In recent years, we’ve seen policies that favor corporate profits over the well-being of the American people. When cancer victims and chronically ill individuals vote for the very politicians who enforce these policies—policies that may have contributed to their suffering—it’s hard not to draw a disturbing parallel to Stockholm Syndrome. Stockholm Syndrome is a psychological phenomenon where hostages develop a bond or loyalty to their captors, even defending them, despite being subjected to harm. In this case, it seems many voters, especially those dealing with health crises, have become unwitting captives of corporate influence, voting for the very policies that have endangered their lives.
The Corporate Capture of Public Health
Corporate capture is the process by which regulatory agencies, like the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), are dominated by the industries they are supposed to oversee. This leads to decisions that prioritize corporate profits over public welfare. The FCC, under both Democratic and Republican administrations, has been slow to update its RF safety guidelines, even when faced with mounting scientific evidence linking radiofrequency (RF) radiation to cancer and other health issues.
Under the Obama-Biden administration, Tom Wheeler, a former head of the wireless industry lobby, was appointed chairman of the FCC. This was a clear case of the fox guarding the henhouse. Wheeler’s leadership ensured that the wireless industry’s interests would come before public health. Instead of acting on studies, like the National Toxicology Program (NTP)’s landmark research that found RF radiation caused cancer in rats, the FCC remained passive, continuing to use outdated safety guidelines from the 1990s. The Biden-Harris administration has continued this trajectory.
Cancer Victims: Voting for Policies That Have Harmed Them?
Take the heartbreaking story of Catherine Crews, a terminal cancer patient who recently cast what may be her final vote. Diagnosed with a rare, aggressive form of cancer in her head and neck area, Catherine’s illness may be linked to environmental factors, including RF radiation exposure—risks that have been ignored by the very politicians she supports. She, like many, is unaware that her vote for Kamala Harris is a vote for a party that has allowed corporate interests to sideline life-saving cancer research and prevented updates to public health regulations that have been court-ordered because it is clear they are not preventing the risk of cancer.
It’s reminiscent of Stockholm Syndrome—where voters are so deeply ingrained in the system that harms them that they defend and support the very policies responsible for their suffering. Democrats like Harris have been part of an administration that halted the NTP’s critical cancer research and ignored court orders to update FCC guidelines based on modern science. Yet, cancer victims, like Catherine, are drawn to the promise of compassion and fairness, unaware that they’re voting for policies that perpetuate the dangers they face.
The Democratic Party’s Role in Perpetuating Harm
The Democratic Party, while often seen as a champion of social issues, has allowed corporate capture to thrive. When we examine the influence of industries like telecommunications, it’s clear that profits are often placed above the health and safety of American citizens. Kamala Harris, along with Joe Biden, has ignored the mounting evidence of RF radiation dangers, failing to act even after the courts ruled that safety standards were outdated and inadequate.
When cancer victims vote for these policies, are they hostages of a system that has failed them? Are they trapped by a political machine that has normalized putting corporate profits ahead of public health, so much so that they can’t even see the harm it’s causing?
Breaking the Cycle: Voting for Health, Not Profit
As the 2024 election approaches, it’s crucial to ask: Are we voting for our own well-being or for the profits of industries that have captured our government? When you vote for politicians like Kamala Harris, you’re voting for the status quo—policies that prioritize corporate interests and leave vital research unfunded and outdated safety guidelines unaddressed.
To break free from this Stockholm Syndrome-like grip, we must start questioning the motivations behind our leaders and whether they are truly looking out for our best interests. The NTP study provided clear evidence linking RF radiation to cancer. Yet, under Democratic leadership, the research was halted, and action was never taken to protect the public from this growing health risk.
We need to hold our leaders accountable. Our votes should not be for those who profit from our suffering but for those who are willing to stand up to corporate influence and make public health a priority. Voting for more of the same will only ensure that more Americans suffer from cancers, neurological disorders, and other chronic health conditions linked to RF radiation and other environmental hazards.
A Call for Awareness and Action
Voting in 2024 is not just about choosing a candidate; it’s about choosing whether we continue to be captives of corporate interests or whether we demand leaders who will put people first. If we continue to vote for those who have ignored court rulings, halted life-saving research, and failed to protect public health, we are complicit in our own suffering.
It’s time to break free from this cycle of corporate control. Let’s reject the notion that it’s normal for profits to be prioritized over people’s lives. Vote for your health, not for the policies that have failed you. Don’t let your vote contribute to the very system that has made you a victim.
Cancer On The Ballot 2024
As the 2024 U.S. Presidential Election approaches, it brings with it a critical issue: the potential health hazards of wireless radiation, particularly RF radiation emitted by cell phones, Wi-Fi, and 5G networks. While it may seem far-fetched to some, this election could have significant consequences for public health, especially as the science connecting RF radiation to cancer, neurological disorders, and other diseases becomes increasingly difficult to ignore.
Cancer on the Ballot isn’t just a metaphor. The decisions made by the next administration will directly influence how the country handles wireless radiation safety. And with candidates taking starkly different positions on RF radiation research and safety guidelines, your vote might indeed affect the risk of brain cancer—yours, your children’s, and future generations’.
