«First  ‹Previous   Page 2 of 752   Next›  Last» 

Three 5G mast rejected as council says plans would harm regeneration
United Kingdom Created: 5 Jun 2020
Plans for a 20 metre tall 5G mast in Merseyside have been rejected over fears it would harm a local regeneration effort.

The mast, which would have been built just off Conway Street in Birkenhead, Wirral, was said to be "unsightly" and "detrimental" to the character of the local area due to its scale by Wirral Council.

The local authority was also concerned the mast would harm huge plans to regenerate Birkenhead, due to its size and “prominent location” within the regeneration site.

5G has been a controversial topic of late, with campaigners who oppose the technology promoting conspiracy theories linking it to coronavirus without any evidence.

Earlier this week a 5G mast in Mossley Hill, Liverpool, was destroyed in a fire and a video showing another 5G mast on fire in the city was shared on social media last month. Plans for a 20 metre tall 5G mast in Merseyside have been rejected over fears it would harm a local regeneration effort.

The mast, which would have been built just off Conway Street in Birkenhead, Wirral, was said to be "unsightly" and "detrimental" to the character of the local area due to its scale by Wirral Council.

The local authority was also concerned the mast would harm huge plans to regenerate Birkenhead, due to its size and “prominent location” within the regeneration site.

5G has been a controversial topic of late, with campaigners who oppose the technology promoting conspiracy theories linking it to coronavirus without any evidence.

Earlier this week a 5G mast in Mossley Hill, Liverpool, was destroyed in a fire and a video showing another 5G mast on fire in the city was shared on social media last month.

Shortly before that incident, Liverpool Mayor Joe Anderson blasted 5G conspiracy theories as “bizarre” and added: "How can anyone contemplate relating putting a 5G mast up in Liverpool causes coronavirus?

“The very idea that Covid-19 was created by 5G is patently nonsense.”

Scientists and other officials, including the World Health Organisation have debunked the 5G Covid-19 theory, stating it is not possible for the virus to be transmitted by electomagnetic radiation.

Three, the company behind this plan, said the new mast in Birkenhead was needed to deliver an “essential” improvement in 5G connectivity in the area.

Explaining the choice of location, Three’s planning documents stated: “Mobile phone base stations operate on a low power and accordingly base stations therefore need to be located in the areas they are required to serve.

“Increasingly, people are also using their mobiles in their homes and this means we need to position base stations in, or close to, residential areas.”

The document also stated that while the planned height of the mast was 20 metres, this has been “kept down to the absolute minimum capable of providing the required essential new 5G coverage”.

It was not possible to simply upgrade an existing mast site to accommodate the 5G mast, because higher radio frequencies used for 5G do not travel as far as those frequencies currently in use and sometimes existing sites do not have the capacity to be upgraded.

To deliver the higher frequency Three said there was an “acute need” for a new mast.

The proposal was rejected for reasons of appearance.

On this, Three’s document said: “The proposed works on this existing site would qualify as a visual change to the area, but are necessary to ensure improved delivery of service [and] would respect and continue to maintain the appearance of the area.”

Three insisted that the plan “would not result in demonstrable harm to the character of the immediate or wider area”.

But Wirral Council disagreed.

The local authority’s letter of rejection, read: “The proposed mast and associated equipment will appear as unsightly features in a prominent location and would therefore, by reason of its scale and siting, have a detrimental and adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the surrounding area.”

The plan’s potential impact on efforts to regenerate Birkenhead was also given as a reason for rejection by the council.

Wirral Council’s letter added: “The proposed mast would be an unsightly feature within an extremely prominent location at the heart of the Birkenhead Town Centre regeneration site, and this would undermine the significantly advanced regeneration plans for this area.”

A spokesperson for Three said: “ 5G rollout is vital for residents and business of Wirral. We want to offer the local area a great network experience and our planners determined that a new site was required to deliver it. We will work with the council to find a way forwards.”
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Liverpool Echo, George Morgan, 29 May 2020

Beware of “False Flag” anti-5G demonstrations
Australia Created: 5 Jun 2020
The term “False Flag” is defined as a covert operation designed to deceive; the deception creates the appearance of a particular party, group, or nation being responsible for some activity, disguising the actual source of responsibility.

