First, I'd like to state that I'm aware of the issues associated with 5G cell towers and the health risks associated with them. Cities and communities across the world have vocally opposed and even banned their construction, and I think they are right to do so.
However, I am curious as to whether the 5G problem is associated with "5G" cell phones.
I have a based friend who may end up needing a new phone for work. Problem is, every phone on the market is "5G", and he wants to take care of himself as best as he can, hence why he's been hesitant to take the plunge on a newer phone.
Fortunately, we live in a county that recently denied multiple permit requests for 5G towers, so we're not as worried about 5G towers.
But do 5G smartphones have the same health risks as the 5G towers?
I'd appreciate feedback from people in the know.
5G covers a lot of ground. The only spectrum with any special health issues that I know of (as opposed to issues that may exist due to any sort of radiation) is microwave spectrum. If you don't live around tall buildings, you won't get hit by it. It's explicitly a short range signal, and they're not going to place a cell tower every few hundred feet in rural areas, but in urban ones it's easy for them to put one in or on a building. They need the bandwidth.
Why any person worried about cell radiation would live in a city is beyond me.
Radio is radio whether it’s 5G, 4G, 3G, whatever. It’s all a frequency space. Like FM radio is in the 88-107Mhz range, that’s one most people are familiar with. Mobile phone’s traditional are 700-2100 and have been for years. Many of these frequencies date back to analog or PCS days. A phone sold as 5G may speak “5G language” on any or all of these frequencies but it’s still just radio. It would be really illogical and seem uninformed to avoid something called “5G” on these frequencies but be ok with every other previous technology.
The new stuff is the 3.6Ghz C-band and the millimeter wave (mmWave) bands 26Ghz+. I personally wouldn’t bother avoiding C-band either. If you’re using Wi-Fi at home, you’re already exposing yourself to 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz. C-band sits right in the middle. If you’re going to make a point to avoid it, start thinking about Wi-Fi too.
So, you’re left with mmWave and I think that’s the one usually being discussed regarding “Dangerous 5G” whether they are clear or not. Well good news, it barely travels any distance at all and he phone companies don’t deploy it that much right now. If you’re inside your house, the chance of getting mmWave signals is near zero. It’s often killed by glass on the front of a building. To avoid mmWave, avoid places where there are often large crowds of people in open space. That’s it. I’d not really trust a 4G phone to protect me there anyway. If you’re in a crowd and the person next to you is using mmWave you’re exposed to it too. Maybe even if they aren’t using it.
Also, a lot of those things you see presented as scary 5G towers (like the cylindrical things) are just more “decorative” standard cell towers. There’s little difference to them and in most cases aren’t going to be on mmWave, but just a standard mobile band. You’re more likely to see mmWave stuff on top of a streetlight in a city than a special purpose built tower unless you’re in a really open area.
There are none. Microwaves have no special effects on the human anatomy either pulsed nor unpulsed. Exposure to microwaves will dump the energy into the outermost layer of your skin as heat, which is only an issue if the intensity is far, far higher than any communications antenna, in which case the radiant heat will become obvious and intolerable before it becomes damaging.
If there are problems with 5G, it's Chinese backdoors in the hardware or the denser network allowing more precise triangulation, not that less energetic radiation at lower intensities than the visible light and infrared you're exposed to every day is somehow more capable of hurting you.
Non-ionizing radiation will cause heat, but where is the heat? Water absorbs a lot of 2.4 GHz microwaves, while plastic is transparent.
Supposedly there are some of these frequencies that heat molecules near your DNA and this heat alters the local H2O <-> H3O+ OH- equilibrium, causing increased DNA damage from normal.
I don't remember enough chemistry to speak to the validity of that, but it looks from an absorption chart water is fairly transparent to like 900 MHz and below. So ironically probably the typically higher 5G frequencies may even be safer.
Nukes sliced ham in the microwave...
Again, presents as heat...
A microwave oven emits 600 to 1200 Watts of power. Cell towers emit far less - 10 to 50 Watts - and cellphones emit less again. You can't present raw energy transfer as evidence that microwaves are dangerous and not care about the amount of raw energy being transferred, for the same reason that a 1 kW laser isn't evidence that flashlights are dangerous.
Oh, yeah, old-school Mexican radio operators. Millions of MHz from those in their Wolfman Jack heyday, and I wouldn't doubt that they broadcasted directly from the towers.
(Now you've gone and reminded me of that WKRP in Cincinnati episode with the bomb threat.)
That's not... entirely true.
There WAS a 600% increase childhood leukemia among children raised within 4 miles of the Vatican Radio AM transmitter. However, in that situation the Holy See was operating their antenna at over twice the maximum legal power output permitted in Italian law (which they ignore).
The signal was so strong it could be picked up on telephone lines as a phantom signal throughout Rome even with noise cancellers. As in, you pick up your telephone and in the background you'd faintly hear Vatican Radio. Get close enough to the antenna and you could hear it on just a speaker with a length of wire connected to nothing.
Putting aside the debate about 5g and answering from a purely objective standpoint: yes, owning a 5g device would increase your exposure to 5g bandwidth significantly. On the order of hundreds or thousands of times. See my other reply and/or Google the Inverse Square Law for more information.
However, if there are no towers anywhere near you, this would not apply. Your phone only broadcasts in 5g when it gets a 5g connection. So if you're in an area with no 5g signal, it doesn't matter what kind of phone you buy.
I don't really believe the 5g hype but still wouldn't mind going back to houses insulated with foil-wrapped fiberglass and elegantly run networking cables to every room instead of wireless everything.
I'd recommend turning off mobile Internet in general unless you actually need it. Saves battery and I don't feel comfortable having such a thing in my pocket.
Yes, the phone will still try to occasionally ping 5G towers but in many phones its possible to turn 5G off (usually via a service menu of some type), which would prevent that from happening.
If there is, we don't know and won't for another 10-15 years. It's easy to look back and see and not look at the present and know.
I like 5G and cell phones in general because the signals can be used as a type of X-ray. It's cheaper and easier to do with way fewer health worries than an X-ray or magnetic scanning system.
No, having a device capable of picking up 5G is not the same as living near a 5G tower. One is a receiver, the other is a broadcaster. Just like there’s no issue from standing near an appliance, but living beside a transformer station will give you leukemia
It's the inverse square law. The most important aspect is distance, not power.
Your phone puts out about half a watt when transmitting a 5g signal. Put it up to your head, you're pretty much getting the entire half a watt.
A tower is much stronger: 50W per antenna, give or take. That's 100x the power. However, you'll be about two miles away in the middle of the range. By the time it gets to you, all that's left is a tiny fraction of a watt.
Or next to your balls