Understanding Types of Radiation
"Non-Ionizing" and "Ionizing" Radiation
Image Source: http://www.alive.com/
Note: The Frequency unit ”hertz(Hz)” represents the number of oscillations in a second, equal to the result obtained by dividing by wavelength the speed, 300,000 Kilometers per Second (km/s) at which an electromagnetic wave propagates.
Kilo-(k) =10^3, Mega-(M) = 10^6, ,Giga -(G) 10^9, Tera-(T)=10^12
Kilo-(k) =10^3, Mega-(M) = 10^6, ,Giga -(G) 10^9, Tera-(T)=10^12
The Concern about 5G
In telecommunications, 5G is the fifth-generation technology standard for broadband cellular networks, which cellular phone companies began deploying worldwide in 2019, and is the planned successor to the 4G networks which provide connectivity to most current cellphones. 5G technology is lauded by governments and industry worldwide as it will help wireless network support the demand for increasing data streaming and many game-changing innovations such as running smart cities, performing remote surgery, transformation towards driverless vehicles and other wide ranging applications.
Below is an excerpt taken from the 'The Scientific American' article
5G, eventually slated to replace present-day 3G and 4G cellular telephone networks, promises to speed up the rate of data transfer by 100 times or more, greatly reduce latency (time between receipt of a signal by a cellular base station and its response) and allow cellular networks to manage far more wireless-connected devices than presently possible. 5G, however, has become intensely controversial in many locations, with citizens' groups, and a few scientists, expressing concerns about the possible health effects of radio-frequency (RF) energy transmitted by 5G base stations. Public opposition appears to focus on two characteristics of 5G networks:
First, 5G systems will operate in several frequency bands, including one that is slightly below (and will eventually extend into) the millimeter-wave part of the RF spectrum that extends from 30 to 300 GHz. While millimeter waves have not heretofore been used for cellular communications, they have been used for many other applications, including airport security scanners, anticollision radar for automobiles, and to link present-day cellular base stations. Public discussions appear to conflate 5G with millimeter-wave communication. In fact, many 5G networks will operate at frequencies close to those used by present cellular networks, and some may use millimeter waves to handle high data traffic where needed.
Second, 5G systems will rely on a multitude of "small cells" mounted close to subscribers, often on utility poles running along public streets. These small cells will incorporate "smart" antennas that transmit multiple beams (up to 64 with present designs, eventually more), which can be independently steered to individual subscribers. They operate at much lower power levels than "macro" cells used by present systems, which are typically located on tops of buildings in urban areas.
In the long run, these will be supplemented by pico cells that are mounted inside buildings, operating at still lower power levels. The prospects of a dramatic increase in the number of sources transmitting RF signals is undoubtedly disquieting to many citizens, regardless of the actual health risks as understood by health agencies.
In fact in 2017, more than 200 doctors and scientists from various countries launched the, so-called 5G Appeal, that has since received more endorsements and whose mission statement starts with : “We the undersigned scientists and doctors(…), recommend a moratorium on the roll-out of the fifth generation, 5G, for telecommunication until potential hazards for human health and the environment have been fully investigated by scientists independent from industry.”
Below is an excerpt taken from the 'The Scientific American' article
5G, eventually slated to replace present-day 3G and 4G cellular telephone networks, promises to speed up the rate of data transfer by 100 times or more, greatly reduce latency (time between receipt of a signal by a cellular base station and its response) and allow cellular networks to manage far more wireless-connected devices than presently possible. 5G, however, has become intensely controversial in many locations, with citizens' groups, and a few scientists, expressing concerns about the possible health effects of radio-frequency (RF) energy transmitted by 5G base stations. Public opposition appears to focus on two characteristics of 5G networks:
First, 5G systems will operate in several frequency bands, including one that is slightly below (and will eventually extend into) the millimeter-wave part of the RF spectrum that extends from 30 to 300 GHz. While millimeter waves have not heretofore been used for cellular communications, they have been used for many other applications, including airport security scanners, anticollision radar for automobiles, and to link present-day cellular base stations. Public discussions appear to conflate 5G with millimeter-wave communication. In fact, many 5G networks will operate at frequencies close to those used by present cellular networks, and some may use millimeter waves to handle high data traffic where needed.
