5G - health hazard?

Capt'n Midnight

If you are worried about 5G then you need to avoid
sunlight
harbours , radars chuck out serious RF
microwave ovens
pubs , lots of them have mobile phone transmitters
Garda stations masts, masts and more masts
old televisions and monitors them feckers emit X-Rays :eek:



the truth is that the frequencies freed up when TV went digital will have a lot less RF than they used to

Capt'n Midnight

KildareP wrote: »

To therefore point at wireless technologies as being the "newest" change and therefore lay the entirety of blame for increasing cancer rates solely on its doorstep is a little silly.

Historically there's a good correlation between lung cancer rates and the number of TV aerials. (hint both probably were related to more disposable income)

whereas for most people the phone is practically attached to the body for almost all their waking hours.

A lot of people when they aren't pressing it to their brain store them down near their genitals.

banie01

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

That may be true but you have to admit the number of young adults and children getting cancer appears to have rocketed in the last decade or so. It seems like every week I’m hearing of another young person that I know being diagnosed with cancer of some sort of other. It is most definitely not limited to old people any more.

Cancer was never limited to old people and that's not what was said in my post. It is however predominantly an age related condition.
Regarding children and young people with the rise of social media this really is more of a confirmation bias than it is an actual increase in the rate of those affected or afflicted.

A young person with cancer is more news worthy and tragic than the usual patient profile precisely because it bucks the usual trend.
Couple that with easy access to publishing and fundraising that social media allows for the tragic cases to be desseminated and stick in the mind.

The appeal to emotion is strong, but without an epidemiological review to show actual rates is pointless.

4068ac1elhodqr

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

If you are worried about 5G then you need to avoid
sunlight
harbours , radars chuck out serious RF
microwave ovens
pubs , lots of them have mobile phone transmitters
Garda stations masts, masts and more masts
old televisions and monitors them feckers emit X-Rays :eek:

the truth is that the frequencies freed up when TV went digital will have a lot less RF than they used to

sunlight - Here since the dawn of time itself, bit of chance homo sapiens have adapted their dna to it by now (except for gingers bathing in tropical climes). Whereas 5G essentally hasn't arrived yet in any meaningful way outside of Seoul.

harbours (radars) - (Ideally) they're they're pointing out towards open seas.

microwave ovens - Unless that is, you're actually inside them (faraday cages) as the run 750w of 2.4ghz. Still easy to detect if they're leaking, put your 2.4ghz mobile inside and try calling it.

pubs - lots of them have mobile phone transmitters - (some). But ALL will need 5G once it is adopted, due to the line-of-sight, and limited range factors.

Garda stations masts, masts and more masts - But now with added 5G masts on top. Chances are they receive in-bound high-powered transmissions (5-10w) anyway from units, rather than broadcast out like a tv studio.

old televisions and monitors them feckers emit X-Rays - And are no longer made, even so (FDA) limits are < 0.5(mR/h) at a distance of 5 cm (2 in). Since 2007, most CRTs have emissions that fall well below this (safe) limit.

The truth is that between 3G/4G/5G, IOT, Bluetooth and wireless connectivity there will be more 2.4+ghz in your face than ever before. The future might involve your kettle/toaster talking to your fridge, then to a FRS ring doorbell who will be busy streaming live 4k to the nearest lampost wating your arrival so it can wirelessly switch on the wireless hallway lightbulb.

Capt'n Midnight

Kenia Full Camera wrote: »

sunlight - Here since the dawn of time itself, bit of chance homo sapiens have adapted their dna to it by now (except for gingers bathing in tropical climes). Whereas 5G essentally hasn't arrived yet in any meaningful way outside of Seoul.

Oh yeah placental mammals such as humans don't do dimer repair like other clades.

harbours (radars) - (Ideally) they're they're pointing out towards open seas.

You know the way they do a 360 scan ...


microwave ovens - Unless that is, you're actually inside them (faraday cages) as the run 750w of 2.4ghz. Still easy to detect if they're leaking, put your 2.4ghz mobile inside and try calling it.

Garda stations masts, masts and more masts - But now with added 5G masts on top. Chances are they receive in-bound high-powered transmissions (5-10w) anyway from units, rather than broadcast out like a tv studio.

(5-10w) directed vs a hundred thousand in all directions yeah.

The truth is that between 3G/4G/5G, IOT, Bluetooth and wireless connectivity there will be more 2.4+ghz in your face than ever before. The future might involve your kettle/toaster talking to your fridge, then to a FRS ring doorbell who will be busy streaming live 4k to the nearest lampost wating your arrival so it can wirelessly switch on the wireless hallway lightbulb.

