Comprehensive coverage

Who is afraid of generation five?

Antennas of the fifth generation cellular network (5G) have begun to go into operation around the world, and a tender for its deployment was recently published in Israel as well. What is the new network, which raises concerns about possible health effects among some researchers and the public, and is there really a reason for concern?

Neta Nissim, Zveta, news agency for science and the environment

Cellular antennas - the fifth generation. Illustration: Image by Ria Sopala from Pixabay
Cellular antennas - the fifth generation. Illustration: Image by Ria Sopala from Pixabay

For about two weeks from mid-October to the beginning of November 2018, an unusual event occurred in one of the parks in The Hague in the Netherlands: 350 starlings were found dead in the park, which caused panic among the residents. A host of explanations have been offered for the phenomenon, ranging from intentional or accidental poisoning to a genetic defect from which the birds suffered. But one of the theories, which gained momentum through websites and profiles of fans of contact theories on Facebook, turned in a completely different direction: an antenna of the new fifth generation (5G) cellular network was openly placed in the park area, and the conspiracy theory that was circulated was that a test of tools of the new network was the cause of the birds' deaths.

After several months, during which a postmortem was performed on those starlings at the Science Museum of Rotterdam, the true cause of their death became clear: toxins from the fruits of the Yew berries were found in the bodies of the birds, and it seems that they experienced a momentary disorientation in space or panic that caused them to crash to the ground. At the same time, it turned out that the post on Facebook was false: no trial of the new cellular network took place in the area at that time. However, the story reflects the concern and fear that has existed for years among the public when it comes to cellular antennas in general, and the new network in particular.

A fifth generation (5G) mobile network has recently been activated in several UK cities and has led to questions about possible health effects of the new technology. As of the beginning of 2018, there were already 113 5G network providers in 56 countries. In countries such as South Korea, the USA, Canada, England, China and the Netherlands, they have begun preparations for its implementation, and in some of them even the deployment of 5G networks, and formulated work plans to realize this goal. According to estimates, 2020 is expected to be the year of the network's big breakthrough, and by 2024 almost 1.9 billion people will use it.

In Israel, the Ministry of Communications is responsible for publishing the tender for the allocation of frequencies intended for the provision of services in the fifth generation alongside the allocation of additional frequencies in the fourth generation. Fourth generation networks are still being deployed in Israel, but the Ministry of Communications is already preparing to lay infrastructure for the fifth generation. Last July, the ministry publicly announced the tender, and according to the current schedule, the fifth generation network will be launched in Israel in 2020, and the winning operators will complete the retirement of the network within four years.

Ten times higher frequencies and more

The fifth generation of cellular networks, or 5G for short, is the next generation of cellular communication that will expand the fourth network (known in Israel as LTE) and its predecessors. Many are crowning the fifth generation as the basis for the next technological revolution.

Similar to previous cellular technologies, 5G networks rely on signals carried by radio waves - part of the electromagnetic spectrum - transmitted between the antenna and the mobile phone. The uniqueness of 5G is the use of higher frequencies than previous cellular networks, which allows more devices to access the Internet at the same time and at a higher speed. Because the waves travel shorter distances in built-up urban space, G5 networks require more antennas and transmitters located closer to ground level than with less advanced technologies.

According to Hadas Vegman, the professional director of the Tanuda Center, a national knowledge center for the effect of non-ionizing radiation on health, "The fifth cellular generation is designed to enable technological solutions to improve the existing capabilities of smart phones and to support the Internet through performance improvements. The main differences between the fifth cellular generation and the current generations (mainly the fourth) are in the operating frequencies, the fifth generation will operate near the frequencies of the current generations (approximately 900, 1800, 2100, 2600 MHz), and in addition at frequencies ten times higher and more. These are short waves with a length of several millimeters, and the radiation at these frequencies has a relatively small penetration depth into the human body."

