Lloyds Insurers Refuse to Cover 5G Wi-Fi Illnesses

Published on February 12, 2019
Written by phibetaiota.net – Source principia-scientific.org

Lloyds of London, one of the world’s premier insurance groups, is refusing to insure health claims made against 5G wireless (“wi-fi”) technologies.

How curious that Lloyds of London has excluded from their policies any negative health effects caused by wi-fi technologies. Now, WHY would Lloyds leave all that money on the table if these technologies are so safe? And, why are other insurance companies following Lloyds’ lead?

If you think that following-the-money provides insights, you’ll probably conclude that something VERY BIG is embedded in this decision.

Here’s some background (including links):

The FCC and other government regulatory bodies, in collusion with the big telecomm industries, are ferociously pushing smart meters, 5G and the Internet of Things.

This roll-out is not only happening in the US, but all over the world. The giant telecomms gush enthusiastically about how EVERYTHING will be connected

OMG!! We’re gonna have Incredibly high-speed connectivity so your little girls and teens can, at supersonic speed, upload pix of their latest nail-polish jobs or cute puppy videos to FaceBook, Pinterest, etc., etc., for their friends to gasp and giggle…..and, of course, click “like” and forward these to their friends…. again, all at warp speed.

It’s pretty clear that this whole “play” by the giant telecomms is seen by them as a financial windfall – for them. And, via their lobby groups, it’s seen as a windfall for all the politicians who support this agenda. Politicians will be rewarded in the usual manner – pricey junkets to exotic places, elegant dinners, campaign contributions and, of course, cushy “golden parachute” jobs for those wi-fi supportive ex-politicians within the telecomm industries, or within their lobby groups. In short, crony business as usual.

BUT WAIT!! ….There’s a tiny but growing wrinkle in this rosy scenario of sugar plums dancing in the heads of these telecomm leaders. Specifically, Lloyds of London, one of the world’s premier insurance groups, is refusing to insure health claims made against wireless technologies. And, other insurance companies are following Lloyd’s lead in this.

If you follow the money, this is HUGE. After all, if these wi-fi techno-toys are so safe, why is Lloyds leaving all this additional money on the table?

Well, Lloyd’s November 2010 Risk Assessment Team’s Report gives us a solid clue: the report compares these wireless technologies with asbestos, in that the early research on asbestos was “inconclusive” and only later did it become obvious to anyone paying attention that asbestos causes cancer.

Keep in mind that Lloyd’s Risk Assessment study of wi-fi was published over 8 years ago. Even back then, however, their Risk Assessment Team was smart enough to realize that new evidence just might emerge showing that the various wi-fi frequencies do cause illness. The result? Lloyds opted to exclude coverage for wi-fi related illnesses.

And then, PG&E followed close on, slipping in its own legal clauses (just as it was rolling out smart meters) that claim no liability for wi-fi related health damage. The schools who opt to put in wi-fi are responsible, according to PG&E, and any other organizations that opt to have PG&E put wi-fi in their buildings are the responsible parties

Today, MANY more recent peer-reviewed scientific studies show a range of serious damage caused by these wi-fi frequencies. 5G brings a quantum leap in damage – to DNA, to cell mitochondria, and much more.

Fortunately the global public is waking up. Conversations are in the air about a global class-action lawsuit vs. the SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS WORLDWIDE who are recklessly ignoring the Precautionary Principle in their promotion of advanced wi-fi technologies. In part – goes the growing conversation – the lawsuit will be based on the Nuremburg Principle of “informed consent.”

After all, what’s going on is a tiny handful of people are pushing a huge experiment on what will be billions of people, all without have gotten their informed consent … and without insurance for those who are electromagnetically sensitive – a growing group to watch. These unfortunate individuals are our “canaries” in the coal mine.

Pay close attention. This whole issue is about to become a whole lot more interesting.

Why Does Lloyd’s of London Exclude EMF Coverage – EMF and Your Health Series #4

After years of listening to cellular phone companies assure us that WiFi and cell phone transmission is safe, why did Lloyds of London, a company who will take risks when other insurers won’t exclude EMF injuries? Are they expecting an avalanche of health claims related to EMF?

What Does Lloyd’s of London Know that We don’t know?

We think Lloyd’s underwriters must be reading the research findings from major publications like the BioInitiative Report. Included in this report are summaries of research publications between 1990 -2014 on the biological effects of radio frequency and cell phone radiation. The research news is chilling. Prolonged exposure to EMF causes cellular malfunction, the formation of free radicals which then leads to a multitude of health issues. There are many physicians who now believe EMF effects underlie ALL medical issues.