After looking at a recent (May 10) demonstration against vaccinations/ COVID -19 restrictions/ and 5G conspiracies, etc., which took place in Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane and Hobart (see media reporting below), I’m wondering just who these supposed demonstrators were and who organised the coordinated events.

Rag tag hastily written signs with the usual mixture of radical looking protesters. A real win for the telco industry as it effectively gives the general public the impression that concerns over 5G are in the looney bin, not to be taken seriously.

Now, if I were working for whatever professional PR firm has been tasked by the federal government to spend that $ 9 million budget to convince the Australian public that 5G is safe, this is exactly what I would do:

Set up a “rent a crowd” ( https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/drive/now-you-can-officially-rent-a-crowd/7534346) pay and dress them suitably with crappy signs and a script and then let them loose in front of a prominent parliament building and make sure the media is there in force, for a professional PR firm, working the media is a no brainer!

It is also absolutely vital to contact genuine protest groups and encourage them to join in the “protest” in order to pack out the crowd so that it looks like the real thing. The more radical the better….

Then sit back and enjoy the circus!

It is an unfortunate fact that some genuine protest groups are blind to tactics that can be used to discredit their cause. So, for people concerned about 5G BEWARE.

Essential reading here is my favourite: Toxic Sludge is Good For You: Lies, Damn Lies and The Public Relations Industry by John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton

Don

Here’s a spattering of some of the extensive media reporting on the May 10 demonstration:

1) From the Guardian: “Australian anti-vaxxers label Covid-19 a ‘scam’ and break distancing rules at anti-5G protests” https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/may/30/australian-anti-vaxxers-label-covid-19-a-scam-and-break-distancing-rules-at-anti-5g-protests

2) From Perth Now: “Hundreds of anti-vaccination protesters have defied social-distancing measures at rallies across Australia.Protesters claiming the COVID-19 pandemic was a “scam” gathered at the Royal Botanic Gardens in Melbourne on Saturday, and carried signs declaring they were against vaccines and 5G technology.Their placards stated “5G — communism“, “COVID 1984” and “our ignorance is their strength”.
https://www.perthnow.com.au/news/australia/anti-vax-protesters-defy-coronavirus-restrictions-across-australia-ng-b881563309z

3) The ABC News: “coronavirus ‘changes the game’ for the anti-vaccination movement”
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-31/anti-vaxxers-are-exploiting-the-coronavirus-crisis/12302710?nw=0

4) The Conversation: “Coronavirus anti-vaxxers aren’t a huge threat yet. How do we keep it that way?“
https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-anti-vaxxers-arent-a-huge-threat-yet-how-do-we-keep-it-that-way-138531

5) The Daily Mail: “COVID-19 is a scam, no mandatory vaccines and 5G equals communism: Inside Australia’s WEIRDEST protest ever where demonstrators flouted social distancing and even the horses had anti-virus protective gear”https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8371699/Bizarre-protests-against-vaccinations-5G-place-Australia.html

6) Again from the Daily Mail: “Protesters clash with cops during wild rally against tough lockdown laws – as frustrated residents are joined by anti-vaxxers and conspiracy theorists who blame 5G for COVID-19” https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8304393/Hundreds-anti-vaxxers-clash-police-protest-Melbournes-CBD.html

7) The Sydney Morning Herald: “AMA urges health education to combat ‘growing’ anti-vaxxer movement” https://www.smh.com.au/national/act-now-ama-urges-health-education-to-combat-growing-anti-vaxxer-movement-20200525-p54w7b.html

8) The Australian: “Coronavirus: Our loony protesters are among the looniest”
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/coronavirus-our-loony-protesters-are-among-the-looniest/news-story/313cb4ac0ceabeb55d819dc25d35b895

9) The Daily Mercury: “We don’t consent’: Dramatic scenes at anti-lockdown protest: Anti-lockdown and anti-vax protesters have caused chaos in Melbourne today.” https://www.dailymercury.com.au/news/we-dont-consent-dramatic-scenes-anti-lockdown-prot/4012592/
Click here to view the source article.
Source: EMFacts, Don Maisch PhD, 04 Jun 2020

URGENT: 5G Judicial Review 2020 - 15 days to reach £50,000 (£38,514 pledged already).
United Kingdom Created: 20 May 2020
I am a solicitor - I became involved in understanding the harmful health impact of 5G when a member of my community alerted me to an application to put a mast on the building opposite her apartment.

