5G test in Holland killed hundreds of starlings made ducks freak out! - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 05:50:04 am
content: Can 5G kill birds and make Ducks go nutts?https://newspunch.com/hundreds-birds-fall-5g-netherlands/

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 06:14:47 am
content: I can see the flame wars on EM radiation safety getting refuelled - even before the final analysis.Still, it would be nice to have adefinitivefinding on the cause.

author: KaneTW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 06:35:02 am
content: Please don't repost obvious conspiracy theory websites.

author: Kjelt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 07:23:39 am
content: There is no conclusion yet, the biggest mystery is that it only seems to affect one type of bird, a type of bird that is known to fly in huge populations together and also eat together. So it could be well possible that they ate some poison somewhere.

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 04:33:28 pm
content: they need to do a toxicology report, I think they drank polluted water.

author: Kjelt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 05:14:49 pm
content: Could be but why would other birds not drink that water ?

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 05:30:24 pm
content: maybe the other birds flew else where or no other significant bird groups drank from there before it was washed away by rain or flooded into a river or something

author: babysitter
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 05:34:31 pm
content: Guess if this site is serious.Hint:Decades of broadcast radio, directional radio, radar and millenia of natural radiation never caused such events.Subtitle "Where mainstream fears to tread."Other hot topics right now (yes, selected):Study Finds Vaccine Aluminum In Lymph Nodes One Year After InjectionI Was In The Illuminati I’m Going To Tell You Everything, Shocking ExposeHarvard: Unvaccinated Children Pose Zero RiskScientists: ‘Something Is Wrong With Our Sun’Britney Spears: Little Girl Lost In A World of Illuminati Controlhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Your_News_Wire

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 05:55:56 pm
content: Quote from: babysitter on November 10, 2018, 05:34:31 pmI'm going to have to use some of those in future tongue-in-cheek posts.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 06:16:12 pm
content: Quote from: KaneTW on November 10, 2018, 06:35:02 amSo you mean that Washingtoncompost is better source for fake news?Here we have truck loads of waxwings who in the Autumn in large flocks eat yeast'ed Sorbus aucuparia berries and get so drunk they cant fly, many times we have to save them from the ground from been taken by the neighborhoods cats.

author: KaneTW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 06:21:58 pm
content: Troll harder. It takes all of 5 minutes to notice that all mentions of 5G in relation to that are from crackpot news sites. Dutch sites only mention the mass bird dying.Shameful to see this kind of posting on this forum.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 06:24:54 pm
content: Quote from: KaneTW on November 10, 2018, 06:21:58 pmHeey, bickering duude! Noone forces you to read this thread.While sane EE 's known for decades 5G is deadly and creates skin cancer like newer before, more then X-rays! You gladly sacrifice birds for nothing!

author: raptor1956
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 07:35:08 pm
content: Quote from: KaneTW on November 10, 2018, 06:21:58 pmSadly, even in a forum where the average IQ has to be a good bit higher than the median there are still a good many people that love to wallow in conspiracy theories and jump on anyone that calls them out for it. The times we live in...Brian

author: coppercone2
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 07:37:39 pm
content: it's good to have some forum posts that actually debunk that crap when people search for it

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 07:52:09 pm
content: Didn't the Mythbusters totally shred the myth of a ship's radar cooking birds when they put a turkey point blank on a radar and couldn't even measure a temperature increase?

author: PA0PBZ
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 07:59:17 pm
content: Quote from: MT on November 10, 2018, 06:24:54 pmSure we had 5G for decades!

author: MrMobodies
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 08:18:09 pm
content: I get hold of joblots of access points, put new caps in and give them away.Years ago I started to get headaches daily. Couldn't work out of what it was I thought I was getting a cold or had some virus.In some places I was alright. One day I was setting some routers from the ISP to put them in modem mode.I had a massive headache with pressure at the back of my eyes.When I turned the Wifi radios which is what I normally do off 20 minutes the headaches went.I turn on the other one to set that up and gradually I felt the pressure built up again until I turned them off.After I was finished I turned one of the radios on and the headaches started not immediately but gradually and it only did it on this particular router.They were Talktalk HG635 routers. These ones had 5GHz AC wifi.Now I get headaches when I am near anything like that after a certain amount of time.I now switch the access points on only when I need it and set them in low power.I wasn't paranoid to begin with.Whether it is psychological or not I don't know and I don't want to chance it.I think I got like that somehow maybe through over exposure I will never know.Maybe I am over sensitive.I prefer cables.Call me silly or paranoid.What I need to get is one of those EMF meters to confirm whether my headaches match up with what is there or not.

author: Kjelt
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 08:47:21 pm
content: Well we all like to think that we know everything but actually we don't.We are only a few hundreds year busy with science and there is so much we don't know.With the replacement of hid streetlighting with white led we observed that this was keeping wildlife out of their sleep and some animals had extreme problems coping with it.Another example, we never knew and still don't know how some animals like for instance eel manage to swim from anywhere in the world thousands of kms to the saragossa sea, breed there and mysteriously the tiny eel swim all the way back from where their parents came from.I agree with that we should not make assumptions over the cause on forehand, but neither should we exclude the possibility. Both in science terms is wrong, the hypothesis should remain broad till we get more answers and a tunnelvision does not help.

