Does 5G pose health risks?| EDN

https://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/5g-waves/4461754/Does-5G-pose-health-risks—part-1-
There has been some talk about 5G and health risks that range from hardly anything to frying your brain and controlling the population. This interesting article series is exploring the health risks posed by mmWave radiation onto humans.

Millimeter wave (mmWave) frequencies extend from 30 GHz to 300 GHz. From the literature, there can be three high-level concerns: thermal effects, ionizing effects, and electromagnetic (EM) effects.
The highest photon energy of a mm-wave photon is 1.2 meV that is 10,000 times less than what is needed to be ionizing. That still leaves thermal and EM concerns.

Most 5G systems use frequencies between 28 GHz and 80 GHz, the so-called FR2 frequency range. Many 5G systems also use the sub-6 GHz FR1 band.

23 Comments

  1. Tomi Engdahl says:

    5G – Pelastus vai uhka – osa 1
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwmeY9P1No4

    Tulisiko meidän olla huolissamme rakenteilla olevasta verkosta vai iloita hankkeesta?

    Huolestunut joukko tutkijoita on jättänyt kansainvälisen vetoomuksen, ehdottaen, että verkon rakentamista tulisi siirtää, kunnes sen mahdolliset terveysvaikutukset ovat puolueettomasti tutkittuja.

    Reply
  2. Ann Moody says:

    5G refers to describe the next-generation of mobile networks beyond the 4G LTE mobile networks. Though not launched, US government websites including CDC and EPA, promotes it and claim that the radiation is safe. But there are scientists and doctors all over the world advice to reduce the exposure to wireless systems and the 5 G lauch will be definitely causes serious health issues.

    Reply
  3. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Dr. Martin Pall To The NIH: “The 5G Rollout Is Absolutely Insane.”
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kBsUWbUB6PE

    Julkaistu 7.8.2018
    During the “Health in Buildings Roundtable” sponsored by the NIH & co-organized by the US CDC and several other organizations, Dr. Martin Pall from the Washington State University (WSU) concluded that the “5G rollout is absolutely insane”.

    In this short presentation, Dr. Pall confirms that the current 2G/3G/4G radiation the population is exposed to has been scientifically linked with:
    - Lowered fertility
    - Insomnia, fatigue, depression, anxiety, and major changes in brain structure in animals
    - Cellular DNA damage
    - Oxidative stress
    - Hormonal disruption
    - Cancer
    - And much more

    Reply
  4. Tomi Engdahl says:

    You Must See – 5G APOCALYPSE – THE EXTINCTION EVENT
    https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=230s&v=WBpZFqR6Qzk

    Reply
  5. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Does 5G pose health risks? (part 2)
    https://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/5g-waves/4461840/Does-5G-pose-health-risks—part-2-?utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=link&utm_medium=EDNWeekly-20190502

    In Part 1 of this series on possible health effects of cellular radiation, 5G mmWave radiation in particular, I examined two possible impacts to human health from 5G: ionization and thermal effects. I concluded both effects were manageable. Ionization can’t take place at mmWave frequencies because a mmWave photon doesn’t have the energy to remove an electron from an atom. Similarly, thermal effects are minimal, and could occur only situationally by placing a transmitter next to the skin. Even then, it was unclear that the one-degree threshold could be exceeded. Using headphones or placing a cell phone in speakerphone mode solved that issue completely.

    Thermal effects are the only effects recognized and regulated by national regulators, such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). For Part 2, we will look at electromagnetic (EM) effects, which are much more controversial

    The concerns about 5G EM health impacts are shared by a wide number of researchers and public health officials. An international petition with over 63,000 signatories from 168 countries has called for a halt to 5G deployment. They state, “5G will massively increase exposure to radio frequency (RF) radiation on top of the 2G, 3G and 4G networks for telecommunications already in place.

    From my research, I can see why 5G is controversial. It’s nearly impossible to perform a study with rigorously defined treatment and control groups. Ideally, it would be desirable to split a population into two similar groups with the only difference being one group was exposed to 5G radiation (the treatment group), and the other wasn’t (the control group). Then wait 20 years and note the difference in health impacts. This, unfortunately, is the case for many environmental health issues.

    The fact that a proper human scale experiment can’t be performed doesn’t mean 5G radiation is harmful or benign; it means that different methods must be used to tease out the answer.