This page is against wireless 5G, radiofrequency radiation (“RFR”) and electromagnetic fields (“EMFs”) generally due to their impact on the health of humans, animals and plants.

Many people are sensitive to RFR and EMFs and suffer illness, distress and financial loss due to inability to work. The balance of scientific evidence is now clear that RFR/EMFs are harmful to humans.

The UK government insist on using ICNIRP’s guidelines to set limits of radiation for public health. ICNIRP’s guidelines are not fit for purpose as, among other things, they only recognise harm from heating of the body and are set for short term exposure – 6 minutes in fact. Many people suffer harm without any heating of their bodies.

5G is the fifth generation of RFR technology used in the mobile telecoms industry and follows 1G – 4G. It dwarfs RFR from 1G – 4G because millions more masts, antennae, small cells, picocells etc have to be placed at short distances apart all around the country in order to develop the infrastructure to deliver the data speed promised by 5G.

The current electrosmog from 1G – 4G will become significantly worse and it is likely to result in more harm to humans, animals, trees and pollinators.

Many people have tried to engage with the government and its agencies, including Public Health England, over the last few years in an attempt to persuade them that their existing policies are harmful to human, animal and plant health. The government rejects such approaches and insists on its adherence to ICNIRP’s guidelines. It has removed health concerns from the National Planning Policy Framework, thereby removing the ability of its citizens from raising such concerns at local council level. Its Electronic Communications Code has limited the rights of its citizens to object to equipment being put on their land. It has permitted the proliferation of RFR gadgets used by babies and children without constraint.

*SNIP* read the complete text at the source link below...

Click here to view the source article.
Source: CrowdJustice, Jessica Learmond-Criqui, 17 May 2020

Luxembourg Govt. to Debate 5G Deployment and Health Effects
Luxembourg Created: 13 May 2020
A Message from Citizens of Luxembourg who have been working to raise awareness of the health and environmental effects of 5G.

“Here is what we made happen:

– on Friday April, 24th our petition claiming to permanently stop the deployment of the 5G in Luxembourg was open for on-line signatures on the website of the Chambre des députés (our local Parliament). In only 4 days (!!!) we collected the necessary number of signatures to provoque a public debate in the Parliament between our citizen’s collective and the members of the Government about the 5G deployment. We will be detailing in front of the Parliament the arguments that lead us to ask the government to give up the 5G deployment and will debate with them about it. We will of course keep you posted on the outcome of that debate (at the earliest by mid-June).

– on Saturday April, 25th, rallying the 2nd global protest day, we published on our FB page the e-mail addresses of all our local MPs & of the members of the government and a letter detailing the risks involved in deploying the 5G tech, reminding them all that they are the representatives of the people, that their duty is to preserve the health of the population and that, in case of doubt, it is their specific duty to apply the precautionary principle and to stop the deployment of the 5G.

We then asked all our followers to mail the letter to all of the MP and, despite the fact that we don’t know exactly how many sent it, they must have been quite a lot as some MPs moaned on their FB profiles about people spamming their mailbox with anti-5G messages, treating them as ignorant fools

*SNIP* read the entire article via the source link below...
Click here to view the source article.
Source: EHTrust, 13 May 2020

Jersey City Council postpones 5G utility pole installation
USA Created: 10 May 2020
The Jersey City Council has unanimously tabled an ordinance to approve the upgrade and installation of 72 utility poles which the council says will include 5G technology after members of the public spoke against the ordinance.

The critics cited a lack of transparency, lack of notice, and lack of information as well as data expressing concerns on the possible health ramifications the technology could have on residents despite the Federal Communications Commission’s ruling that the technology is safe.