2.4 GHz has a max EIRP of a few hundredths of a watt. The adjacent amateur radio band allows up to Hundreds of watts, not to mention the old MMDS band for TV




This is like complaining about the light emitted by traffic lights on a summers day.

Capt'n Midnight

Most people are starting to avoid sunlight these days or put sunscreen on. They probably care more about skin aging than cancer, but that's neither here nor there. :rolleyes:

That is the point.
Spreading FUD because you may have an agenda isn't helping anyone.

I've pointed out before I know people who wouldn't think twice of holding fluorescent tubes close enough to an active transmitter to make them glow , but won't cross a safety line near a proper high power transmitter. As Paracelsus said “What is there that is not poison? All things are poison and nothing is without poison. Solely the dose determines that a thing is not a poison,”

Sephiroth_dude

Mod

Just deleted some posts from a thread banned poster and edited some posts that quoted them, if they post again do not engage with them and report the post, thanks.

M5

If anyone wants to know why the stage went for fiber, rather than 5G, read this thread!

4068ac1elhodqr

Interesting to see this week sees Belfast become one of the 1st 5G cities, with up to 1,000mps available (100-150mps is more of a reasonable expectation for peak hours) in the city-centre via EE.
From the map it looks like a few areas only will benefit: Docks/CC/Uni and the more wealthy South areas of the city.
https://syncni.com/article/2401/ee-to-launch-uk-s-first-5g-service-in-belfast-this-month

Capt'n Midnight

Kenia Full Camera wrote: »

Interesting to see this week sees Belfast become one of the 1st 5G cities, with up to 1,000mps available (100-150mps is more of a reasonable expectation for peak hours) in the city-centre via EE.
From the map it looks like a few areas only will benefit: Docks/CC/Uni and the more wealthy South areas of the city.
https://syncni.com/article/2401/ee-to-launch-uk-s-first-5g-service-in-belfast-this-month

Judging by the pattern there's only a handful of masts. Despite the claims that there'd be a Brazilian of them everywhere.

https://ee.co.uk/why-ee/5g-on-ee/5g-uk-coverage/5g-uk-coverage-map#belfast

whisky_galore

dan1895 wrote: »

They remind me of anti-vaxxers

I notice one of my anti vax contacts has just put up, yep, you've guessed it... A Stop 5G profile picture.

Pinch Flat

whisky_galore wrote: »

I notice one of my anti vax contacts has just put up, yep, you've guessed it... A Stop 5G profile picture.

Let me guess, also includes reference to chem trails, new world order, agenda 21 and all other tinfoil hatter nonsense?

4068ac1elhodqr

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Judging by the pattern there's only a handful of masts. Despite the claims that there'd be a Brazilian of them everywhere.

It's the 1st day of the 1st rollout, in one of just 6 cities across the uk, obvs they're not going to saturate the landscape (just yet), beside there isn't enough room with all the flegs hugging the poles up there.

It's probably the 3or4 best areas to place whatever masts are needed, a small square in the Uni area, a light-industrial/office area around the harbour, and a small square section of the city-centre (ideal for any phone shops to sell their latest 5g phone$), and a very wealthy residential area in the south.

Haven't seen any pictures of the EE-5G masts in the press, even for these few areas they may need a good few dozen perhaps?

Mixed feedback to it over on the reddit https://www.reddit.com/r/northernireland/comments/burdex/do_you_have_5g/

whisky_galore

Pinch Flat wrote: »

Let me guess, also includes reference to chem trails, new world order, agenda 21 and all other tinfoil hatter nonsense?

Probably, I wasn't interested in delving any deeper.

One of those hippy dippy single mums who are all herbal this and mindfulness that.

fryup

^^^^^^^^^^^^

and rock crystals this and yoga that

Igotadose

Earlier here, I mentioned Dr. Tom Butler of UCC coming to my local area next week to give a talk about 5G being hazardous to the health of children (and everyone else.) He's given that talk recently in Kinsale, and it was put up on Youtube:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvcATkW5APE&t=752s

I'd be very interested in other's reactions - I find his research, well, not really like research as I understand it. Finding lots of papers saying 'RF is bad! bad! bad' and hyperbolic language, such as (paraphrasing) "RF has been weaponized for crowd control, the same technology that'll be deployed here" suspicious. Also, to me his initial remarks about training scientists seem odd - why would he say that? Again, he's a professor of social science/computing at UCC, but states he was a physicist/engineer before that so I take his word for it he's qualified to do the analysis.

