I started 5G emerge in some places in the world, as promised at breakneck speeds, and their ability to run new technology including self-driving cars, the experience of virtual reality and augmented reality technology. But regardless of what this new technical developments, the question remains puzzling: what will you do this technique with us?
At the time of the race in which the companies of cell phones all over the world to spread the network of the fifth generation of and support with phones of their own, warned US President Donald Trump, when he explained that we must not join the United States to attempts to develop technical and.
I know of
There are fears that the spectrum of high-frequency, known as the (wavelengths of seller) used in the processes of the early deployment to make 5G a reality, could pose a risk to people’s health.
In the month of April last, the government of Belgium to stop the test 5G networks in Brussels, due to fears that the radiation from base stations may be harmful. He also has called members of Parliament in other countries such as the Netherlands, to take a closer look on the networks of the fifth generation. This is in addition to that Switzerland has taken steps to monitor the impact of technology on people. In the United States, leaders in Congress, the same fears, prompting city in the state of California to stop the dissemination of this technique.
It is worth mentioning that these types of concerns are not new at all, it has consumers worried for years about the potential health effects of radiation in everything, starting from the small to mobile phones, claiming that the air waves wireless cause brain cancer and reduce fertility, headaches, children, and other diseases.
The deployment of networks of the fifth generation of the new, which require deployment of a larger number of cell towers is small near the places to live, work and go to school, would raise these concerns. Has begun to legislators and policy makers all over the world to get ready for.
And she said the food and Drug Administration FDA, the Federal Communications Commission FCC, and that there is nothing to worry about, as I didn’t expect the studies to the connection between the radio frequencies of cell phones or cell towers, and diseases.
But in 2011, the World Health Organization that cell phones may cause certain types of brain cancer, which leaves the possibility of a link between cancer and cellphone radiation.
Critics say that the safety of the use of the wavelength of the millimetre to provide the fifth generation has not yet been tested, and there is still a need for more information before you say the United States and the rest of the world the deployment of new networks.
The Federal Communications Commission FCC criticized the lack of updated safety standards for cell phones since 1996, as critics say he should review the levels based on the latest wireless technologies. The authority the FCC uses a value known as the SAR or specific absorption rate; to improve the possibility of selling the devices safely in the United States. And SAR is the amount of energy absorbed by the body for each particular block. In the month of March last, recommended that the engineering group IEEE to remain in power levels on the same as it was since 1996.
Now, keep frequently asked questions and common about this technique:
What’s the problem with cellular signals on?
If radiation is defined as the emission of energy from any source, this includes even the heat that comes from your body. But I can give you some form of radiation disease.
We can organize the types of radiation according to the level of their strength on the electromagnetic spectrum. So the wavelengths of the large low-frequency be less powerful, while wavelengths small in the higher frequencies stronger. Divided this spectrum into two different categories: ionizing and non-ionizing radiation.
And ionizing radiation, which includes ultraviolet rays, X-rays, gamma radiation, and from shapes of harmful. Can Energy resulting from ionizing radiation to the disintegration of atoms, it is known that the breakup of chemical bonds in DNA can cause damage to the cells, and then cause cancer.
For that reason warning the food and Drug Administration FDA of the presence of X-ray is not necessary, and this is the reason that sun exposure can cause skin cancer.
The radiation is non-ionizing radiation would have lower frequencies and lengths of Beam is larger, as it does not produce enough energy to disassemble the chemical bonds of DNA. Example: radio frequency, or wireless radiation, such as: FM radio, signals, television and mobile phones which use the networks of the two armies, the third and fourth.
The radiation wavelength of the millimetre, which is one of the major blocks of spectrum which will use the 5G network, it is not ionized, and produces a type of energy that harms cells directly. Uses common devices, such as: routers, WiFi, scanners, airport security, and wireless connectivity, and small low frequency.
Does this mean that mobile phone radiation does not cause cancer?