Resident and registered nurse Lucille Shah said she was against 5G utility pole installation.

“My children’s bedroom faces the street, and they can potentially be sleeping just a few feet away from a 5G tower,” she said, noting that the World Health Organization has yet to issue an opinion on the possible health impacts of the technology.

She said that several European countries have halted their installation until more studies have been concluded.

Resident and former councilman Chris Gadsden said that residents have not been notified that the utility poles would be coming to their neighborhoods.

“I just want to caution and hold up on the installation of these towers because just like how we notify the community of CCTV camera installations, and different construction projects, and street paving, I just think we need to afford the public the same courtesy,” he said, saying that the new towers will primarily be installed in Ward A and Ward F, possibly near senior citizen homes and apartment complexes, without residents being made aware of it.

Resident Esther Wintner also pushed for the council to hold off on the ordinance because people were preoccupied with the current the public health emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Nick Strasser of the city’s law department quoted federal law stating, “No state or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate placement construction and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent such facilities comply with the commissions regulations concerning such emissions.”

“Simply put, the FCC has reviewed this and deemed the equipment in this ordinance to be safe to the public, and Congress has given the FCC exclusive jurisdiction to determine what is safe and is not and has prevented states and municipalities from individually deciding what is safe and is not from an emissions standpoint on this equipment,” he said.

Several council members voiced their frustration over seemingly having their hands tied. Council President Joyce Watterman asked Strasser whether the council could send a resolution or letter to the federal government to express their concerns.

“It’s always within the Council’s jurisdiction resolution to send a resolution to Congressmen Albio Sires and Donald Payne, and the U.S. Senators from New Jersey, to notify them of your frustration with the state of the federal law, you always have that ability,” Strasser said.

He also explained that the city still has the ability to restrict certain aspects of the installation itself.

“What you can’t do is say it is on the basis of the emissions coming from the equipment, because the FCC has already reviewed that from a safety standpoint and said that it is safe,” said Strasser. “But what the city does have the ability to do is to regulate the fees as it does in here or the engineering review of the individual towers… the city also has the ability to decide where they go from a public safety standpoint” if they are to close to fire hydrant or driveway, for example.

He added that the council can also have a say when it comes to the design of the poles, especially in historic neighborhoods, because they would have to comply with the historic requirements of any historic preservation district.

According to Business Administrator Brian Platt, the vendor will have to notify residents who are within 200 feet of a utility pole instillation site before they are installed.

That notification will include information regarding the technology’s safety.

“Council people spent the last month trying figure out what to do with this, and its bad to think the FCC is in control of what we do here in Jersey City,” said Councilman Jermaine Robinson. “I want to put people first and make sure they know exactly what’s going on here in our city.”

Council President Joyce Watterman urged members of the public to petition and write letters to their state and federal leaders expressing their concerns.

Ultimately, the council decided to table the ordinance to further explore their options after Platt noted that the council has 150 days to make a decision on the ordinance.

The ordinance will return before the council on final reading on May 20th.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Hudson Reporter, Marilyn Baer, 08 May 2020

UK Legal action against 5G
United Kingdom Created: 10 May 2020
We are groups of individuals nationwide, including doctors, scientists and engineers, supported by a strong team of lawyers headed by Michael Mansfield QC, who have joined forces to commence legal proceedings to challenge the UK government’s failure to take sufficient notice of clearly identified health and safety risks of wireless radiation and the increased exposure from the deployment of 5G.

The risks are foreseeable and preventable, current standards are not fit for purpose and obsolete. The case concerns defending our fundamental right to privacy and protection from experimentation.

*SNIP* Visit the website, here: https://actionagainst5g.org/
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Action Against 5G, 10 May 2020

If all roofs were developed as ‘green’ what would happen with the phone masts?
United Kingdom Created: 9 May 2020
I WRITE in support of the tenants and residents of Haddo House, who are currently living with the threat of having mobile phone masts placed on the roof of their Camden Council owned block.

In several similar cases, namely Chester Court, Lissenden Gardens, Winifred Paul House and Monmouth House, such plans were ditched after meeting very strong opposition.