She further adds that "Another communication technology that will distinguish the fifth generation is Massive MIMO (Multiple In/Multiple Out) technology - multiple input and multiple output. Each mobile site will be able to communicate with many users at the same time, in transmission and reception, and thus will be able to support Internet of Things - IoT systems that enable the ability to connect many 'smart objects' on the Internet designed for remote information collection, information analysis and management." The intention is a network that will support the simultaneous connectivity of "smart" objects such as cars, security cameras, parking lots, etc., in what will make the entire space "smart" and will be a significant technological leap forward. The deployment of the network is also expected to have positive indirect benefits, such as the activation of smart city infrastructure in cities, which will shorten travel times (synchronization of traffic lights) and promote autonomous transportation in a way that is expected to reduce air pollution in metropolitan areas, as well as educational and scientific benefits due to improved access and accessibility to information.

The consequences are still unclear

smart city Illustration: shutterstock
smart city Illustration: shutterstock

Despite the obvious technological upgrade brought about by the new network, questions also arise regarding possible health effects associated with placing a large number of cellular antennas in a populated area. The main concern among those who oppose the placement of the antennas is the exposure to non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation (the type of radiation emitted by antennas and cellular devices as well as WiFi radiation and electrical devices and infrastructures), which is used by all mobile phone technologies. Opponents of the new technology make a variety of claims that are mostly not supported by research, regarding the effect of exposure to this type of radiation and its connection to various health risks. As the story of the birds in the Netherlands well demonstrates, the fear of the new technology is already fueling various conspiracy theories today.

According to Wagman, "Many different studies are being conducted around the world trying to check whether non-ionizing radiation has an effect on the health of animals and humans and whether it can cause harm. The studies examine the entire range of non-ionizing radiation frequencies, from low to very high frequencies. The scientists also study a wide range of health outcomes such as cancer, degenerative diseases, behavioral changes and the effect on fertility and aging.

"As for the effects of unsorted radiation on health," she explains. "Non-ionizing radiation can react with biological tissue through a variety of mechanisms. The energy level of non-ionizing radiation is not high enough to cause the dissolution of bonds between atoms and molecules within the cells of the body and therefore, as far as we know today, non-ionizing radiation is not able to directly damage the hereditary material (DNA) inside the cell. At the same time, there may be a biological effect that works through other mechanisms.

"All the professional bodies currently involved in the field focus on two major effects of non-ionizing radiation on human health," she continues and explains, "a thermal effect when the tissues in the body are heated by radiation, and a non-thermal effect that is not related to the heating effect but to another change caused to the tissue by The frequency, the wavelength, the height of the wave and the electric or magnetic field. The issue of non-thermal effects is being examined to this day and does not have an unequivocal answer."

In 2014, the World Health Organization declared that "no negative health effects have been proven as a result of the use of mobile phones". However, the World Health Organization together with the International Agency for Research on Cancer have classified all radio frequency radiation (radiation emitted from mobile phones and antennas, including the 5G network) in group B2 - "possible carcinogen to humans". The reason for classifying the frequencies in this category is that there is certain and limited evidence , but which are not sufficient to link exposure to this type of radiation to cancer in humans or animals, there is no proof of a causal relationship between the two and no mechanism of effect has been found. It should be noted that eating pickled vegetables and using talcum powder are also defined as having the same level of risk (B2Group ), while processed meat is defined at a higher level of risk (Group 2A) - "factors known to be probable carcinogens in humans". Consumption of ethanol in alcoholic beverages is defined at the highest level of risk - "probably carcinogenic to humans" alongside exposure to asbestos and formalin (Group 1).

On the other side of the barrier, there are scientists from a variety of research fields who believe that there is indeed a real danger in using the 5G network. In a recently published petition, hundreds of doctors and scientists from various fields of research call on the European Union institutions to appoint an independent committee to examine the health hazards of the new network deployment. "Electromagnetic radiation at these frequencies has the potential to pose a risk to humans," they write, "and the fifth generation network will significantly increase exposure to this radiation."

According to Prof. Hagai Levin, head of the health and environment track at the School of Public Health of the Hebrew University and Hadassah, "The issue is indeed complicated. It is not yet scientifically clear to us what the consequences of the cellular network are on our health and the environment. What does worry me as a public health specialist are the immediate effects of deploying a network of this magnitude. One of the points that arise is an increase in electricity consumption and the number of network users when the capacity of each cellular antenna increases, and the environmental implications derived from this, such as an increase in resource consumption and air pollution, and the routing of areas in favor of the location of the antennas. The second point is the social consequences of the availability of the network connection among the public. Already today we are aware that the technological development harms the communication between us and creates loneliness, and this has worrying consequences".