Second, 5G systems will rely on a multitude of "small cells" mounted close to subscribers, often on utility poles running along public streets. These small cells will incorporate "smart" antennas that transmit multiple beams (up to 64 with present designs, eventually more), which can be independently steered to individual subscribers. They operate at much lower power levels than "macro" cells used by present systems, which are typically located on tops of buildings in urban areas.
In the long run, these will be supplemented by pico cells that are mounted inside buildings, operating at still lower power levels. The prospects of a dramatic increase in the number of sources transmitting RF signals is undoubtedly disquieting to many citizens, regardless of the actual health risks as understood by health agencies.
In fact in 2017, more than 200 doctors and scientists from various countries launched the, so-called 5G Appeal, that has since received more endorsements and whose mission statement starts with : “We the undersigned scientists and doctors(…), recommend a moratorium on the roll-out of the fifth generation, 5G, for telecommunication until potential hazards for human health and the environment have been fully investigated by scientists independent from industry.”
Tracking 5G adoption around the world
You may be interested to know how 5G is being utilised in your city or country. Opensignal is an online app that tracks 5G rollouts around the world and aim to be the single source of truth on the true 5G experience users receive as adoption grows in markets around the world. The promise of 5G to revolutionize the mobile industry started years before the first commercial networks even launched. How much of the promise of 5G is reality now that the first commercial networks have begun rolling out? Opensignal seeks to answer that question, using real-world 5G measurements from actual users to reality-check the hype.
Click here to open the app.
Visual Map of 5G network globally
You may also be interested to visualise on a map how the 5G implementation has progressed in your city or country. The OOKLA 5G MAP™ is an interactive map that tracks 5G rollouts in cities across the globe. Updated weekly from verified public sources and Ookla data, you can follow operators' newest 5G networks on @Ookla5GMap.
Click here to open the app
Click here to open the app
OOKLA 5G MAP™ sreenshots below for a few selected countries. We suggest you go to your city, and zoom in further to explore where the 5G installations are.
5G Network across UK and Europe
5G Network across Australia
|
5G Network across US and Canada
5G Network across South Korea and Japan
|
Wireless Radiation from phones
Exposure to cell phone radiation occurs because cell phones emit radio frequencies (“RF”), a type of non-ionizing electromagnetic energy that falls between FM radio waves and microwaves on the spectrum. Cell phone radiation does not have the capacity to break chemical bonds in DNA, but studies have shown that it does affect brain activity and may have other serious side effects linked to certain types of cancers. The cell phone’s RF energy is measured by its Specific Absorption Rate (“SAR”), which calculates the average amount of cell phone radiation emitted by each model.
Dangers Of Cell Phone Radiation May Be UnderestimatedThe Federal Communications Commission (FCC) set the upper limit of a cellular phone’s SAR level to be 1.6 watts per kilogram. Although most mobile phone models are supposed to comply with the FCC requirement, a paper published in the Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine Journal on October 17, 2011 found that most SAR testing performed by the researchers in the cell phone industry underestimate the value of the SAR actually emitted. Regular cell phone users may be exposed to unsafe levels of cell phone radiation. Several flaws that were highlighted in the paper:
Read the full article here. |
Cellphone radiation linked to InfertilityNovember 9, 2009
Men who keep cell phones in a trouser pocket in the talk mode while using a Bluetooth device may experience decreased fertility, according to researchers. We found increased oxidative stress and a decrease in sperm motility,” said investigator Ashok Agarwal, PhD, Director of Reproductive Research at Cleveland Clinic in Ohio. Two studies from the Cleveland Clinic in the past three years have shown the harmful effects of cell phone-generated electromagnetic radiation on semen quality. In recent years more than a dozen studies have been published by other groups supporting Cleveland Clinic's find. Read the Full Article here. |
Professor Olle Johansson on WiFi and the damage on DNA
A comment from a viewer (ZAIZAIDevlin):
1, We have been using radio for more than 5 generations but we are still here?