Think it’s more complicated than he thinks he is, as suspected by some experts that the radiation output from such devices could damage cells via a mechanism other biological agents, such as oxidative stress in cells, leading to inflammation and then cause cancer, diabetes, heart disease, blood vessels, nervousness, pulmonary.
Among the thousands of studies conducted over the past two decades, the results have been mixed. According to the American Cancer Society, I didn’t find most of the studies published so far, on the use of the service, the traditional mobile phone in the range of RF, for the association with the development of tumors. But the group believes that the majority of these studies have restricted value, which leaves some doubt.
However, didn’t make any of the Environmental Protection Agency or the national program of toxicology, radiation RF officially as the cause of the cancer. But in 2011, classified the International Agency for research cancer, affiliate World Health Organization radiation RF that “may cause cancer in humans”, after studies indicated the existence of links to certain type of brain tumors. However, the agency acknowledged also that the evidence is limited.
As a result, the commission was able to confirm with certainty that mobile phones are safe, but they didn’t also continue to say the opposite. Experts say that it is supposed to conduct more research of high quality on how to cause radiation non-ionizing radiation, such as: RF caused changes in the cells.
In the past year, published the national programme for the toxins and also the final results of the study which lasted ten years on mice, which found a link between exposure to high levels of radiation of mobile phones of the second generation and the third generation, tumors of the heart cancer have male rats. The study found that mice that were exposed to radiation lived more than the mice that were not exposed to any radiation.
I have pointed the researchers, the participants in the studies that can be compared to levels of radiation exposure in mice by exposure to humans, as mice radiation wireless across their bodies as a whole, with levels four times higher than the allowable cell phones. At the same time, the human exposure to radiation of the radio-frequency be selected at the head and at power levels low.
I have passed these researchers also he can’t tell us these studies a lot about the effects of the fifth-generation networks. He said Michael Wade, senior scientist of toxins in the studies: “the network of the fifth generation still a nascent technology yet to be determined”. He added: “It is our organization the current, see it’s likely to be very different from what we have studied”.
Underlines the operators on the phones that there are no harmful effects of mobile phone radiation, including the fifth-generation networks. The association said the wireless industry CTIA in a statement: “did not show radiofrequency energy devices and wireless networks, including the 5G, they cause health problems, according to the consensus of the international scientific community”.
What to say to activists?
Pointed activists to the research which they say show that mobile phone radiation affect human health, and they want to stop deployments of fifth-generation networks can even determine the safety of these devices.
As rife with social networking sites, and other forums across the internet concerns itself. There are also a lot of talk in these forums about trying to train phones to hide the data on the dangers of radiation, cell phones, and participants in those forums that the same methods deceptive used by the tobacco industry to conceal the dangers of smoking cigarettes; also used by sectors of the networking industry.
What Says Science?
Expert says Kenneth Foster, professor of bioengineering at the University of Pennsylvania, who has studied the health effects of radio-frequency energy for nearly 50 years: “the activists and naysayers to deploy the networks of the fifth generation belonging of studies supporting their views only, while ignoring other research that contradicts, or does not find any link between mobile phone radiation and health risks.
I admit Foster, who participated in the standards committee of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers IEEE to develop exposure limits to radiofrequency, that unlike the radiation level of the third generation and the fourth generation, which have been studied over at least two decades; there is not a lot of research on the biological effects of the use of the wavelength of the Miller network of the fifth generation.
You Service is a fifth generation 5G safe?
According to experts, studies conducted so far, there is no indication that the seller networks, 5G could constitute a significant risk to health. But a majority of experts for their opinion, saying: “there is still a need for more research concerning”.
Said Foster: “it seems that everyone, including me, are calling for further research on the biological effects of the potential network of the fifth generation,” he added: “But what we don’t need is more of the browsing and selection, we need more systematic reviews of current research, and more good studies that focus on endpoints related to health”.