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 08:51:00 pm
content: Quote from: raptor1956 on November 10, 2018, 07:35:08 pmI hate to keep pointing this out but IQ has no bearing on what kind of things people believe (and is a pretty meaningless measure in itself anyway). Those with reasonable higher education and who "believe" themselves to be above average intelligence are more likely to believe conspiracy theories, because they have more faith in their own opinion.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_biasGranted in this instance it is about RF/microwave radiation where electronic engineers probably have more knowledge/experience of the subject than say, a medical doctor, or a geologist. But don't assume that such fears and conspiracies are from those who aren't intelligent - it is quite the opposite.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 09:26:07 pm
content: I see articles like this all the time when surfing the literature about issues like this.Check out the related articles links in stories like this.Personally, I would not trust corporations to regulate themselves. Or governments that are owned by them. Corruption has reached an all time high and its global in scope.Its been long established that RF does have effects on living things. How much effect, and whether the proliferation of devices is reaching unsafe levels? It depends a lot on frequency and what kind of exposure it is.I don't think many people here even acknowledge that cell phones can be used in unsafe ways, despite the science on that being fairly solid.That said I think some people are not being rational when they say that a cell phone site a half mile away would impact their health. Thats not likely.In the typical use scenarios?I don't know.It probably depends on a lot of things. I would not 'just assume' its always safe though.Think of how many devices there are in the environment now.Do we need that many? No.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30247338Format: AbstractHealth Phys. 2018 Sep 21.doi: 10.1097/HP.0000000000000930. [Epub ahead of print]Systematic Derivation of Safety Limits for Time-Varying 5G Radiofrequency Exposure Based on Analytical Models and Thermal Dose.Neufeld E1, Kuster N1,2.AbstractExtreme broadband wireless devices operating above 10 GHz may transmit data in bursts of a few milliseconds to seconds. Even though the time- and area-averaged power density values remain within the acceptable safety limits for continuous exposure, these bursts may lead to short temperature spikes in the skin of exposed people. In this paper, a novel analytical approach to pulsed heating is developed and applied to assess the peak-to-average temperature ratio as a function of the pulse fraction α (relative to the averaging time T; it corresponds to the inverse of the peak-to-average ratio). This has been analyzed for two different perfusion-related thermal time constants (τ1 = 100 s and 500 s) corresponding to plane-wave and localized exposures. To allow for peak temperatures that considerably exceed the 1 K increase, the CEM43 tissue damage model, with an experimental-data-based damage threshold for human skin of 600 min, is used to allow large temperature oscillations that remain below the level at which tissue damage occurs. To stay consistent with the current safety guidelines, safety factors of 10 for occupational exposure and 50 for the general public were applied. The model assumptions and limitations (e.g., employed thermal and tissue damage models, homogeneous skin, consideration of localized exposure by a modified time constant) are discussed in detail. The results demonstrate that the maximum averaging time, based on the assumption of a thermal time constant of 100 s, is 240 s if the maximum local temperature increase for continuous-wave exposure is limited to 1 K and α ≥ 0.1. For a very low peak-to-average ratio of 100 (α ≥ 0.01), it decreases to only 30 s.The results also show that the peak-to-average ratio of 1,000 tolerated by the International Council on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection guidelines may lead to permanent tissue damage after even short exposures, highlighting the importance of revisiting existing exposure guidelines.PMID:30247338DOI:10.1097/HP.0000000000000930

author: Echo88
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 09:44:18 pm
content: Useless thread.Also: Since MT mentioned the sane EEs had known about cancerous 5G for decades, i really gotta ask myself if Dave is one of the bad guys.*sinister voice*"Winner winner, chicken dinner"

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 10:18:15 pm
content: See if your symptoms respond to n-acetylcysteine. NAC as its called is the precursor ofglutathione.As we get older the level of glutathione in our body falls a lot. Literature on various forms of radiation and health often make this connection.The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition suggest that older people especially, should take supplemental NAC.Quote from: MrMobodies on November 10, 2018, 08:18:09 pm

author: Marco
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 10:27:49 pm
content: Quote from: MrMobodies on November 10, 2018, 08:18:09 pmEasier to do a blind test, have a mate sit behind a sonically well insulated wall and turn it on randomly and keep a log ... you keep your own log, match them up.Or make a program to replace the mate and turn it on with a relay.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 10, 2018, 10:33:09 pm
content: I don't think any "EMF" meter could possibly be broadband or respond quickly enough to paint a realistic picture of 'electrosmog' as its called. An SDR would be better but even there, the problem is, few SDRs are broadband enough. Also antennas would need to be swapped out and a scan repeated multiple times to assess the spectrum with any kind of fidelity. The higher in frequency one goes the less available equipment that can measure it is.The following abstract illustrates the problem.------------https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29655646Environ Res. 2018 Aug;165:484-495. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2018.01.016. Epub 2018 Apr 11.5 G wireless telecommunications expansion: Public health and environmental implications.Russell CLAbstractThe popularity, widespread use and increasing dependency on wireless technologies has spawned a telecommunications industrial revolution with increasing public exposure to broader and higher frequencies of the electromagnetic spectrum to transmit data through a variety of devices and infrastructure. On the horizon, a new generation of even shorter high frequency 5G wavelengths is being proposed to power the Internet of Things (IoT).The IoT promises us convenient and easy lifestyles with a massive 5G interconnected telecommunications network, however, the expansion of broadband with shorter wavelength radiofrequency radiation highlights the concern that health and safety issues remain unknown.Controversy continues with regards to harm from current 2G, 3G and 4G wireless technologies. 5G technologies are far less studied for human or environmental effects. It is argued that the addition of this added high frequency 5G radiation to an already complex mix of lower frequencies, will contribute to a negative public health outcome both from both physical and mental health perspectives. Radiofrequency radiation (RF) is increasingly being recognized as a new form of environmental pollution. Like other common toxic exposures, the effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF EMR) will be problematic if not impossible to sort out epidemiologically as there no longer remains an unexposed control group.This is especially important considering these effects are likely magnified by synergistic toxic exposures and other common health risk behaviors. Effects can also be non-linear. Because this is the first generation to have cradle-to-grave lifespan exposure to this level of man-made microwave (RF EMR) radiofrequencies, it will be years or decades before the true health consequences are known. Precaution in the roll out of this new technology is strongly indicated.This article will review relevant electromagnetic frequencies, exposure standards and current scientific literature on the health implications of 2G, 3G, 4G exposure, including some of the available literature on 5G frequencies. The question of what constitutes a public health issue will be raised, as well as the need for a precautionary approach in advancing new wireless technologies.KEYWORDS:Environmental pollution; Public health; Radiofrequency radiation; Wireless technologyPMID:29655646DOI:10.1016/j.envres.2018.01.016

author: RobK_NL
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2018, 07:17:05 pm
content: The official investigation shows that the starlings most likely died due to poisoning by yew-tree berries.While investigation is still ongoing, it is clear, however, that there is no connection to 5G whatsoever.I just found that there has been only one 5G test anywhere near the Huygenspark and that was on june 28, 2018.