In the case of Monmouth, the mobile phone masts that were planned for our roof eventually appeared on the roof of a commercial premises just past the main entrance to Regis Road industrial estate on a building that has the words Kentish Town written on its side in large graffiti.

If you took mobile phone mast law at face value, it would tell you that the mobile phone firms can choose to put their masts on any roof, whether the property owner likes it or not, unless the owner has the intention to develop their roof.

I still maintain Camden could end all threat of mobile phone masts being placed on its residential buildings by proving that its green credentials are more than just talk through implementing a programme of developing all its roofs as green roofs.

That said, if the opposition is strong enough, these firms will find an alternative site on a non-residential building.

I would urge any TRA that is under threat from having such masts placed on their roofs to read the many letters written by myself and others on this whole subject in recent months in the CNJ Letters section.

The dates and letters are as follows: in 2019 (Act now on mobile phone masts, May 2), (Are we living amid danger that we don’t understand? May 9), (New dangers with the roll-out of 5G, May 16) and (concerned), (Why the silence on mobile phone masts? May 30), (Waves are worrying, June 6), (Phone masts questions, July 4), (Stop these phone masts, July 11), (Signals safety first, please, August 1), (Danger signals for the 5G roll-out, August 8), (Scrap digital rooftops programme, September 19), (Scrap the 5G programme, October 10), (5G safety is not assured, October 31), and, on January 9 2020, Never mind phone masts, let’s green our rooftops.

LOUIS LOIZOU
Raglan Street, NW5
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Camden New Journal, LOUIS LOIZOU, 08 May 2020

Senate asks Govt. to suspend deployment of 5G network in Nigeria
Nigeria Created: 6 May 2020
The Senate on Tuesday directed the Federal Government to suspend the planned deployment of the Fifth Generation Network in Nigeria.

The Senate resolution is sequel to a motion on the present status of 5G Network in Nigeria. The motion was sponsored by Sen. Uche Ekwunife (PDP Anambra), who in her lead debate said there were growing concerns on the on-going discussion about the current status of 5G network in Nigeria, especially in regards to the question, ‘if Nigeria is presently connected to 5G.’

She said there were further concerns by some scientists and medical experts that emission from 5G towers could adversely affect the health of citizens by causing symptoms like damage to the eyes and immune systems, among other adverse effects.

She, however, said that 5G network has also been reported to hold a lot of promises for mobile broadband services because of its faster speed and better capacity.

She expressed concern over the uncertainty surrounding whether or not the 5G network has been launched in Nigeria will continue to fuel the speculations and rumours concerning the deployment of 5G network and its faster effect on the citizen of Nigerian.

She said that several countries, including Switzerland, one of the world leaders in the roll out of 5G mobile technology has placed an indefinite moratorium on the use of 5G network because of the health concern.

She said that it was important to investigate the status of 5G network in Nigeria to ensure that Nigerian citizens are not exposed to unreasonable risk of great bodily injury or harm.

The Senate in its other resolution directed the concerned committees to also investigate the technological impact of the network on Nigerians and report back to plenary within two weeks. (NAN) The red chamber, however, asked the relevant federal agency supervising the ICT operations in the country to suspend the 5G deployment until a thorough probe to determine its suitability for human health had been achieved.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Vanguard, 06 May 2020

5G – a building biology perspective
Germany Created: 2 May 2020
Everybody is talking about 5G - The electrosmog debate has been stirred up again and all those concerns about the exposure to electromagnetic fields as well. The industry in particular, but also many other people would like to have faster and more powerful data networks. Yet others are concerned about radiation risks and data security. So what can building biology contribute to the solution, what do we know so far, and what do we have to expect from the future development of our ambient wireless environment?

5G – what is it?

5G refers to the latest generation of wireless technologies for cellular networks. This fifth generation goes well beyond basic communication between cell phones or the mobile Internet. After the first generation (1G) of analog networks (A, B, and C) in the 1960s and 1980s and the digital standards of the second generation (2G) GSM (D, E networks since 1991), the third generation (3G) UMTS/HSPA (since 2000), as well as the fourth generation (4G) LTE (since about 2010), wireless communication is now even faster (latency or response times will be about 1 millisecond).

