Dr. Oz Interview With Medical Journalist Nicole Saphier On 5G Cell Towers. Is She Concerned or “Que Sera Sera”?

By B.N. Frank

On February 9, 2018, Dr. Oz included a segment on his program about Americans who are concerned about 5G small cell towers being installed in front of their homes and throughout their communities.  The segment was called “The Rise of 5G Cell Towers.”

The introduction includes that Internet Service Providers (ISP) and telecom companies are installing these new 5G small cell towers so Americans can

  1. Binge watch
  2. Post (online)
  3. Surf (the Internet)

without experiencing dropped calls, slower speeds or screens freezing up.

This is similar to how humans spent all their time in the 2008 futuristic movie, WALL-E.

His introduction also explained how smart phones and other electronic devices use a very specific frequency on the “Radio Frequency Spectrum.”

This specific frequency is also referred to as:

  1. Cell Phone Radiation
  2. Microwave Frequency
  3. Microwave Radiation
  4. Non-ionizing Radiation
  5. Radio Frequency (RF)
  6. Radio Frequency Radiation (RFR)
  7. Wireless Frequency (WiFi)
  8. Wireless Radiation

Dr. Oz explained that 5G small cell towers are being installed throughout communities – including in front of homes

  1. “due to the rise of smart technology
  2. “the ever growing number of devices in each household”
  3. to meet our increasing desire for higher Internet speed

Even when municipal governments and citizens oppose these new 5G towers, many of our elected officials have already created and passed laws so that ISPs and telecom companies can install them anyway pretty much everywhere.

Members from The Center for Safer Wireless were given a chance to speak about their health concerns from 24/7 exposure to 5G towers and infrastructure.  Many American municipal governments share the same concerns.  Some have filed lawsuits against their state 5G laws.  Organizations are also fighting federal 5G bills that are still being discussed.

Dr. Oz also interviewed Nicole Saphier, M.D. whose website states that she is a

  • Dedicated physician, author, fierce legislative advocate and frequent media contributor
  • Frequently reports on breaking medical and health policy news for FOX News, FOX Business and MSNBC

Her Twitter page includes that she is a “Mom of 3 boys” and has a dog.

She seemed prepared and confident when discussing this topic.  I lost confidence in her early on though when she stated that non-ionizing radiation doesn’t cause DNA damage.  According to the $25M National Toxicology Program Cell Phone (Non-ionizing) Radiation Study, it does cause DNA damage in mammalsPeople are mammals.  Many of us have pets in our homes that are also mammals.

She fluctuated from seeming very concerned about the potential for health issues from 5G cell towers being installed all over America to seeming very “Que Sera Sera.”

She seemed concerned when she made the following comments.

  1. In regard to non-ionizing radiation: “…we do know with certainty it causes heat and thermal damage…”
  2. Most of the research (on 5G) has to do with high doses. We don’t have anything thus far on the long-term chronic effects of this low dose (5G) radiation and that is what I’m concerned with.”
  3. So could (5G cell towers) cause cancer, long-term effects, we don’t know.”
  4. We know that chronic heat can increase metabolism and that may make some changes.”

Dr. Oz asked her:

“So – bottom line this for us.  These towers are going up in neighborhoods all over America.  This is where technology is headed.  We need the wireless bandwidth in order to do all the things we’ve gotten comfortable doing.  Should we be worried?”

Dr. Saphier:  “It depends on who you ask.”

Unfortunately she was the only medical “expert” who Dr. Oz asked.

“Safety testing” and guidelines for wireless technology were established 20+ years ago when most of us didn’t use technology at all or nearly as often.

“Safety testing” for wireless devices and products isn’t performed on mammals.  It is performed on plastic mannequin heads and bodies.

During the interview, Dr. Oz also referenced the fact that the World Health Organization classified Non-ionizing Radiation as a Possible Carcinogen in 2011.

Dr. Saphier did not seem impressed with the WHO classification.  Her response:  “Whenever something’s classified as ‘possibly carcinogenic’ that just means the jury’s still out, we don’t know.”

Well – if we don’t know – maybe our elected officials shouldn’t be allowing telecom companies to be putting more cell towers everywhere – especially in front of homes.  It’s called “erring on the side of caution.”

Then again…  “Que Sera Sera.  Whatever will be will be.  The future’s not ours to see.  Que Sera Sera.”

Many Americans are not comfortable with this “Que Sera Sera” approach to 5G cell towers.  Some, like Dr. Saphier, are also medical professionals.  Many scientists also already believe there is enough research already that proves Non-ionizing Radiation should be classified as a Group A Carcinogen.

Dr. Oz encouraged viewers to go to his website and read a statement that was provided by the CTIA in regard to concerns about 5G cell towers.  Keep in mind that the CTIA feels no obligation in ever mentioning that current federal regulations and safety guidelines are 20+ years old and don’t apply to how technology is used day. 