I think what he *doesn't* do, is his own experimentation, relying on others and with a confirmation bias against WiFi in general, for whatever reason.

joe swanson

Along with Chemtrails, vaccinations , fluoride one of the most deadly things in the world. Only way to cure it is to smoke cannabis cos it's harmless.

Hotblack Desiato

joe swanson wrote: »

Along with Chemtrails, vaccinations , fluoride one of the most deadly things in the world. Only way to cure it is to smoke cannabis cos it's harmless.

That is sarcasm, right?

Hotblack Desiato

Plenty of cranks in academia, Igotadose.

joe swanson

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

That is sarcasm, right?

Very much so

banie01

I have a long time friend IRL who is UK based.
She is a qualified radiographer and is a senior support and sales agent for a major medical imaging company supporting clients across Europe.
Her job revolves around selling and supporting, x-ray, CT scanners,Nuclear medical devices aswel as MRI scanners and PET scanners.

She constantly takes the "contrarian" position on topics.
She works for huge Multi-National dependent upon EU market access yet is a huge brexit supporter!
Medical professional, is virulently anti-vax with Facebook mom group posts constantly shared!

Her latest crusade is sharing photos of trees allegedly killed by 5g radiation...!
This is a person who should by the nature of their job have a good understanding of the difference between ionising and non-ionising radiation.
Who should understand the effects of wave propagation and EM radiation particularly in short wavelengths.
Who has to keep track of their hourly flight time every year to ensure they accurately track their ionising radiation exposure.

Yet just jumps on the anti-5g bandwagon and appears to her friends and followers to be speaking from a position of authority.
Rather than just repeating and re-hashing the latest CT nonsense.

She was a great friend, but I'm at the stage where it's a few years since we have actually met up and her rantings are really driving me towards deleting her...
Rather than keeping her as a mate and watching the madness.

Igotadose

banie01 wrote: »

I have a long time friend IRL who is UK based.
She is a qualified radiographer s.

Sadly, the speaker out here waves his UCC bonafides (not in anything related to WiFi) before stating his hyperbole. Pretty sly imo

jumbo

I find this subject fascinating, as somebody who works on the bleeding edge of Telecomms (in industry, not academia), because there are very definitely social/economic/political/security issues with 5G, the way the technologies have been developed, and their intended roll out schedule.

I find it fascinating, because nobody is discussing these issues, instead any discussion about the evils or whatever of 5G seem to focus on the (seemingly spurious) issues regarding health, and contamination from 5G apparatus.

I believe that the case is far from closed in that matter. Earlier generations of the technology made do with comparisons with microwave ovens and the like, don't really hold water where the rate of proliferation, and ambient levels are set to increase exponentially.

But the arguments around "base rate" risk still hold, i.e. there's still so many more things in our environment that are for more dangerous for the foreseeable future. Like for instance, it's commonplace that a lot of the "Anti 5G" crowd area also "Anti Carbon Taxes", and also all the other stuff like "Chemtrails" and "Forced Immigration".

But what I can't get over, and maybe this is the objective of those shadowy organisations organising shill campaigns on both sides, is that we really aren't making any headway in the critical evaluation of these new technologies.

5G isn't a mere increment over 4G, like the previous generations where. It represents a dramatic rethink in how the network is managed, organised, and (crucially) controlled. Even the way in which it has been developed has taken a whole new path that has left a lot of players excluded.

I often wonder if both sides of these ridiculous online discussions aren't somehow fomented by organisations with something to gain from the resultant confusion. e.g Antivax as a way to protect big pharma by making anybody who questions any public health initiatives seem like a crank? Same here perhaps by focusing the discussion of 5G on the radio emissions issues it distracts from the bigger problems ...

... I just know somebody is going to call me out as a crank here for pointing out what to me is obvious. Never mind, nothing to see here, some guy online said it's okay and he confirms your bias to believe that everything you like is okay and that there's no real problems. It's all okay really.

ohnonotgmail

jumbo wrote: »

I find this subject fascinating, as somebody who works on the bleeding edge of Telecomms (in industry, not academia), because there are very definitely social/economic/political/security issues with 5G, the way the technologies have been developed, and their intended roll out schedule.

I find it fascinating, because nobody is discussing these issues, instead any discussion about the evils or whatever of 5G seem to focus on the (seemingly spurious) issues regarding health, and contamination from 5G apparatus.

