Switzerland halts rollout of 5G over health concerns - Update: Swiss gov't denies the report

[Delicieuxz]

 

Switzerland halts rollout of 5G over health concerns

Quote

Switzerland, one of the world’s leaders in the rollout of 5G mobile technology, has placed an indefinite moratorium on the use of its new network because of health concerns.

 

The move comes as countries elsewhere around Europe race to upgrade their networks to 5G standards amid a furious rearguard diplomatic campaign by the US to stop them using Chinese technology provided by Huawei. Washington says the company, which is fundamental to most European networks’ upgrade plans, presents a grave security risk.
 

...

 

However, a letter sent by the Swiss environment agency, Bafu, to the country’s cantonal governments at the end of January, has now in effect called time on the use of all new 5G towers, officials who have seen the letter told the Financial Times. 

 

The agency is responsible for providing the cantons with safety criteria against which telecoms operators’ radiation emissions can be judged. Under Switzerland’s highly federalised structure, telecoms infrastructure is monitored for compliance and licensed by cantonal authorities, but Bern is responsible for setting the framework.

 

Bafu has said it cannot yet provide universal criteria without further testing of the impact of 5G radiation.

 

The agency said it was “not aware of any standard worldwide” that could be used to benchmark recommendations. “Therefore Bafu will examine exposure through adaptive [5G] antennas in depth, if possible in real-world operational conditions. This work will take some time,” it said.
 

...

Several cantons have already imposed their own voluntary moratoria because of uncertainty over health risks. 

 

Swisscom said that Bafu’s assessment process would not halt its ongoing work to build out 5G infrastructure, even if it meant that it would not be able to be used at full capacity. The operator said it could still achieve high speeds for customers of up to 2Gb/s without the full use of new masts.

 

...

 

Swisscom, the country’s largest mobile operator, said it understood “the fears that are often expressed about new technologies”.

 

“There is no evidence that antenna radiation within the limit values adversely affects human health,” the company added, pointing out that 5G is run on frequencies similar to the current 4G standard, which has been subject to “several thousand studies.”

 

The company said Switzerland’s regulatory limits were “10 times stricter than those recommended by the World Health Organization in places where people stay for longer periods of time”.

...

The Swiss Medical Association has advised caution on 5G, arguing that the most stringent legal principles should be applied because of unanswered questions about the technology’s potential to cause damage to the nervous system, or even cancers.

 

Five “popular initiatives” — proposals for legally binding referendums on 5G use — are already in motion in Switzerland. Two have already been formalised and are in the process of collecting the 100,000 signatures needed to trigger nationwide votes that if successful will amend Switzerland’s constitution.

 

One will make telecoms companies legally liable for claims of bodily damage caused by radiation from masts unless they can prove otherwise. The other proposes strict and stringent limits on radiation emissions from masts and will give local residents veto power over all new constructions in their area.

 

It looks like not every country is eager to implement 5G. I'm satisfied with 4G for my uses, and 5G sounds a bit impractical to me, so I favour waiting for more research to be conducted before getting 5G locally.

 

 

Update: Swiss agency denies ban on 5G roll-out over health concerns (updated)

Quote

14 February 2020: Since the original publication of the story in the Financial Times, the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment has denied plans for a blanket ban on 5G in Switzerland. The agency said it had written to the country’s cantons about the placement of 5G equipment, but the assertion that previous reports had made about halting 5G entirely were “misleading”.

 

While some cantons had imposed restrictions on planning permission for 5G sites, it does not apply to the whole of Switzerland. This article was updated to reflect these comments.

 

[soldier_ph]

Yep that's just our government, they wanna make sure that we don't have any security backdoors in our Telecom infrastructure and that there are no health risks with the new frequencies for 5G. They've already auctioned off 3 frequency bands for 5G to the Telecom providers Swisscom, Sunrise and Salt over a year ago so it's just a matter of our government making regulations for everything.

[Alex Atkin UK]

Presumably this is only about the new higher frequencies, because it would be pretty stupid to get paranoid about frequencies already in use?

[Sauron]

14 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

unanswered questions about the technology’s potential to cause damage to the nervous system, or even cancers.

We actually have the answer to this, and it's "no". All studies looking for damage caused by phone radiation in normal use have found no or inconclusive results. In the over 2 decades where mobile phones have been commonplace there has been no notable increase in cancer rates. You'd think if there was a serious risk we'd have at least noticed the consequences by now.