2, What mechanisms are there due to non thermal effects from microwave exposure that can damage a DNA strand (or any other molecule what so ever)? And why is Olle not explaining these mechanisms in any detail?
I expect this to be consored by the admin... Olle was awarded a prominent price in 2004, Obscurantist of the Year, by his scientific peers."
Professor Olle Johannsson's response:
These are two very important issues, and I hereby try to answer them to the best of my capacity.
1. To begin with, radio has not been used for 5 human generations but in most countries only for one - or at most two - full generations. Actually, the radio and TV exposures of our populations have possibly left an unwanted mark on us. For instance, Dolk et al (1997) found that there was significant decline in skin and bladder cancer incidence among adults in England as distance from a frequency modulation (FM) broadcasting tower increased. In the second part of the study, these investigators reported a similar trend for individuals who lived various distances from FM and TV towers, but the effect was less pronounced than in the first study. Furthermore, cancer incidence has also been associated with proximity to television towers (Hocking et al. 1996). We have studied the incidence of melanoma which has been increasing steadily in many countries since 1960, but the underlying mechanism causing this increase remains elusive. The incidence of melanoma has been linked to the distance to frequency modulation (FM) broadcasting towers. Using exposure--time-specific incidence extracted from exposure and incidence data from 4 different countries, compared with reported age-specific incidence of melanoma, we could show a correlation between melanoma incidence and the number of locally receivable FM transmitters (Hallberg & Johansson 2002). Of course, further studies are needed to unfold the mechanisms and factors behind these observations.
2. When it comes to the mechanisms behind EMFs and their effects on various molecules, cells, tissue systems, organs and biological systems, including bacteria, plants, birds, mice, rats, etc., there is a wealth of yet completely established explanations, including effects on ionic channels, nitric oxide pathways, hormonal gateways, transmitter release and reuptake, apoptotic factors, calcium fluxes, immune-regulatory pathways, growth- and differentiation-related molecules, phosphorylation-dephosphorylation/cAMP/protein kinase A/DARPP-32, etc., and it would be very interesting to see these put to more scientific tests. Non-thermal effects are very common in biology and some of their mechanistic explanations have even been rewarded a Nobel Prize. When I and/or "ZaizaiDevlin" can explain the corresponding molecular events for the mechanisms relating to the current discussion about microwaves and health effects, then we may also come to meet His Majesty the King in Stockholm.
With my very best regards
Yours sincerely
Olle Johansson
(Olle Johansson
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden)
Source
1, We have been using radio for more than 5 generations but we are still here?
2, What mechanisms are there due to non thermal effects from microwave exposure that can damage a DNA strand (or any other molecule what so ever)? And why is Olle not explaining these mechanisms in any detail?
I expect this to be consored by the admin... Olle was awarded a prominent price in 2004, Obscurantist of the Year, by his scientific peers."
Professor Olle Johannsson's response:
These are two very important issues, and I hereby try to answer them to the best of my capacity.
1. To begin with, radio has not been used for 5 human generations but in most countries only for one - or at most two - full generations. Actually, the radio and TV exposures of our populations have possibly left an unwanted mark on us. For instance, Dolk et al (1997) found that there was significant decline in skin and bladder cancer incidence among adults in England as distance from a frequency modulation (FM) broadcasting tower increased. In the second part of the study, these investigators reported a similar trend for individuals who lived various distances from FM and TV towers, but the effect was less pronounced than in the first study. Furthermore, cancer incidence has also been associated with proximity to television towers (Hocking et al. 1996). We have studied the incidence of melanoma which has been increasing steadily in many countries since 1960, but the underlying mechanism causing this increase remains elusive. The incidence of melanoma has been linked to the distance to frequency modulation (FM) broadcasting towers. Using exposure--time-specific incidence extracted from exposure and incidence data from 4 different countries, compared with reported age-specific incidence of melanoma, we could show a correlation between melanoma incidence and the number of locally receivable FM transmitters (Hallberg & Johansson 2002). Of course, further studies are needed to unfold the mechanisms and factors behind these observations.
