Most of our educational articles have been focused on the effects that electromagnetic fields have on humans, as well as solutions and action steps to make us safer and healthier. For most of us, this is our immediate concern, as we want to ensure that our own health is protected as much as possible from this invisible danger, and we want to do everything we can to protect our families. However, humans aren’t the only living organisms that are harmed by EMFs! Every single life form on Earth is affected, as all life is bioelectric in nature. Every organism’s function is tied intimately to the subtle natural electric and magnetic fields of the Earth, and is harmed by any kind of disruption or interference with this natural field.
Electromagnetic fields have harmful effects on all animals (large and small), as well as birds, insects (especially bees), soil microbes, fungi, plants and trees. All flora and fauna of the Earth is affected, and since all organisms are interconnected (and depend on each other to flourish), that means each organism is harmed by the effects that EMFs have on other organisms, in addition to the harm each one deals with directly! EMFs can even affect the climate in unpredictable ways, throwing off the balance of all the species that depend on more consistent climate and weather patterns.
This Earth Day, we are going to specifically address the well documented harmful effects of EMFs on plants and trees.
Remember that the health of plants and trees is vital to us as humans, as plants are the foundation of our nourishment and food systems. We eat plants, and we also eat animals that eat plants. If the plants around us are less healthy and vital, they are less productive, and cannot feed us as well. They also cannot produce the levels of nutrients that we need for optimal health, so any kind of danger that is threatening plants and trees, by extension is also a danger to us.
There’s a lot of talk about climate change, global warming, et cetera. Many causes have been investigated, but astonishingly, the massive and unprecedented increase in artificial electromagnetic fields has barely been considered in the mainstream! Considering that EMF levels have risen so drastically over the past couple hundred years, and exponentially more so in the past 20-30 years, it is baffling that this isn’t a main topic of discussion. Fortunately, it is gaining awareness in the scientific community, and we are going to share some of this research with you today!
There are an accumulating number of research studies that have found a variety of adverse effects of EMFs on plants and trees, even at EMF levels much lower than the FCC legal limits for cell phone tower emissions. In most of these studies, there hasn’t been a clear dose-effect relationship, meaning that adverse effects were found at both high and low exposure levels. What was found consistently, though, was that longer exposure durations resulted in more adverse effects, and specific frequency ranges were found to be more harmful, particularly the common frequency ranges that cell phones and Wifi use (about 800 Mhz up to 2.6 GHz).
This is basically the opposite of the FCC’s exposure “testing” that was done on humans, where very large, robust humans were exposed to EMF levels for a very short period of time, at a strong enough dose to cause a thermal heating effect on tissue. It was hypothesized that the thermal effect was the only possible mechanism that could harm living tissue, and if the levels were low enough that the tissue wasn’t heated, there would be no harmful effects. Obviously this was an assumption, and their safety standards were set without considering any other potential mechanisms of harm. There was also never any official testing of the effects of long term exposure, and what we’re seeing in trees and plants is that the longer the exposure, the worse the outcome, no matter if the actual dosages are high or low!
What is happening to the trees and plants?
At this very moment, there is a strong human-generated radiofrequency (RF) field occurring across the entire Earth, at all times. This is caused by the combination of all the cell towers emitting overlapping fields, as well as RF emitting satellites that are providing coverage in more remote areas. Even the areas that don’t get much or any cell service still have an ever present low grade RF field, as lower frequency communication fields can travel great distances around the Earth by bouncing between the ionosphere and the Earth’s surface, like a racquetball in an enclosed room.
The highest RF field strengths occur in areas with the highest human population numbers: central Europe, the eastern US, and China. Forest decline was first recognized and defined based on events that occurred in these exact same areas. China is currently experiencing rapid desertification and species die-off, as their radiation levels continue to increase. In several studies, climate change was not found to be a causal agent in forest decline (see this study and this one), although there is evidence that trees in areas of forest decline are less tolerant of extreme weather conditions, and are also more vulnerable to pests, pointing towards some unknown factor that’s reducing the vitality and resilience of the trees to natural stressors. Mortality rates of all dominant tree species in the western US have been doubling every two to three decades in old growth forests, and new tree growth is happening slower than old trees are dying. No definitive cause has been found for these occurrences.
Even more so than humans and animals, trees are very well suited for studying whether radiofrequency emissions from cell phone towers cause damage in living organisms. Trees are stationary, slow growing, and live for a very long time. Any unusual but consistent changes observed in trees reflect sustained influences in their immediate environment.
In 2017, an Observation Guide was created by Helmut Bruenig, and posted on the Competence Initiative for the Protection of Humanity, the Environment and Democracy website. It documents consistent, visible crown damage to trees, always occurring on the side of the tree that directly faces a cell phone tower. The document provides one example after another, all displaying the same distinct patterns, all within sight of a cell tower. This observation guide was also summarized in a published study, Radiofrequency radiation injures trees around mobile phone base stations.
Typical damage patterns include dead limbs and branches, irregular leaf coloration, leaf wilt and loss, fewer new shoots and leaves, bare patches in the tree canopy, and a generally diseased look without any indicators of pests. The damage starts on the side facing the cell tower, and over a number of years, may permeate the interior of the tree and eventually affect the entire tree. The trees degrade more every year, and do not recover.
This document is incredibly eye-opening, and we recommend that everyone look through it and compare the photos of the trees, and the progression of the damage. Once you start recognizing the damage patterns, you may start noticing the same patterns on free-standing trees in line of sight of cell towers in your area!
