3 ms·

I read an article a couple of months ago where numerous scientists signed a letter proclaiming significant health risks to ubiquitous 5G in society, that the wa

I read an article a couple of months ago where numerous scientists signed a letter proclaiming significant health risks to ubiquitous 5G in society, that the waves are apparently quite dangerous to health? Anyone know anything about that? I think this was it: https://www.saferemr.com/2017/09/5G-moratorium12.html https://www.saferemr.com/2017/09/5G-moratorium12.html

zw123456 8y ago
One of the primary premises of cellular technology is Frequency re-use (time division is as well, combined called OFDMA) but just in terms of Freq re-use, if you want to increase the capacity of a cellular system then you want to reduce the size of a cell site. The way this is done is by reducing the power level (also lowering the elevation of antennas). When you reduce the power level then adjacent cell sites can re-use the same frequencies without interfering with each other. When people hear about 5G where plans call for 300 meter cell spacing, they panic thinking that the power levels will increase, but in reality it does not. Because the transmitter power levels are reduced commensurately. A lot of people (even scientists) do not understand this basic concept. Current spacing and power levels are 2Km at 40Watts (typical but varies) in an urban area for low and mid band (1ghz - 3ghz). If you reduce the spacing to 300M and 5W, then you really have not changed the energy density. But what you accomplish is getting more capacity by enabling more re-use of frequency spectrum. The numbers are different for different bands due to different propagation properties, but that is the basic concept.
- hellofunk 8y ago
  I was referring to this: https://www.saferemr.com/2017/09/5G-moratorium12.html https://www.saferemr.com/2017/09/5G-moratorium12.html The concerns seemed legit, I wonder why the industry is either not paying attention to them, or not at least responding to the concerns
  - Junk_Collector 8y ago
    People respond to these concerns constantly. This was the same group against, 2G, 3G, 4G, wireless power meters, etc. In fact, The response from the DIRECTORATE-GENERAL HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY of the European Union was linked on the site. Of course, the SaferEMR folks dismiss it and all of the safety testing and health risk studies that have been done. Their official stance is that we haven't demonstrated that there couldn't be some unknown mechanism by which EMR could negatively impact human health so we should curtail all wireless technology until we have proven that there is no possible down side. This is of course impossible.
  - zw123456 8y ago
    In the article, this is the give away that they don't understand: "5G expansion, which is designed to carry higher loads of data more rapidly through wireless transmission, will require the construction of cell towers every 10-20 houses in urban areas." "cell towers" at that density are not really towers but small devices not unlike a wifi AP hung on lamp posts. The power levels are very low.

zw123456 8y ago

One of the primary premises of cellular technology is Frequency re-use (time division is as well, combined called OFDMA) but just in terms of Freq re-use, if you want to increase the capacity of a cellular system then you want to reduce the size of a cell site. The way this is done is by reducing the power level (also lowering the elevation of antennas). When you reduce the power level then adjacent cell sites can re-use the same frequencies without interfering with each other. When people hear about 5G where plans call for 300 meter cell spacing, they panic thinking that the power levels will increase, but in reality it does not. Because the transmitter power levels are reduced commensurately. A lot of people (even scientists) do not understand this basic concept. Current spacing and power levels are 2Km at 40Watts (typical but varies) in an urban area for low and mid band (1ghz - 3ghz). If you reduce the spacing to 300M and 5W, then you really have not changed the energy density. But what you accomplish is getting more capacity by enabling more re-use of frequency spectrum. The numbers are different for different bands due to different propagation properties, but that is the basic concept.

hellofunk 8y ago
I was referring to this: https://www.saferemr.com/2017/09/5G-moratorium12.html https://www.saferemr.com/2017/09/5G-moratorium12.html The concerns seemed legit, I wonder why the industry is either not paying attention to them, or not at least responding to the concerns
- Junk_Collector 8y ago
  People respond to these concerns constantly. This was the same group against, 2G, 3G, 4G, wireless power meters, etc. In fact, The response from the DIRECTORATE-GENERAL HEALTH AND FOOD SAFETY of the European Union was linked on the site. Of course, the SaferEMR folks dismiss it and all of the safety testing and health risk studies that have been done. Their official stance is that we haven't demonstrated that there couldn't be some unknown mechanism by which EMR could negatively impact human health so we should curtail all wireless technology until we have proven that there is no possible down side. This is of course impossible.
- zw123456 8y ago
  In the article, this is the give away that they don't understand: "5G expansion, which is designed to carry higher loads of data more rapidly through wireless transmission, will require the construction of cell towers every 10-20 houses in urban areas." "cell towers" at that density are not really towers but small devices not unlike a wifi AP hung on lamp posts. The power levels are very low.