Home Tech Dispelling the 5G myth

Dispelling the 5G myth

7
the 5G myth

SCIENTISTS: there’s NO PROOF OF ADVERSE EFFECTS ON WELL-BEING Study shows airport scanners, which use similar frequencies, pose no health risks.

Do 5G cell telephones and networks pose health risks? Worries about the effect the technology has on humans and therefore the environment have persisted because it has been deployed in various countries. What do scientists need to say about it?

What is 5G?

The 5G networks are touted as promising an exponential leap within the amount and speed of wireless data, enabling advances in self-driving vehicles, computer game , connected health and more as sensors and servers communicate instantly.

To get that speed, 5G uses higher frequencies than current networks. The trade off with higher frequencies is that signals don’t travel as far and are easily blocked by buildings.

This means more antennae are going to be needed to meet up with phones.

This is what concerns some people, who were already skittish about the enormous antennae placed on top of towers and building. The 5G networks will use many smaller antennae placed closer to people, like on top of streetlights, potentially exposing people to even more radio waves.

What is the health impact of radio waves?

Cellphones aren’t the sole equipment to emit radio waves. TVs, radios, Wi-Fi are all also sources of exposure.

The World Health Organisation ( WHO) notes concern about such exposure but says: “To date, and after much research performed, no adverse health effect has been causally linked with exposure to wireless technologies.”

It does acknowledge that only a couple of studies have checked out the frequencies to be employed by 5G.

There are still concerns about the long-term use of cellphones on the brink of your head possibly increasing cancer risk, with the WHO recommending in 2011 using hands-free devices.

There are concerns that cellphones, tablets and connected toys could have effects on the cognitive ability of youngsters , with France’s ANSES safety agency recommending in 2016 limits to their exposure.

Biological vs health effects

When radio waves hit the body, their principal biological effect is to heat body tissue.

“Radiofrequency exposure levels from current technologies end in negligible temperature rise within the physical body ,” the WHO says on its website.

“Provided that the general exposure remains below international guidelines, no consequences for public health are anticipated,” it adds.

But consistent with ANSES expert Olivier Merckel, “studies have shown biological effects in certain very specific parameters like sleep and stress”.

But there’s a huge difference between a biological effect – when an organism responds to the environment – and determining that it poses a health risk. it’s a distinction that always gets lost publicly debate.

The determination of a health risk is formed after observing whether the physical body is capable of adapting to cumulative effects of exposure.

Specific concerns about 5G?

The lack of data on higher frequencies that are to be employed by 5G means it’s a neighborhood that France’s ANSES and other researchers are looking into.

The 5G networks are currently using frequencies on the brink of those of Wi-Fi boxes, but they’re going to eventually use much higher frequencies.

And because the frequency increases, radio waves are less ready to penetrate the body, with absorbtion limited to the skin and eyes.

ANSES’s Merckel said “this poses different questions in terms of potential health effects”.

In 2012, ANSES evaluated airport body scanners, which use similar frequencies, and located they pose no health risks.

But albeit the frequencies are close, the usage is different. With the deployment of 5G networks both users and nonusers are likely to be exposed to varying amounts of radio waves on a more or less permanent basis. –

Biological effects in certain parameters