We should caution against stopping the global roll out of 5G (fifth generation) telecom networks until we are certain that this technology is completely secure, urging an opinion piece published online from an expert. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.
There is no health concern about 5G and COVID-19, despite what the conspirators have suggested.
But the transmitter density required for 5G means that more people will be exposed to radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs), and levels that suggest emerging evidence are potentially harmful to health, Professor John William Frank, Ashar Institute, University of Edinburgh argues.
The advent of 5G technology has been achieved by governments and some vested interests as transformative, obvious economic and lifestyle benefits, through the promotion of wireless and mobile connectivity at home, work, school and community.
But it has become a subject of fierce controversy by four major areas of scientific uncertainty and concern.
- Lack of clarity about what technology is included in 5G; And a growing but distant from the broader body of laboratory research indicating the biologically disruptive potential of RF-EMF
- Nearly total absence of high-quality epidemiological studies on human health from 5G EMF exposure (yet)
- Submitting epidemiological evidence of such effects from previous generations of RF-EMF exposure at lower levels
- Continued allegations that some national telecom regulatory authorities have not based their RF-EMF security policies on the latest science, amid potential complications of interest
5G uses much higher frequency (3 to 300GHz) radio waves than in the past and it is very new and relatively indisputably in terms of security-assisting technology to enable higher data transmission capability, Professor Frank explains.
He says the inherent fragility means that the transmission cell ‘cell’ antenna usually requires every 100-300 meters, far more than the transmission mast required for older 2G, 3G and 4G technology. Are spatially dense, using low frequency waves, he says.
A dense transmission network is also needed to achieve the ‘everywhere / anytime’ connectivity promised by 5G developers.
The current 4G system can serve up to 4000 radio frequency-using devices per square kilometer; 5G systems will connect up to one million devices per square kilometer – increasing the speed of data transfer (by a factor of 10) and the amount of data transmitted (by a factor of 1000), he explains.
Although several major reviews of existing evidence on the potential health hazards of 5G have been published in the last decade, these are “variations in scientific quality”, Professor Frank says.
And they have not stopped the uproar from the “increasing number of engineers, scientists and doctors internationally … calling on governments to raise their safety standards for RF-EMF, more research and better research, and publicly Prohibit moving forward. ” Risk, clear evidence pending security, ”he writes.
He stated that the maximum protection threshold for RF-EMF exposure varies greatly around the world.
What’s more, ‘5G systems’ is not a consistently defined term, which includes vastly different specialized technologies and components.
“It is highly likely that some forms of each of these transmission have somewhat different biological effects – sound, extensive and up-to-date research on those effects is almost impossible,” he explains.
Recent reviews of laboratory data on RF-EMF indicate that exposure may produce broad-ranging effects, including reproductive, fetal, oncological, neuropaketric, skin, eye, and immunologists. But there is no evidence that anyone who suggests that it has been implicated in the spread of COVID-19, as some conspiracy theorists have suggested, insists.
“There are knowledgeable commentators debating this theory on the web, and no respected scientist or publication has endorsed it,” he says, adding that “5G and related EMFs have contributed to the epidemic.” “
But for the current 5G roll-out, there is a sound basis for applying the ‘precautionary principle’ due to significant skepticism about the protection of new and potentially widespread human risk, enough to call a moratorium on “risk” The cause should be “substantial scientific investigation of its suspected adverse health effects is pending,” he says.
He said that there is no compelling public health or safety rationale for rapid deployment of 5G. He promised that the main benefits are either economic, and then possibly more for others, or related to consumer convenience.
“Until we know more about what we are doing from a health and ecological point of view, those crises will have to wait for benefits.”
Updated Guidelines for Interaction of High-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields
Dissertation: Electromagnetic Fields, 5G and Health: What about Precautionary Theory? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, DOI: 10.1136 / jech-2019-213595
Provided by the British Medical Journal
QuotesStop the global roll from the 5G network until security is confirmed, urging experts (2021, 18 January) to https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-01-global-5g-networks-safety on 19 January 2021 be retrieved from -urges. Html
This document is subject to copyright. No part may be reproduced without written permission, except for any fair which serves for the purpose of personal study or research. The content is provided for information purposes only.