G5 Telecomms Network - Cancer Risk ?
Discussion
UK trials ongoing. G5 to use small antennae attached to lamposts in the street.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/scientists-and-docto...
Should we be worried ?
https://www.globalresearch.ca/scientists-and-docto...
Should we be worried ?
https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevent...
Not massively, no. Worth keeping an eye on it, but not worth becoming an anti-vaxxer about it.
Not massively, no. Worth keeping an eye on it, but not worth becoming an anti-vaxxer about it.
Not really, some folks still think microwave ovens are going to kill them. The website seems to be a tad sensational.
I worked in mobile handset development around 2G days, when people still held the things to their heads for hours at a time and we had to quote SAR (saturated absorption rate i.e heating effects on brain tissue) on marketing literature, people care less and less now they've realise just how useful a smart phone is. The reality is that the more small cells we have the lower the power level needed in your hand or next to your ear. There was a very serious doubt of the safety of the Tetra radio system in the noughties for slightly different reasons which I don't think ever quite went away.
The risk of an increasing level of continuous background emf noise is unknown but I suspect the city's pigeons and squirrels will start falling over first.
I worked in mobile handset development around 2G days, when people still held the things to their heads for hours at a time and we had to quote SAR (saturated absorption rate i.e heating effects on brain tissue) on marketing literature, people care less and less now they've realise just how useful a smart phone is. The reality is that the more small cells we have the lower the power level needed in your hand or next to your ear. There was a very serious doubt of the safety of the Tetra radio system in the noughties for slightly different reasons which I don't think ever quite went away.
The risk of an increasing level of continuous background emf noise is unknown but I suspect the city's pigeons and squirrels will start falling over first.
Andy-SP2 said:
Microwave ovens are pretty well screened so little, if any, RF should escape.
What sort of power levels are the 5G transmitter sites likely to use?
5G is a catchall term for several standards that vary quite widely in spectrum use and implementations, up ton6Ghz. I suspect until such a time as we see the first application we won't know in what direction the industry will go. But don't expect power levels to go up if cell size is goi g down, but do expect your phones radio to be "on" and sharing more data more often. What sort of power levels are the 5G transmitter sites likely to use?
pavarotti1980 said:
Ive had some dealings with those characters in a professional capacity. Obsessed!Driller said:
The same thing always happens in these discussions.
Strangle all debate by quoting some extreme nut job and associating him with all views contrary to the “correct” one.
Or quieten a loon by reflecting that the massive preponderance of science is agin him? How goes the fluoride poisoning of the populace? Strangle all debate by quoting some extreme nut job and associating him with all views contrary to the “correct” one.
I'd forgotten about all the fuss about mobile phone SARs.
But then, these days I think nothing of exposing people to 4W/kg whole body exposure for an hour at a time.
If people had the same concerns about MRI about phones they wouldn't go near them. RF fields can reach 10kV/m peak (1 kV/m time averaged; although if someone has a pacemaker or implanted electronics, like a neurostimulator, I would usually try to keep this below about 350V/m to avoid disturbing the electronics). I guess that even these reduced intensity fields exceed that even around mobile phone base stations.
But then, these days I think nothing of exposing people to 4W/kg whole body exposure for an hour at a time.
If people had the same concerns about MRI about phones they wouldn't go near them. RF fields can reach 10kV/m peak (1 kV/m time averaged; although if someone has a pacemaker or implanted electronics, like a neurostimulator, I would usually try to keep this below about 350V/m to avoid disturbing the electronics). I guess that even these reduced intensity fields exceed that even around mobile phone base stations.
FredClogs said:
Andy-SP2 said:
Microwave ovens are pretty well screened so little, if any, RF should escape.
What sort of power levels are the 5G transmitter sites likely to use?
5G is a catchall term for several standards that vary quite widely in spectrum use and implementations, up ton6Ghz. I suspect until such a time as we see the first application we won't know in what direction the industry will go. But don't expect power levels to go up if cell size is goi g down, but do expect your phones radio to be "on" and sharing more data more often. What sort of power levels are the 5G transmitter sites likely to use?
I think the simple answer is we don't know, the need to quote SAR or some value for exposure is basically to show that a limit is being applied. Whether the limit is correct or not I don't know as it is based on tissue heating effects and applying a large protection factor to provide a precautionary limit.
If anyone is likely to prove RF is hazardous it is most likely be a lawyer and then all hell will break loose as the feeding frenzy starts. Personally I think there are much worse things out there that need dealing with before worrying about RF.
P.S. Cell sizes are getting smaller because of capacity issues, all these high speed whizz-bang data connections need to get their data through something so the base station throughput becomes the limiting factor.
Not to mention the handset, modem, etc are power limited i.e. battery so reducing RF power improves battery life which gets used for digital bits to process the new whizz-bang data connection i.e. battery life isn't really improving.
If anyone is likely to prove RF is hazardous it is most likely be a lawyer and then all hell will break loose as the feeding frenzy starts. Personally I think there are much worse things out there that need dealing with before worrying about RF.
P.S. Cell sizes are getting smaller because of capacity issues, all these high speed whizz-bang data connections need to get their data through something so the base station throughput becomes the limiting factor.
Not to mention the handset, modem, etc are power limited i.e. battery so reducing RF power improves battery life which gets used for digital bits to process the new whizz-bang data connection i.e. battery life isn't really improving.
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff