5G - yay or nay?

[Kwacky]

https://www.howtogeek.com/423720/how-wo ... sks-of-5g/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

https://www.jrseco.com/european-union-5 ... cts-of-5g/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Quit a few countries are worried about the health risks (or potential health risks) associated with 5G. It's been held back in a few places.

[Monty]

I really don't see why we need it. What can't you do on your phone with 4G?

[Monty]

Just seen Duke's post, I'd not thought about self-driving cars. That's going to need a lot of bandwidth.

[duke63]

I read it somewhere recently but cannot remember where.

[C00kiemonster]

5G isn't drastically different to 4G in terms of user experience imo. But it will support lots more bandwidth for lots more people at the same time. ie lots of cars etc.

From a technical and physics standpoint I think it's a cancer disaster waiting to happen, especially in cities as the aerial density and signal energy is nuts imo.

I'll be in the middle of nowhere with my tin hat on

[D41]

Nay for me personally....I have no real need for something like that....sounds WAY too fancy.

[D41]

Why is it more of a cancer risk than 4G??

[Jack]

Why is it more of a cancer risk than 4G??

higher energy signals

[Kwacky]

It's a higher dose of radiofrequency radiation.

Modern tech is pretty amazing already. Frankie and I were watching live MotoGP racing in HD on my phone of footage beamed live from a moving motorbike while we were stood in the middle of the countryside next to an airfield.

[kiwikrasher]

From a technical and physics standpoint I think it's a cancer disaster waiting to happen, especially in cities as the aerial density and signal energy is nuts imo.

I'll be in the middle of nowhere with my tin hat on

I’m with you Cookie. I don’t get any reception where I am up the hill, 3G or 4G, and I don’t mind in the least.

I put my phone on flight mode at night because it’s on my bedside, I don’t even like the wifi pollution that close to me.

[Deegee]

I’ve spent years back in the 90’s with the old house brick phones glued to my ear sorting other people’s problems out, we had to swap ears after about 15 mins due to the uncomfortable heat it induced, now I might be wrong, but in hindsight that wasn’t good for me.
I’m so cooked.

[Blade]

Its worrying that these new and very potentially dangerous technologies can be rolled out with little understanding of the long term health issues.

Not the best analogy but when Asbestos was first developed it was a good material, only later to be found to be responsible for tens of thousands of fatalities and much suffering. To unaware average Joe's.

[D41]

Well, you go with what you know at the time, you don't worry about what you may or may not find out later on, otherwise nothing would ever get done.

I mean...what I'm kind of understanding right now is that the early cellphones were bad, the up & coming cellphones are also bad, but the cellphones we all own right now are just fine, right??
OR....the phones we have right now are also fcuked, but we go right ahead & use them anyway.

????

[StMarks]

.... OR......
????

This ^^^.
The truth is we don't know.
These days radio waves are passing through us constantly on a daily basis, & it's been increasing exponentially. The effect this may have on us & our DNA in the long term is yet to be fully understood.

[Blade]

Or Goverments know and aren't telling us as they need the progress.

[duke63]

As many know my mother in law has terminal cancer. She went on a two day course at a hospice about coping with it a few weeks ago.

There was a list of things they 'suggested' avoiding.

I cannot remember them all but the main ones that stick in my mind are:

Weedkiller - never ever use without gloves and a mask. They nearly all have known carcinogens in them. Every few years some of the chemicals get banned but the manufacturers just alter the contents slightly. Its a constant cycle.

Be wary of many household cleaners for similar reasons.

Red meat - don't eat it all the time. The human body cannot process too much and it sits in the bowel causing problems.


We are not far away from cancer being at epidemic proportions - the NHS barely copes now. When i was younger it was said 1 in 3 people contracted it at some point in their lives. Its now 1 in 2 people. It wont be long before its everyone.

[D41]

Those figures you mention are still in effect, although in practice they equate as a roughly 1-in-3 chance for women, and a roughly 1-in-2 chance for men.
Average lifespan for people of either sex is longer than it has ever been previously.
Except of course for rock - rock will never die!!

[Cav]

This sort of discussion is one I don't see any benefit having - it's going to happen - it's likely to increase risk to health - why bother getting caught up about it when we don't have a choice.

[duke63]

I understand there are other factors within those stats that mean cancer is more likely because we live longer, though isn't it the case that even that stat has stalled and is likely to fall?

The fact remains however that the cost to the NHS of coping with people with cancer is huge and there will be a limit on what it can deal with. That will happen long before it gets to every person being diagnosed with the big C. there are outside factors that money alone will not fix.

[duke63]

Since a client this week was quoted £1300 for each ( of 7) 5g capable phone he wanted for his staff, i think at the moment 5g will be beyond most people's pocket anyway.