Question for Scientific Community

[Omar del Sur]

I would like to ask two of the site's top scientific minds about something

@Sophisticate @TekNiKo

people are trying to talk me into getting a 5G phone. should i be wary of getting a 5G phone?

I don't really understand what 5G is but from what I hear it is something bad.

 

[Sophisticate]

• I know many here are proponents of wireless who see it as some transformative technology and are quite skeptical of the anti-5G sentiments often flagging it as misinformation due to their preconceived biases.
• Even though there was an expert panel in Canada in 2019 on the potential health implications of 5G. See here.
• Alas, government agencies and industry experts declare 5G safe. Despite federal safety guidelines being decades out of date and there is currently no independent safety testing of 5G.
• Though fibre optic wiring/cables are a faster, safer, more efficient, secure, and more reliable technology compared to wireless. Telecommunication companies have lobbied for wireless and their influence is strong.
• Many do not know the politics of science and how dissenting voices rarely get a say and few are aware of the widespread problem of science for sale.
• They certainly have among their ranks ‘ industry experts’ who downplay the health effects of wireless and declare that through the limited epidemiological studies that there are ‘no adverse effects associated with 5G systems.’ However, an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
• Moreover, information on the biological effects of 5G is limited, and scant and does not show a wide range of operations from units to tens of gigahertz. There is a paucity of experimental studies on animals. However, one recent 2022 study of male rats exposed to 24-hour radiation of multifrequency electromagnetic fields effects of 5G NR/IMT-2020 mobile communication for four months showed impairments in the activity of the hypothalamus, pituitary, and adrenals.
• In my humble opinion, wireless radiation is bad for your long-term health and even the WHO classifies radiofrequency radiation as a Class 2 carcinogen.
• Radio frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are carcinogenic in humans and affect male fertility with possible adverse effects in embryos, fetuses, and newborns.
• I see the greater potential health dangers posed by 5G (1 GHz – 40 GHz) frequency bands since they are higher than 4G (600 MHz – 2.5 GHz). I don’t think it’s merely the phone type (4G v. 5G) that is the problem but the infrastructure as well. If you wanted to err on the side of caution to reduce RFR exposure you’d stick with a corded phone and a landline. As that may not be convenient or feasible for some in a landscape with over-reliance on Wi-Fi.
• Then I recommend the possession of any wireless device should be limited or closely monitored.

1. Never hold them close to your head.​

2. Keep them away from your body.​

3. Go for wired over wireless headsets.​

4. Turn off your Wi-Fi router when not in use.​

 

[Omar del Sur]

• I know many here are proponents of wireless who see it as some transformative technology and are quite skeptical of the anti-5G sentiments often flagging it as misinformation due to their preconceived biases.
• Even though there was an expert panel in Canada in 2019 on the potential health implications of 5G. See here.
• Alas, government agencies and industry experts declare 5G safe. Despite federal safety guidelines being decades out of date and there is currently no independent safety testing of 5G.
• Though fibre optic wiring/cables are a faster, safer, more efficient, secure, and more reliable technology compared to wireless. Telecommunication companies have lobbied for wireless and their influence is strong.
• Many do not know the politics of science and how dissenting voices rarely get a say and few are aware of the widespread problem of science for sale.
• They certainly have among their ranks ‘ industry experts’ who downplay the health effects of wireless and declare that through the limited epidemiological studies that there are ‘no adverse effects associated with 5G systems.’ However, an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
• Moreover, information on the biological effects of 5G is limited, and scant and does not show a wide range of operations from units to tens of gigahertz. There is a paucity of experimental studies on animals. However, one recent 2022 study of male rats exposed to 24-hour radiation of multifrequency electromagnetic fields effects of 5G NR/IMT-2020 mobile communication for four months showed impairments in the activity of the hypothalamus, pituitary, and adrenals.
• In my humble opinion, wireless radiation is bad for your long-term health and even the WHO classifies radiofrequency radiation as a Class 2 carcinogen.
• Radio frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are carcinogenic in humans and affect male fertility with possible adverse effects in embryos, fetuses, and newborns.
• I see the greater potential health dangers posed by 5G (1 GHz – 40 GHz) frequency bands since they are higher than 4G (600 MHz – 2.5 GHz). I don’t think it’s merely the phone type (4G v. 5G) that is the problem but the infrastructure as well. If you wanted to err on the side of caution to reduce RFR exposure you’d stick with a corded phone and a landline. As that may not be convenient or feasible for some in a landscape with over-reliance on Wi-Fi.
• Then I recommend the possession of any wireless device should be limited or closely monitored.

1. Never hold them close to your head.​

2. Keep them away from your body.​

3. Go for wired over wireless headsets.​

4. Turn off your Wi-Fi router when not in use.​

BarakAllahufeekum

 

[Liban89]

@Omar del Sur here is an informative, unbiased take on the subject.

 

[Sheikh Google]

No point in a 5g phone as most areas won't have a 5g tower.

 

[Removed]

The science and tech section is in shambles

5g is non-ionizing not much to worry about unless there’s enough of it to cause alot of heat like a microwave for example.