It is not anymore just about communication from person to person, but also from person to machine as well as from machine to machine, including such applications as the Internet of Things (IoT), smart homes, autonomous driving, telemedicine, intelligent power supply, smart metering, smart farming, or smart cities. These applications have come to infiltrate our daily lives at an accelerated pace. The new model VW Golf 8, for example, is designed to be online at all times and stay connected with the cloud. This car can also talk to other cars and to the driver’s home. The goal of 5G developers and providers is the “totally connected society.”
New bandwidths, frequencies, and pulses

5G offers many new technical advancements. Besides the previously mentioned extremely fast transmission speed, data rates are also very high. With up to 10 gigabits per second – ten times more than LTE – the electromagnetic signals require a greater bandwidth. First measurements of active 5G cell antenna sites in Germany (e.g. in Düsseldorf, Cologne, or Darmstadt) showed “frequency hills” as wide as 50 or 100 MHz.

The initial 5G carrier frequencies will be not much different from the ones currently in use with 4G: Previous networks (2G, 3G, and 4G) mostly operated at 800 MHz, 900 MHz, 1800 MHz, 2100 MHz, and 2600 MHz and networks used inside homes such as Wi-Fi/WLAN (wireless local area network) and cordless phones (DECT) at 1900 MHz, 2.4 GHz, and 5.2–5.7 GHz. 5G networks will at first mainly use 3.4–3.7 GHz, from 2021 also 2.1 GHz. In Germany, four telecommunications providers secured those frequencies (for a total revenue of ca. 6.6 billion euro) during an auction in spring 2019. In addition to Telekom, Vodafone, and Telefonica, there is now also 1&1 Drillich.

The significantly higher frequency ranges of about 24–28 GHz and 32–33 GHz or even higher, which are often hotly debated, will most likely only become deployed in a few years.

So-called pulses – which constantly and strictly periodically switch the wireless signals on and off, several times per second – are expected to be similar to LTE because the modulations are similar (e.g. 100 Hz or 2000 Hz). There will be a new pulse of 50 Hz, at least in the frequency range about 3.5 GHz (due to the TDD modulation used). During our first measurements, these nonstop pulses could also be clearly shown, both in “zero span” mode of a spectrum analyzer and as an audio signal with broadband RF meters.

New antennas and cell sizes

When we analyze and evaluate 5G signals, it is important to consider the new antenna design. They are called “smart,” especially since they are able to form beams of radio and microwaves (so-called beamforming). As a result, wireless radiation is not spread indiscriminately everywhere, but it is directed, at least the main portion of it, toward the user of a smartphone or other mobile device. The emissions in the user’s direction will be possibly higher and thus greater safety distances must be calculated for cell antenna sites. In the past, safety distances around cell antennas ranged typically from 3 to 9 meters and now rather from 15 to 20 meters, as documented in the site certificates of the German Federal Network Agency.

New is also the much more frequent deployment of so-called small cells, whose coverage extends to just 200 meters. They are, for example, mounted at street lights, traffic lights, on-street parking meters, utility poles, garbage cans, or house facades, but also inside buildings. Though the transmit power of small cells is lower, people are also much closer to these (small and almost invisible) antennas; in addition, cellular network providers are not required to have a site certificate (due to the low output power below 10 W) because the exposure limits of the 26th Federal Pollution Control Ordinance do not apply here (however, the sites are to be reported to the German Federal Network Agency).

Health risks

There are hardly any research results available about risks specifically associated with the use of 5G wireless radiation. Already in 2017, more than 180 scientists and physicians from 36 countries signed an appeal. In this appeal, they warn of severe health risks associated with 5G wireless technologies and recommend putting a moratorium on the deployment of the fifth generation of wireless communication technologies until possible risks to human health and the environment have been fully researched by industry-independent scientists. They also state that it has been proven that radio-frequency electromagnetic fields are harmful to human health and the environment. The use of 5G will significantly increase the exposure to electromagnetic fields in the radio-frequency range since this new layer of signals will be added to the already existing networks of GSM, UMTS, LTE, Wi-Fi, and so on.