This report was created by 29 authors from around the world, including 10 with medical degrees, 21 PhDs and 3 masters degrees. More than 100,000 people visit their site annually (http://www.bioinitiative.org). No longer can public officials pretend EMF is harmless. The cat is out of the bag!

Schools May Foot the Bill with WiFi Injuries

Lloyds is dumping the blame back on schools. In their insurance waiver, they state clearly that it is schools responsibility to inform parents and teachers if WiFi is being installed in their schools.

Parents for Safe Schools and other groups want to know why schools are not acknowledging the proven health effects of EMF? By allowing WiFi to be installed in the schools, they are acting as if WiFi is a safe technology. For many individuals, animals and plant life, serious health consequences occur with daily exposure to EMF.

Get Protection for Your Cell phone and WiFi & Your Body

We do recommend multi-level protection.

First and foremost, protect your entire body from the harmful effects of EMF and WiFi with a BioShield. There are also a number of ways you can dampen the amount of radiation coming from your cell phone. Visit our store to view several EMF blockers for phones and tablets. Don’t wait until you have symptoms to get protected. If you want to add EMF protection in your work and living spaces, there are several options as well.

Lloyd’s Won’t Discuss Their New EMF Exclusion Clause

My interpretation of this revealing statement is that CFC Underwriting, and perhaps all of “the market” has realized that the time has come to hedge against a future surge in “illnesses caused by continuous long-term non-ionising radiation exposure i.e. through mobile phone usage.” Why else would they refuse coverage “across the market as standard.”?

Lloyds Refuse To Discuss Why They Excluded RF/EMF Claims

“Unfortunately, Lloyd’s doesn’t have a spokesperson who can talk about this so we’re going to have to decline.” Now I’m used to rejection as a reporter, but I couldn’t quite believe this and told her so in my reply, mentioning that their refusal to talk about the policy change would possibly “draw attention away from more important aspects of the story.”

Read more at phibetaiota.net

P/s – In additional to the above article also read the following –
Telecom and Insurance Companies Warn of Liability and Risk

Appel aux dons – Daniel Obi

Appel aux dons (crowdfunding) pour une procédure ayant le caractère d’une décision fondamentale en matière de troubles du voisinage.

Daniel Obi est électrohypersensible (EHS); ce juriste est au chômage à cause de son EHS et il souffre également du WLAN de son voisin, qui ne veut pas réduire la performance de son WLAN partout ou l’éteindre la nuit.

Il a deux procès en cours :
1 – Droit du travail (licenciement abusif)
2 – Troubles du voisinage (élimination des emissions)

Les affaires judiciaires deviennent rapidement très coûteuses. La famille Obi n’est pas en mesure de supporter elle-même les coûts des deux procès. Daniel Obi finance lui-même le procès le moins coûteux devant le tribunal du travail.

Ces deux plaintes sont fondamentales et pourraient être déterminantes pour nous tous (en particulier pour les personnes électrosensibles parmi nous).

Un avocat mandaté par nous ( Dachverband Elektrosmog Schweiz und Liechtenstein ) a constaté que nos chances sont réelles. Bien sûr, on ne peut jamais prédire comment les procès vont se dérouler. Mais s’il n’y a jamais de plainte, aucune expérience ne pourra être acquise. Des affaires similaires qui ont été portées devant le Tribunal fédéral peuvent facilement coûter plus de CHF 25’000.

Comme il s’agit de deux procédures fondamentales, l’association faîtière « Electrosmog Suisse et Liechtenstein » recommande de soutenir financièrement la procédure de troubles du voisinage.

Pour plus de détails et d’informations, veuillez consulter le site Daniel-Obi

S’il y avait un excédent, il irait, en parts égales, à
• la « Coopérative de construction de logements pour les personnes électrosensibles » – Baugenossenschaft für electrosensible Menschen
• et à l’association faîtière « Electrosmog Suisse et Liechtenstein » – Dachverband Elektrosmog Schweiz und Liechtenstein. – Nachbarrecht

Au-dessus, la traduction française par Leon Warnier



Spendenaufruf (Crowdfunding) für ein Verfahren mit Grundsatzentscheid-Charakter zum Thema Nachbarrecht

Daniel Obi ist elektrohypersensibel (EHS). Der ausgebildete Jurist ist aufgrund seiner EHS arbeitslos geworden und er leidet auch unter dem WLAN seines Nachbarn, der die Leistung seines WLAN partout nicht reduzieren, respektive nachts nicht ausschalten will.

