ACHES Substack
ACHES has been set up to promote, enhance, and protect human and environmental wellbeing. ACHES provides a forum to highlight and advance the truth about legal, medical and scientific information relating to current and emerging technologies. Our ‘Weekly Picks’ summarise the most relevant news pieces from our partners and collaborators to raise awareness of the health harms caused by such technologies, and offer much-needed solutions to enhance our health.
The Dangers of Social Media
On the 30 July on This Morning ITV programme, a mother Ellen Roome’s was faced with every parent’s worst nightmare, when her 14-year-old-son Jules, tragically died in what she believes was a social media challenge gone wrong. Since then, Ellen has fought tirelessly to protect children online. She has successfully campaigned for an amendment in the law named after her son: Jules’ Law. In July 2026, Ellen won a landmark legal battle in the High Court to reopen the inquest to Jules’ death, which she hopes will bring much-needed answers. Ellen describes her son as bright and was very happy, always smiling.
No access to phone
Ellen wanted access to her son’s phone following his passing, but she was not allowed access. She explains that as a parent, you have no legal right to see your own children’s social media data. This is ridiculous as she has access to bank records, medical records and school records, but she was denied access to what he looked at on social media. During the original inquest, the social media company did not carefully check all his social media data. The inquest ruled that they did not know why Jules had taken his life, despite no signs of any adverse mental health, or bullying. It was not until after that Ellen questioned what was online, and was there something we missed, but they refused her to see the online history data.
Thankfully, now there is a new inquest into the case, which has never happened before. No one has reopened a child’s inquest over the fact social media and other angles were not looked at. She took this to the High Court, despite being told it would cost £86,000. All she asked for was the right to look at the data. Ellen says we may never get the answers, but she just wanted social media to hand over the data so she could examine it.
Changes to Online Safety Act
After the original inquest, Ellen took matters into her own hands. She commented that it is hard enough to contact a person in these media companies, but she began with Meta, TikTok and Snapchat. For Snapchat, she had to be able to logon to Jules’ phone and she could not find the link to request the data. She managed to download some things, but they did not provide her with browsing data or messages without a court order. The law changed and the Online Safety Act came out in 2023, which prompted her to consider if she went back for a new inquest, they could now use that law. The coroner now has the right to demand his social media data.
New 5 Day Rule of Data Preservation
Ellen did this on her own, but found other bereaved parents who were also in the same position. She said this was fundamentally wrong and we need to change law, so she campaigned and petitioned through Parliament, which she called Jules’ Law. This has now become an amendment in the Crime and Policing Act. In this act, when a child dies, within 5 days their social media data is automatically preserved, so no other parent will ever be in Ellen’s situation again. When a child dies, the coroner now has to preserve the social media data within 5 days. The coroner goes to Ofcom, Ofcom then approaches the social media companies and requests they preserve the data. So, if they ever need to go back for it because of an investigation, they have the data.
Ellen said that the night Jules died, she asked the policeman to look at her son’s phone, as she wanted to know what was on, but the policeman said we are not tampering with it. At the time, there was a story about another little boy who was on the news about the blackout challenge. She could not watch the news as it was too upsetting, but wondered if it could be the same thing? The police said potentially but we cannot prove it. So it was always on her mind what happened online.
Missing Data
The police took her son’s phone and used a machine that randomly scrolls through numbers trying to break the code. It was later on that Jules’ friend guessed the pin, and they accessed the data. The police did a forensic download of the device, but did not scrutinise the information on it. This only came to light a couple of months ago when she discovered the police had the forensic download, but nobody had looked at it carefully. They did not uncover that he had multiple TikTok accounts, and multiple Instagram accounts. In the end, Ellen paid for a private investigator to go through his phone.
She discovered further details, which became public in the High Court, that Jules was sent a link, a sextortion link from a West African organized crime gang. She said they do not know if he clicked on the link. When Ellen asked the social media companies to hand over the data, but apparently without a court order the police could not obtain that data. She is unsure what the re-opened inquest will achieve, but wants to see if she can get some answers. Was there an online challenge, such as the blackout challenge, did he click on the link, was there online bullying involved? There is so much harm, she has come to learn about content on social media, and she wants the right to see what it is.
Remembering Jules
Each year, Jules’ friends celebrate the anniversary of his birthday and turn up at Ellen’s house. One girl makes a cake, and others choose songs and remember him. She has campaigned tirelessly and if she can make a difference for one other person, then she will continue to campaign to help others with children. When she met other bereaved parents, she realised there must be more we can do. Back in 2022, we were not talking about the harms social media can do; we are now. As a parent, she was not aware of the dangers of social media. Now she spends her time trying to make a difference. If she can stop one other child from dying or being harmed on social media, then her efforts are worth it. The interview concluded by mentioning the new ITV drama Jeff Pope is writing on this topic, which she will feature in. Although she will relive the painful memories so the documentary can be made, she hopes it will make a constructive difference.
RFK Jr Warns of Health Risks Related to Cellphones
Not in Your Head!
In a brief 6-minute video recorded at the end of July, Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary RFK Jr has warned about the health risks related to cell phones. He says never put a cell phone near your head or let your child carry it in a pocket. For a girl, warn them not to carry the phone in their breast pocket or in any place near their ovaries. Also, the further a cell phone is from your head when talking on it, the better off you are. The interviewer continues by stating that holding a radioactive device next to your head could never be a good thing, and has anyone ever thought that a mobile device emits harmful radiation? The reality is shocking when one considers it is held near your body several times a day. Similarly, wireless headphones are not without harms. How many people sleep with their phones plugged in inches away from their brain?
