5G technology: Is it bad for our health?

5G technology: Is it bad for our health? Why do some people believe that 5G technology may bad for our health?

• 5G refers to the fifth generation of mobile technology, With promises of faster Streaming,browsing and download speeds, as well as better connectivity when compare to 4G,many people still thing that 5G Technology is bad for our health.
• This new 5G technology may seem like a natural evolution for our increasingly tech-dependent society’s.
• Many government authorities and groups advise that there is no need to be concerned about the impact of radiofrequency waves on human health as 5G wireless technology quietly spreads around the globe.
• Some experts, though, vehemently disagree and claim 5G technology Is it bad for our health.

The fifth generation of mobile technology is referred to as 5G. 5G may seem like a logical step for our culture that is becoming more and more dependent on technology because of its promises of quicker browsing, streaming, and download speeds as well as greater connectivity.

Why 5G technology: Is it bad for our health?

• But 5G has been developed to enhance capacity and decrease latency, which is the amount of time it takes for devices to interact with each other, in addition to enabling us to stream the newest movies.
• These adjustments will have a significant impact on how quickly we integrate technology into our daily lives for integrated applications like robotics, self-driving cars, and medical gadgets.

• The usage of higher-frequency bandwidths throughout the electromagnetic spectrum will be the cornerstone of 5G technology, that the reason most of scientist are concern about 5G technology and its bad for our health?
• The Federal Communications Commission of the United States has put up for auction the first bandwidth, 28 gigahertz (GHz), that will make up the 5G network, with larger bandwidth auctions planned for later this year.

5G mobile networks and health-Is 5G Making You Sick?

This Spotlight examines electromagnetic radiation, including what it is, how it affects human health, the debate over radiofrequency networks, and what it implies for the development of 5G technology.

What is electromagnetic radiation?

• An electromagnetic field (EMF) is a field of energy that results from electromagnetic radiation, a form of energy that occurs as a result of the flow of electricity
• Electric field exist wherever there are power lines or outlets, whether the electricity is switched on or not. Magnetic fields are created only when electric currents flow together, these produce EMFs.

• Electromagnetic radiation exists as a spectrum of different wavelengths and frequencies, which are measured in hertz (Hz). This term denotes the number of cycles per second.
• The lower end of the frequency range, between 50 and 60 Hz, is where power lines operate. These low-frequency waves, which extend into the megahertz (MHz), GHz, and terahertz spectra, along with radio waves, microwaves, infrared radiation, visible light, and some ultraviolet wavelengths, are collectively referred to as nonionizing radiation.

• The petahertz and exahertz spectra, which comprise X-rays and gamma rays, are located above this. These are ionising radiation kinds, which means they have enough energy to disintegrate molecules and seriously harm living things.
• The main sources of RF-EMF exposure for the general population include handheld devices like cell phones and tablets, as well as cell phone base stations, medical devices, and TV antennas.
• The biological impact of RF-EMFs that has the greatest evidence is employing High dosages of RF-EMFs can cause the tissues that are exposed to heat up, which can result in burns and other types of harm.
• But RF-EMF emissions from mobile devices are very modest. The introduction of 5G has rekindled the discussion over whether this is a reason for concern.

Radiofrequency waves ‘possibly carcinogenic to humans’

• In order to evaluate the possibility of acquiring cancer as a result of exposure to RF-EMFs, 30 worldwide scientists who are a part of the working group of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) gathered in 2011.

• The Trusted Source published a summary of the working group’s findings.
• One cohort study and five case-control studies in people were examined by the researchers to see if there was a connection between cell phone use and glioma, a kind of brain cancer.
• Based on the best available research, the team came to the conclusion that “A causal interpretation between mobile phone RF-EMF exposure and glioma is plausible.”
• Smaller investigations for acoustic neuroma suggested a similar finding, although the evidence was insufficient for other types of cancer.
• Additionally, the group reviewed more than 40 research that had utilised mice and rats.
• The working group designated RF-EMFs as “probably carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B)” due to the scant data in people and experimental animals.

