3 ms·

“Led by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (Arpansa), the systematic review examined more than 5,000 studies from which the most scie

by avalys 2y ago

“Led by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (Arpansa), the systematic review examined more than 5,000 studies from which the most scientifically rigorous were identified and weak studies were excluded.” This is not a new study. It’s a review and meta-analysis of existing studies. It is always hard for me to believe that the decisions on which studies to exclude can be done in an unbiased way.

janice1999 2y ago
I haven't read the study but it appears to include studies as far back as 1994. Mobile phone technology has changed a lot in just the last few years (MIMO, 5G etc). Frequencies used are increasing meaning decreasing wavelengths and decreasing penetrating power. I would hope that means less effects on the human body...
- wanderingmind 2y ago
  What? E=h×freq, where h is plancks constant. So higher frequency, higher the energy. How did you come to the opposite conclusion?
  - vel0city 2y ago
    Penetration power of a material, not energy. An arrow is going to have more penetrating power than a baseball bat despite the bat potentially imparting more total energy. Lower frequency waves tend to go through things more while higher frequencies tend to get attenuated and absorbed by materials. So, if you're worried about the waves going deep through your tissues and into your brain, its less likely those waves will end up reaching very deep and will tend to be absorbed on the surface of your skin.
    - cogman10 2y ago
      Not for nothing, but generally speaking the lower frequency transmissions haven't fallen out of use. Instead, they are deployed more in less populated areas. (Not saying these signals cause cancer, just that they are still in use).
      - vel0city 2y ago
        Oh, I totally agree and understand that point. I was just trying to clarify the power misunderstanding. But yes, 700ishMHz and up is still plenty used in modern 4/5G deployments.
        cogman10 2y ago
        Also agree. I mean, for context, basically all EMF that we are talking about for communications are sub-visible spectrum by a long shot. Visible light operates in the Terahertz range (400->790THz) while all communications are 1000x (or 100,000x) lower frequencies, with the highest being around 20GHz. Ionizing radiation happens at even higher frequencies than the visible spectrum. That's why I see it as silly to worry about the higher energy of higher frequencies. We are talking about much lower frequencies and exposure vs what you get hit with everyday by turning on a lamp or walking in the sun.
  - janice1999 2y ago
    The other response to you is correct. It's about material blocking. Skin depth, how far electromagnetic waves can penetrate, is inversely proportional to the square root of the frequency.

by avalys 2y ago

janice1999 2y ago

I haven't read the study but it appears to include studies as far back as 1994. Mobile phone technology has changed a lot in just the last few years (MIMO, 5G etc). Frequencies used are increasing meaning decreasing wavelengths and decreasing penetrating power. I would hope that means less effects on the human body...

wanderingmind 2y ago
What? E=h×freq, where h is plancks constant. So higher frequency, higher the energy. How did you come to the opposite conclusion?
- vel0city 2y ago
  Penetration power of a material, not energy. An arrow is going to have more penetrating power than a baseball bat despite the bat potentially imparting more total energy. Lower frequency waves tend to go through things more while higher frequencies tend to get attenuated and absorbed by materials. So, if you're worried about the waves going deep through your tissues and into your brain, its less likely those waves will end up reaching very deep and will tend to be absorbed on the surface of your skin.
  - cogman10 2y ago
    Not for nothing, but generally speaking the lower frequency transmissions haven't fallen out of use. Instead, they are deployed more in less populated areas. (Not saying these signals cause cancer, just that they are still in use).
    - vel0city 2y ago
      Oh, I totally agree and understand that point. I was just trying to clarify the power misunderstanding. But yes, 700ishMHz and up is still plenty used in modern 4/5G deployments.
      - cogman10 2y ago
        Also agree. I mean, for context, basically all EMF that we are talking about for communications are sub-visible spectrum by a long shot. Visible light operates in the Terahertz range (400->790THz) while all communications are 1000x (or 100,000x) lower frequencies, with the highest being around 20GHz. Ionizing radiation happens at even higher frequencies than the visible spectrum. That's why I see it as silly to worry about the higher energy of higher frequencies. We are talking about much lower frequencies and exposure vs what you get hit with everyday by turning on a lamp or walking in the sun.
- janice1999 2y ago
  The other response to you is correct. It's about material blocking. Skin depth, how far electromagnetic waves can penetrate, is inversely proportional to the square root of the frequency.