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 24, 2018, 04:40:36 pm
content: Yeah right...totally real news site.*clicks link*404OL

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 24, 2018, 05:43:33 pm
content: Still, the article's faulty logic speaks to that event only, not the safety (or possible lack of safety?) of high power pulsed RF, about which we still don't know enough!For a good discussion of the issue of causation in epidemiology see:KundiCausality and the Interpretation of Epidemiologic Evidencehttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1513293/

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 25, 2018, 10:59:12 pm
content: Quote from: PA0PBZ on November 10, 2018, 07:59:17 pm5G is just the name of the product, at the end of the day, it's just RF modulated in weird and wonderful ways at low power levels. We've know of the effects of RF on living cells and tissue for decades (I'm not saying there isn't more to learn, but what I am saying is we already know a substantial amount).The frequencies used aren't anything unusual nor ones that haven't been used before. In Australia 5G operates at 3.4 GHz and 26 GHz which has been used in field trials since 2016 (Guess what? No freaked out birds!). As of this month, Australia has about 200 5G sites in operation.I put this fearmongering about 5G in the same bucket as people who claim to get headaches after the installation of smart meters in their electrical box. I suspect their tin foil hat had failed and was letting in all the secret government mind controlling waves.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2019, 05:34:37 pm
content: Here is an explanation from the wireless industry about how they plan to accomplish the high 5G bandwidths they hope to enable.They are going to install base stations every 100-200 meters in most areas.https://www.rcrwireless.com/20161020/network-infrastructure/att-outlines-5g-network-architecture-tag4One interesting aspect of this is that battery-less eternally active devices may become feasible and very cheap to manufacture and they wont require any provisioning.An RF 'rectenna' is a antenna-like structure that turns RF into (very) low power DC. It can be integrated into products of every kind - its basically an RFID tag like structure.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RectennaFeed the DC produced into a joule thief like circuit and people may be able to use it to run small networkable eternally on devices off of the rectified current developed from all that RF, that will 'just work' everywhere - all the time, they wont even need a power switch!Each one will have its own network address, unique in the entire universe. Maybe computers will come with networking built in and always on.

author: raptor1956
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 02:32:01 am
content: Quote from: cdev on January 02, 2019, 05:34:37 pmWould the aperture of a "rectenna" be known as a sphincter.Brian

author: Red Squirrel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 03:03:27 am
content: I'm not conspiracy theorist when it comes to RF, but I do wonder if perhaps we don't know enough about RF and maybe we are indeed playing with fire and don't realize it. With everything going wireless we are just adding more and more RF into the environment. Asbestos, lead paint, and lot of other stuff considered bad today were considered ok in the past. Will we eventually look back at our use of high frequency RF and think we were nuts because it caused issues that we did not realize now?I'd like to think that RF engineers who design this stuff truly understand every aspect and have done plenty of studies to ensure it's safe though and that there are 3rd party studies too.It is alarming when you hear of a specific species being harmed by it though, like are they affected differently for a reason or another, like the way their brains might absorb that specific frequency or something. I recall hearing that a certain frequency of sound can actually kill chickens. That was sound mind you, but wonder if certain frequencies of RF can affect certain creatures in weird ways.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 05:56:28 am
content: RF stuff has been in use for a long time so we would probably already know about its bad effects. Although I think there are likely to be a number of indirect health effects like people staying up late at night using their mobile devices that can easily be incorrectly attributed to a harmful effect of RF itself.

author: Red Squirrel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 07:46:30 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on January 03, 2019, 05:56:28 amYeah low frequency AM/FM and it's also pumped at very high wattages (like thousands) but higher frequency stuff is newer. I would think that because the much lower power high frequency tends to be pumped at (usually under 100w), it's probably fine though. Like a microwave oven cooks food, but it's also like 1200w in a concentrated cavity.They'll want to prove out what killed all those birds though and if it really is the RF or if it's some kind of weird fluke. Even if it may not affect us we don't want it to affect wildlife either.

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2019, 08:55:41 pm
content: They freaked out about the radiation from power lines killing stuff, but turns out it was the herbicides they spray on the towers.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2019, 12:06:08 am
content: Certainly hundreds of companies are poised to make tons of money off of 5G.Its hard to say what the health situation is, frankly.One can find a lot of stuff on PubMed about it. If anybody wants to know more thats the best place to look. Not here.

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2019, 10:17:10 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on January 04, 2019, 12:06:08 amWhilst its great we have free access to many articles (most are behind paywalls though), it is another matter how one interprets the trials/setups/results. Often it is either in-vitro tests with very specific conditions, or mouse-models, which over the past decade have shown to be increasingly problematic. This means unless one reads pretty much theentirepaper, it can be very easy to cherry pick quotes and data to show almost anything. Even then, very intelligent people can easily be misled by their own presumptions and biases - its not so much about intelligence, its more experience in the field, what makes the experts actual experts. An RF engineer won't necessarily fully comprehend test results on biological specimins, and likewise, a biologist or MD might not fully understand "RF radiation".Whilst it should be that "good studies" should be used as "good evidence", sadly, their results can easily be distorted, or dismissed based on ambiguous methodology.Conspiracy theorists not only make up their evidence, they also cite real-world studies, omitting (either intentionally, or just because they didn't fully read) the specific details that provide context. This is especially true in mainstream media (= tech journalists). Conspiracies are also fueled by sweeping statements like "All RF is perfectly safe" when.. if one was to nitpick, I'm sure 10kW of 2GHz beamed at someone would have an "effect" its just that is orders of magnitude greater power then used anywhere. Just because something isn't ionizing radiation doesn't mean to say it has no effect, just no ionizing effect. Just to be clear here, I'm not claiming there are any negative health effects of current commercial RF/Comms systems, just that blindly dismissing fears actually creates fear.Real-world evidence is all around us. We've had 4G for a while now... and with the vast amounts of health data governments (and now google) has access to surely something would have been flagged up. Same with the fears about WIFI. I have no doubt there will be more scare stories on 5G, as there was with 2G, 3G, WIFI etc.. but what keeps these fears alive isn't evidence, but fears about other things where people invoke new technology to blame for their vague (but probably very real) health problems.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2019, 03:10:33 am
content: In your opinion, should there be any limits put on 5G whatsoever If so, what should they be and who or what should they impact, and why?Also, should limits on cell phone radiation be abolished? Do you feel thats a resolved question, handsets right next to the head being in your opinion completely safe?