It was noticed that the tops of the trees nearest the towers tend to dry up, and they seem to be most vulnerable if their roots are close to water, possibly indicating the resonant quality of water to frequencies – the body of water is “entraining” with the incoherent EMFs from the cell tower, which is being absorbed by the tree roots, in addition to the tree canopy being hit by the frequencies directly. Tree tops are known as RF waveguides, and are actually used to channel and direct frequencies for military applications, especially for low-flying weapon systems.
What changes are being seen in plants and trees from RF radiation exposure?
What exactly is happening inside the plants from radiation exposure that’s causing such poor health? It all seems to center around oxidative stress. The trees and plants are telling us they are under a lot of stress, and are attempting to compensate for it. The effects are strikingly similar to what happens to a plant when it is wounded, cut or burned, as found in a study exposing tomato plants to cell phone frequency EMFs. Great differences were found in the exposed plants, compared to the control group – up to 300%! The EMFs used in the study were at low, non-thermal power levels.
Another study on aspen trees showed healthier, more vigorous growth in the Faraday shielded group of trees, versus the trees exposed to the normal ambient RF levels of the area, which had cell towers nearby. The RF exposed trees in this study showed necrotic lesions on the fall leaves, smaller leaves, less vigorous growth overall, and considerably less anthocyanin production. Anthocyanins are responsible for the vibrant, rich colors of autumn leaves, and act as a shield for the photosynthetic apparatus in the leaves, so the absence of these important compounds makes the leaves vulnerable to damage from visible light. The EMF exposed plants in these studies had weaker leaf coloration, and considerably more leaf damage, which affects the overall nutrient levels in the tree, leaving it with less nutritional resources for growth in subsequent years.
A study exposing thale cress (a mustard family plant) to the EMFs from the base unit of a cordless phone system for a long duration found a considerable decrease in photosynthetic potential. This means the plant’s main growth mechanism (chlorophyll production as a response to sunlight) was stalled, decreasing nutrient production and overall vigor, growth and lifespan.
Another fascinating phenomenon which definitely indicates a strong stress response is the increase in terpene compounds in plants exposed to EMFs. Three aromatic plant species were exposed to cell phone and Wifi range frequencies, which resulted in enhanced emission of volatile compounds (terpenes and other volatile oils). These are protective constituents designed to shield a plant from an imminent danger or threat. They also make the plant incredibly flammable.
Consistent EMF exposure tends to reduce the moisture levels of plants and trees, making them drier and therefore more flammable. It also increases volatile oil production, as noted above. Plants with a high enough concentration of volatile oils have been known to spontaneously combust, catching on fire. Could this have something to do with the alarming increase in wildfires over the past several years? It sure does seem to correlate with the increase in cell tower numbers, and the 5G rollout! This is definitely something warranting further investigation, in a serious and dedicated manner.
On top of the direct damage that EMFs have on plants and trees, it just adds insult to injury that trees are being cut down, aggressively trimmed, and their roots disturbed to build out the small cell infrastructure that 5G requires.
As our most recent FCC Under Fire article mentioned, the FCC is currently under a lot of pressure by the Council on Environmental Equity (CEQ), who are responsible for setting the environmental safety regulations for the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). The FCC is now required to provide documented research that proves their current safety guidelines for radiofrequency radiation exposure are safe for the environment, including wildlife and plants. This research doesn’t actually exist.
One of our favorite things about Blushield stationary home EMF protection devices is their extremely large coverage area, which will protect areas far beyond the walls of most people’s homes. This is because our homes do not end at our walls – the Earth is our home, as well, and it’s just as important to protect the wild creatures around us as our own human families! Having a Blushield plugged into your home will essentially create a safe space for wildlife – your own nature sanctuary.
We hope that this Earth Day brings widespread awareness to the harmful effects that artificial incoherent EMFs are having on the environment, including the plants that feed us and produce the oxygen we breathe. The continued existence of our species, and all other species on Earth, depends on it!
- Environmental Health Trust: “Wildlife and wireless: policy is needed to protect flora and fauna” – https://www.fcc.gov/ecfs/document/10327153179340/5
- Study: “Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, part 1. Rising ambient EMF levels in the environment” – https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/reveh-2021-0026/html
- Study: “Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, Part 2 impacts: how species interact with natural and man-made EMF” – https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/reveh-2021-0050/html
- Study: “Radiofrequency radiation injures trees around mobile phone base stations” – https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0048969716317375#!
- “Tree damage caused by mobile phone base stations: an observation guide”, a private manuscript written by Diplom-Forstwirt Helmut Breunig (Diplom degree in forestry) – https://kompetenzinitiative.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/2017_Observation_Guide_ENG_FINAL_RED.pdf
- Study review: “A review of the ecological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF)” – https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412012002334
- Study review: “Impacts of radio-frequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) from cell phone towers and wireless devices on biosystem and ecosystem – a review” – https://www.walshmedicalmedia.com/open-access/impacts-of-radiofrequency-electromagnetic-field-rfemf-from-cell-phone-towers-and-wireless-devices-on-biosystem-and-ecosystem-a-review-0974-8369-4-179.pdf
- Study: “Adverse Influence of Radio Frequency Background on Trembling Aspen Seedlings: Preliminary Observations” – https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijfr/2010/836278/
- Study: “Influence of microwave frequency electromagnetic radiation on terpene emission and content in aromatic plants” – https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0176161714001710?via%3Dihub
- Study: “The effect of the non ionizing radiation on cultivated plants of Arabidopsis thaliana” – https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0367253016300780?via%3Dihub