Is 5G Dangerous?

It appears that 5G has become the most sensational topic in terms of conspiracy theories, in line with anti-vaccination campaigns. There is also considerable funding available to these groups, which begs the question on the motives of the people behind them. The mobile market and the value chain should be more open to dispel these arguments and prove that 5G is safer than previous generations and will introduce exponentially more benefits for consumers and businesses alike.

There are public Internet groups (the most prominent of which is Stop5G, founded by a UFO enthusiast) that discuss the health concerns regarding 5G and even discuss how to destroy cellular sites and poles.

The most prominent arguments to support these claims stem from mainly two arguments:

• 5G uses Millimeter Wave (mmWave) frequencies, ranging from 24-60GHz. These frequencies require directional beams for communication between the cellular base station and the mobile phone, contrary to previous generations where omnidirectional antennas were used at cell sites. Critics compare mmWave 5G to military heat ray, or Active Denial System (ADS), weapons.
• The use of mmWave requires hundreds—if not thousands—of small cells in addition to previous base stations. Critics claim that the radiation from these small cells will be detrimental to health and the environment.

These two claims contradict each other, since mmWave beams need to be highly directional and will not “pollute” the entire environment. Moreover, the link between a mmWave base station and a user terminal requires line-of-sight; if it is blocked by any obstruction (e.g., a human head, foliage, heavy rain), it will fail, and the base station will stop transmitting to the device. These mmWave networks are still in their infancy, and certainly adhere to local, state, and country regulations regarding electromagnetic radiation, all of which are stringent and take health effects into account. Moreover, there are sound facts that need to be considered with 5G network design and technology:

1. 5G will predominantly be driven by sub-6GHz deployments worldwide, most of which will be in the bands around 3.5GHz. These are neither mmWave nor require hundreds of new small cells to operate. Mobile service providers are focusing on reusing existing macro cellular base stations instead of installing new cell sites. Moreover, these sub-6GHz deployments will use spectrum similar to current mobile networks and WiFi.
2. mmWave uses highly directional beams with a very strict link budget, meaning that there is no room for obstructions between the two antennas. This is why handset manufacturers include multiple antennas on smartphones that need to take into account hand and head blocking. If either of these obstruct the radio propagation channel, the communication link is interrupted, stopped, and transferred to another antenna.
3. Radio frequencies, including mmWave, are non-ionizing radiation and mmWave signals cannot even penetrate the human body beyond the epidermis and skin. The standard unit of measure is called Specific Absorption Rate (SAR), which describes the rate at which energy is absorbed by the skin when exposed to electromagnetic radiation. The U.S. limit, mandated by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), is 1.6 W/kg and in Europe, the limit is 2 W/kg. All mobile devices adhere to these regulations, otherwise they are not allowed in any market. Radio spectrum is very far from the dangerous ionizing radiation frequencies, which start at 430 THz.

Several publications have claimed that 2G, 3G, 4G, and even 5G signals are not harmful to humans or the environment and recent studies have shown no effects on either. The World Health Organization (WHO) claims that “A large number of studies have been performed over the last two decades to assess whether mobile phones pose a potential health risk. To date, no adverse health effects have been established as being caused by mobile phone use.” Moreover, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) agency reports that “current safety limits are set to include a 50-fold safety margin from observed effects of radiofrequency energy exposure”.

Some of the studies that claim mobile radiation is harmful to humans are inconclusive, and critics only cite specific parts that suit their narrative. For example, a National Toxicology Study is frequently cited by skeptics who claim that mobile signals have increased cancer rates by as much as 3% in test rats compared to the control rat group. However, this very same study reports the following:

• At the end of the two-year study, survival rates for the control group rats were lower. In other words, the rats that were radiated lived longer on average.
• Radiation for this study was at 1.5 W/kg, 3 W/kg, and 6 W/kg, with the latter two being significantly higher than the global regulated limit.
• The increased cancer rates only appeared in male rats. The increase in female rats was 1%.

This study, and many more, cannot be regarded as proof that mobile signals increase cancer rates. The very same conclusion can be drawn about 5G, which will radiate less energy and be very focused on avoiding humans and any other obstructions.

Despite public skepticism against 5G, it will actually be the stringent Electromagnetic Field (EMF) restrictions that are present in many countries that will likely delay 5G rollouts considerably. For example, the Italian Regulatory Authority for Energy, Networks and Environment (ARERA) has mandated very strict limits for radio frequency radiation and, according to a recent study, 62% of existing sites in Italy will not be capable of supporting 5G due to having already exhausted their maximum transmitted power quotas. Mobile service providers in Italy—and many other markets—will need to either switch off a previous generation or reduce power in all generations to accommodate 5G. Furthermore, in some historial cities and city centres, EMF restrictions are even more stringent. At the end of the day, public skepticism can be managed when the public is educated about the nature and scientific facts behind 5G. However, it is unlikely that regulators will relax EMF limits, meaning that regulation will actually be the bottleneck for 5G deployments, especially in Europe.