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2019, 03:50:58 am
content: Quote from: cdev on January 05, 2019, 03:10:33 amI am unaware of any increase in diseases of the brain/head/neck that line up with the explosion of cellphone use over the past 20 years. But I also don't think the question will ever be fully resolved, as it is incredibly difficult to prove the absence of an effect. Also, there is no such thing as "perfectly safe" because, to use a crude phrase - the dose makes the poison. Framing anything as either "perfectly safe" or, "dangerous" puts pretty much everything in the latter. The recent "round-up" lawsuit shows that even in the absence of evidence of harm, people can still just "assume" something is dangerous, ignoring important things like doses, exposure times etc.. This is why you can't "prove" to everyone something is completely safe, only show the weight of evidence, even then evidence itself is subjective.I would imagine there should be limits put in black and white on the phones output power, but not necessarily based purely on potential biological effects, just because a limit seems sensible to stop manufacturers using output power as a marketing tool. I'm sure 5G tests have already been carried out to gauge the output power required for different situations. It isn't in anyone's interest to have higher output power than necessary, regardless of health effects - people don't want to charge their phones constantly.If you have any evidence that links cell-phone use to problems/diseases I'd like to see it. I daren't google through fear of being swamped with antivaxx/contrail/anti-GM food panic crap that seems to be linked to it. (I'm not trying to be facetious, I genuinely haven't seen any evidence for it).

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2019, 05:07:44 am
content: If you want to know a relevant piece of information to all these things we're discussing, as well as the explanation to why a great many environmental toxicants should be regulated as part of a single category that is additive, a fact that people are doing their best to ignore, learn about the importance ofglutathioneand just how many things deplete it at the intracellular level and what happens then.

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2019, 03:55:33 pm
content: I just googled that compound. Seems its the supplement du jour these days. I don't see what that has to do with RF or microwaves, except for two dubious white papers discussing links between EMF (a term that is so vague now its lost all meaning) and various "antioxidant defense" mechanisms, and a hoard of less-than-reliable pseudoscience pages like emfwise dot com. -I'm not posting that actual link.Whilst I of course did not read both of those papers, only skimmed, I couldn't find any mention of power level or intensity. And the frequencies they mentioned were over huge ranges (apparently 1000MHz to 3900MHz has "some effects").Maybe something more specific? As I said, I don't like googling such matters, because for every credible source there is in the results, there's ten quackery websites (including the Daily Mail form the UK!) that mix poorly cited white papers, with opinion, anecdote and other quackery. That's not to say there isn't any relevant information there, just that it is swamped by crap that I really don't want to wade through.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2019, 09:11:32 pm
content: Actually to increase one's levels of glutathione most people take the supplement n-acetylcysteine. (NAC) (best search term isacetylcysteine)Quote from: Buriedcode on January 05, 2019, 03:55:33 pmYou can see from how I constructed the pubmed search term how to construct a search, use the plus sign to add multiple terms to the search. Also there are filters on the left which you can use to reduce the results. I don't even want to guess at what search terms to use, but you can likely figure good ones out yourself and drill down and find lots of stuff on your own. Knowing how to use any database is a great skill to have.Please don't ask me to attempt to pass judgment on this, I'm simply saying that it doesn't seem to me like a settled issue as some try to say, yet. It may be in the future. All sorts of new tools to evaluate and visualize external influences on biological systems are being developed and are becoming available. So what's the rush! Something this important needs to be gotten right.

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2019, 11:56:47 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on January 05, 2019, 09:11:32 pmDepends on your idea of settled. Even the idea the Earth isn't flat isn't necessarily "settled" since there are some people who believe otherwise. I think I get your point though - the fact that there are still on-going studies and we're still learning lots about our own biology. What amazes me is not only do people fail to understand what we know (as in, have solid theories for) ignoring good science, but also the amount of stuff people assume we *do* know, that remain rather mysterious.There may of course be some sort of influence found, its just I very much doubt it would be detrimental to health for the reasons I've already given. In the mean-time there will always be the "electro-smog" crowd, seling shielded clothes, hats and earthing, whilst also still using their gadgets because they dont' believe it enough to give up cell phones, tablets, and laptops

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2019, 01:07:25 am
content: You'reimplyingnow that we CAN say no, a year or to down the line, even if we start building this system, IF a COMPELLING reason to do so develops, right? Well, that likely wont be the case once it starts and I suspect very few of the people who are arguing different things even know that!This change applies to a lot of things.. Picking this one out of a hat because thats its name but- the concept is getting used a lot and its creating a binding set of situations that cant be reversed.https://www.ciel.org/lowest-common-denominatorThe problem is, they literally have created an increasingly -fake? is it already that? I dont know, but it could easily get that way - dysfunctional, lets use that word, broken regulatory system that cant regulate. Quietly, the 'right to regulate' is being taken away.So nomatter what emerges, even if things turn out to be much much worse than people like you think, because of how its set up, with a sort of ratchet, that only goes one way, so it wont be able to say no. Instead, it will be on autopilot to seek out theleast common denominatorin everything.There is a similar situation in the US with health care, for similar reasons. Everybody is operating under a mistaken assumption that certain kinds of decisions could be made, when those optionshave already been taken off the table.

