Anyone worried about being exposed to 5G waves?

[flying kurbmaster]

On the bright side, cancer rates are down over the past 25 or 50 years! So that's cool!

That is not the whole story though, the numbers of cancer deaths has increased since 1990 by 68% but because of population growth and age adjustment, (75% of cancer deaths occur in people over 50) and we are living longer, they claim a reduction in cancer deaths, which is fine if you are 15 years old, however there has also been an increase of cancer survival since the 1970s has doubled  due to better medicine, inoculations and virus control.  I wonder how many people are debilatated, incapacitated or just made very uncomfortable for long periods of time even if the cancer doesn’t kill them. Here is the sad part the countries that have the largest number per capita are the developed countries, the ones with the best medicine, with the US one of the leaders in cancer deaths.

 

[Wabbit]

For the people here who don't understand basic science but can read, here's a link to a study done by people that do understand basic science.

https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/results/areas/cellphones/

Now we wait for the obligatory, "Rats don't use cell phones you kook!"

 

[Wabbit]

That is not the whole story though..

I agree. Things are usually a bit more complex than some like to acknowledge. Understandable at some level, this world can sometimes be pretty frightening for some. We all have coping methods\crutches to get us through life. That make sense?

 

[C-Cat]

https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/results/areas/cellphones/

Now that is certainly a study that raises some eyebrows, however, as they say themselves in the final report, the finding are not meant to be applied to humans, because the rats were exposed to far greater levels of radio waves than humans would ever experience.

The way I look at it: If you expose a rat (or a human for that matter) to too much water, death is a pretty certain outcome... like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_intoxication - should we limit or avoid water then if it can be toxic? Of course not... but the amount of exposure and context is for sure an important factor if you want to determine if something can be harmful or not.

The study could not explain why only male rats were "clearly" affected and not female rats. The study also mentions that the rats were held in very controlled conditions, small enclosures to make sure the radio waves were applied evenly to their bodies. One could make the argument that maybe these unusual living conditions could have contributed to stress on the animals and I wonder if this stress could have contributed to cancer taking hold and not the radio waves themselves.

And the final kicker: the study also mentions that overall the male rats had a longer lifespan than usual, despite the increase in cancer cells... I'd say these 30 million were well spent...

 

[badmotorscooter]

Cancer survival statistics are misleading. They are based on a 5 year survival period. If you die at 5 years and one month the statistics count you as a survivor. So the real fatality rate is significantly higher. I don't know the exact amount, but I have known more than a few people who battled cancer longer than 5 years but succumbed to it.

 

[Wabbit]

... Now that is certainly a study that raises some eyebrows, however, as they say themselves in the final report, the finding are not meant to be applied to humans, because the rats were exposed to far greater levels of radio waves than humans would ever experience...

I personally don't know either way, but I do not discount the risk. I think one of the things to keep in mind with this study, is that non-ionizing radiation(as opposed to the "dangerous" ionizing radiation) can damage DNA and effect change at a cellular level. I do wonder what people know that I don't when they state unequivocally that cell phone use is safe. Do they know or are they just drunk on whatever kool-aid is being served up. I think it warrants serious discussion and not just dismissive and condescending remarks. That last line isn't aimed at anyone specifically, more just in general. To be fair, I'm the last person who should lecture anyone on being mature or whatever. I'm not very mature lol, but I do try really hard to be.

 

[Ticklebellly]

5G microwaves are totally beyond compare to anything we are currently exposed to.

For the same reasons I do not believe in the existence of any of the 3000 odd Gods supposedly out there, until I see some evidence that 5G microwaves are bad Ju Ju, I remain unconcerned.

I have seen evidence that Electromagnetic waves of any length, when concentrated, proximal, or long term, can have negative long term health effects.   Remember too, that the energy emitted by these energy sources degrades logarithmetically so that  even a small distance from a Telephone tower is sufficient to have a general safety effect.

 

[JReader]

"(And remember, if you want to protect yourself from the government mind-control rays, the tinfoil hat goes with the shiny side OUT.)"


Also, those who prefer to keep their heads buried in the sand need not worry about radiation, are more prone to whistling blissfully in the dark...

 

[JReader]

Sorry to hear about your friends.

Statistics say 1 out of every 2 men and 1 of 3 women in America will get cancer.  Why isn't everyone screaming epidemic?  Auto related deaths, heart disease, HIV, influenza, Ebola and probably everything else added together doesn't even come close.  Why isn't the media, medical community, government and citizens panicking about this?

In reference to 5G effects on humans, and why we're not hearing about the dangers, it's because the monolithic suppliers of 5G hardware have BIG MONEY at stake in the race to get this technology on-line. It's US firms vs. Chinese corporations, and that's what is stealing the headlines. The Center for Disease Control, the FDA, and even Wikipedia would gladly look the other way or outright dismiss scientific studies on this issue. All of those folks who decry the "conspiracy theorists" and anybody who questions the status-quo don't even seem remotely concerned that there has hardly been any public debate about very legitimate concerns being raised. Like always, money talks.

 

[closeanuf]

ALWAYS follow the money.  After all, money talks all languages.

 

[Wabbit]

I've heard the pen is mightier than the sword, any one heard what's mightier than the dollar? Grrrr lol.

Edit: It is shiny side out, might not be apparent, but mine is shiny side out!

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

. . . it's because the monolithic suppliers of 5G hardware have BIG MONEY at stake in the race to get this technology on-line . . .

Nope.  This is being driven by consumers (with interest from the government).  Just look at this site for the number of people who are outraged by GB limits and/or throttling.  Today's cell customers want instant video streaming when they want it, where they want it, and no thank you I don't want to be tied to a cord.