Since mid-band frequencies of 800, 2000, and 3500 MHz feature similar modulations and/or pulses as are found in GSM and LTE, associated risks are also expected to be similar. Should the above-described 50 Hz pulse turn out to be present at all times, this could make for more serious effects.

Regarding high-band frequencies above 20 GHz, we know rather little and rather little research has been done so far. Due to their short wavelengths, these waves hardly penetrate the body, but are absorbed at the surface of the body. First studies suggest that adverse health effects predominantly occur in eyes, skin, and sweat glands, possibly also ECG effects.

It is the official position of the Federal Office for Radiation Protection in Germany that any developments shall be closely watched, but that the compliance with the exposure limits of the 26th German Federal Pollution Control Ordinance are sufficient for now.
Will the exposure to wireless radiation increase with 5G?

Based on the currently available scientific evidence, it is not possible to answer with a clear: yes or no. Due to the higher amount of data that can be transmitted, there will certainly also be an increase in total transmissions. And with many more antennas and smaller cell sizes, people will get much closer to them. (Consequently, personal exposure levels in the immediate vicinity of small cell antennas can be higher despite the antennas’ lower output power). Because of the characteristic beamforming, it could also be possible that in some – or even many? – locations where 5G is available, but not actively used by a user, exposure levels could even be much lower compared to LTE.

Furthermore, the higher frequencies about 3.5 GHz are typically much more strongly attenuated than those at 2 GHz or even 1 GHz, which is why in the former case indoor exposure levels could be lower.

The pending shutdown of the UMTS networks will result in some reduction of exposure levels. So this specific type of wireless radiation, also including its pulses and risks, will disappear; however, these very frequencies will be added to 5G networks and thus exposures in this frequency band will continue to occur after all.

In the future, possibly many new devices will operate at 5G frequencies inside buildings, which may contribute to much higher indoor exposure levels. It will be important to review on a case-by-case basis how much, how often, when, and where a given network is actively transmitting.

Caution is advised with higher frequencies, which are expected to be deployed later. As discussed earlier, in this higher frequency range, there will probably be other or additional risks.

Whether smartphones in 5G mode will emit more radiation than handsets in 2G, 3G, or 4G mode remains to be seen; 5G emission levels are currently not known or have not yet been measured by us (though the levels of intensity will most likely be similar to previous ones).

5G satellites

Currently, there are 2000 telecommunications satellites zipping around the Earth and about 10,000 new ones are planned to be added – with 5G capabilities. From a building biology perspective, it could be an advantage that the great distance to the Earth’s surface translates into very low exposure levels (lower than 0.1 µW/m²), though admittedly everywhere.
Building biology recommendations

Everybody is encouraged both to raise awareness in a factual and constructive way among family members, friends, and coworkers and to campaign against 5G antennas or for installations with the lowest emissions possible. (Unfortunately, many of the 5G antennas will not be subject to approval so that actions in this regard may be limited.) The consumer protection organizations “Diagnose Funk” and “Kompetenzinitiative,” which fight against wireless radiation pollution, are here to help you, but also need your support.

To reduce your personal exposure, it is best to choose high-mass building materials; in the case of lightweight construction – for the entire building or just the roof structure – a layer of shielding material should be integrated. Shielding materials (paints, fabrics, screens), which have been in common use to date, do not show much of a difference in their shielding effectiveness in the frequency range from around 1 to 3 GHz compared to current sources of wireless radiation such as 2G, 3G, 4G, Wi-Fi, DECT, etc. At higher frequencies above 20 GHz, mesh materials such as fabrics and screens are less effective, but high-mass building materials and continuous surface treatments such as paints are more effective.

If in doubt, have exposure levels verified by measurements; looking up the EMF Monitor at the German Federal Network Agency (or equivalent databases of cellular antennas in other countries) can already reveal important information.