Er hat zwei Gerichtsfälle am Laufen:
1 – Arbeitsrecht (missbräuchliche Kündigung)
2 – Nachbarrecht (Beseitigung von Immissionen)

Gerichtsverfahren werden schnell sehr teuer. Familie Obi ist nicht in der Lage, die Kosten beider Prozesse selber zu tragen. Die Kosten des weniger aufwendigen Arbeitsgerichtsstreits finanziert Daniel Obi selber.

Beide Klagen haben Grundsatzcharakter und könnten wegweisend für uns alle (vor allem für die elektrosensiblen Personen ) unter uns sein.

Eine von uns ( Dachverband Elektrosmog Schweiz und Liechtenstein ) beauftragte Anwältin hat die bestehenden Akten als intakt befunden. Selbstverständlich kann man nie zum Voraus sagen, wie die Prozesse ausgehen werden. Aber wenn nie geklagt wird, können auch keine Erfahrungen gesammelt werden. Ähnlich gelagerte Fälle, die bis vor das Bundesgericht gezogen wurden, können gut und gerne 25‘000 Franken aufwärts kosten. Da es hier um zwei Prozesse mit Grundsatz-Charakter geht, empfiehlt der Dachverband Elektrosmog Schweiz und Liechtenstein, den Nachbarrechts-Prozess finanziell zu unterstützen.

Details und mehr Information finden sie auf der Webseite Daniel-Obi.

Falls es einen etwaigen Überschuss geben würde, ginge dieser zu gleichen Teilen an die Baugenossenschaft Wohnraum für elektrosensible Menschen und an den Dachverband Elektrosmog Schweiz und Liechtenstein.

Law Firm seeking those who have been harmed by WiFi

Premier Compensation Lawyers, based in New South Wales, Australia is now seeking potential clients who believe they have been adversely affected by WiFi. (EMR)

A following summary from their website

…If you believe that the effects of WiFi (EMR) have caused injury to yourself, your child/children or a friend, you are not alone. The increasingly wide spread use of WiFi (EMR) across business and government (especially in schools) is a move that goes against the rapidly mounting body of credible scientific evidence which makes increasingly clear that exposure to even low levels of WiFi (EMR) on an ongoing basis has a wide range of serious adverse health effects…

…In recent years it is well established that there are numerous adverse health effects of WiFi,(EMR) although not always immediate, many of which are cumulative and irreversible, and have most damaging effects on children….

…As from 2015, Lloyds of London, one of the world’s largest insurers, excluded as standard from its policies any EMR injury claims. They did so for good reason, and many insurers around the world have done the same. Even insurers see EMR as a significant claims risk.

Any business/government/school not covered by insurance for injury caused by EMR (including WiFi) may be liable for injuries it causes from EMR now and in the future…

…Emeritus Professor Anthony Miller, one of the world’s leading experts on cancer, dismisses telco industry and government claims that EMR cannot cause harm as “simply false” and the suggestion that there are no “established” health effects as “misleading”….

Source – Premier Compensation Lawyers in Australia

Additional informational sources

Telecom and Insurance Companies Warn of Liability and Risk
 » …. Cell Phones Wireless Companies Warn Shareholders About Future Financial Risks From Electromagnetic Radiation….  »

Risks, regulations and liability around exposing other people to wireless technology EMF radiation « ……The world is changing at a rapid pace. Not surprisingly then, there has been a rampant proliferation of home and business cordless transmission technology (e.g. mobile phone towers, smart meters, wi-fi cordless phones) that has vastly increased our exposure to radiation. Recent legal developments are causing the producers of this radiation overload to sit up and take notice, as the issue of costly liability and lawsuits is fast becoming a reality……. ».

Insurers exclude risks associated with electromagnetic radiation
 » …..It may take two more decades to know if electromagnetic radiofrequency energy is a significant liability issue for telecommunications companies, so, in the interim, insurers are treating the risk as cautiously as a downed power line after a storm…. »

Lloyds of London bails out of the cell phone health debate
“….The purpose of the exclusion is to exclude cover for illnesses caused by continuous long-term non-ionising radiation exposure i.e. through mobile phone usage….. » and Listen to the « Radio Show on Lloyds EMF exclusion »

Collective Action Quebec  » ….Québec resident decided to initiate a class action suit against an array of manufacturers and large scale suppliers/users of wireless technology for exposing the population to a variety of wireless technologies despite the fact that there are growing concerns about the safety of such technologies for humans, fauna and flora…. ».

Brit dad sues Nokia for up to £1million claiming using his mobile phone caused his brain tumour « ….It is ultimately about justice for many people who have, akin to Neil, been victims of what some experts describe as the ‘smoking gun of the 21st century’…. ».