An interesting reply
Since the new frequencies are not ionizing and cannot penetrate deeply (a few mm at most) into the body, one must presumably concentrate on thermal effects. Far higher frequencies like infrared and light reach our skin in powers of 1-2kW/m², at noon in summer or close to a big campfire. This is what we perceive as "nice and warm". There is no way the small 5G radio cells will even come close to such energy densities.
So I tend not to see any danger in it.
However, I agree that this should be covered as soon as possible and comprehensively in studies to make absolutely sure that nothing is overlooked and to bring this discussion back to a factual level.
Thank you Ms. Hossenfelder, for your really well done videos. This is really a helpful contribution to the topic!
2 comments:
Quoting from the New York Times:
The 5G Health Hazard That Isn’t
How one scientist and his inaccurate chart led to unwarranted fears of wireless technology.
Except that Dr. Curry and his graph got it wrong.
According to experts on the biological effects of electromagnetic radiation, radio waves become safer at higher frequencies, not more dangerous. (Extremely high-frequency energies, such as X-rays, behave differently and do pose a health risk.)
In his research, Dr. Curry looked at studies on how radio waves affect tissues isolated in the lab, and misinterpreted the results as applying to cells deep inside the human body. His analysis failed to recognize the protective effect of human skin. At higher radio frequencies, the skin acts as a barrier, shielding the internal organs, including the brain, from exposure. Human skin blocks the even higher frequencies of sunlight.
“It doesn’t penetrate,” said Christopher M. Collins, a professor of radiology at New York University who studies the effect of high-frequency electromagnetic waves on humans. Dr. Curry’s graph, he added, failed to take into account “the shielding effect.”
The 5G Health Hazard That Isn’t
That's interesting, thanks!
Post a Comment