Dangers of 5G a real risk?

[Electronics Wizardy]

Just now, Lee L. said:

Would u like a link...can I post links?

yes...

[bob345]

1 minute ago, Lee L. said:

Would u like a link...can I post links?

yes you definitely can. Just make sure the studies are peer reviewed and actually have a solid conclusion because every study i have seen that "proves" radio waves cause cancer are either not peer reviewed or do not have conclusive evidence.

[Mira Yurizaki]

The only part of the electromagnetic spectrum that's been proven to definitively cause cancer are UV, X-rays, and Gamma rays. Everything else only causes thermal injuries if the signal is powerful enough. The only way for a 5G tower to be dangerous to you is if you're standing literally in front of the transmitter.

 

Also of something to note, 5G uses either the 6GHz bands or the 22 GHz bands. The former is in the C-Band which has wide use (5GHz Wi-Fi is in this band). The latter is in the Ku Band which also has wide use (satellite communication is in this band)

 

So if neither of those have been proven to definitively cause cancer, as far as I know, I have no reason to suspect somehow 5G magically will.

 

But I'll happily wait for links.

[Lee L.]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/cellular-phone-towers.html

 

Read "studies in people" also realize this is on low frequency waves not 5G which is much higher off the tower and much closer to humans then standard 4G towers

[Electronics Wizardy]

2 minutes ago, Lee L. said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/cellular-phone-towers.html

Not much to support you there 

Quote

At this time, there is very little evidence to support this idea. In theory, there are some important points that would argue against cellular phone towers being able to cause cancer.

 

Just now, Lee L. said:

Read "studies in people" also realize this is on low frequency waves not 5G which is much higher off the tower and much closer to humans then standard 4G towers

But most 5g is about the same as 4g frequencys, as explained above, it won't be much different. The high frequency 5g is a ways off.

[Mira Yurizaki]

1 minute ago, Lee L. said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/cellular-phone-towers.html

Emphasis added

Quote

Studies in people

Very few human studies have focused specifically on cellular phone towers and cancer risk.

 

In one large study, British researchers compared a group of more than 1,000 families of young children with cancer against a similar group of families of children without cancer. They found no link between a mother’s exposure to the towers during pregnancy (based on the distance from the home to the nearest tower and on the amount of energy given off by nearby towers) and the risk of early childhood cancer.

 

In another study, researchers compared a group of more than 2,600 children with cancer to a group of similar children without cancer. They found that those who lived in a town that could have exposed them to higher than average RF radiation from cellular phone towers in the previous 5 years had a slightly higher risk of cancer, although not of any certain type of cancer (like leukemia or brain tumors). This study estimated the children’s possible exposure based on the number of towers in their town and how strong the signals were from the towers. It did not look at actual exposure of any individual child based on how far their home or school was from a tower. This limitation reduces confidence in the results of the study.

 

One study looked for signs of DNA and cell damage in blood cells as a possible indicator of cancer-causing potential. They found that the damage was no worse in people who lived near a cell phone tower as compared with those didn’t.

 

The amount of exposure from living near a cell phone tower is typically many times lower than the exposure from using a cell phone. About 30 studies have looked at possible links between cell phone use and tumors in people. Most studies to date have not found a link between cell phone use and the development of tumors, although these studies have had some important limitations. This is an area of active research. For more information, see Cellular Phones.

So your source basically says there's nothing definitively linking RF exposure and cancer.

 

1 minute ago, Lee L. said:

Read "studies in people" also realize this is on low frequency waves not 5G which is much higher off the tower and much closer to humans then standard 4G towers

Which I would again point out that the higher frequency band that 5G is in has been in wide use already.

[bob345]

2 minutes ago, Lee L. said:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposure/cellular-phone-towers.html

A few quotes directly from your link.