The question of health damage has not yet been decided

"As far as the assessment of exposure in 5th generation technology is concerned, this is a complex issue and one must take into account all the aspects related to the characteristics of the technology that are unique compared to the previous generations", concludes Wagman. "There is difficulty in assessing the health effects of exposure to this radiation for several reasons; Firstly, the question of health damage has not yet been decided, and secondly, this technology is not yet widely used and there is no exposure of the general public to radiation at these frequencies. Accordingly, there is almost no knowledge on the subject of exposure's consequences on human health, and studies are required in the field, under laboratory conditions as well as population studies."

"In Israel, the Ministry of Communications is responsible for announcing the tender and starting the assimilation of the network," concludes Levin. "Currently the problem is that there is no reference to the health and environmental effects of the project. If a percentage of the funds invested in the project is taken and consciously allocated to examining the health, social and environmental effects, we will be able to better understand what the consequences of the 5G network are and public concern will be reduced."

The Ministry of Environmental Protection stated in response:

"The ministry relies on the position of the World Health Organization and the Ministry of Health, a position based on many years of research. The threshold values ​​recommended by the World Health Organization also cover the range of frequencies that will be used in generation 5. The Ministry of Environmental Protection has set much stricter exposure thresholds in relation to the recommendations of the World Health Organization. The Ministry approves the construction and operation of each specific antenna with reference to the exposure thresholds and with reference to the specific environment of each antenna, including the existence of additional transmission centers. The Ministry of Communications consults with a joint work team for the Ministry of Environmental Protection, the Ministry of Health and the Local Government Center.

The Ministry of Environmental Protection sees the deployment of 5th generation infrastructure as an essential means of reducing exposure to radiation, when the use of the transmission centers will be in accordance with the limits set by the radiation supervisor in the ministry. This technology is more efficient than the previous generations in the use of the broadcasting providers, and will allow a higher browsing speed and a large number of users at the same time.

These criteria, along with a wider intra-structural deployment and the use of antennas that use this technology, will significantly reduce the exposure to radiation, which will be significantly lower than the threshold recommended by the World Health Organization."

The Ministry of Health responded: "The director general of the ministry forwarded to the director general of the Ministry of Communications a letter detailing the ministry's position on the matter, in which it was recommended, among other things, to establish an inter-ministerial committee with the participation of representatives of the relevant ministries. As far as coordinating between the ministries and holding a public discussion on the issue is concerned, one should contact the party responsible for publishing the tender, i.e. the Ministry of Communications."

The Ministry of Communications stated in response: "Although the health aspects are not defined within the scope of activity of the Tenders Committee, to the best of our knowledge, which we rely on the authorized factors in the Ministry of Environmental Protection, the transition to the use of advanced technologies based on the 5th generation will lead to a decrease in risks from radiation. Moreover, a joint team of the ministries of communications, health, environmental protection and the planning administration began to examine the changes that would be required in this area for the establishment of infrastructures for the fifth generation, including in matters of radiation risks.

21 תגובות

  1. Personally, I'm crazy about the picture where there are lots of windmills and antennas and everything around them looks dead, even though the earth is supposed to be healthier and the sky is brighter because windmills produce green energy with pollution that strives for zero and C radiation does not affect the vegetation or the appearance of the sky Nasty clickbait

  2. I'm not in the field but it seems to me that the 5th generation under the auspices of the Corona are coming together, one big lie with confidentiality for 30 years and then we'll see the consequences.

  3. moment. The use of transportation fuels for industry and electricity is not dangerous for us, maybe even much more than 5th generation radiation? So what are we giving up? At least the radiation does not break down the ozone, which is surely many times more dangerous. Is the atom for energy and military not dangerous? So what is no use for the atom. Enough with the hypocrisy.