 

EM radiation at those frequencies can cause tissue damage and potentially cancer but only at high power in close proximity - the worst case scenario for a phone is when you're holding it up against your head during a phone call and that's not close enough to your brain to be a threat. Furthermore, every advancement in technology (the "G"s) reduces the signal's power significantly - 5G is much safer in this regard than 4G, and 4G was much safer than what came before it.

 

In short, this is the usual baseless scaremongering that happens every time there's a major change in infrastructure. I can kind of understand the concern about backdoors (though the solution would be as simple as demanding the source code to be made available) but the health risk is just not there.

24 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

One will make telecoms companies legally liable for claims of bodily damage caused by radiation from masts unless they can prove otherwise.

I mean, seriously? How could you possibly prove that an individual cancer wasn't caused by cell phones other than by pointing out that no significant correlation has ever been found? Literally anyone with any kind of cancer could sue and win with a law like this.

27 minutes ago, Delicieuxz said:

The other proposes strict and stringent limits on radiation emissions from masts and will give local residents veto power over all new constructions in their area

Radiation limits are already a thing (and as I said, 5G significantly reduces radiation compared to anything that came before it), nothing new there.

[RonnieOP]

There was protestors marching downtown a couple months ago over 5G.

 

I havent looked into it very much but what little i have doesnt cause me to worry but again i havent looked too much in to it. But these idiots marching in the street caused a huge traffic jam so im inclined to vote for anything they are against.

[Commodus]

43 minutes ago, RonnieOP said:

There was protestors marching downtown a couple months ago over 5G.

 

I havent looked into it very much but what little i have doesnt cause me to worry but again i havent looked too much in to it. But these idiots marching in the street caused a huge traffic jam so im inclined to vote for anything they are against.

The long and short of it: there's no evidence that you need to be concerned.  The frequencies that could potentially damage you are so high that they make even millimetre wave 5G seem completely tame.

[mr moose]

Just add it to the list of dumb things countries and their legal systems do as result of cherry picking scientific evidence.

 

Overwhelming body of evidence says at best there is no current causal link,  most evidence suggests what can happen is rare because of the power levels used in application.

 

But as the latest monsanto trials in the US have shown us, even when nearly every research study in the world shows no link between a product and cancer, the company can still be found guilty of selling a known carcinogen.   Because judges are not scientists and lawyers are professional con artists.

 

 

 

 

[TempestCatto]

I want to throw in my two cents, keep in mind I've only read the headline.

 

I used to work for a company that was contracted out by a big American telecom company to control traffic at their worksites while their linemen would install new poles, lay line, make repairs, etc. The crew I was assigned that day (new one everyday) had to lay line underground, fish it back up the other side of a highway, and then attach it to a pole (for support) which contained a 5G antenna. They were very upset and when I asked why, I was told this:

 

Quote

We had to have a safety course in addition to the regular training to work on them. When we work on or near them, we have to wear a special device on our belts that will sound a tone if we get too close to it. We were told that if we get close enough, and stay in front of it long enough to do any kind of work to it [while powered on] we could literally become sterile. We've watched squirrels and birds sit on top of them [while powered] and after at least 5 or so minutes, they died. I fucking hate this 5G shit. It's supposed to be the new way internet is provided. So your cellphone connects to it, and your home wifi connects to it as well. It's supposed to make our jobs easier when deploying fiber line. But it's just too risky. 

 

Given that these guys were trained to work on this stuff, I trust them and what they say. I know the internet has hyped up this a lot, but there's some merit to the words this particular guy said. On that note though, they ended up using a very long pike pole to turn the power off to the antenna so they could go up and attach the line. Once they ran it and hooked it up a few poles down, they used the same pike pole and restored the power. 

[Brooksie359]

38 minutes ago, TempestCatto said:

I want to throw in my two cents, keep in mind I've only read the headline.

 

I used to work for a company that was contracted out by a big American telecom company to control traffic at their worksites while their linemen would install new poles, lay line, make repairs, etc. The crew I was assigned that day (new one everyday) had to lay line underground, fish it back up the other side of a highway, and then attach it to a pole (for support) which contained a 5G antenna. They were very upset and when I asked why, I was told this:

 

 

Given that these guys were trained to work on this stuff, I trust them and what they say. I know the internet has hyped up this a lot, but there's some merit to the words this particular guy said. On that note though, they ended up using a very long pike pole to turn the power off to the antenna so they could go up and attach the line. Once they ran it and hooked it up a few poles down, they used the same pike pole and restored the power. 

