moratorium

17/06/2026

📡 How Close Is Your Nearest Cell Tower?

This map shows the location of telecommunications towers across the Whakatāne area.

Take a moment to look at where they're located.

Many are situated close to homes, schools, parks, businesses, medical facilities, and places where people spend much of their time.

One of the questions increasingly being asked around the world is whether there should be minimum setback distances between telecommunications infrastructure and places where people live, learn, work, and gather.

A commission report in New Hampshire discussed recommendations from some researchers suggesting setbacks of approximately 500 metres (1,640 feet) between cell towers and residential homes, schools, and other sensitive locations.

Yet many towers today are located far closer than that.

Whether these sites are currently carrying 3G, 4G, 5G, or a combination of technologies isn't really the point of this post. The question we're asking is whether the growing density of telecommunications infrastructure in residential and public areas deserves more discussion, more transparency, and more independent long-term research as exposure continues to increase.

Technology has changed dramatically over the last 20 years. We now carry wireless devices with us everywhere we go, and many people are asking what the long-term effects of constant exposure may be.

We don't claim to have all the answers.

We simply believe these are reasonable questions that deserve open discussion.

What do you think?

16/06/2026

🎧 New Podcast Episode: 5G - The Biggest Public Health Experiment in History

Released today, this episode of the Culture Apothecary podcast features Stephanie Locricchio, Senior Advocacy Manager at Children's Health Defense and founder of Wellness Warriors Revolution.

The conversation explores:

• The rapid expansion of WiFi, Bluetooth, and 5G technology
• Questions surrounding long-term RF/EMF exposure
• Current wireless safety standards
• Why some scientists and advocacy groups are calling for more independent research
• A proposed US bill that could reduce local community control over where cell towers are placed, including near homes, schools, and playgrounds

While this discussion is focused on the United States, many of the topics raised are highly relevant here in New Zealand too, particularly around 5G rollout, community consultation, safety standards, and the ongoing debate around long-term exposure.

🎥 Watch on YouTube:

We're surrounded by WiFi, Bluetooth, and 5G every day — so why have...

16/06/2026

Interesting story out of California. After multiple cancer diagnoses at an elementary school, a nearby cell tower was eventually removed following years of concerns from parents and the community.

Have a read and decide for yourself!

This story happened at Weston Elementary School and is an intriguing case for us to consider as I will get to some key thoughts by the end. Essentially, parents became alarmed after 4 students were diagnosed with different forms of cancer over a period of several years, including kidney cancer and brain cancer. Some parents also pointed to cancer cases among teachers and nearby children.

A Sprint cell tower was located on the school campus, and many families suspected it could be connected to the illnesses. The issue gained national attention, with packed school board meetings, student protests, and parents pulling children out of school. Eventually, more than 200 parents reportedly attended meetings demanding action.

After mounting public pressure, Sprint agreed to shut down the tower and relocate it, even while maintaining that the tower was operating well below federal safety limits, which are controversial to begin with. The school district's testing and the parents' independent testing both found radiation levels within government standards.

The story gets more complicated of course. Investigators later looked at other possible environmental causes and found that there was historical contamination in the area from a former industrial site that used the chemical trichloroethylene (TCE), a known carcinogen. Lawyers and investigators examined whether groundwater or soil contamination could have played a role in the cancer cases. They found that it was possible given the prevalence.

What I find interesting about cases like this comes down to the overall LOAD on our human bodies. We often search for a singular cause for something, but this isn't a wise approach. Humans have detoxification systems via lymph, liver, kidneys etc, but were they meant to filter ubiquitous toxins? Were they meant to function well under the massive levels of stress we face?

Often, cases like this may come down to the straw that 'breaks the camel's back.' Meaning, it could have been the TCE, it could have been the 5G added extra stress to an already bad situation. One question I'd ask is, since removing the tower, have cases stopped? Current records show that the cases have stopped. No one looked at records of cases during the 5 years prior to first diagnosis, when the tower was first installed.