I believe that the case is far from closed in that matter. Earlier generations of the technology made do with comparisons with microwave ovens and the like, don't really hold water where the rate of proliferation, and ambient levels are set to increase exponentially.

But the arguments around "base rate" risk still hold, i.e. there's still so many more things in our environment that are for more dangerous for the foreseeable future. Like for instance, it's commonplace that a lot of the "Anti 5G" crowd area also "Anti Carbon Taxes", and also all the other stuff like "Chemtrails" and "Forced Immigration".

But what I can't get over, and maybe this is the objective of those shadowy organisations organising shill campaigns on both sides, is that we really aren't making any headway in the critical evaluation of these new technologies.

5G isn't a mere increment over 4G, like the previous generations where. It represents a dramatic rethink in how the network is managed, organised, and (crucially) controlled. Even the way in which it has been developed has taken a whole new path that has left a lot of players excluded.

I often wonder if both sides of these ridiculous online discussions aren't somehow fomented by organisations with something to gain from the resultant confusion. e.g Antivax as a way to protect big pharma by making anybody who questions any public health initiatives seem like a crank? Same here perhaps by focusing the discussion of 5G on the radio emissions issues it distracts from the bigger problems ...

... I just know somebody is going to call me out as a crank here for pointing out what to me is obvious. Never mind, nothing to see here, some guy online said it's okay and he confirms your bias to believe that everything you like is okay and that there's no real problems. It's all okay really.

So what are the issues with 5G?

jumbo

Sorry, it's a copout I know, but I'm not here to get into a debate or argue a point one way or the other.

I just stumbled upon this thread when I was searching for some background on this Tom Butler guy (seems a bit shady from what I can tell).

I just get bombarded by all this anti-5G stuff by some of my less informed friends and from my standpoint most of the stuff they come out with is just so ridiculous, you couldn't imagine somebody who is any way informed lapping it up.

Makes you wonder. Like, where are the online pressure groups against big pharma that aren't anti-vax. Completely inundated with nonsense, that's where. Same goes for telecomms. Seems like a good strategy if you're trying to convince everybody that there's "nothing to see here".

ohnonotgmail

jumbo wrote: »

Sorry, it's a copout I know, but I'm not here to get into a debate or argue a point one way or the other.

I just stumbled upon this thread when I was searching for some background on this Tom Butler guy (seems a bit shady from what I can tell).

I just get bombarded by all this anti-5G stuff by some of my less informed friends and from my standpoint most of the stuff they come out with is just so ridiculous, you couldn't imagine somebody who is any way informed lapping it up.

Makes you wonder. Like, where are the online pressure groups against big pharma that aren't anti-vax. Completely inundated with nonsense, that's where. Same goes for telecomms. Seems like a good strategy if you're trying to convince everybody that there's "nothing to see here".

Yes, that is a copout. You come here to complain that nobody is talking about the real issues with 5g and then refuse to even say what those issues are.

Igotadose

jumbo wrote: »

I often wonder if both sides of these ridiculous online discussions aren't somehow fomented by organisations with something to gain from the resultant confusion. e.g Antivax as a way to protect big pharma by making anybody who questions any public health initiatives seem like a crank? Same here perhaps by focusing the discussion of 5G on the radio emissions issues it distracts from the bigger problems ...

You often wonder if whatever you think big pharma is, is promoting anti-vax?

Wow.

jumbo

Yeah sorry. I know it's not the kind of red hot material you're looking for. Hopefully you'll manage to get to the truth with out me!

ohnonotgmail

jumbo wrote: »

Yeah sorry. I know it's not the kind of red hot material you're looking for. Hopefully you'll manage to get to the truth with out me!

pathetic.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

jumbo wrote: »

Sorry, it's a copout I know, but I'm not here to get into a debate or argue a point one way or the other.

I just stumbled upon this thread when I was searching for some background on this Tom Butler guy (seems a bit shady from what I can tell).

I just get bombarded by all this anti-5G stuff by some of my less informed friends and from my standpoint most of the stuff they come out with is just so ridiculous, you couldn't imagine somebody who is any way informed lapping it up.

Makes you wonder. Like, where are the online pressure groups against big pharma that aren't anti-vax. Completely inundated with nonsense, that's where. Same goes for telecomms. Seems like a good strategy if you're trying to convince everybody that there's "nothing to see here".

Then that was a pointless dragging up of an old thread, wasn't it?