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2019, 01:31:27 am
content: cdev, I mean no offence but I really don't understand anything in your last post, or how it relates to 5G. Your posts often have an air of conspiracy theory about them (which doesn't automatically make them wrong of course!) and paranoia. I sympathize to a degree, as I don't particularly trust my government (UK) to implement sound regulations, as they often ignore their advisors, but this isn't about governments, or health care.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2019, 01:59:41 am
content: Let me try to find the right reference.One of the core principle of the WTO is called "Progressive Liberalization". It means that anything 'affecting trade in services' (like basic telecommunications services, for example) has to be revisited every two years andprogressively liberalized.That means any regulation that is going to happen might have to be at the beginning, even for services that haven't been invented yet, which is impossible isn't it!?Progressive is a nice word, but here it means become less and less regulated, with each change captured- kind of like the Rack, a medieval torture instrument, or maybe a noose.. and not being possible to reverse.Unless its kept completely noncommercial and has no competition. Like health care in Canada, completely free. Everybody is equal there and there is no money involved. Smart!But unfortunately only Canada has managed to escape that trap. And only with great difficulty.The desired end state is total privatization of everything. Except things that are exempt. the government itself, basically.Thats the GATS.. one of several treaties that might be applicable..Governments specified limitations of various kinds in their schedules, back in 1994 or 1998 or whenever. there also is a treaty, the Basic Telecommunications Treaty.Plus there are other agreements, hundreds of them. Each one is there to make sure the people don't vote to do anything they don't want. Or that governments don't do anything they don't want for any other reasons.there are likely others..I really know very little about the Telecommunications treaty. But it would very much have relevance. But I cant think of any thing (this is my very subjective NON-LEGAL NOT-LAWYER opinion) perhapslesslikely to be in there or any WTO agreement than restrictions on businesses because ofhealth.An Australian law professor, Tania Voon wrote a paper several years ago discussing the efforts of Australia to regulate tobacco packaging with labels that said in no uncertain terms that tobacco caused cancer. They had a real battle in the WTO over this.The WTO REALLY doesn't want to enter into any kind of discussion of rights or health or anything non business related of any kind.We also have to remember that since large areas of countries are only marginally profitable, basically they will have to beg for service. To sweeten the pie they might have to reduce their standards, wage laws, everything.Communications infrastructure even if the density is considerably less than discussed elsewhere as the plans, is very expensive. Profit is #1. These companies here in the US are already pushing people really hard (Its literally themost dangerous professionhere) and frankly, a lot of workers are getting killed by the push to extract superhuman productivity out of them. But they want more profits and cheaper workers so they put it in the WTO GPA. (Government Procurement Agreement)So the companies that do a lot of this work in less profitable areas will probably be from very lightly regulated parts of the world. (Or maybe nobody will bid on it! But I kind of suspect they will because money is money.).Its not the 20th century when one company had a monopoly and did it all here. (AT&T)

author: MrMobodies
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2019, 02:31:49 am
content: Next time I do my decorating I am going to put up some of that sound and heat insulation with the backed foil and maybe some tripled glazed windows if I am still alive by then without any health issues.https://www.independent.ie/business/technology/homeowners-may-have-to-choose-between-warm-home-and-a-mobile-signal-warns-watchdog-37198826.htmlIt may turn out to be nothing.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2019, 02:33:43 am
content: You're right, governments are stepping out of the picture when business issues are involved. Thats exactly my point. We're on our own.You're not alone in thinking its a conspiracy theory when somebody tries to explain it to you, for example, see below, Prof. Stumberg who is a Professor of Law as well as the Director, of the Harrison Institute for Public Law at Georgetown University in my nation's capital, Washington DC. he also recently wrote a book on trade rules and government procurement entitled "Turning a Blind Eye: Respecting Human Rights in Government Purchasing". See his bio here>>>https://www.law.georgetown.edu/faculty/robert-k-stumberg/Watch closely - he says exactly the same thing as you just said about people mistaking this for a conspiracy theory... to the California legislature.This short video is actually really good - perhaps the best Ive seen in the respect that he crams a LOT of knowledge into a very few minutes. It would take most experts years, literally to get that much understanding into students.Basically the world is changing and businesses ... well..Quote from: Buriedcode on January 06, 2019, 01:31:27 amYour argument had an implicit embedded assumption that health 'matters' in this context and that may well not be really true any more.What I'm saying is that if we are to accept that assumption we also might accept other assumptions, like there was some kind of limit on the RF that could be enforced on this global standard. If so, by whom?

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2019, 02:37:33 am
content: Read up on thehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-radical_theory_of_aging.Quote from: MrMobodies on January 06, 2019, 02:31:49 am

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 02:17:35 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on January 06, 2019, 02:37:33 amLets not get off-track here. You've mentioned antioxidants a couple of times before, they are not magic, and in fact, supplementation can be harmful as the body uses oxidation reactions :https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/a-call-for-caution-on-antioxidant-supplementation/ps. I'm aware I'm derailing the thread also, couldn't resist a rebuttal though! edit: typos

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 02:24:13 pm
content: So how come Diego Garcia, with large US military bases and the obvious crowd of radar and radio communications all over the spectrum, seems to be a wildlife haven?

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 04:23:32 pm
content: After reading about all the dangers of 5G i decided to sanitizing my lab bench to become electrical free zone! I know you will start to bitch about that to but i highly recommend all serious EE's to do this. Vitamin C neutralizes free radicals.Apparently the US Cuba embassy was bombarded by 60Ghz collimated standing waves made by short legged crickets!https://www.rt.com/usa/448151-cuba-embassy-sonic-attacks-crickets/

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 06:21:25 pm
content: The whole planet used to be a wildlife haven before the human race started making it a human haven in ways that eliminated wildlife habitat. Remote islands of all kinds (for example, the Channel Islands in California) Military bases, even the DMZ between North and South Korea, because they are closed to the general public and many uses are prohibited, tend to become wildlife havens now.Also, whats contemplated for 5G in terms of quantity of transmitters and wide range of frequencies used seems to me to be way beyond anything else thats being done today with RF. Please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't know of anything else that comes even remotely close to what I am reading about is being planned. Also sea birds come and go over long distances, and they are (at least currently) unlikely to be carrying small transmitters around with them right next to their gonads. So nothing that exists today is really comparable.(Reproductive health is a major area of concern with pro-oxidant environmental factors - or should be, seehttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1790953/)Think about the implications of zillions of transmitters in every possible object that could be fitted with one and one starts to get the idea. If you look at some of the research thats being done with RFID applications, particularly self-powered RFID applications, a picture starts to emerge.I am not saying we should stop progress, just that we should not jump headlong into what may become an unhealthy situation in a bunch of different ways. Even if the effects on the body are clearly shown to be minor or insubstantial (I'm not saying that here, to be honest, I think the jury is still out)but the potentially high density of these transmitters and the higth pulsed power levels and beam forming aspects (what steers the beams - what is the effect of these beams on unborn life in particular - see the paper linked below) in some environments - highways, for example, and the conflicts of interest aspects - seem like red flags to me - I just think we should go very slowly,given that the regulatory aspect of countries to ever reverse these things seems to have been deliberately broken by the 'ratchet clause' aspects in FTAs.)Quote from: borjam on January 07, 2019, 02:24:13 pmAlso, I don't know if you picked it up earlier. 5G is going to occupy a very wide spread of spectrum going from 600 MHz to over 70 GHz.I think people who post on it should take some more time to read up on it. Lots of the things people are saying are just plain wrong. Its just a very very ambitious project, that is proceeding with precious little public awareness of where it might go, and it should be posing a lot of questions in people. Privacy should be a major concern, people have no idea how many products are going to be carrying networked devices.Something like that in some contexts could also be very good. Imagine doctors having the abilty to monitor peoples health and tell how various things are effecting the health of people around them in real time.

