“Brussel’s citizens are not lab rats whose health can be sold for profit”. These were the words used by Brussel’s Minister of Environment to oppose the introduction of 5G (Evers 2019). Since then, more and more people have spoken out against the faster network in fear of its negative affect on our health. Two weeks ago, a national demonstration was held, attracting hundreds of people (NOS 2019). Those opposing 5G substantiate their apprehension by quoting experts and referring to researches discussing health risk. Yet, these protesters do not seem to be taken very seriously and their arguments are often falsified by citing contradicting study results.
After the European Commission’s action plan for the development of 5G in September 2016, the Dutch government made contributing to with this objective a priority. In 2019, the European Commission was forced to ask European countries to analyze the safety risk of 5G (Europa Nu 2019) After doing so, the Dutch government stated that 5G is not proven to have any negative impact on our health (NOS 2019).
So, does that also mean that 5G is proven to NOT have any unfavorable health consequences? Well, not exactly. The reasons that there is no conclusive research is simple: it is just not possible. The negative effects of radiation can only be determined after lengthy exposing, meaning it will take up to sixty years to get definite results (Evers 2019; Hewings-Martin 2019). The fact that the government is going through with the initiative despite the lacking information, leads to some saying that our health is being put at risk, evoking the earlier discussed image of lab rats. Then why is the government still so eager to put 5G to use? 5G will enable “faster browsing, streaming, and download speeds, as well as better connectivity”, thus playing a vital role in the widespread implementation of Internet of Things (Hewings-Martin 2019). 5G will particularly be a significant stimulator for the advancement of integrated systems, like autonomous cars, medical technology and robotics. While this all sounds very beneficial, it might not be worth putting or health on the line for.
If we cannot base the decision on conclusive research, the next best thing is to listen to the views of experts. According to radiation expert Vandenbosch electromagnetic radiation can cause ionization, dividing electrons from atoms, creating positive ions. Consequently, biochemical processes will appear, possibly leading to DNA-damage and demolition of proteins. However, “the frequency of a 5G-network is about a million times too low to trigger these kinds of processes.” (Evers 2019). A well-known biological effect of radiation is heating (Hewings-Martin 2019). Scientist are divided whether the amount of radiation we will be exposed to, is enough to significantly increase our body temperature. Even though the chance that our body will be heated indeed seems likely, this consequence does not really bring any serious health risks (Klomp 2019). One of the biggest concerns associated with 5G, is the fact that the number of antennas will severely increase. Due to the higher frequency of 5G, the radio signal has a harder time going through walls, hence needing more antennas. As a result, people fear that that they will me more exposed to radiation, especially since the impact of radiation is correlated with the distance to the source. Yet, because your cellphone and other personal electronic devices are far closer to your body, the negative effects of antennas are almost neglectable in comparison. Vandenbosch even goes as far as to say that the total radiation load will increase, because all the many individual antennas radiate significantly less each (Evers 2019). While this all sounds relatively reassuring, only time will tell if 5G really is risk free when study results can give us conclusive answers.
Europa Nu (2019).Brussel wil analyse veiligheidsrisico’s 5G. [online] Available at:
https://www.europanu.nl/id/vkx4o4e1ndz0/nieuws/brussel_wil_analyse_veiligheidsrisico_s?ctx=vim2bx14ecsu&s0e=vifdkm1d06kk&tab=0 [Accessed 19 September 2019]
Evers, F. (2019). Is 5G slecht voor uw gezondheid? [online] De Morgen. Available at:
https://www.demorgen.be/tech-wetenschap/is-5g-slecht-voor-uw-gezondheid~b2ca3986/ [Accessed 19 September 2019]
Hewings-Martin, Y. (2019). Is 5G technology bad for our health? [online] Medical News
Today. Available at: https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/326141.php[Accessed 20 September 2019]
Klomp, C. (2019). Is 5G schadelijk voor de gezondheid? [online] AD. Available at:
https://www.ad.nl/tech/is-5g-schadelijk-voor-de-gezondheid~a09354d4/ [Accessed 25 September 2019]
NOS (2019). Honderden betogers bij demonstratie tegen 5G.[online] Available at:
https://nos.nl/artikel/2300973-honderden-betogers-bij-demonstratie-tegen-5g.html[Accessed 20 September 2019]
Dear Bo,
What an interesting article! I know that this has been a news item, however I was not aware that there could actually be potential risks. I assumed this was just fake news. It makes me wonder what the effects are of 4G and all its predecessors. I don’t really understand why this is an issue now and has not been previously. Do you think it might have the to do with the increase in physical appearance you mentioned, such as the antennas?
Thank you for the insight.
With kind regards,
Anlei
Hi, thank you for your comment! Some experts do indeed say that there is very little difference between 3G, 4G, and 5G, so it is quite interesting that somehow the introduction of 5G brings a lot more commotion than its predecessors. The most obvious reason for this is probably the increase in the number of antennas, as you suggested, since this (wrongly?) suggests that the radiation will be closer and therefore more harmful to us than before.
The 5G debate is really interesting. At one hand, it is easy to dismiss the people protesting against it as tinfoil hat conspiracy theory enthusiasts but on the other every new technology has to be examined critically. It is great that you provide so many sources! It is always important to check as much research as possible before coming to any conclusion. My two cents on the topic is that the harmful effects of 5G, if any, need to be cleared before the technology is introduced to the masses. Once we have 5G, no one will be bothered by the effects it has, other than very very fast connection.
Thanks for you comment! The objective of my article was to include as much perspectives as possible by including a wide range of sources, so I am glas that came across! I find that media might indeed be too quick to falsify all arguments concerning the health risk of 5G, possibly because of all the financial benefits it will bring. In my opinion, it is unlikely that governments will wait until all harmful effects of 5G are cleared before introducing the technology, since this will possibly take decades. However, I do think that the health risks of 5G should be taken more seriously and that governments must be regardful of not falling victim to the confirmation bias while doing their research, because ignoring all harmful side effects of the technology would benefit their objective.