16/06/2026

🎧 BEWARE AIRPODS & BLUETOOTH HEADPHONES ⚠️

15/06/2026

NZ's current radiofrequency exposure standard is called NZS 2772.1:1999.

I know we don't want to believe it, but 1999 was awhile ago...

Supporters say the standard remains valid and is based on international guidelines.

Critics argue that while the standard has remained largely unchanged, the world around us has not.

In 1999:
• There was no 5G
• Smart phones didn't dominate daily life
• Smart watches didn't exist
• WiFi was far less common
• Smart meters weren't widespread
• Children weren't growing up surrounded by wireless technology from birth

Today many people are exposed to wireless technologies 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

We're not claiming this means current exposure levels are unsafe.

We're asking whether exposure standards have adequately kept pace with the way technology is now used.

Should more independent research be conducted into long-term, cumulative exposure?

What do you think?

12/06/2026

Confused by all the terms being thrown around in the 5G debate?

Don't worry. It can be hard to follow!

RF, EMF, radiofrequency, non-ionising radiation, milligauss, GHz... there's a lot of jargon, and many people are arguing about it without actually understanding what these terms mean.

So before discussing whether 5G is safe, unsafe, overhyped, or misunderstood, we thought it would be helpful to break down some of the basics in plain English.

This carousel explains:

• What EMF actually means
• What RF is
• What 5G is and how it works
• What "non-ionising radiation" means
• What some of the common measurements and numbers refer to
• Why some people are concerned, and why others aren't

Whether you support 5G, oppose it, or are simply curious, understanding the language is the first step.

Knowledge first. Debate second.

Let us know in the comments if there's a term, study, or topic you'd like us to explain next.

11/06/2026

There's a common misconception that everyone agrees on this topic.

They don't.

In 2017, hundreds of scientists and medical professionals signed an appeal calling for a pause on 5G deployment until potential health and environmental effects could be more thoroughly investigated.

That doesn't automatically mean 5G is harmful.

But it does show that concerns have existed within parts of the scientific community for years.

As a volunteer community group, we're not claiming to have all the answers.

We're simply asking questions and encouraging people to look into the evidence for themselves.

What do you think?

Should new technologies be proven safe before widespread deployment, or should deployment continue while research catches up?

European scientists' appeal:
https://www.5gappeal.eu/

11/06/2026

09/06/2026

Wow! Our last post sparked a lot of discussion 💬

Some people agreed with us. Some disagreed with us. Some asked thoughtful questions. Some challenged our information.

That's exactly what public discussion should look like.

What isn't helpful is the name-calling, bullying, ridicule and personal attacks we've seen from a small number of people.

The purpose of this page is not to tell people what to think.

The purpose of this page is to:

• Share information
• Document local readings and observations
• Collect testimonials from the community
• Ask questions
• Encourage people to do their own research
• Promote transparency and informed consent
• Create respectful discussion about a technology that is becoming increasingly present in our lives

We are a group of concerned local volunteers, not all scientists, doctors, or industry experts.

We are not claiming to have all the answers, or to promote fear.

Our concern is that many of the questions people are asking have never been properly answered.

We are also more than happy to hear from people with different views, experiences, knowledge, research, or expertise. Whether your experience with this technology has been positive, negative, or somewhere in between, your perspective is welcome here.

Our position remains simple:

We believe more research is needed.

We believe New Zealanders deserve transparency.

We believe safety standards should be regularly reviewed as technology changes.

We believe people should be allowed to ask questions without being mocked or dismissed.

Whether you support 5G, oppose it, or are simply undecided, you should still support the right to ask questions, access information, and make informed decisions.

If the technology is as safe as we are told, then independent research, open discussion and public scrutiny should only strengthen that position.

Healthy debate is welcome here.

Personal attacks are not.

Thank you to everyone who has contributed respectfully, whether you agree with us or not.

We'll continue sharing information, studies, expert opinions, local observations, and community experiences in the coming days and weeks. We hope you'll follow along!

Progress should never be afraid of scrutiny.

If a technology is truly safe, it should stand up to questions.

Thank you! 😊