author: stj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 09:32:07 pm
content: do we know the bands, power levels and beam patterns??one thing i noticed where i am, the 5G antenna are mounted very low down - low enough to radiate through the 1st floor of peoples houses!!!this is totally the oposite of cell-masts that are placed above all nearby structures to avoid signal loss and constant exposure risk.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 10:11:48 pm
content: Just found this, another data point thats relevant to the placement of cell sites.This is from the US National Toxicology Program and its preliminary. I had not seen it before.https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/about_ntp/trpanel/2018/march/tr595peerdraft.pdfHere are some comments on it..https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6254861/Thoughts?

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 03:17:07 pm
content: If you read closely you will find out not statistically significant effects and, in one case, radiation seemed to be even beneficial.

author: stj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 03:28:17 pm
content: Quote from: borjam on January 29, 2019, 03:17:07 pmGTFO.

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 04:05:47 pm
content: Quote from: stj on January 29, 2019, 03:28:17 pmQuoteI think that's what he was referring to. Also note the huge dosage, about two orders of magnitude higher than one gets from a standard cell phone at max power.I didn't see anything in that study that pointed towards a solid causal relationship between cell phones and disease.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 04:46:48 pm
content: Here is the thing thats going to change, the power thats going to be used is going to increase a lot and be spread over a huge number of frequencies from several hundred MHz up to above 70 GHz. its also going to be delivered via a huge number of new base stations, basically one every 100-200 meters in populated areas. Globally. So, although I have no idea if these particular birds were impacted, anything or anybody that is aloft or perhaps even on a hill, or near to one of these base stations, or say, along a major road or especially near an intersection where people's cars spend more time, (because of the beam steering and beam forming aspect) may I suspect be placed in the path of more RF than ever before.Should there be limits of any kind?Not a single person Ive asked this question to in real life, had any doubt, they all think there should be and are.But, here, it seems that some people are basically arguing there should not be any limitations.Due to the architecture of the 5G buildout's various elements, it seems as if it will be hard to limit or measure anything The beam forming they will likely be using means multiple simultaneous data streams will be both converging inward from multiple directions and likely also going outward, on multiple frequencies.Basically, an epidemiologists nightmare.

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 05:47:36 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on January 29, 2019, 04:46:48 pmWho here, or anywhere said there shouldn't be any limits in power?

author: stj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 06:22:23 pm
content: a 200-300m grid globally?? this is clearly a weapon of some type - simply based on cost alone, it cant be anything related to "business".even if it could pinpoint oil or gold, it couldnt pay for itself.i wonder how much electricity it consumes while we are being told to reduce energy usage because of so-called "global warming" ??the same goes for survailance grid's like in the u.k.huge power drain for no good use.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 07:01:10 pm
content: Resistance will be futile.But what are we complaining about, really? Everyone will be able to watch streaming videos in 8K on their 7" smartphone! Isn't that something worth making sacrifices for?

author: stj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 07:11:05 pm
content: i know your being sarcastic, but just to blast some lies/excuses i'v seen for this stuff,the human eye cannot resolve 4k, nor is much produced in it other than some porn.and you cant download a film to your tablet/phone in 2seconds - the internal interfaces and flash chips are nowhere near that fast - it's all sales-agent lies.how would such bandwidth originate anyway? are they saying 5g is autonomous of the other networks and relays data from tower to tower over whatever distance???if not then it has to dump into the existing fiber lines at much lower speeds.NO, it does not add up unless it's a complete lie and the tech is for something else.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 07:15:17 pm
content: If you look at the info on the rollout from the telecom industry, thescope of what they want to dois unprecedented."Is demand for 5G there?"Don't forget, by all accounts, employment is likely to decline in the coming years as we head further into deindustrialization.Not only are many businesses automating, because jobs will be scarcer many people may not be out and about as much to put it optimistically. This change is pretty much unavoidable and the consensus is that both developed and developing countries will see huge changes as the middle class, the main buyers of cell phones and plans, shrinks.At least one cell phone exechas come out saying that with LTE still very recently deployed, he holds the opinion that 5G is unnecessary, not needed now.A UK advisory group's framing of research on possible health issues involved with RF in cell phoneshas come under criticismfor making allegedly misleading statements.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 07:21:26 pm
content: Think of it this way, all of the electronics people buy could be hosted elsewhere. Including automobiles. What if a car was just four wheels attached to servomotors, a GPS, and its control surfaces?What if they simplified all of the electronics instruments, moved all the calulation elsewhere, and turned them all into hosted applications on a server somewhere, with yearly, monthly, or hourly subscriptions? I think this is likely what businesses of all kinds hope to do.Lets also not forget that the RF will be an always available source of power to charge batteries, provide timing information, authorize or deny payments, tell us where to turn, who to date, where to eat, etc.