2. When it comes to the mechanisms behind EMFs and their effects on various molecules, cells, tissue systems, organs and biological systems, including bacteria, plants, birds, mice, rats, etc., there is a wealth of yet completely established explanations, including effects on ionic channels, nitric oxide pathways, hormonal gateways, transmitter release and reuptake, apoptotic factors, calcium fluxes, immune-regulatory pathways, growth- and differentiation-related molecules, phosphorylation-dephosphorylation/cAMP/protein kinase A/DARPP-32, etc., and it would be very interesting to see these put to more scientific tests. Non-thermal effects are very common in biology and some of their mechanistic explanations have even been rewarded a Nobel Prize. When I and/or "ZaizaiDevlin" can explain the corresponding molecular events for the mechanisms relating to the current discussion about microwaves and health effects, then we may also come to meet His Majesty the King in Stockholm.
With my very best regards
Yours sincerely
Olle Johansson
(Olle Johansson
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden)
Source
A Comprehensive Joint Report on the health effects of EMF
The BioInitiative Report is one of the most important joint reports on EMF affects on health, and on the inadequacy of present safety standards. This report has been written by an international group of scientists, researchers and public health policy professionals to document the scientific evidence on electromagnetic fields. This comprehensive report is the current prime document for evidence-based legislation related to tightened health and safety regulations.
In their 2007 report, the BioInitiative Report, concludes that the existing standards for public safety are completely inadequate to protect your health. The report includes studies showing evidence that electromagnetic fields:
In their 2007 report, the BioInitiative Report, concludes that the existing standards for public safety are completely inadequate to protect your health. The report includes studies showing evidence that electromagnetic fields:
- Affects gene and protein expression (Transcriptomic and Proteomic Research)
- Have Has genotoxic effects – RFR and ELF DNA damage
- Induces stress response (Stress Proteins)
- Affects immune function
- Affects Neurology and behavior
- Causes childhood cancers (Leukemia)
- Impacts melatonin production; Alzheimer’s Disease; Breast Cancer
- Promotes breast cancer (Melatonin links in laboratory and cell studies)
| bioinitiativereport2007-2012.pdf |
Exposure to power lines linked to cancer
August 24, 2007
An Australian study says living next to high-voltage power lines increases the risk of cancer.
Researchers from the University of Tasmania and Britain's Bristol University looked at a database of 850 patients in Tasmania diagnosed with lymphatic and bone marrow cancers between 1972 and 1980, and found that living for a prolonged period near high-voltage power lines may increase the risk of leukemia, lymphoma and related conditions later in life.
Those who lived within 328 yards of a power line up to age 5 were five times more likely to develop cancer, while those who lived that close to a power line at any point during their first 15 years were three times more likely to develop cancer as an adult, the newspaper said.
The study was published in the Internal Medicine Journal.
"The evidence of detrimental long-term health effects is far from conclusive, and international guidelines for limiting exposure to EMF are based on possible short-term effects rather than longer-term disease risks such as cancer," said Ray Lowenthal, a professor at the University of Tasmania.
Copyright 2007 by United Press International ;
source: phys.org
An Australian study says living next to high-voltage power lines increases the risk of cancer.
Researchers from the University of Tasmania and Britain's Bristol University looked at a database of 850 patients in Tasmania diagnosed with lymphatic and bone marrow cancers between 1972 and 1980, and found that living for a prolonged period near high-voltage power lines may increase the risk of leukemia, lymphoma and related conditions later in life.
Those who lived within 328 yards of a power line up to age 5 were five times more likely to develop cancer, while those who lived that close to a power line at any point during their first 15 years were three times more likely to develop cancer as an adult, the newspaper said.
The study was published in the Internal Medicine Journal.
"The evidence of detrimental long-term health effects is far from conclusive, and international guidelines for limiting exposure to EMF are based on possible short-term effects rather than longer-term disease risks such as cancer," said Ray Lowenthal, a professor at the University of Tasmania.
Copyright 2007 by United Press International ;
source: phys.org