 

" The energy of RF waves given off by cell phone towers is not enough to break chemical bonds in DNA molecules "

 

" RF waves have long wavelengths, which can only be concentrated to about an inch or two in size. This makes it unlikely that the energy from RF waves could be concentrated enough to affect individual cells in the body. "

 

" Levels of energy from RF waves near cell phone towers are not significantly different from the background levels of RF radiation in urban areas from other sources, such as radio and television broadcast stations. "

 

" One study looked for signs of DNA and cell damage in blood cells as a possible indicator of cancer-causing potential. They found that the damage was no worse in people who lived near a cell phone tower as compared with those didn’t. "

 

After that there are quite a few more pretty much saying that there is zero link to cancer. That is actually quite a good article.

[Lee L.]

Yes but once the fcc gets it up the speeds will continue to rise as well as the frequency. Is it really necessary to have us walking around being bombarded by radio waves at every instance of life? Just seems like greed at it's finest. I'm mostly concerned for children for they have a far greater risk then full grown developed men or women.

[Electronics Wizardy]

Just now, Lee L. said:

Yes but once the fcc gets it up the speeds will continue to rise as well as the frequency. Is it really necessary to have us walking around being bombarded by radio waves at every instance of life? Just seems like greed at it's finest. I'm mostly concerned for children for they have a far greater risk then full grown developed men or women.

You have no source to support your fear of heath affects, but rf communications has lots of benefits, even in the safety and medical sectors.

[bob345]

28 minutes ago, Lee L. said:

Read "studies in people" also realize this is on low frequency waves not 5G which is much higher off the tower and much closer to humans then standard 4G towers

Low is relative. Compared to visible light uv, xrays, and gama rays, 5g is orders of magnitude lower frequency. frequencies higer than 5g have been in use for decades in radars and in the pas few years in cruise control and collision avoidance systems in cars which run around 77-80ghz.

 

23 minutes ago, Lee L. said:

Yes but once the fcc gets it up the speeds will continue to rise as well as the frequency. Is it really necessary to have us walking around being bombarded by radio waves at every instance of life? Just seems like greed at it's finest. I'm mostly concerned for children for they have a far greater risk then full grown developed men or women.

You, your father, and you grandma,and anyone after the 1920's have all been bombarded by high power radio their entire lives. radio waves are not a new thing by any means.

[Lee L.]

They also have admitted they can't say it doesn't cause cancer or it does by many researchers. It's not been long enough to determine. Plus the younger generation is exposed to rf far greater then generations past. My point is that there are multiple hypothesis about this. Some are convinced this is the worst and others say it's fine. It's a topic u can find multiple studies proving or disproving it. Depends where u look. 

 

Yeah and look up cancer rates to people who work with sonar....it's not the rf waves as much as the tower being extremely close to people and the waves coming off the tower not your device

[bob345]

1 minute ago, Lee L. said:

They also have admitted they can't say it doesn't cause cancer or it does by many researchers. It's not been long enough to determine. Plus the younger generation is exposed to rf far greater then generations past. My point is that there are multiple hypothesis about this. Some are convinced this is the worst and others say it's fine. It's a topic u can find multiple studies proving or disproving it. Depends where u look. 

The only people who are saying it is the worst thing ever are the uneducated.

[Lee L.]

I'm no expert but it's being discussed everywhere right now. If it wasn't a concern it wouldn't be broadcasted on major news platforms and people avidly speaking out against it. 

[Electronics Wizardy]

Just now, Lee L. said:

They also have admitted they can't say it doesn't cause cancer or it does by many researchers. It's not been long enough to determine. Plus the younger generation is exposed to rf far greater then generations past. My point is that there are multiple hypothesis about this. Some are convinced this is the worst and others say it's fine. It's a topic u can find multiple studies proving or disproving it. Depends where u look. 

There are normally different findings. Thats normal in science. Findings can depend on conditing, how the study was done, how well errors were corrected for, and lots of other factors. If there was a massive effect, we

 

Cell phones have been around for 20+ years, with lots of studies in that time, no conclusion on the danger.