So we have 3 options:

1. We can continue with rationing, only get more draconian.  This is already very unpopular, so furgedaboudit.
2. We can greatly increase the density and power of the 4G network.  This would greatly increase the number and severity of medical problems.  
3. Or we can move to higher frequencies that will handle much more traffic.  This has the advantage of much higher data throughput for a given power output and higher frequencies don't travel as far or penetrate as deep as lower frequencies.

Its like our response to alcohol: we tolerate a number of disabilities and deaths because we know the general population will not put up with prohibition.

 

[JD GUMBEE]

Its like our response to alcohol: we tolerate a number of disabilities and deaths because we know the general population will not put up with prohibition.

Being picky about wording here.
(You may not have even meant it as such.)

but...We tolerate a little freedom of choice, actually.
It isn't alcohol that causes these things. It's impaired booze gluttons with poor self control.
We need far less of the "for the safety of all" legislation. Too many damned laws now.

It wasn't too long ago, I was experimenting with these frequencies.
Ham operators used to be encouraged to.
The 5G debates, if you understand the frequencies involved and the power used, are kind of silly.

More "dangerous" devices allowed in the home:
picture tube color TV's.
Microwave ovens.
Fluorescent lights.
Wireless routers.

Folks reading this with one of those "wifi repeaters" that beams a signal into their RV...are they aware they already get more RF than 5G will deliver?
5G is less power than the older cordless phones.
Bluetooth devices flood us with oceans of similar powered RF emissions.
(...and once you get up near radio waves at a frequency that will cook a turkey...none of them are really safer than another.)

 

[Wabbit]

/\Any sauce for those claims? If 5g is that harmless, why bother with any of these scientific studies? I would think the scientists know at least as much as you, why would they bother?

 

[highdesertranger]

" why would they bother?"

money, they got to make a living somehow. if there was nothing to study how would they make a living. they must justify their pay checks.

highdesertranger

 

[S Cello]

If the range of this 5 g is so short, boondockers ought not be in range of it? Hopefully they leave the 4 G operational for us out in the sticks.

Ha, for myself, it seems like every time I come back to the S&B to get some work done on the van, I get sick. Who knows? I like to blame the Edison meter, but it probably has more to do with the processed food I always eat.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

There is a misconception that 5G is all millimeter band frequencies.  Its not, it will use some of the same frequencies that 2G, 3G, and 4G utilize.  2G is dead in most of the first world, Verizon has announced it is shutting down 3G at the end of the year.  The other carriers haven't announced but it is speculated that they will be shutting down 3G by 2021.  Nobody has said anything about shutting down 4G.  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_frequencies_in_the_US

5G will probably be limited to high population density areas and high volume travel corridors.

 

[JD GUMBEE]

/\Any sauce for those claims? If 5g is that harmless, why bother with any of these scientific studies? I would think the scientists know at least as much as you, why would they bother?

Not saying it is harmless.
For a small percentage of the populous, it is very possible that cell phone use can help to cause brain cancer.
(...but they were highly susceptible in the first place)

I spend a LOT of time on the phone, but if cellular, I use a Blue Parrot. Always.
At home, I like the copper wires hooked to a plug in ear set for the lengthy meeting calls and support issues.
That said, we already know what exposure to RF does to human beings.
Ever since we achieved coast to coast 800MhZ in the age of high powered "bag phones" we have seen the results.

Understand? 5G is more noise and public bullsh!t than truly unknown scary monsters.

^^^(Bathroom Stossel video.)The very same reason million dollar bathrooms exist...is why the big stink is being made. All the little bugs crawl out of the woodwork...many with political agendas attached to their rhetoric.

If you go back in time when Boeing brought the first carbon fiber/plastic airplanes about, there were similar trails in the press about their safety.
Radial tires.
FM radio.
120 Volt AC in private homes.
All had similar "whistle blowers" in their time.

We have already been BATHED in RF for decades now..."5G" is nothing new, except for the frequency occupied.
(...and again, once you hit turkey cooking range...a little higher or lower is of little importance.)

 

[Wabbit]

That sounds more reasonable than it doesn't do anything to anyone. Hungover a bit so my mind is mud. I know I have sacrificed some end years so that I could partake in some fun activities for the rest of them. Hangovers and such...lol. I'm not so worried about 5g that I won't use it, but I might use speaker phone a lot more. I don't think I would wear a VR unit on my head that had a 5g antenna in it, but if the signal is some feet away, sure. I'm hoping I live long enough to get to experience some real cool VR simulation crap. I've wanted to be either a ninja or a turtle growing up, still do. I'm hoping to accomplish that in VR.

 

[C-Cat]

More "dangerous" devices allowed in the home:
picture tube color TV's.

I remember my parents to tell me not to sit so close to our tube TV in the 70s, but even worse, I worked on computers attached to tube TVs and later tube PC monitors for decades, right in front of it... now if that didn't expose me to a higher risk for cancer I don't know what... there are serious x-rays emitted by those tubes (and those are in the ionizing radiation range) and I bathed my face in it every day for most of the day - my job was programmer and PC musician (the musician part still is to this day)... boy do I love the invention of flat panel LCD monitors... I had chronic eye problems in the late 90s (wonder why, right) and was the first to request a 15 inch flat panel LCD monitor in my company and my eye problems went away immediately.

But back to my points earlier, I'm still not worried about the roll-out of 5g tech... it always comes down to exposure amounts with anything (see my water example) and the industry is moving to lower power because that also improves battery time. A microwave oven is using 200-300 times more power than that cellphone you're using and energy drop off over distance is exponential, so if you're really worried, use a wired headset (ear buds with microphone) and you're plenty far away from that already low-wattage transmission.