It will be important to ensure that devices and systems with 5G wireless antennas (or other wireless technologies) are not installed inside buildings unless they can be disabled – at least at night, there should be wireless silence. Whenever possible, smart home applications should use hardwired solutions via network cables or cable bus systems. (In new construction, an abundance of data cables should be run.) Caution is also advised with all electrical appliances that come equipped with wireless functions: Either do without wireless functions or make sure that the wireless mode used only transmits infrequently and for short periods.

From a building biology perspective, it is generally recommended not only to focus on 5G, but also to consider other stress factors (e.g. ELF electric and magnetic fields, static electric and magnetic fields, formaldehyde, radioactivity, etc.) and to always take a holistic approach to problem solving, measurements, and mitigation.

Summary

Many things regarding 5G are not yet known, but enough to use caution and to reduce one’s exposure to 5G radiation as much as possible. One thing is for sure, the introduction of 5G will lead to an increased personal exposure in various situations, at work, in public, or even at home. It is possible, as discussed above, that wireless radiation levels may drop compared to current levels. The how and where of exposure levels must be verified on a case-by-case basis, preferably with measurements.

The main goal of the building biology approach is to keep the sleep environment as free of wireless radiation exposure as possible, also including 5G. With regard to indoor wireless sources, main strategies include prudent avoidance, shutting off devices, or keeping a safe distance; with regard to outdoor wireless sources, shielding measures are in order.

How to measure 5G

Ideally, spectrum analyzers are used to measure 5G signals, which allow for the most detailed measurements. Depending on the situation, broadband RF meters can also be used. In the latter case, there will be certain measurement errors due to “crest factors” similar to LTE and even higher bandwidths, but they should all be manageable in the context of building biology assessments.

In any case, the measurement device must cover the frequencies used: Since many 5G applications will transmit around 3.4-3.7 GHz, spectrum analyzers or broadband RF meters must at least detect up to 4 GHz. For higher frequencies above 10 GHz, there are no broadband meters available as of yet and only very few building biology professionals own spectrum analyzers that can detect such high frequencies.

In the building biology community, experience with 5G measurements is still rare. Owing to the low traffic on 5G networks at this time, first measurements should be treated with caution. In the future, measuring 5G signals will be most likely rather difficult because of the great fluctuations in power levels, depending on who transmits how much data where. For example, emissions from base station antennas to mobile devices will at least partly form beams. How should one calculate maximum power levels based on random measurements? And when there is no data traffic, 5G emissions may even be shut off completely!? These aspects will present new challenges to 5G exposure measurements.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Baubiologie Magazine, Dr. Manfred Mierau, 26 Apr 2020

Glastonbury calls for 5G inquiry
United Kingdom Created: 30 Apr 2020
Following six months of investigation, Glastonbury Town Council has resolved unanimously to adopt the recommendations of their ‘5G Advisory Committee’, which was set up in 2019 to explore the safety of 5G technology.

The recommendations include:

writing to MPs asking them to establish an inquiry into the safety of 5G;
calling for the UK Government and Public Health England to undertake an independent scientific study into:
The non-thermal effects of 5G, and
Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity;
and lobbying the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) to take into account the non-thermal effects of radiofrequency EMFs in their Guidelines on Limiting Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields.
In addition to the recommendations, Glastonbury Town Council resolved unanimously to continue their adoption of the Precautionary Principle; opposing the roll-out of 5G until further information is made available on the safety or otherwise of the technology.

“The Town Council is greatly indebted to the members of the 5G Advisory Committee, who have met regularly; collected and studied a large volume of literature – and received presentations from a number of academics and professionals, including the Director of Mobile UK, the organisation overseeing the roll-out of 5G in the UK.

As chair of the advisory committee, I have been impressed by the number of councils and local authorities who have been in contact; requesting copies of the committee’s report and recommendations… However, I must stress that a Town Council, such as Glastonbury, has absolutely no power to stop the roll-out of 5G, which is why it is so important to bring our report to the attention of MPs, the Government, Public Health England, and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection.”

Cllr. Jon Cousins, Deputy Mayor of Glastonbury, and Chair of the 5G Advisory Committee.

*** See source link below for full report ***
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Glastonbury Town Council, 29 Apr 2020

«First  ‹Previous   Page 2 of 752   Next›  Last»