Maybe Dr. Saphier, her 3 boys, and their dog will be fine if they get a 5G cell tower in front of their home or in their neighborhood.  Maybe her neighborhood is filled with scientists and other residents who are also “Que Sera Sera” about cell phone and wireless (WiFi) radiation.

However health issues have already been documented from past and present sources of wireless (WiFi) radiation and electrical pollution.

Even if this isn’t doesn’t seem to be affecting her family right now, radiation exposure is cumulative.

As a doctor, she may want to be more concerned about this at least in regard to her patients and the rest of the public.  Dr. Oz seems to be.  The vulnerable are usually affected first –children, the disabled, pets, nature.

Other noteworthy statements from Dr. Saphier:

“Everything to date shows us that (5G) millimeter waves are not going to cause cancer.  However we don’t have long-term studies.

No long-term studies seems like a good enough reason to “err on the side of caution” on 5G.  You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to understand this.

“We know that cancer incidence is on the rise – mainly from self-inflicted behaviors

Dr. Saphier didn’t mention what kind of “self-inflicted behaviors” that children are guilty of doing during their short lives when they get cancer.

Dr. Saphier:  “Is 5G the next one?  I don’t think so.”

Dr. Saphier seems to have just offered a medical opinion and then  immediately follows with

“However we won’t know that for decades to come.”

That, my friends, is commonly referred to as CYA.  Dr. Saphier has gracefully and successfully incorporated it throughout this entire interview with Dr. Oz. This is not an uncommon approach for doctors to take.  Most of us have experienced this firsthand.

It is important now to address that earlier in the interview, Dr. Saphier offered other medical opinions that are worth re-visiting again: 

  1. In regard to non-ionizing radiation: “…we do know with certainty it causes heat and thermal damage…”
  2. We know that chronic heat can increase metabolism and that may make some changes.”

What kind of changes?  Shouldn’t we be “erring on the side of caution” before allowing more cell towers to be installed?

Dr. Saphier’s website also claims that she is a “fierce legislative advocate.”

Because of recently passed legislation, many American municipal governments have no right to stop these 5G cell towers from being installed within their communities.  There is no mention in this interview that she is fighting this legislation.

Security experts are fighting this legislation also.  They cannot say enough bad things about 5G technology and “The Internet of Things” (IoT) which already has a 75% failure rate.

And let’s not forget what all this 5G business is about:

“Binge Watching” is not healthy.  There are even tech inventors and investors who are ticked off about digital addiction– especially among children.

Que Sera Sera.  Whatever will be will be ” in regard to 5G cell towers may be a okay for some folks.  But this doesn’t jive for many Americans who prefer “erring on the side of caution” with new technology instead of embracing Telecom Industry promises that it will enable us to

  1. Binge watch
  2. Post (online)
  3. Surf (the internet)

without experiencing dropped calls, slower speeds or screens freezing up.

In the movie, WALL-E, when the humans realized they didn’t have to live this way, they put down their devices.  It wasn’t easy for them.  They had to escape to get back to Earth.  They did it anyway.

For more information, contact the following organizations:

Additional related links:

WALL OF SHAME”Photo Gallery of “Small” Cell Towers

CBS News Posts 8 Dumb Ways to Boost Possible Cancer Risk.  Experts Still Not in Complete Agreement.

“The Flu” and “Microwave Sickness” Share Many of the Same Symptoms

Dear Cell Phone Radiation Warning Naysayers, MeThinks Thou Protests Too Much”

“Whose Research Is It Anyway? Meet One Scientist Who Gets Paid to Defend Both Tobacco and Wireless Products”

“It’s All Fun & Games Until Your Wireless Products Malfunction, Catch Fire or Explode – Apple AirPods The Latest”

“CBSNews.com #4 Dumb Thing to Boost Possible Cancer Risk Addresses Those Who Gab and Drive: Using a Cell Phone When Signal is Weak

“CBSNews.com: #3 Dumb Thing to Boost Possible Cancer Risk is Encouraging Kids to Use Cell Phones

“CBSNews.com: #2 Dumb Thing to Boost Possible Cancer Risk is Carrying Cell Phone Too Close to Body”

“CBSNews.com: Sleeping with Your Cell Phone is #1 Dumb Thing to Boost Your Possible Cancer Risk”

“Road Rage Explained? Cell Phone Radiation Lowers Impulse Control, Disrupts Blood Brain Barrier”

Popular Science” Magazine Still Blows Off Cell Phone Radiation Warnings Despite Reports From The World Health Organization, Dr. Oz, Stephen Colbert and Others

Virtual Reality’s Literal Side Effects: Headaches, Sore Eyes, Behavioral Changes in Adults; Eyesight, Balance Problems, Unknown Long-Term Consequences in Kids

Activist Post Daily Newsletter

Subscription is FREE and CONFIDENTIAL
Free Report: How To Survive The Job Automation Apocalypse with subscription

3 Comments on "Dr. Oz Interview With Medical Journalist Nicole Saphier On 5G Cell Towers. Is She Concerned or “Que Sera Sera”?"