author: Red Squirrel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 07:22:55 pm
content: Too me I don't even take any advantage of 3G or 4G as long as they continue having data caps. Who cares if I can download at crazy speeds if I'm limited. It's like if you bought the highest model Tesla but it was powered by a couple D cell batteries. Yay super fast this is fun! Oh and it's dead.I don't like this whole idea of "Everything is connected" though. I think a smart home could be nice if it's done right, where everything is connected to a local server but of course it's never going to be that way and we know this from existing things that everything always ends up being cloud based. No thanks. Rather keep control of my stuff.

author: stj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 07:27:25 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on January 29, 2019, 07:15:17 pmthe traditional response to high unemployment has been to push a lie, start a war, and draft the unemployed off to the killing grounds.watch very carefully - i suspect round3 is not far off.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 07:27:45 pm
content: That isn't profitable enough for the business leaders of today to like the idea. All the vendors of IOT stuff make additional money by selling data, for example, even if stationary, location data, They collect all sorts of info on the users of their stuff.Quote from: Red Squirrel on January 29, 2019, 07:22:55 pm

author: KaneTW
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 07:31:38 pm
content: Quote from: stj on January 29, 2019, 07:11:05 pmQuoteVastly depends on the DPI. On a cell phone? Sure, but nobody streams on a cellphone in 4k. On a 27" monitor? It can absolutely resolve 4k there.Most big-name cinema is produced on 4k or 8k cameras and post-produced in 4k.QuoteSure, but nobody downloads movies. You stream it, and non-permanent storage is definitely fast enough. Especially in intermittent connections (subways, etc) when you buffer the movie while you have good signal and use up that buffer when you don't have a good signal.QuoteThe fiber already exists for 4g uplinks. You just need to upgrade the uplinks to whatever the estimated load is going to be. It's not like it's copper that's already at its limit.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 07:32:29 pm
content: I don't think so. The influence of the poor will just be more and more self-limiting. Don't forget, they won't be able to do anything involving money. Will they walk everywhere?Quote from: stj on January 29, 2019, 07:27:25 pm

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 07:40:49 pm
content: maybe the network will carryvirtual reality nerve input data, which needs very low latency to work, (feelings are transmitted by timing aware nerve impulses which can be mimicked by electronics) imagine if people's sensory world was networked and their brains just needed to be kept in a very high tech jar in a climate controlled data center somewhere.A scientist in Sydney, where Dave lives, is working on this. Currently so amputees can have prosthesis that convey all the feelings of real life.But it doesn't take much imagination to see where that could take us.

author: Echo88
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 07:54:54 pm
content: Tesla-Avatar Thinks Climate Change is a hoax Predicts World War 3 in the near future If were playing 4 in a row here, then i only need to hear that there are Nazis on the dark side of the moon or that your brother develops street lamps in the UK and also visits this forum to win this game.

author: Red Squirrel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 09:03:31 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on January 29, 2019, 07:27:45 pmYeah this business model is sickening, and it's sickening that it's legal. But does not surprise me, even our own governments are spying on us all the time. There is no privacy.

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 09:11:12 pm
content: Wow.. this thread started badly and has gone full on conspiracy theory woo. Its not even about 5G anymore, it just seems to be a platform for people to try and justify their fears about anything and everything.cdev, have a holiday, take a break, relax. 5G isn't just another part of some grand plan to further radical political ideals, it is simply a response to the growing demands of connectivity. If you do not require this connectivity, thats fine, many don't.stj - honestly, without a /s I really can't tell if you're trolling. Poe's law really is a thingIf you are serious, then I'm unsure what to say. You clearly have some very strong fears of some deep conspiracy that I'm afraid to ask about.Here's an exercise that I think does us all some good. For half an hour - assume you're wrong. Just for 30 minutes, try and work out what assumptions you're making (which is hard to do since, by definition, assumptions are views we are unaware we have) and question it. Sure, it rarely changes my views on things, but it can give one a chance to see things from a different angle. We rarely come to opinions based on evidence, often it is our opinion that drives what we consider to be evidence, tis the human condition - we arenotrational, that is why we have (and need) the scientific method.edit: typos

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 09:12:12 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on January 29, 2019, 07:27:45 pmAnd this is probably what all this extra data bandwidth is for. The end-user direct data consumption will probably end up being a tiny fraction of the overall used data bandwidth.The rest will probably be used by all the connected devices that will constantly push data.That, and TV. All TV emitters, even DVB, are bound to disappear, freeing yet more frequency bands, that will be used for 5G/6G and whatever is next. It has already happened to make room for 4G, and the final round will happen. This will result in a gigantic waste of data bandwidth for video streaming (which is already using a lot, but that's just the beginning IMO - thus why I was joking with 8K video streaming on mobile phones - it's probably not even a joke in the end).

author: stj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 09:21:01 pm
content: i'm not trolling.and for the record, i have no connection to the guy who had failing led streetlamps.

author: stj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 09:22:31 pm
content: btw,i study history - you can see a lot of parallels when you do that.the same stunts, lies and playbooks often get re-used once they think people wont remember.

author: 0culus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 09:29:43 pm
content: One thing that makes getting scientific results hard in this area, is difficulty of doing actual controlled studies. I doubt there's any place on the planet left that is free of significant RF (and other man made EM fields) outside of (relatively tiny by comparison) shielded rooms at research labs and other types of secure facilities. Emphatic assertions as to whether 5G is going to kill us all or it's harmless are meaningless without sound controlled studies into the matter.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 10:02:29 pm
content: You're aware that there is a long history of use of exactly those same arguments to delay regulation of dangerous things, like tobacco, long after they should have been regulated.There is afascinating archive at UCSF of tobacco industry disinformation related documentswhich were revealed by discovery in a number of lawsuits. I highly recommend checking it out.You want to know a bizarre fact, I have a friend who is mentioned in those documents. He was actually part of those efforts. Of course he couldn't share his name openly, nor could he put this decades long experience on his resume, so they found a way he could still prove he was involved, without attaching his name to it.Anyway, I had not seen my friend in decades, until I ran into him in NYC a few years ago. He still knew a lot about the disinformation industry and what he told me was disturbing. Now the disinformation industry is very active on the Internet. They confuse issues, exactly as before. This is evidently still a huge business, much larger now than it was before, totally under the radar.Quote from: 0culus on January 29, 2019, 09:29:43 pm

author: 0culus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 29, 2019, 10:12:39 pm
content: Note that I didn't say whether it was dangerous or not. I'm saying it may be difficult to impossible to establish either way, assuming honest research. I am quite aware of dishonest corporate research suppressing results that are detrimental to the bottom line.