Insights: Nick Hoelscher and Devra Davis
The video discusses the hundreds of studies linking 5G, which is the wireless cell network that most cell phones operate on, with increased cancer cells, genomic instability, stem cell damage, development of tumours, memory issues, and fertility issues — an endless list. There are studies linking cell phones with changes in red blood cells. Parents question radiation from cell towers. Wireless radiation limits are too high to protect against cancer. Cell phone radiation fails public health. An interview with Nick Hoelscher, an epidemiologist at the McCulloch Foundation, and Devra Davis, the founder of the Environmental Health Trust (EH Trust) and author of Disconnect: a Scientist’s Solution for Safer Technology, discuss these issues in more depth. Nick starts by explaining that 5G is very deleterious to biological systems. He says there are over a hundred studies looking at what is called the millimeter wave gigahertz frequencies that 5G broadband uses.
Health Issues
Scientists have discovered significant gene expression alterations, DNA damage, tumour growth, and neurological injury. Devra gives a sobering account: cell phone radiation, which is actually microwave radiation, disrupts the membranes of every living cell of every living creature that has ever been studied. If you disrupt cell membranes, it can allow toxins to circulate around the body. Devra agrees with RFK Jr, and has worked with him for many years. You should keep phones away from your head and you should not carry them close to your body; ideally, use devices on speakerphones, and children should not be using phones.
Devra completely supports proposals around the world today to keep phones out of schools and to let our children learn the way they’re supposed to, with paper and pencil and traditional learning. All over the world, children are falling behind in their academic achievements: tests results in maths, science, and reading have plummeted. Wireless headphones are not good because they are sending the signal from headphone to headphone, which of course travels right through your brain. When you take an AirPod out of its cover, it is radiating, and placing them in your ears results in the radiation going into the brain. It is much better to wear a wired headset.
5G Enables The Transhumanist Agenda
Another issue is the 5G cell towers, which are installed all over the country. Multiple studies support the observation that cancer rates increase if you live within a half mile of a 5G tower. A brief clip shows the CEO of Nokia stating that “by 2030, the smartphone as we know it today will no longer be the most common interface. Many of these things will be built directly into our bodies”. Essentially this represents an agenda to fuse the Internet of Bodies (IoB) to be connected directly to the Internet of Things (IoT), such that an AI interface will be built directly into our bodies. China just approved the world’s first commercial brain chip. We have Neuralink coming, and this is going to be pushed heavily on the population and interface with latest generation infrastructure. Not only will this result in very serious deleterious health effects, but the real concern is the merging of human consciousness with AI.
Resisting Transhumanism
The interview concludes with Devra recommending that people should write to Senator Cruz right now and tell him that his bill to streamline spreading 5G around the country should not go forward. The Senate does not understand these issues. The last Senate hearing on this topic and these issues was in 2009, when Devra testified, as did members of the National Toxicology Program on the subject 2009. Of course, the phone technology back then was not 4G or 5G, and so the fact this has not been discussed in over 15 years is remarkable. We have highlighted the concerns of transhumanism on ACHES in previous articles. We strongly encourage everyone to resist Digital ID, see our leaflet. By raising awareness of these issues as much as possible, collectively we can help to prevent further rollout of dangerous wireless infrastructures though campaign work and objecting to cell towers. See our next post “Tools to Object to 5G Towers”.
ACHES Website
Tools to Object to 5G Towers
In her Facebook videos, Lara Lawson provides a wonderful short 2 minute video that talks through how to object to 5G masts in the UK. Lara explains how to write to your council about masts or any infrastructures that you are not happy about. If you go to our website, which can be found by typing “ACHES International” into your search engine browsers, you can access the homepage of ACHES.
There are many helpful links in the RESOURCES section on the main menu options displayed at the top of the homepage. Template letters to councils are also available under drop-down section ACHES ACTION. These are multiple letters that ACHES has sent to all local Councils across the UK, with varying pieces of information that expose the health concerns relating to Wi-Fi and cell tower infrastructures, as well as inconsistencies we have identified relating to so-called safety guidelines that do not protect the public from harmful manmade EMF radiation. These are all available on the “ACHES Action” drop-down menu and within this is “Council Letters”. Have a browse as there are many letters, but a recent one we recommend is ACHES Letter 9 at the bottom of the page. There is also a Contact Us option, which is available on the website if you have any questions you would like to ask the ACHES Team.
On the ACHES Council Letters page before scrolling down to the many shown example letters, a text section states “To make an objection to any 5G mast please click here”. When you click on this link it directs you to a collaborator site called Esther’s List. This website requires users to first sign up and register (for free). However, this site enables anyone to object to any new mast applications shown within this site. As Lara emphasizes, anyone can object to any 4G or 5G mast, the mast does not have to be in your local area.
Lots of information and guidelines about the lack of safety aspects relating to the installation of large cell towers and masts is shown. We need as many people as possible to write to their councils and object to masts. It is important for Councils to take accountability for allowing these harmful infrastructures to be erected everywhere. Although there are many people across the country doing this, the more, the better. Telecommunications companies and local councils are approving new applications for these infrastructures, without questioning the safety aspects. Such structures cannot be approved without valid risk assessments, as well as health and safety considerations to be taken seriously. We need our voices to be heard.
ACHES is a not-for-profit organisation that is funded by donation, and not supported or influenced by any sector of industry or government. If you have enjoyed this post and others, please share this information with as many people as possible, and subscribe to the ACHES Substack. To donate to ACHES, please see the homepage. Another way to support our mission is by purchasing apparel from Freedomforlifeshop.com, which will help support ACHES and our campaigning work.
