Back in 1993 an undergrad pal following a similar route into industry as I'd taken ran his thesis against a microwave assessment of RF hazards. The industry wide consensus was that whilst there were some opportunities for hazard. Summarising/paraphrasing: The predominant warming impact of having an RF transmitter to side of head was the benefit of slightly better circulation and stimulation of the brain tissue.
A mast would be miniscule. Overhead power pylons seem to be the entry point to much of this paranoia. Leukaemia having been a regular supposition/health-signal back in the 80s. Some sort of interaction with the iron in our blood was touted as causal.
We attribute much to what occurs naturally irrespective of potential societal/environmental stimuli. The best study is to appreciate that microwave (inc. mmWave) is pervasive and isn't new technology. With people working around and close to the bands that are now being freed up for licence-free use. Plus the 'change of use bands' (UHF TV) that are now the so-called Sub6 parts of 5G/6G to increase terminal support density etc.
The book should never be closed for safety, I'd reflect on that as valid. But we've lived in clouds of smog and diesel particulates with only recent times bringing such outcry. Radio signals that can barely warm a human cell (5G/6G) seem like a fairly safe investment.
Forget the health issues! We need decent 4G and even 3G would be nice across the UK. 5G is overrated. In China the main proponent and user of 5G is finding it expensive to run. Many transmitters are turned off at off-peak times to save electricity.
5G needs bigger and more masts to give coverage. It works less well inside buildings, something that mobile users have come to expect, although mobile wasn’t designed for indoor use.
5G is not necessary for everyday use,as 4G (when available) does what we need. Let’s have a decent network! 5G will always be patchy unless there is a relay on every street corner!
I share Rory's enthusiasm for 5g, but not his contempt for crowd-funding legal cases. I have contributed to several such funds in the last few years and most of them have been successful. That may be because none of the cases I've supported were brought by a certain high-profile KC, who brings many cases but only wins around 15% of them.
We have just stopped a mast that was due to be sited extremely close to our house. The process is stressful and difficult to overcome. Whilst I can understand your approach from a technical viewpoint I would like to say that they are not always put in suitable locations..and your last sentence referring to “the end of your street”. That’s the very problem they are not at the end of the street they are right next to homes and overlooking gardens. There is supposed to be a mast sharing culture that to me seems non existent. I fully and totally support locations in industrial settings, or supermarket car parks, roundabouts etc. I expect to see street hardware in these places and if I wish I can avoid being near them . However I cannot avoid living and existing and leading my life in my own home. The agencies who apply on behalf of the technology companies are all varied across the country and their applications are all different methods. Though one might assume a standard, that was not my experience. The language and phrasing in the applications is laughable, “will assimilate well into the street scenes” …..it’s a 52 foot grey mast and four grey cabinets! Any health concerns that anyone may or may not have are totally disregarded by the planning department. They are eyesores in communities. They do and will affect house prices. With respect I wonder would you be so keen if it genuinely were located exactly outside your gate.? If your planning portal is functioning fully (ours isn’t)look up some that are coming your way. Look across the country the crime that needs reporting is how these masts are getting through planning, with poor or no consultation. Tiny little planning notices wrapped around a lamppost and four letters sent to residents. With short notice to appeal as well. So I’m sorry to say it’s not as simple as yes yes yes to the technology .
Back in 1993 an undergrad pal following a similar route into industry as I'd taken ran his thesis against a microwave assessment of RF hazards. The industry wide consensus was that whilst there were some opportunities for hazard. Summarising/paraphrasing: The predominant warming impact of having an RF transmitter to side of head was the benefit of slightly better circulation and stimulation of the brain tissue.
A mast would be miniscule. Overhead power pylons seem to be the entry point to much of this paranoia. Leukaemia having been a regular supposition/health-signal back in the 80s. Some sort of interaction with the iron in our blood was touted as causal.
We attribute much to what occurs naturally irrespective of potential societal/environmental stimuli. The best study is to appreciate that microwave (inc. mmWave) is pervasive and isn't new technology. With people working around and close to the bands that are now being freed up for licence-free use. Plus the 'change of use bands' (UHF TV) that are now the so-called Sub6 parts of 5G/6G to increase terminal support density etc.
The book should never be closed for safety, I'd reflect on that as valid. But we've lived in clouds of smog and diesel particulates with only recent times bringing such outcry. Radio signals that can barely warm a human cell (5G/6G) seem like a fairly safe investment.
Forget the health issues! We need decent 4G and even 3G would be nice across the UK. 5G is overrated. In China the main proponent and user of 5G is finding it expensive to run. Many transmitters are turned off at off-peak times to save electricity.
5G needs bigger and more masts to give coverage. It works less well inside buildings, something that mobile users have come to expect, although mobile wasn’t designed for indoor use.
5G is not necessary for everyday use,as 4G (when available) does what we need. Let’s have a decent network! 5G will always be patchy unless there is a relay on every street corner!
Fine food for thought.
I share Rory's enthusiasm for 5g, but not his contempt for crowd-funding legal cases. I have contributed to several such funds in the last few years and most of them have been successful. That may be because none of the cases I've supported were brought by a certain high-profile KC, who brings many cases but only wins around 15% of them.
We have just stopped a mast that was due to be sited extremely close to our house. The process is stressful and difficult to overcome. Whilst I can understand your approach from a technical viewpoint I would like to say that they are not always put in suitable locations..and your last sentence referring to “the end of your street”. That’s the very problem they are not at the end of the street they are right next to homes and overlooking gardens. There is supposed to be a mast sharing culture that to me seems non existent. I fully and totally support locations in industrial settings, or supermarket car parks, roundabouts etc. I expect to see street hardware in these places and if I wish I can avoid being near them . However I cannot avoid living and existing and leading my life in my own home. The agencies who apply on behalf of the technology companies are all varied across the country and their applications are all different methods. Though one might assume a standard, that was not my experience. The language and phrasing in the applications is laughable, “will assimilate well into the street scenes” …..it’s a 52 foot grey mast and four grey cabinets! Any health concerns that anyone may or may not have are totally disregarded by the planning department. They are eyesores in communities. They do and will affect house prices. With respect I wonder would you be so keen if it genuinely were located exactly outside your gate.? If your planning portal is functioning fully (ours isn’t)look up some that are coming your way. Look across the country the crime that needs reporting is how these masts are getting through planning, with poor or no consultation. Tiny little planning notices wrapped around a lamppost and four letters sent to residents. With short notice to appeal as well. So I’m sorry to say it’s not as simple as yes yes yes to the technology .