5G’s health risks, myth or real fears?

Recently, the Nigerian government was forced to clarify that it had not issued any licence for 5G deployment after thousands of its citizens took to social media to express their views on allegations that the government was laying 5G cables across the country while people stayed in-doors.

A variant of the public conversation was that 5G radiation could be responsible for the coronavirus pandemic. But Ali Isa Pantami, Minister of Communication and Digital Economy dismissed the connection in a recent interview with Channels Television.

“When it comes to health, we have (the) World Health Organisation and many health bodies,” Pantami said. “I just want you to bring out any research which they have conducted and (in which they) made their position about 5G’s relationship with COVID-19. I am yet to see anyone from the World Health Organisation.”

While the link to coronavirus may be unfounded and a bit exaggerated, there are real fears that people’s health could be at risk in a 5G world. Some of those fears have seen protesters burn down cell towers in the UK and the Netherlands.

It has also led to petitions from scientists and doctors for greater health protection on non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF).

As of October 15, 2019, over 240 scientists and doctors from 43 countries have signed an appeal to the officials of the European Commission, warning about the danger of 5G networks, which they said will lead to a massive increase in involuntary exposure to electromagnetic radiation.

In the appeal, the scientists urged the EU to follow Resolution 1815 of the Council of Europe, asking for an independent task force to reassess the health effects.

“Wireless communication technologies are rapidly becoming an integral part of every economic sector. But there is a rapidly growing body of scientific evidence of harm to people, plants, animals, and microbes caused by exposure to these technologies. It is our opinion that adverse health consequences of chronic and involuntary exposure of people to non-ionizing electromagnetic field sources are being ignored by national and international health organizations despite our repeated inquiries as well as inquiries made by many other concerned scientists, medical doctors, and advocates,” the EMF Scientists wrote.

What is 5G?

5G refers to the fifth generation of mobile networks. Unlike previous generations, 5G is expected to elevate the mobile network to not only interconnect people, but also interconnect and control machines, objects, and devices.

It is also expected to deliver new levels of performance and efficiency that will empower new user experiences and connect new industries. 5G will deliver multi-Gbps peak rates, ultra-low latency, massive capacity, and a more uniform user experience.

5G operates on three spectrum bands, low-band spectrum; mid-band spectrum; and high-band spectrum.

 

The health debates

The fulcrum of the 5G debates has to do with radiofrequency radiation (RFR). RFR describes anything emitted in the electromagnetic spectrum, from microwaves to x-rays to radio waves to light from your monitor or light from the sun. To know whether a particular RFR is dangerous, scientists identify two categories, ionizing or non-ionizing radiation. Non-ionizing is a radiation that is too weak to break chemical bonds. That includes ultraviolet, visible light, infrared, and everything with a lower frequency, like radio waves.

5G would employ millimeter waves for the first time in addition to microwaves that have been in use for older cellular technologies, 2G through 4G. In view of its limited reach, 5G will require cell antennas every 100 to 200 meters, exposing many people to millimeter-wave radiation. 5G also employs new technologies (e.g., active antennas capable of beam-forming; phased arrays; massive multiple inputs and outputs, known as massive MIMO) which pose unique challenges for measuring exposures.

However, Simon Clarke, associate professor in cellular microbiology at the University of Reading, told the BBC on Sunday that while very strong waves can cause heating, 5G is nowhere near strong enough to have any meaningful effect.

“Radio waves can disrupt your physiology as they heat you up, meaning your immune system can’t function. But [the energy levels from] 5G radio waves are tiny and they are nowhere near strong enough to affect the immune system. There have been lots of studies on this,” he said. Nonetheless, there are still concerns that the effects of millimeter-wave signals from 5G might be more dangerous than traditional frequencies; and that the larger number of access points, some potentially much closer to people’s homes, might expose people to more radiation than 5G services.

A report from Wired which alludes to these concerns says the wireless industry is focused on using mid- and low-band frequencies for 5G because deploying a massive number of millimeter-wave access points will be time-consuming and expensive. In essence, 5G will continue using the same radio frequencies that have been used for decades for broadcast radio and television, satellite communications, mobile services, WiFi and Bluetooth.

In any event, the industry opts to use higher-band frequencies, a report by Cornell University says that at higher radio frequencies, the skin acts as a barrier, shielding the internal organs, including the brain, from exposure. Human skin blocks the even higher frequencies of sunlight, they said.

Are these sufficient enough for Nigeria to declare 5G safe for Nigerians?

Dave Johnson, the author of three books on technology and a vocal advocate for 5G, acknowledges that just because there is no known mechanism for non-ionizing radiation to have a biological effect, that doesn’t mean the technology is safe or that no effect exists.

“Indeed, researchers continue to conduct studies,” he wrote.

Joel M. Moskowitz, director of the Center for Family and Community Health in the School of Public Health at the University of California, Berkeley, writing in the Scientific American, suggested that 5G is a new technology, hence requires comprehensive research on health effects.

“So we are “flying blind” to quote a U.S. senator. However, we have considerable evidence about the harmful effects of 2G and 3G. Little is known about the effects of exposure to 4G, a 10-year-old technology because governments have been remiss in funding this research. Meanwhile, we are seeing increases in certain types of head and neck tumors in tumor registries, which may be at least partially attributable to the proliferation of cell phone radiation,” he wrote.