Tackling the 5G and EMF Nightmare – Free Live Webinar with Trevor King

What You’ll Learn

In this session, you’ll start with a plain-language look at electromagnetic fields and where they appear in daily life, so the technical terms feel easier to follow. Trevor will explain the distinctions he makes among phones, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, household electricity, and newer mobile networks.

You’ll then hear why the presenter is concerned about close-range and repeated exposure, which means you can examine his reasoning rather than relying on a dramatic headline. The session connects those concerns with questions about sleep, concentration, fertility, children’s environments, and general well-being without establishing that EMFs cause any individual symptom.

The webinar also introduces practical habits, home-checking ideas, and optional shielding technology, and then places those ideas within a modern connected lifestyle. The focus is on choices you can consider without giving up every device or treating a product claim as a guaranteed health result.

• How Trevor defines EMFs and identifies everyday sources
• The webinar’s perspective on 5G and health concerns
• Why the presenter highlights close contact with phones and wireless earbuds
• How Wi-Fi routers, Bluetooth, smart meters, and dirty electricity are discussed
• Why children, schools, and family homes receive special attention
• The household appliance the webinar identifies as a surprising field source
• Simple distance and device-use habits that may reduce exposure
• Ways the presenter suggests checking conditions around the home
• What scientists and regulators have said, including areas of disagreement
• How the webinar presents optional Qi shielding technology and its claimed lifespan

Citations & References

This evidence-centered list provides public sources related to claims commonly made about 5G, EMFs, wireless devices, and health. It includes studies that have raised questions as well as systematic reviews, exposure standards, and regulatory guidance that often reach more reassuring conclusions.

Science develops over time, and results can differ by frequency, exposure level, study design, and population. Reading across several types of evidence can help you distinguish a research signal, a seller claim, and a conclusion supported by the broader evidence base.

The links open the original publication or official source in a new window. They are provided for informed, non-alarmist discussion and do not replace advice from a qualified healthcare professional.

• Classification of RF EMF as “possibly carcinogenic (Group 2B)” (2011): IARC Press Release
• WHO-commissioned systematic reviews (2024-2025): no association between mobile phone use and brain or head cancers; no effect on cognition: Environment International (Karipidis et al., 2024); ARPANSA summary (2024); ARPANSA cognition review summary (2024)
• Large animal studies reporting tumor increases at high exposures: U.S. National Toxicology Program final reports (2018); Ramazzini Institute rat study (2018); context from American Cancer Society
• Regulatory exposure limits that cover 5G, Wi-Fi, and Bluetooth: ICNIRP RF Guidelines (2020) and overview for 5G
• Measured RF levels near 5G base stations are well below public limits: Ofcom 33-site measurement report (2021); Ofcom EMF audits hub
• Teens, children, and brain tumors: A large case-control study in youth found no statistically significant increase: CEFALO / JNCI (Aydin et al., 2011). Adult heavy-use case-control signals exist in some studies: CERENAT (Coureau et al., 2014). A large WHO-commissioned meta-analysis reports no association overall: Karipidis et al., 2024.
• Adult heavy mobile-phone use and glioma (mixed epidemiology): Signals in some case-control studies and meta-analyses: Hardell et al., 2008; CERENAT full text. Prospective data show no overall increase: Benson et al., 2013. WHO-commissioned meta-analysis: Karipidis et al., 2024.
• Fertility and sperm quality (evidence mixed): Adams et al., 2014; Kim et al., 2021; Rahban et al., 2023; cautionary appraisal: ARPANSA commentary
• Sleep, symptoms, and well-being (mixed findings): Bijlsma et al., 2024; Bosch-Capblanch et al., 2024; Henschenmacher et al., 2022
• Immune-system effects (mixed evidence): Yadav et al., 2022; Ohtani et al., 2015; EU SCHEER Opinion (2023)
• “Digital dementia” and children’s brain development (screen-time context, not EMF itself): Hutton et al., 2019/2020; American Academy of Pediatrics media guidance
• Bluetooth and wireless-earbud exposure context: FCC SAR overview; ICNIRP RF Guidelines (2020)
• Smart meters: California Council on Science and Technology (2011); UK Health Security Agency guidance (updated 2023)
• Fire stations and small-cell siting exemptions: California SB 649 (2017) bill text; IAFF Position on Cell Towers on Fire Stations (2004)
• Frank Clegg, former Microsoft Canada CEO, on RF policy concerns: Canadians for Safe Technology
• National regulators and standards: U.S. FDA: Science and Cell Phones; ICNIRP 2020 RF guideline announcement
• Wi-Fi health-effects overview below guideline levels: Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology (2022 review)
• Power-frequency magnetic fields and neurodegenerative disease: German Federal Office for Radiation Protection summary; Jalilian et al., 2018
• Neuroscience and biological-mechanism discussions (mixed evidence): Eskandani et al., 2023; Panagopoulos et al., 2025
• Base-station compliance policy: Ofcom EMF compliance measures

Notes: Some promotional statements associated with this webinar, including claims of a “400% increase” in teen brain tumors or that wireless earbuds “microwave” the brain, are not supported by the weight of current evidence. Exposure varies by distance, device, power, duty cycle, and network conditions, and practical steps such as using speakerphone or increasing distance can reduce exposure without fear-based messaging.