5G safety and security

Is 5G completely safe and secure?
Is 5G radiation more or less dangerous than currently used 2G/3G/4G?

Just read this article and advice also other people to read (including two earler articles referenced). It tries to cover both the sides that say 5G is safe and 5G could potentially dangerous. But does it succeed in covering that properly?

https://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/5g-waves/4462072/Does-5G-pose-health-risks—part-3-

Part 1 examined the potential ionization and thermal health risks posed by 5G. These are the conventional risks widely recognized and well controlled.

Part 2 examined electromagnetic (EM) effects. Here, the outcome was not so clear.

14 Comments

  1. Tomi Engdahl says:

    5G has already been source lots bad quallty news articles – repeating vague marketing promises, technically incorrect and lots of FUD

    Reply
  2. Tomi Engdahl says:

    A discussion of mmWave and terahertz signals would not be complete without mentioning health issues and the need for further study. On the biological front, the paper’s authors say that “heating is believed to be the only primary cancer risk” but much work is needed to “understand the biological and molecular impact of THz radiation on human health, even though THz is three orders of magnitude lower in frequency that ionizing radiation,” that being X-ray radiation.

    Source: https://www.edn.com/electronics-blogs/5g-waves/4462105/Initial-6G-work-is-underway

    Reply
  3. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Berliinissä naapurini ahdistuu kännykkämastosta – Saksassa 5G-verkko herättää Suomea enemmän kysymyksiä
    https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-10893215

    Parhaillaan rakennettava 5G-verkko on Euroopassa niin iso puheenaihe, että Venäjäkin näkee siinä hämmentämispotentiaalin.

    Reply
  4. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Stupid is as stupid does.

    Orkney pupils kept at home over 5G mobile health fears
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-49401068

    Two families are keeping their children from going to a school in Orkney amid concerns about a 5G mast.

    But regulators insist there is no risk to public health.

    Its head of digital communications, Ian Walker, said in a letter to parents: “The equipment we’re using for the 5G broadcast radio trial is based around 4G technology, which is widely used across the UK, and the radio frequencies being used are the same that are used to broadcast TV.

    Reply
  5. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Cities Are Saying ‘No’ to 5G, Citing Health, Aesthetics—and FCC Bullying
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/cities-are-saying-no-to-5g-citing-health-aestheticsand-fcc-bullying-11566619391

    Those hawking specious safety concerns about the new technology have found common cause with some of America’s most powerful mayors

    Jack Tibbetts, a member of the Santa Rosa, Calif., city council, knew he had a problem. It was early 2018, and he’d started getting calls from constituents at opposite ends of the political spectrum. The common thread: cellular antennas going up next to their homes, causing concerns over property values and health.

    Reply
  6. Tomi Engdahl says:

    It looks like many frear-mongrters follow the conspiracy theorist logic that if it new, slightly more complicated than you can understand and offers fast Internet, it must be lethally dangerous and no scientifically sound proof is needed for that.

    This is the logic that has been “successfully” applied to 3G, 4G, 5G and earlier WiFi.

    Reply
  7. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Saying that we haven’t studied 5G long enough to see if it has adverse health effects is like saying we haven’t done enough studies to see if 40C water will cause burns. Like water temperature, we know at what frequencies electromagnetic radiation becomes dangerous, and it’s much higher than where 5G sits. https://www.androidauthority.com/5g-dangers-895776/ (Image:Jose Conejo Saenz (CC))

    Reply
  8. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Huawei believes banning it from 5G will make countries insecure
    https://www.zdnet.com/article/huawei-believes-banning-it-from-5g-will-make-countries-insecure/

    Chinese giant warns of potential for backdoors in 6G thanks to AI.

    Huawei may be lacking 5G contracts and 100 former employees in Australia as a result of its banning in 2018, but one thing it is certainly not lacking is gumption.

    “Blocking companies from certain countries does nothing to make Australia any safer from cybersecurity issues — in fact it just makes things worse because they are not addressing the real issues on cybersecurity,” Soldani said

    The CTSO warned that thanks to Huawei being ahead of its rivals in 6G research, it could see how insecure those networks could potentially be as the attack surface becomes larger.

    “With the converge of management and control plane, AI will poses a significant impact on network security, as it might be exploited to launch more effective attacks, and in some scenarios, the security of AI systems is a matter of life and death,” he said

    Reply
  9. Tomi Engdahl says:

    The following text from the article seems to be clear indication that we are dealing here with pseudoscience:
    “It seems that all types of human-made EMFs and electromagnetic radiation (EMR), in contrast to natural EMFs/EMR, are polarized. Polarized EMFs/EMR can have increased biological activity, possibly due to their ability to generate constructive interference forces, which magnify their concentrations at many places.”

    Article link:
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/cognitiveworld/2019/09/09/an-electromagnetic-health-crisis/?utm_source=FACEBOOK&utm_medium=social&utm_term=Valerie/#76616c657269

    Reply
  10. Tomi Engdahl says:

    Is the following paper science or pseudo-science?

    Polarization: A Key Difference between Man-made and Natural Electromagnetic Fields, in regard to Biological Activity
    https://www.nature.com/articles/srep14914

    “In the present study we analyze the role of polarization in the biological activity of Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs)/Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR). All types of man-made EMFs/EMR – in contrast to natural EMFs/EMR – are polarized. Polarized EMFs/EMR can have increased biological activity”

    “These features render man-made EMFs/EMR more bioactive than natural non-ionizing EMFs/EMR. This explains the increasing number of biological effects discovered during the past few decades to be induced by man-made EMFs, in contrast to natural EMFs in the terrestrial environment which have always been present throughout evolution”

    “A large and increasing number of studies during the past few decades have indicated a variety of adverse biological effects to be triggered by exposure to man-made EMFs, especially of radio frequency (RF)/microwaves, and extremely low frequency (ELF).”

    “Solar EMR intensity incident upon a human body ranges normally between 8 and 24 mW/cm2 (depending on season, atmospheric conditions, geographical location, etc) “

    Reply

Leave a Comment

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

*

*