    “The Modeling of the Absorbance of Sub-THz Radiation by Human Skin,”
    “Millimeter waves are mostly absorbed within 1 to 2 millimeters of human skin and in the surface areas of the cornea.”
    This recent IEEE study found, however, that upper coiled portion of sweat ducts (Figure 1) could be regarded as a helical antenna at these frequencies, and then transmitted by a waveguide-like structure internally to the body. The summary of this is that the surface of the body is not the absorbing shield we once thought it was. One of the authors concludes, “In light of our work and a growing number of publications showing the frequency of 5G can have serious biological effects, we believe that current efforts to accelerate the implementation of 5G should be delayed until additional studies are made to assess the critical impact on human health.”

    A study published in Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology examined the effects of mmWave radiation on bacteria. The study found that mmWaves altered bacteria growth, mainly depressing their growth and changing certain properties and activities.

    Though not specifically relating to mmWaves, a study published in Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine linked radiation from cell towers to damage in human blood. The study compared people living close and far from cell antennas as the treatment and control groups respectively.

    My own conclusion is that there could very well be negative impacts from electromagnetic radiation. There is enough evidence to show how a causal link could exist:

    mmWave frequencies conduct to the interior of the body through the sweat glands.
    Bacteria and cells are affected by mmWave frequencies.
    DNA damage is a precursor to cancer.

    We know each of the above is true. Together they may show a possible link from mmWaves to cancer or other ailments. The key word is “may.” Also, they may not. However, these risks cannot be simply waved away as nutty conspiracy theories.

    If a network is deployed on a 400 meter grid, and there is uniform population density, the median distance from a cell is 160 meters.

    So, given that there’s a yet unquantifiable risk, what do we do? Stop 5G until it is proven harmless? Deploy 5G until it is proven dangerous? Something in between?

    Reply
  6. Tomi Engdahl says:

    The Modeling of the Absorbance of Sub-THz Radiation by Human Skin
    https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8016593

    In the near future, applications will come online that require data transmission in ultrahigh rates of 100 Gbit per second and beyond. In fact, the planning for new industry regulations for the exploitation of the sub-THz band are well advanced under the auspices of IEEE 802.15 Terahertz Interest Group. One aspect of this endeavor is to gauge the possible impact on human health by the expected explosion in commercial use of this band.

    Reply
  7. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Is 5G Safe?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1x07dyqLs_0

    Mike is wondering if the energy from 5G would be harmful to humans.

    Comments:

    1x..2G, 3G, 4G, 4GLTE,4GLTE LAA and 5G are all safe…

    Sorry, Leo – there are now over 10,000 studies that disagree with you about the dangers of EMF radiation. If you don’t press the phone against your head while in a call, if you have your phone in Airplane Mode while it’s in your pocket – and you practice other safe methods, then yes, you may not be overexposed to radiation. But most people don’t follow that advice.

    And smaller waves doesn’t mean less damage, as you incorrectly state. It means more ability to create biological cellular & DNA damage (which has been proven). Imagine trying to damage a human cell with a yardstick (roughly the length of 3G/4G waves) – it’s too big to do any damage. But if you have a millimeter-size tool (oscillating at billions of times per second) it can more precisely target (and potentially do damage to) smaller things.

    The only thing is studies take time to both prove or disprove 5G harm. It might take 20 years to determine if it is truly safe. I just think these “paranoid” people site that there are studies but done of shorter period of times than longer. Being exposed to 5G over decades might show us that it is in fact harmful. But we are test subjects, I heard someone an actual proper study might be finished by the time we have 7G or 8G. Take for example something completely different, plastics (micro plastics) in food and water, we don’t know the long term effects of it until I will be in my 90s, and I am in my mid 20s at the moment.

    The government side of it is that the first to 5G will create jobs and infrastructure for the future.

    Reply
  8. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Is 5G Safe?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag1hkv2Upww

    You are being exposed to radiation right now. It’s coming at you from both space and the soil. From water and food. Your body itself is radioactive. And you’re being exposed to microwaves and radio waves, both natural and human-made. WiFi. TV. Radio stations. Cellphones. 3G, 4G and now, 5G.

    But there is a spreading fear that 5G will cause cancer. Here’s why scientific consensus says 5G is safe and will not harm humans.

    Reply
  9. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Your 5G Phone Won’t Hurt You. But Russia Wants You to Think Otherwise.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/12/science/5g-phone-safety-health-russia.html

    RT America, a network known for sowing disinformation, has a new alarm: the coming ‘5G Apocalypse.’

    Whichever nation dominates the new technology will gain a competitive edge for much of this century, according to many analysts. But a television network a few blocks from the White House has been stirring concerns about a hidden flaw.

    “Just a small one,” a TV reporter told her viewers recently. “It might kill you.”

    The Russian network RT America aired the segment, titled “A Dangerous ‘Experiment on Humanity,’” in covering what its guest experts call 5G’s dire health threats.

