More from the ‘Say No To 5G’ campaign in LB Hammersmith & Fulham on the technical background to 5G, its health risks and the key official documents.



ANNEX - A bit of (rather technical) local history


In 2014, Hammersmith and Fulham Council announced that the contractor Arqiva had been awarded the exclusive rights to provide outdoor wireless connectivity to residents and visitors. The PR was disarmingly bland.


The service will provide users with unlimited telephone free access to the council’s online services 24/7 as well as providing the first 30 minutes of use per day for free. The deployment of the WiFi service will take place over the next 12 months, starting in high footfall areas such as high streets.


Making use of its already extensive portfolio of phone boxes, rooftops and other buildings, Arqiva will also incorporate street infrastructure made available.” 



Arqiva announced this would see the combined deployment of WiFi and 3G/4G small cells to provide indoor and outdoor coverage. (i.e. this added ‘mini mobile phone masts’ or antennae.


In December 2018, Arqiva’s brief was extended. It was announced that Hammersmith & Fulham would host the UK's largest 5G small cells pilot to date. The industry press reported that the pilot was purely focused on backhaul capacity for small cells.  (i.e. not wired broadband into homes, such as Fibre To The Premises).


Also that Arqiva’s partner, CityFibre would install a 15 km / 9.3 mile high density fibre network, which is ‘multi-operator capable’, in the London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham.


The pilot will explore the idea of centralised C-RAN architecture and 5G, providing backhaul capacity to allow any MNO (mobile phone network operator) the ability to quickly and easily deploy small cells on the borough’s street assets.. The network will consist of a fibre ring with over 90 cabinets to enable the sharing of the infrastructure





A bit more (technical) background information – the politics, economics, risks and health issues


Here are various key links that cover plans to expand 5G, including under the headings of the ‘Internet of Things’, the EU ‘Digital Single Market’, and ‘Smart Cities’ such as being promoted in London,


Briefing to MPs on 5G, 2019 (spin warning)


Wider UK policy – Future Telecoms Infrastructure Review.

Covers other 5G policy challenges including security and health concerns.


The UK was a member of the EU before Feb 2020, and the following policy documents would have been taken into account in planning 5G:

5G Manifesto, EU, 2016

5G Action Plan, EU, 2016

5G Action Plan, companion document, 2016

Commission Working Document SWD(2016) 306 final.

“Despite this availability of early data, the business opportunities still require further investigation because the digitalization of the many industries in transformation will significantly disrupt the current business models. A particularly relevant example is the transformative effect and economic shift towards new service delivery models (e.g. where "on demand" approaches will replace long term planned contracts) for which the expected significant redistribution of revenues streams cannot yet be fully assessed


Risks highlighted by cyber-security agency, ENISA.

“But ENISA has poked holes in the high-flying political talk about 5G: fast mobile connections come with a “medium to high risk” of cybersecurity attacks, according to the Athens-based agency. Despite the hype over 5G, the EU cybersecurity agency has cautioned that there are not enough safeguards in place to make sure the new networks will be secure. Steve Purser, the agency’s director of operators, told EURACTIV “the current signalling protocols have not been designed with security in mind, making it impossible at this point to implement


Insurer report on 5G risk


5G PPP - the 5G Infrastructure Public Private Partnership

5G PPP - Roadmap (part of a Pan-European 5G Trials Roadmap)


Sadiq Khan’s ‘smart cities’ initiative’ and wider European project (spin warning)  


Digital Catapult report on perceived potential,

5G NATION, The UK 5G Ecosystem 2018. 5G activities and capabilities in the UK


UK planning guidelines (set of Ordnance Survey documents).





A scientist spells out the shocking health impact


Dr Martin Pall has produced a comprehensive paper on health hazards of EMFs (electromagnetic fields) such as from mobile phones, masts and wireless routers,

Here are only some of its main points


Over 60% of this document (Chapters 5 & 6), is focused on the failures of statements from SCENIHR, the telecommunications industry, the U.S…. to reflect the science….  the evidence is inconsistent or conflicting and therefore, in their view, no conclusions can be drawn. (p2)


The European Commission has done nothing to protect European citizens from any of these very serious health hazards  (p3)


My own paper on this and two earlier reviews cited in it found that there are whole series of repeatedly found EMF effects which have also become extremely widespread complaints in our technologically advanced societies… these findings are…at levels well within our safety guidelines (p5)


Our current safety guidelines are based only on heating (thermal) effects. Therefore, our current safety guidelines are allowing us to be exposed to EMFs that are approximately 7.2 million times too strong. (p22)


(Chapter 6 Summary)

I think we are looking at cumulative severe impact on our brain function, on our reproductive function and on our DNA, and that these, in turn will lead to the crash of every single technologically advanced country on earth, barring a major change in course. I consider EU and U.S. views and actions to be shocking. (p79)


In summary, then, 5G is predicted to be particularly dangerous for each of four different reasons:

1. The extraordinarily high numbers of antennae that are planned.

2. The very high energy outputs which will be used to ensure penetration.

3. The extraordinarily high pulsation levels.

4. The apparent high level interactions of the 5G frequency on charged groups presumably including the voltage sensor charged groups.…


…many organisms will be much more impacted than we will. This includes insects and other arthropods, birds and small mammals and amphibia. It includes plants including even large trees (p79/80).


…We have no biological safety testing of genuine 5G radiation. Therefore, we have no risk analysis or risk management because we have no risk assessment whatsoever on 5G….


But it is not the request for the use of the precautionary principle that is premature, it is the Commission’s claim that it has done the required risk analysis and risk assessment.


This is the bizarre world that we live in. The European Commission has done nothing to protect European citizens from the very serious health hazards and the U.S. FDA, EPA and National Cancer Institute have done nothing to protect U.S. citizens. (p81/82).




Data protection note: Safeguarding privacy, GDPR and your right to object





Home page        Site map        Main Hammersmith & Fulham Page