  4. Ask the world's population about:

    Is it good to smoke?
    1600: Wonderful, a pipe symbolizes Indian peace!
    1900: Excellent
    1970: Don't know
    1980: from cancer

    Is oil good for humanity?
    1900: Excellent
    1970: Don't know
    1980: Air pollution, ozone hole, global warming

    Cell Phone?
    1980: Great!, a technological breakthrough
    1985: Don't know
    1990: radiation that causes cancer,
    2000: ADHD, increased death of bees...

    bra?
    1900: the invention of the century!
    2022: Don't know
    2030: Breast cancer

    G5
    2018: A technological breakthrough
    2020: Don't know…

    (Note: the named years have not been scientifically verified, for illustration only)

  5. Each radiation brings a level of damage compared to the environment without radiation.
    5G probably brings less transmission power when it comes to a single transmitter and occasional exposure, but each antenna will contain dozens of transmitters and in 5G the estimates are that they will install 10 times (!!) more antennas than in 4G to get effective coverage (related to the low power of the transmission "which" should make it difficult to pass through walls and should not be able to penetrate the skin of our body).
    But, as stated in previous responses, the installation of 5G should be added to the existing 3G/4G/2G infrastructure and increase the amount of radiation in the air.
    In addition, when we sit at home or at work or at school for hours, it must be assumed that even if it is radiation of a lower intensity, there will be cumulative damage.
    By the way, there is an assumption in the telecom market that 4G will continue to live for many more years and 5G will be used mainly for a stationary connection of Internet access and for all the new services (autonomous cars, IOT, etc.) while normal telephony will continue mainly with the help of 4G/LTE

  6. The fact that the writer begins by spouting delusional conspiracy theories that have nothing to do with the real dangers that many scientists in the world warn about on the basis of thousands of scientific studies proves that the article is sponsored.

    Recommended article for those who want to read something more serious:
    https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/we-have-no-reason-to-believe-5g-is-safe/

    In general, what is written there is that there are hundreds of studies that show damage and growth from the previous versions of the diesel. Almost no research was done on the G5 at all. So anyone who says there is evidence one way or the other is lying. What is shocking is that the public is going to be the guinea pig. There is a chance that it could harm the skin, eyes and testicles.. We'll just find out after they install it if it's a real risk or not. Thank you all for participating in the experiment.

  7. to an anonymous user
    You are right that the energy of a photon is directly related to the frequency. So presumably a 10 times higher frequency means 10 times higher energy per photon. But you forget that it is still several orders of magnitude lower than visible light, even much less than red light. According to what you say visible light should be much more than cancer. Or even radiation coming out of a heater.
    Nor does fifth generation use ionizing radiation. Radiation to ionize should be from the other side of the visible spectrum ie ultraviolet and beyond.
    Absolutely no one has yet shown a mechanism by which non-ionizing radiation at such a low intensity can harm the body (of course, at psychic powers even ordinary light can be harmful, for example to a blind person, and this is still not a reason to stop using flashlights)
    The matter of economic interest is indeed a point of healthy suspicion, but economic interest in itself cannot be proof that something is harmful. What's more, there are quite a few who have opposite interests. For example, an entire industry of radiation testing, the oil and automobile industry that spread fake studies about non-ionizing radiation in electric vehicles, investments by the Russian government in propaganda against 5G in America (surely it does not concern the health of Americans)

  8. The consequences are clear to those with eyes in their head.
    The energy of a photon is h*w the amount of energy that comes out of the transmitter as w is the transmission frequency and h is Planck's normalized constant.
    Transmission at a 10 times higher frequency means 10 times higher energy. I am no longer sure that it is not ionizing according to the FCNIRP medical standard. Let's assume for a moment not. The meaning of this is that an electron is not released from the atom in the nucleus of the cell. But such a field strength is enough to move different parts of the cell at different speeds - and cause a mutation. Even 50 hertz can do it so 10 gigahertz (10 to the power of 10, that's 200 million times more powerful particle energy fired at our bodies. Bullets.
    The only reason the consequences are not clear is research funds that are awarded by cell phone companies to those conducting the research.
    Any topic that was not biased by money capital would have long been said to be dangerous.
    The Ministry of the Environment has issued a regulation that requires the installation of a non-cellular modem in meters. A Knesset committee from 2018 froze the purchase of cellular meters.

