Having lived in Brussels for a year now and witnessing sidewalks covered in trash and bad air quality I’m quite cynical of politicians waxing lyrical about protecting their constituent’s health. I think the last paragraph in that article holds more weight.<p>“Last week, the various governments in Belgium once again failed to reach agreement on the auctioning of the 5G licences. The file remains stuck on the <i>distribution of the proceeds</i>. It will be up to the next government to handle the proposal, said Telecom Minister Philippe De Backer (Open VLD) last week.“
I live in Brussels, internet over 4G works great and nobody complains about it being slow.<p>I am willing to change my mind if somebody proves why we need to upgrade but (and as much as I love new tech) "if ain't broken dont touch it", if anything just make it cheaper.
Someone should tell politicians about how radio waves propagate and the inverse square law: the cellphone kept in their pocket, very often more than one, expose them to a lot stronger EM fields than any tower they might have nearby.
Or maybe they already know that, but banning or imposing restrictions on cellphones would destroy their careers.
"<i>The Brussels region has particularly strict radiation standards for telecom applications. The standard of 6 volts per metre has already led to problems in the past with providing fast mobile internet via 4G in the capital.</i>"<p>On one hand, 6V/m seems like a lot; I haven't been able to find a reliable regulation site. On the other, 20V/m is apparently common (<a href="https://www.arpansa.gov.au/understanding-radiation/what-is-radiation/non-ionising-radiation/low-frequency-electric-magnetic-fields" rel="nofollow">https://www.arpansa.gov.au/understanding-radiation/what-is-r...</a>).
It looks like there are a couple of disinformation campaigns against cellphone infrastructure and particularly 5G right now. One is aimed at retargeting environmentalists to fight harmless cell towers instead of bothering industry by fighting global warming. The other looks like the usual Russian campaign to slow down the tech progress of other nations. For example there was a widely shared story that a 5G test killed a flock of birds in The Hague, which was completely false (check Snopes).
1) Your eyes and testes are at risk<p><pre><code> "Two areas of the body, the eyes and the testes, are particularly vulnerable to RF heating because of the relative lack of available blood flow to dissipate the excess heat load."
</code></pre>
source: <a href="https://www.fcc.gov/engineering-technology/electromagnetic-compatibility-division/radio-frequency-safety/faq/rf-safety#Q5" rel="nofollow">https://www.fcc.gov/engineering-technology/electromagnetic-c...</a><p>2) The WHO has an article written in 2014 that says:<p><pre><code> "Several studies investigating potential health effects in children and adolescents are underway."
</code></pre>
I'd say that the lack of updates 2 years later is concerning.<p>source: <a href="https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/electromagnetic-fields-and-public-health-mobile-phones" rel="nofollow">https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/electrom...</a>
We live in a culture where there is an normally an intense focus on the benefits of technology and not really a lot of regard for any of the possible the negatives. I.e. there is a huge bias at a cultural level. I guess this a lot to do with idea that consumerism is <i>the</i> solution when things get difficult in life. If you study history you can see how this normally presents itself - and even effects the science c.f. the smoking industry.
Is there a good (and short) technical summary of the 5G specifications?<p>I've seen some (very disturbing) values of 20W/square meter reported. Is this true?