• The authors state in the study that “a substantial majority of working group members supported this evaluation.”
• For instance, Group 2B also includes progesterone-only contraceptives, oxazepam, and sulfasalazine, as well as whole leaf aloe vera extract, gasoline exhaust emissions, and pickled vegetables.

WHO says ‘no adverse health effects’

Although RF-EMFs have been labelled as potentially cancer-causing to humans, other organisations have not reached the same conclusion.

Part of the World Health Organization is the IARC (WHO). A separate “health risk assessment of [RF-EMFs]” is being conducted by the WHO, nevertheless, and will be published as a monograph in the Environmental Health Criteria series.

The International EMF Project claims that

• An advisory body that represents eight international organisations, eight independent scientific institutes, and more than 50 national governments oversees the initiative and offers a worldwide viewpoint.
• The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection collaborates with scientists on this research (ICNIRP). The WHO Secretariat oversees and coordinates all activities.The project’s findings have not yet been made public.

• According to the WHO, “No detrimental health effects from low level, long-term exposure to radiofrequency or power frequency fields have been documented to date, although experts are actively continuing to explore this topic.
• “According to the Federal Communications Commission in the United States, “the evidence for generation of deleterious biological consequences is equivocal and unproven at relatively low levels of exposure to RF radiation, i.e., levels lower than those that would create considerable heating.”

5G and Cancer Risk /What do the latest studies say about cancer risk?

1. The author continues, “Biological impacts have also been observed at exposure levels below the legal limits, raising concerns about the true safety of the currently in use ICNIRP standards.
2. In order to better and thoroughly examine the health effects on humans induced by exposure to general or specialised RF-EMF frequencies in different age groups and with increasing exposure density, more experimental and epidemiologic investigations are urgently required.

1. “Two of the most recent studies that looked into whether RF-EMFs can induce cancer in rats and mice were published by the ICNIRP.High exposure levels at 900 MHz were examined in a National Toxicology Program research by the US Department of Health and Human Services.
2. The researchers discovered “clear evidence of cancers in male rats’ hearts,” “some evidence of malignancies in male rats’ brains,” and “some evidence of tumours in male rats’ adrenal glands.”

Moving from 4G to 5G technology: Is it bad for our health?

Although its effects may be systemic, higher frequency (shorter wavelength) radiation linked with 5G does not permeate the body as deeply as frequencies from older technologies, the authors write.

1. “Although significant biological results have been linked to millimeter-wavelength radiation, the scope and size of the prospective effects of 5G technologies have not received enough attention.
2. The authors go on to list oxidative stress, altered gene expression, skin-related impacts, and systemic consequences, such as on immunological function.
3. The team makes a number of recommendations, including more thorough testing and data gathering to uncover linkages between RF-EMF exposure and health outcomes, disseminating information to users about health risks, and restricting exposure to those under the age of 16.
4. The final item on their list reads as follows:Cell towers should be distanced from homes, daycare centers, schools, and places frequented by pregnant women, men who wish to father healthy children, and the young.”

Conclusion

• There is definitely evidence linking RF-EMF exposure to a slight rise in the probability of contracting specific malignancies and other unfavourable health effects.
• The extent of the damage that RF-EMFs in general, and 5G bandwidths in particular, represent to our health is still up for debate.
• There is no escape for those of us who live in highly populated regions from the countless radio waves whizzing through the air all around us.
• The Food and Drug Administration [FDA] advises limiting the amount of time we spend on our cell phones as well as using speaker mode or a hands-free kit to put greater space between the devices and our heads in order to lessen our exposure to RF-EMFs.

1. Pediatricians advise parents to minimise their children’s and adolescents’ use of mobile gadgets.
2. There are ongoing long-term research looking into the impacts of exposure to digital networks. One research project, which began in 2007, aimed to monitor at least 290,000 individuals across six European nations for 20–30 years to evaluate their cell phone use and health consequences.
3. What the findings of these and other research suggest won’t be known for some time.