Kamala Harris: Corporate Capture and Health Neglect
Kamala Harris has aligned herself with the same policies that have allowed the telecommunications industry to continue operating under outdated safety standards. Under the Biden-Harris administration, funding for the National Toxicology Program (NTP), which found clear evidence linking RF radiation to cancer, was diverted to military projects, shutting down critical cancer research.
One of the biggest failures under Harris has been the refusal to update safety guidelines for RF radiation, despite overwhelming evidence of non-thermal biological effects. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) still relies on safety standards from 1996—before smartphones and Wi-Fi were part of everyday life. These guidelines focus exclusively on thermal effects, dismissing the more insidious risks of non-thermal exposure, such as DNA damage, oxidative stress, and increased blood-brain barrier permeability, all of which have been linked to cancers like gliomas, the very cancer that claimed President Joe Biden’s son, Beau Biden.
Yet despite personal tragedy striking so close to home, Harris’s administration has turned a blind eye to the growing scientific consensus that RF radiation can contribute to cancer. The National Toxicology Program’s findings, along with those from the Ramazzini Institute, which showed similar cancer risks at much lower exposure levels, have been ignored. This is a critical failure in public health policy, driven largely by corporate influence over regulatory bodies like the FCC.
Public Health Neglect Under the Biden-Harris Administration
Despite the 2021 U.S. Court of Appeals ruling that the FCC had failed to properly justify maintaining outdated RF radiation exposure guidelines, the Biden-Harris administration has allowed these antiquated standards to persist. Rather than enforcing the court’s mandate to reassess these guidelines in light of new scientific evidence, the administration has remained passive, effectively allowing the FCC to continue neglecting public health.
What’s worse, under Vice President Kamala Harris, the National Toxicology Program (NTP)—which conducted one of the most comprehensive studies linking RF radiation to cancer—was allowed to run out of funding. This halted further research that could have provided even more concrete evidence that the current FCC guidelines fail to protect the public, especially vulnerable populations like children.
In short, Harris has not made any effort to safeguard public health from a threat that has been clearly recognized by the courts. Her inaction has left millions, including children, exposed to potential risks from RF radiation, even as scientific and legal findings demand urgent reform.
Voting for Harris in 2024 is not just a vote for corporate interests—it’s a vote that could directly impact the public’s health, putting millions at risk of developing brain tumors and other serious conditions.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.: A Champion for Public Health
In stark contrast to Harris, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been a tireless advocate for RF radiation safety. His 2021 lawsuit against the FCC resulted in a historic court ruling that the agency had “failed to justify” its outdated safety standards. Kennedy has long pushed for a complete overhaul of these guidelines, emphasizing the need for regulatory bodies to recognize the dangers posed by non-thermal RF radiation exposure.
Kennedy’s stance is firmly rooted in science. He has pointed to major studies, including the NTP’s decade-long investigation, which found increased rates of brain and heart tumors in animals exposed to cell phone radiation. Kennedy has also criticized the FCC’s cozy relationship with the telecommunications industry, calling for independent research and stricter oversight to protect the public from the dangers of wireless radiation.
A vote for Kennedy in 2024 is a vote for updated safety guidelines and a government that prioritizes public health over corporate profits.
Donald Trump: A Shift in Perspective
While Donald Trump’s first term was marked by appointments that favored corporate interests—such as Ajit Pai, a former Verizon lawyer, as chairman of the FCC—he has since acknowledged his past mistakes. Through discussions with Kennedy, Trump has pledged to make RF radiation safety a key issue in his 2024 campaign.
Trump has committed to restoring funding for the NTP’s research on cancer risks associated with RF radiation and has promised to overhaul the FCC, breaking the telecommunications industry’s stranglehold on regulatory policy. By admitting past failures and shifting focus toward public health, Trump represents a significant change in the way RF radiation safety could be handled under his leadership.
Voting for Trump in 2024 means supporting a candidate who now recognizes the risks of RF radiation and is committed to updating safety standards to reflect current scientific evidence.
Why Cancer Is Truly on the Ballot in 2024
It may seem sensationalist to say that cancer is on the ballot in 2024, but the evidence is undeniable. The NTP’s findings, the Ramazzini Institute’s confirmation, and epidemiological studies like the Interphone Study and Dr. Lennart Hardell’s work consistently show a link between RF radiation exposure and increased cancer risks. We are no longer debating if RF radiation poses a risk to human health—we are now debating how much it will be allowed to continue harming the public without intervention.
Kamala Harris’s administration has not only failed to address these risks but has actively halted research that could save lives. On the other hand, both RFK Jr. and Donald Trump have pledged to reinstate this critical research, update safety standards, and end the regulatory capture that has allowed corporate interests to dominate public health policy.
Your Vote Could Save Lives
This election is about more than political alignment. It’s about public health. As wireless radiation continues to proliferate, the decisions made by our next leaders will have lasting consequences on our health and the health of future generations. Voting in 2024 is not just about economic or social policy—it’s about whether we will stand by as outdated safety guidelines contribute to rising cancer rates, or if we will take action to protect ourselves and our children.
Cancer is indeed on the ballot this year, and your vote could be the difference between a government that protects its people and one that sacrifices public health for corporate profits.
Don’t vote for who has made you a complacent hostage embroiled in corporate profits over public health!