I mean essential the waves of that strength and that close up is basically enough to microwave living creatures that are too close for too long. I would say it is definitely worth finding out at what power and distance is 5G assuredly safe as people becoming sterile from being too close to a tower seems like a bad thing to me. 

[Bitter]

That's entirely the wrong kind of radiation to sexually sterilize.

[akio123008]

I believe high power high frequency transmitters have always come with safety regulations, but this is purely due to the thermal effect of microwave radiation at very very close distances to very high power microwave relay link transmitters.

 

At larger distances however, the power levels are simply way too low for organisms to be affected. Assume a power level of 50 watts for a transmitter (that's a very powerful transmitter) considering an omni-directional antenna we can use the formula I = P / (4Pir^2) where I is the intensity in W/m2, P the power of the transmitter and r the distance from the transmitter. for a distance of 10 meters (you'd be standing very close to the pole) the intensity would be I = 50 / (4Pi/10^2) = 50 / 1256 = 0.03 W/m2. Assuming your body has a surface of 2m2, you'd receive 0.06W of radiation. The average LED has 100x more power than that, even though this is worst case and we're really close to an overpowered transmitter. Think about that. An LED sends out electromagnetic radiation at a frequency waaaay higher than that of 5g, and at roughly 100x the power level if it were located against the skin surface, compared to the 5g transmitter 10 meters away. Except that's not scary because "it's just light".

 

In reality the power level would be even lower; you'd be further away (and because of r^2 that has an exponential effect) and the transmitter would have way less power. I should also point out that the very high frequencies used probably don't even penetrate the human skin.

 

[RonnieOP]

1 hour ago, TempestCatto said:

I want to throw in my two cents, keep in mind I've only read the headline.

 

I used to work for a company that was contracted out by a big American telecom company to control traffic at their worksites while their linemen would install new poles, lay line, make repairs, etc. The crew I was assigned that day (new one everyday) had to lay line underground, fish it back up the other side of a highway, and then attach it to a pole (for support) which contained a 5G antenna. They were very upset and when I asked why, I was told this:

 

 

Given that these guys were trained to work on this stuff, I trust them and what they say. I know the internet has hyped up this a lot, but there's some merit to the words this particular guy said. On that note though, they ended up using a very long pike pole to turn the power off to the antenna so they could go up and attach the line. Once they ran it and hooked it up a few poles down, they used the same pike pole and restored the power. 

Im not doubting they were told that but does that actually mean its true?

 

I mean Ive been trained/taught things that i had to do or not do but they were incorrect.

 

Hell theres some things I have to do at work to comply with the health department codes that are factually incorrect. but I have to do them.

[williamcll]

Why even bother with mmWave signals at this point.

[kpluck]

6 hours ago, Delicieuxz said:

Switzerland halts rollout of 5G over health concerns

 

No, they did not.

Quote

Switzerland’s environmental agency has denied calling a halt to the switching on of 5G over health concerns.

 

-kp

[Colonel_Gerdauf]

What health concerns exist with 5G, again? All of these signals are lower in frequency than visible light, something that human bodies are showered with every second. Unless it gets into the scale of ionizing radiation (UV-B and above), there is zero risk of cancer or related health risks. And again, the signals for cellular/wifi are nowhere even close to the scale of ionization.

[TechyBen]

22 hours ago, Sauron said:

We actually have the answer to this, and it's "no". All studies looking for damage caused by phone radiation in normal use have found no or inconclusive results. In the over 2 decades where mobile phones have been commonplace there has been no notable increase in cancer rates. You'd think if there was a serious risk we'd have at least noticed the consequences by now.

 

EM radiation at those frequencies can cause tissue damage and potentially cancer but only at high power in close proximity - the worst case scenario for a phone is when you're holding it up against your head during a phone call and that's not close enough to your brain to be a threat. Furthermore, every advancement in technology (the "G"s) reduces the signal's power significantly - 5G is much safer in this regard than 4G, and 4G was much safer than what came before it.