  9. The consequences are clear to those with eyes in their head.
    The energy of a photon is h*w the amount of energy that comes out of the transmitter as w is the transmission frequency and h is Planck's normalized constant.
    Transmission at a 10 times higher frequency means 10 times higher energy. I am no longer sure that it is not ionizing according to the FCNIRP medical standard. Let's assume for a moment not. The meaning of this is that an electron is not released from the atom in the nucleus of the cell. But such a field strength is enough to move different parts of the cell at different speeds - and cause a mutation. Even 50 hertz can do it so 10 gigahertz (10 to the power of 10, that's 200 million times more powerful particle energy fired at our bodies. Bullets.
    The only reason the consequences are not clear is research funds that are awarded by cell phone companies to those conducting the research.
    Any topic that was not biased by money capital would have long been said to be dangerous.
    The Ministry of the Environment has issued a regulation that requires the installation of a non-cellular modem in meters. A Knesset committee from 2018 froze the purchase of cellular meters.

  10. Givatayim Institute of Science, I would be happy to receive references to research that proves with certainty that microwave radiation causes cancer.

  11. What nonsense people write in the comments.
    Even in the fourth generation the antennas are directional. And even if the waves are shorter they are still many orders of magnitude longer than visible light.
    Causing pain or heating requires enormous intensities,
    Much more than such an antenna is capable of producing, in fact these antennas will transmit weaker.
    It is clear that a sufficiently strong intensity of any radiation, even visible light, can cause damage.
    But it's like demanding that all the streetlights be turned off because their light is dangerous, for evidence that if you increase their light a thousand times it causes irreversible blindness immediately. It follows that a street lamp is dangerous

  12. demagogy.

    More than 20000 articles have shown a connection between non-ionizing radiation and a host of physiological problems.
    The above article is more propaganda than a scientific article. The way is very sophisticated, a link between the opponents to conspiracy theories, backing from large institutions that sound authoritative (and in practice do not act as required in the face of crimes against humanity) and worst of all, the presentation of the literature in a distorted way.

    A day will come and this omission will be exposed, and then the "scientists" and "journalists" who participated in the propaganda will find themselves in a situation similar to the one that befell the psychiatrists and anthropologists in Germany after World War II.

  13. The article exhausts the subject. The high frequency enables fast data reception from many devices. The problem is doubling and tripling the antennas. In a word, we will be the guinea pigs. And only another 20 years. We will know the truth. My guess is that it's a little more dangerous, but that's the price of introduction.

  14. I don't understand why to start an article that claims to be objective and balanced with a delusional story about birds, which is not relevant and is not the main reason for the opposition to the 5th generation.
    Also incomprehensible is the statement that although radiation is considered a possible carcinogen, but in one breath other products are included. Talc and pickled vegetables I can choose whether to consume, the same with processed meat and alcohol. 5th generation antennas are forcibly installed, broadcast 24 hours a day, and more and more end devices are added every day. I mean, the fact that I choose not to use wireless products helps me less and less every day because of the environmental radiation pollution that is on the rise.
    The talk of the government ministries about a decrease in the level of radiation in the 5th generation does not make sense, after all it is actually about the deployment of more antennas in addition to the 4th and 3rd generations that are deployed today. That is, more radiation broadcast 24 hours a day, not to mention all the new radiating inventions that will come and more bandwidth in use, meaning more consumption and more radiation. Why can't the government ministries, which are supposed to protect public health, educate to reduce use and exposure - especially in young populations? This is a possible carcinogen, why not emphasize the dangers and reduce the use, instead of talking to the cell phone companies?

  15. Unlike the 4th generation and its predecessors, the 5th generation works with the help of millimeter waves, i.e. microwaves. This technology was taken from a military means of dispersing demonstrations with the help of painful shock waves that is applied around the world. In the bottom line, this is a technology that is not intended for civilian use, illegal, immoral and of course carcinogenic for sure.

  16. The problem with the fifth hole is that the antenna has the possibility to control the direction of the cellular energy (beam forming) and this means that in the sixth case a malfunction or something breaks in and takes over the antenna. The antenna can concentrate energy at a certain point for a long time and cause damage. To verify that there is direction in the fourth generation

Leave a Reply

Email will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismat to prevent spam messages. Click here to learn how your response data is processed.