author: stj
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 30, 2019, 12:56:58 am
content: it's not difficult once it's running,it's a fact that people living on the top floor of buildings with cell arrays on the roof suffer from huge clusters of brain and blood cancer.the problem is, by then it's too late because the shit's already installed everywhere!

author: apis
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 30, 2019, 01:23:13 am
content: Haven't there been one of these alarms for every new generation of base stations?If low frequency em-radiation was so bad we would all be dead by now. It would be evident in all epidemiological statistics that some since so many are exposed. If there is any negative effect it's going to be small.

author: 0culus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 30, 2019, 01:29:24 am
content: Quote from: stj on January 30, 2019, 12:56:58 amCorrelation != causation. There are plenty of other ways to get cancer. Establishing a causal relationship is going to require a controlled study. Again, this is NOT saying there is not a causal link, and I wish people would engage their brains and realize that. BUT we don't know enough (publicly, anyway...open access to research is a whole other can of worms!) to definitely say.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 30, 2019, 01:37:39 am
content: That doesn't make sense to me from what I know about what kinds of statistics are taken of where people live.I don't think that information that breaks down where people live in such detail exists yet, although thanks to 5G it likely will exist soon.Generally geocoding addresses doesn't reveal such fine grained location information yet, stj.Although, thanks to advances in GPS technology, seems newer phones supported under the 5G system will be so accurate the data will reveal where people are much less than a meter. (multi-band RTK gps will be extremely accurate, as in so accurate it will be possible to evaluate peoples health status by their physical activity, heartbeat etc. Health insurers really want this, so they can price health insurance by how healthy people appear to be from this data!)Quote from: stj on January 30, 2019, 12:56:58 amDo you have a source, STJ? I wouldn't be surprised if proximity to a cell site eventually resulted in cancers a few years down the line, but it might take quite some time because the repair capacity of cells seems to be based on the number of times they have divided. (In some cases, apoptosis i.e. 'programmed cell death' in response to DNA breaks, leading to more cell division only needs to occur if not enough glutathione is available to quench a free radical, for example, thats much more likely to be the case as people age because of the glycation of cells and the formation of cross links.) Telomere length might be a biomarker for cell division but as its been shown that certain interventions may effectively re-lengthen telomeres over time (!) it may not an definitive one.

author: apis
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 30, 2019, 01:45:57 am
content: Many years ago now there was a lot of media reporting here about a local epidemiological study whose preliminary results indicated that, after having collected several years worth of data, they could show there was a slight increase in ear-cancer for people using cell phones. But when the study was finally published they hadn't been able to find any statistically significant relation after all.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 30, 2019, 02:00:45 am
content: Because of the way apoptosis, cell repair and cell division work drawing connections between cancer causing environmental chemicals (cell phones are likely to involve similar processes) often takes a long time and a lot of detective work. New ways of determining such things are coming on line (oxidative stress, DNA repair adducts, imaging cell repair by means of tracers of various kinds, these are the tools biologists use now)But unfortunately, as discussed elsewhere, it seems that organizations like that UK advisory panel that are supposed to pay attention to such thingsmay not be doing so as they should.When I read studies on the issue of whether cell phones cause adverse health effects, I consistently see information which makes me think there likely may be effects, and I also repeatedly see problems with studies we have now. Who is using cell phones a lot? Those are the people who should be looked at. But where are cell phone users broken out by usage? Not all cell phone owners use phones that much. Also, usage is rising in some groups and falling in others. Phone SAR ratings also are deceptive. There are a lot of complicated issues.

author: MT
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 18, 2019, 04:43:11 pm
content: http://theduran.com/why-we-must-stop-the-5g-network/https://youtu.be/kBsUWbUB6PE

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: February 19, 2019, 10:09:29 pm
content: Quote from: stj on January 30, 2019, 12:56:58 amCould you link us to these "facts"? Maybe Australian cell towers aren't as nasty, but we fail to see huge clusters of people developing cancer in our built-up areas.Also, aren't sector antennas directional? Meaning that there is essentially a "dead spot" directly under cell towers?

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2019, 04:00:25 pm
content: The EU *used to have laws* that were very explicit that the main axis of directional antennas needed to not point at human habitation for some fairly long distance, hundreds of meters, but then they changed it, I recently read, and it no longer requires that.I don't remember where I read that, but I read it recently. It was likely while I was reading up on the issue for this and similar threads.If anybody knows the actual law, presumably being an EU-wide law it was from some EU or EC based organization.The most problematic situation as I see it is in urban areas where both sides of streets are occupied to several stories by continuous rectangular apartment buildings with people living on all the above street level floors. In order to cover these streets often cell sites will be located on utility poles located quite close to apartments, with their directional antennas facing up and down the streets. One would hope that the directional aspect - if facing away, would prevent the signals from being very strong in apartments right nearby but...

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: February 23, 2019, 04:10:06 pm
content: Halcyon, I honestly don't think any statistics existed anywhere a few years ago (when carcinogenesis would putatively been initiated) (although there likely will be soon) that gave such fine level of location accuracy that a person's residential location could be pinpointed so accurately, especially in the vertical direction where GPS systems, especially pre multi-constellation systems as were the norm until recently, have had accuracy issues. However, such precise data clearly has existed for a long time for the actual cells, due to the use of their GPSs as base stations to provide the AGPS ephemeris data. The combined effect of AGPS, raw-data capable (RTK-capable) handsets, fast update times (20 Hz) and so on however is now allowing the collection of extremely precise location data. (at least a few centimeters, probably even better, even when indoors, especially if you average it over time, and throw out the obvious cycle slips- (the outliers).)So even though I am skeptical about the existence of such data now, in the future it definitely will be possible to retrospectively ascertain if a particular user has spent any appreciable time living right next to or in front of a cell site antenna (or any other health risk, also to determine their level of physical activity, strength and rate of their heart beats, etc.) and then price their health insurance, etc. accordingly.