  1. So maybe it will be Sir Mehmet Oz just like Sir Richard Doll.

  2. I will physically remove any such device near my house. I will treat it as a home invasion.

  3. Some examples for Dr. Oz and his MD friend:
    1. FEBS Letters, Vol. 543, 1–3, 22 May 2003, Pages 93-97: Microwave radiation can alter protein conformation without bulk heating. => abstract: .. These alterations in protein conformation are not accompanied by measurable temperature changes!
    2. Mutation Research/Genetic Toxicology and Environmental Mutagenesis
    Volume 583, Issue 2, 6 June 2005, Pages 178-183: “Non-thermal DNA breakage by mobile-phone radiation (1800 MHz) in human fibroblasts and in transformed GFSH-R17 rat granulosa cells in vitro”. => abstract: RF-EMF exposure (1800 MHz; SAR 1.2 or 2 W/kg; different modulations; during 4, 16 and 24 h; intermittent 5 min on/10 min off or continuous wave) induced DNA single- and double-strand breaks. Effects occurred after 16 h exposure in both cell types and after different mobile-phone
    modulations. The intermittent exposure showed a stronger effect in the comet assay than continuous exposure. Therefore we conclude that the induced DNA damage cannot be based on thermal effects.
    3. Cell Biol Int. 2000;23(11):739-48. “Effects on protein kinase C and gene expression in a human mast cell line, HMC-1, following microwave exposure.” abstract: We conclude that low-power microwave exposure may act on HMC-1 cells by altering gene expression via a mechanism involving activation of protein kinase C, and at temperatures well below those known to induce a heat shock response.
    4. FEBS Lett. 2005 Aug 29;579(21):4829-36. 2.45 GHz radiofrequency fields alter gene expression in cultured human cells. part of abstract: These results indicate that the RF fields at 2.45 GHz can alter gene expression in cultured human cells through non-thermal mechanism.!!!!!!!!!!!
    5. Differentiation. 2002 May;70(2-3):120-9. “Non-thermal activation of the hsp27/p38MAPK stress pathway by mobile phone radiation in human endothelial cells: molecular mechanism for cancer- and blood-brain barrier-related effects.”
    6. 2002. DNA Damage and Micronucleus Induction in Human Leukocytes after Acute In Vitro Exposure to a 1.9 GHz Continuous-Wave Radiofrequency Field. Radiat Res 158:523-533.
    Here summary of physiological effects caused by different power densities of wi-fi:
    As low as (10-13) or 100 femtowatts/cm2 =>Super-low intensity RFR effects at MW reasonant frequencies resulted in changes in genes; problems with chromatin conformation (DNA) Belyaev, 1997
    5 picowatts/cm2 (10-12)=> Changed growth rates in yeast cells Grundler, 1992
    0.1 nanowatt/cm2 (10-10) or 100 picowatts/cm2 =>Super-low intensity RFR effects at MW reasonant frequencies resulted in changes in genes; problems with chromatin condensation (DNA) intensities comparable to base stations Belyaev, 1997
    0.00034 uW/cm2 =>Chronic exposure to mobile phone pulsed RF significantly reduced sperm count, Behari, 2006
    0.0005 uW/cm2 RFR decreased cell proliferation at 960 MHz GSM 217 Hz for 30-min exposure Velizarov, 1999
    0.0006 – 0.0128uW/cm2 => Fatigue, depressive tendency, sleeping disorders, concentration difficulties, cardio- vascular problems reported with exposure to GSM 900/1800 MHz cell phone signal at base station level exposures. Oberfeld, 2004
    0.003 – 0.02 uW/cm2 => In children and adolescents (8-17 yrs) short-term exposure caused headache, irritation, concentration difficulties in school. Heinrich, 2010
    0.003 to 0.05 uW/cm2 In children and adolescents (8-17 yrs) short-term exposure caused conduct problems in school (behavioral problems) Thomas, 2010
    0.005 uW/cm2 In adults (30-60 yrs) chronic exposure caused sleep disturbances, (but not significantly increased across the entire population) Mohler, 2010
    0.005 – 0.04 uW/cm2 Adults exposed to short-term cell phone radiation reported headaches, concentration difficulties (differences not significant, but elevated) Thomas, 2008
    0.006 – 0.01 uW/cm2 Chronic exposure to base station RF (whole-body) in humans showed increased stress hormones; dopamine levels substantially decreased; higher levels of adrenaline and nor-adrenaline; dose-response seen; produced chronic physiological stress in cells even after 1.5 years.
    Buchner, 2012
    0.01 – 0.11 uW/cm2 RFR from cell towers caused fatigue, headaches, sleeping problems Navarro, 2003

    etc, etc, etc… ALL in BIOINITIATIVE REPORTS, all from publicly available papers… Do MD’s read anything, at all??? How about safety data sheets of all the drugs they prescribe to their patients??
    How about safety data sheets of every vaccine being injected into new born or even old bodies of humans?? Any talk/ ANY MENTION about all these?

Leave a comment