 

In short, this is the usual baseless scaremongering that happens every time there's a major change in infrastructure. I can kind of understand the concern about backdoors (though the solution would be as simple as demanding the source code to be made available) but the health risk is just not there.

I mean, seriously? How could you possibly prove that an individual cancer wasn't caused by cell phones other than by pointing out that no significant correlation has ever been found? Literally anyone with any kind of cancer could sue and win with a law like this.

Radiation limits are already a thing (and as I said, 5G significantly reduces radiation compared to anything that came before it), nothing new there.

It's the emitters/towers. Depending on the tech and the quality/design/power output you can apparently cook things with them. This is so for most electrical devices, as they produce electricity, heat or radiation in some form.

 

So some form of checks is welcome, it's just if they are standard or over exaggerated.

 

[Sauron]

3 minutes ago, TechyBen said:

It's the emitters/towers. Depending on the tech and the quality/design/power output you can apparently cook things with them. This is so for most electrical devices, as they produce electricity, heat or radiation in some form.

 

So some form of checks is welcome, it's just if they are standard or over exaggerated.

Well sure, it's just that none of those are exclusively related to 5G technology and in fact 5G is supposed to be much less of a problem in all those regards than previous tech.

[TechyBen]

4 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Well sure, it's just that none of those are exclusively related to 5G technology and in fact 5G is supposed to be much less of a problem in all those regards than previous tech.

I think the density of the transmitters (lots more, closer to users) and the power output of some of the towers (IIRC) is higher. But that just means it needs checking as usual. Its sad that people go crazy over it... then buy radon blankets (see my other post where Amazon is selling those).

 

So, yeah "don't cut down trees/5g is killing usss!!! [goes out and buys a radioactive "free oxygen" bracelet]".

[Sauron]

10 minutes ago, TechyBen said:

I think the density of the transmitters (lots more, closer to users) and the power output of some of the towers (IIRC) is higher.

The cell density is higher, but the power is lower. The whole point of having more towers is that the power can be much lower (that and more reliable coverage).

[Kilrah]

Since exposure reduces with distance squared being closer causes more exposure than a reduction in power.

 

20 hours ago, mr moose said:

Just add it to the list of dumb things countries and their legal systems do as result of cherry picking scientific evidence.

It's not the government at fault, they're forced to do something due to some very vocal groups having used the democratic system as intended.

[dalekphalm]

There's no scientific basis for how 5G towers can be dangerous to humans*.

 

*: There is the risk of microwave radiation heating body tissue to the point of danger and/or death - as is the risk with literally every kind of radio transmitter ever invented, including AM/FM/2G/3G/4G/WIFI, etc. The main concern is that if you stand right beside a commercial transmitter (Eg: the thing on top of the cell tower), the power involved could harm or kill you. That hasn't changed with 5G.

 

But it's not cancer that'll kill you - since non-ionizing radiation doesn't cause cancer. What kills you is that by standing beside a commercial radio transmitter, you're literally inside a Microwave oven.

 

But, since there are already safety procedures in place for that kind of thing (and have been for decades), no one is standing beside these things.

 

So yeah - mmWave 5G might be new (with the higher frequencies), but even in that case, there's no scientific basis for how mmWave might be more dangerous to us than current frequencies (which is to say, not dangerous at all for the end user).

 

 

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, Kilrah said:

 

 

It's not the government at fault, they're forced to do something due to some very vocal groups having used the democratic system as intended.

I understand, it comes down to either doing as the vocalists demand and win votes or do what's right and be looking for another job tomorrow.   I think it is exactly the same in every country.

 

 

[greenmax]

On 2/19/2020 at 1:49 PM, RonnieOP said:

There was protestors marching downtown a couple months ago over 5G.

Was that in Zurich?

Very nice city, I loved it much while I was there. Its a very easy city to live in, but I am happy with 4G service and wouldnt want big corp hacking cell service.

[RonnieOP]

9 minutes ago, greenmax said:

Was that in Zurich?

Very nice city, I loved it much while I was there. Its a very easy city to live in, but I am happy with 4G service and wouldnt want big corp hacking cell service.

No im in NC-USA.

 

4g is fine. but im not going to argue about even faster speeds.

[greenmax]

1 minute ago, RonnieOP said:

4g is fine. but im not going to argue about even faster speeds.

But with no back doors to hack