    Reply
  10. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Health concerns were raised last year when a large federal study showed that 2G signals could produce brain cancer in male rats. But officials discounted a direct link to humans, saying people received smaller doses.

    Nonetheless, RT has taken an active role in stirring up apprehension, casting the debut of 5G in biblical terms. The caption superimposed on a January show read, “5G Apocalypse.” The anchor reported that doctors, scientists and environmental groups were now calling for its ban.

    RT America taps the ranks of existing anti-cellular activists to wage its 5G campaign. Some have railed for decades against cellphones, power lines and other everyday sources of electromagnetic waves.

    Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/12/science/5g-phone-safety-health-russia.html

    Study of Cellphone Risks Finds ‘Some Evidence’ of Link to Cancer, at Least in Male Rats
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/01/health/cellphone-radiation-cancer.html

    Many caveats apply, and the results involve radio frequencies long out of routine use.

    Reply
  11. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Is 5G Safe?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag1hkv2Upww

    You are being exposed to radiation right now. It’s coming at you from both space and the soil. From water and food. Your body itself is radioactive. And you’re being exposed to microwaves and radio waves, both natural and human-made. WiFi. TV. Radio stations. Cellphones. 3G, 4G and now, 5G.

    5G is just getting started. Qualcomm, Samsung, Verizon, LG, Sprint — all these companies and more are right now working to build out the 5G ecosystem. But there is a spreading fear that 5G will cause cancer. Here’s why scientific consensus says 5G is safe and will not harm humans.

    Reply
  12. Tomi Engdahl says:

    5G Technology: Potential Risks To Human Health: Excerpts From Scientific Conference
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvPg1AyQ43I

    This video has clips from the expert conference on Wireless and Health held at IIAS January 2017. All presentations from this conference are availible at

    https://ehtrust.org/science/key-scientific-lectures/2017-expert-forum-wireless-radiation-human-health/

    Reply
  13. Tomi Engdahl says:

    World’s Largest Animal Study on Cell Tower Radiation Confirms Cancer Link
    http://www.sbwire.com/press-releases/worlds-largest-animal-study-on-cell-tower-radiation-confirms-cancer-link-953696.htm

    Scientists call on the World Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer to re-evaluate the carcinogenicity of cell phone radiation after the Ramazzini Institute and US government studies report finding the same unusual cancers

    Researchers with the renowned Ramazzini Institute (RI) in Italy announce that a large-scale lifetime study of lab animals exposed to environmental levels of cell tower radiation developed cancer. A $25 million study of much higher levels of cell phone radiofrequency (RF) radiation, from the US National Toxicology Program (NTP), has also reported finding the same unusual cancer called Schwannoma of the heart in male rats treated at the highest dose. In addition, the RI study of cell tower radiation also found increases in malignant brain (glial) tumors in female rats and precancerous conditions including Schwann cells hyperplasia in both male and female rats.

    Reply
  14. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Lots of 5G fear, uncertainty and doubt
    https://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/5g-apocalypse-the-extinction-event/
    5G APOCALYPSE – THE EXTINCTION EVENT
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ol3tAxnNccY

    A full length documentary by Sacha Stone exposing the 5G existential threat to humanity in a way we never imagined possible!

    Reply
  15. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Study of Cellphone Risks Finds ‘Some Evidence’ of Link to Cancer, at Least in Male Rats
    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/01/health/cellphone-radiation-cancer.html

    Many caveats apply, and the results involve radio frequencies long out of routine use.

    Reply
  16. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Defending the Indefensible
    Deconstructing a New York Times Headline
    https://microwavenews.com/news-center/defending-indefensible

    Reply
  17. Tomi Engdahl says:

    It seems that 5G does not give us cancer. But 5G can damage your brains/mind more than 4G not because of radiation, but because faster speed allows you to consume faster and more “entertaining” videos, fake news and conspiracy theories. Those can be more harmful to you than a little bit of non-ionizing radiation.

    Reply
  18. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Your 5G Phone Won’t Hurt You. But Russia Wants You to Think Otherwise.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/12/science/5g-phone-safety-health-russia.html

    RT America, a network known for sowing disinformation, has a new alarm: the coming ‘5G Apocalypse.’

    Reply
  19. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Health Concerns May Slow Rollout of Super-Fast 5G Mobile Networks, Analyst Warns

    http://fortune.com/2019/05/22/health-concerns-5g-cellphones-cancer/

    “The race to 5G could be slowed by alleged health concerns related to radio frequency,” Rajgopal writes. “These concerns have been around as long as mobile phones, but there have been a number of recent regulatory/public initiatives demanding delays or outright bans on the rollout of 5G.”

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

*