Just now, Lee L. said:

Yeah and look up cancer rates to people who work with sonar....it's not the rf waves as much as the tower being extremely close to people and the waves coming off the tower not your device

correlation != causation

 

You need to run a proper experiment to prove causation that has temporal precedence, internal validity, and covariation. I have yet to see one that has done that, everything else is just showing correlation.

[imreloadin]

4 minutes ago, Lee L. said:

they can't say it doesn't cause cancer

That would be because you can't prove a negative...

[Mira Yurizaki]

6 minutes ago, Lee L. said:

They also have admitted they can't say it doesn't cause cancer or it does by many researchers.

The problem with this argument is that it's impractical, if not impossible, for us to test that something is 100% safe. You'd have to test it in every conceivable condition and combination thereof.

 

Can you prove that water consumption definitively doesn't cause cancer?

[Electronics Wizardy]

1 minute ago, Lee L. said:

I'm no expert but it's being discussed everywhere right now. If it wasn't a concern it wouldn't be broadcasted on major news platforms and people avidly speaking out against it. 

People got scared of vaccines after there was one false study, that got spread around a lot as well, no risk, and that caused major harm to the population. Misinterpreted research can be a major issue. You can't just look at once study, and the news will often just read the abstract and the most exciting line from the results and push it way to far.

[Lee L.]

http://scientists4wiredtech.com/2018/07/firefighters-living-next-to-cell-towers-suffer-neurological-damage/

[Blademaster91]

14 minutes ago, Lee L. said:

Yes but once the fcc gets it up the speeds will continue to rise as well as the frequency. Is it really necessary to have us walking around being bombarded by radio waves at every instance of life? Just seems like greed at it's finest. I'm mostly concerned for children for they have a far greater risk then full grown developed men or women.

I think its fine to be questioning how safe it is,and IIRC there has been concern as well with children using cell phones because of the level of RF emitted.  And for some reason there has been a very aggressive push for 5G, when 4G is more than enough.

[Electronics Wizardy]

Just now, Lee L. said:

http://scientists4wiredtech.com/2018/07/firefighters-living-next-to-cell-towers-suffer-neurological-damage/

First thing, biased source, great start.

 

Also another correlation, you can't show cause.

 

Do we have a control group here?

 

How do you know its not the nocebo affect, this has been shows to be an issue with wifi.

[bob345]

1 minute ago, Lee L. said:

http://scientists4wiredtech.com/2018/07/firefighters-living-next-to-cell-towers-suffer-neurological-damage/

The only evidence there is purely speculative, there was no real science done. Had the same firefighters been farmers, blame would be placed on the pesticides they used. Again, causation does not equal correlation.

[Lee L.]

Because of smart fridges smart ovens smart chairs smart everything...... What ever happened to smart people lol. The lazyness just continues 

[Electronics Wizardy]

Just now, Lee L. said:

Because of smart fridges smart ovens smart chairs smart everything...... What ever happened to smart people lol. The lazyness just continues 

If we can design machines that will waste less of my time, I'm happy. More time to do what I want to be doing.

 

We have been making things more efficient for a long time, and computers are just continuing this trend.

[WereCatf]

2 minutes ago, Lee L. said:

If it wasn't a concern it wouldn't be broadcasted on major news platforms and people avidly speaking out against it.

"I see a lot of people saying vacciness cause autism, therefore it must be true!" -- yeah, no, that's not how it works. People have a tendency on jumping on bandwagons and generally the people with the least knowledge are also the loudest ones. It's absolutely fucking idiotic to rely on the frequency of people talking about as an indication of some claims' truthfulness.

[bob345]

1 minute ago, Lee L. said:

Because of smart fridges smart ovens smart chairs smart everything...... What ever happened to smart people lol. The lazyness just continues 

They are the ones that are out there inventing and engineering this technology. People that know what they are doing and have a passion for it. That's where the smart people are.