Updated March 4, 2024: Sporadic protests over the rollout of 5G networks and its impact on human health have not slowed the global rollout of the latest generation of mobile phone technology. Most significantly, Switzerland suspended 5G rollout in 2020 over concerns about radiation exposure, but eventually allowed network operators to roll out 5G technology (although public opinion on the technology remains divided).
But research on the health effects of 5G remains murky at best. In the United States, for example, much of the fundamental research that led to safe exposure limits to non-ionizing radiation was conducted in the 1990s, when cell phone networks (to the extent that they existed) were very different from today’s 5G networks. Studies from that time found some weak potential links between cell phone radiation and certain health problems (such as an increase in childhood leukemia). But by and large, rigorous, extensive studies of human health effects have never been done, and the studies that have been done are decades old.
But there is one area of concern where 5G may be better than previous networks. As IEEE Fellow Rod Waterhouse points out in the original article below, cellular radiation is non-ionizing radiation, not the ionizing radiation that causes various cancers. Non-ionizing radiation does carry the risk of tissue heating, however, and 5G operates in part at a higher frequency, so it doesn’t penetrate as deeply into the skin, lowering the risk of damaging it. But overall, the health effects of 5G, now in its fifth or sixth year of operation in large parts of the world, are still unclear. —IEEE Spectrum
The original story from Nov. 12, 2019 follows:
Residents of several cities, including Aspen, Colorado, Bern, Switzerland, San Diego, California, and Totnes, UK, are protesting against the installation of 5G wireless base stations because they are concerned about the harmful effects of these network nodes on humans, animals, and plants. They point out the potential dangers of radio frequency (RF) radiation emitted by antennas installed in close proximity to people.
Protesters also argue there is no scientific evidence showing that 5G signals are safe, especially those transmitted in the millimeter wave region of the electromagnetic spectrum. While today’s mobile devices operate at frequencies below 6 gigahertz, 5G will use frequencies above 600 megahertz, which includes the millimeter wave band between 30 GHz and 300 GHz.
Concerns are growing about 5G, leading some cities to halt or delay the installation of base stations.
These news reports have caught the attention of members of the IEEE Future Networks Initiative, which works to pave the way for 5G development and deployment. In September, the group published a short paper titled “5G Communications Systems and Radio Frequency Exposure Limits,” which reviews existing guidelines for RF exposure.
Research Institute We asked two members of the IEEE Initiative for their perspective on the debate over 5G: IEEE Fellow Rod Waterhouse is a member of the Initiative’s editorial board. Technology Focus He has worked in publishing and editing the 5G report. His research interests are in antenna, electromagnetics, and microwave photonics engineering. He is CTO and co-founder of Octane Wireless in Hanover, MD.
IEEE Senior Member David Witkowski is co-chair of the initiative’s deployment working group. He is an expert in the wireless and telecommunications industry. Witkowski is executive director of the Wireless Communications Initiative at Joint Venture Silicon Valley, a nonprofit based in San Jose, California, that works to solve problems in areas such as communications, education and transportation.
Introduction to 5G
Waterhouse says most of the concerns about 5G’s negative health effects stem from the fact that its base stations are designed quite differently from those that power today’s 3G and 4G mobile phone networks. Those base stations are spaced several kilometers apart and typically installed in tall buildings away from densely populated areas. Because 5G base stations are smaller than a backpack, they can be placed anywhere, on street lamps, lampposts or rooftops. That means they’ll be located near homes, apartments, schools, stores, parks and farms.
“Wireless companies are going to be putting devices into everyday structures like benches and bus stops, so they’re going to be lower to the ground and closer to people,” Waterhouse says. “You’re going to see more of these base stations. [compared with the number of cell towers around today] That’s because of limited range. 5G mmWave networks require cell antennas to be placed every 100 to 200 meters.”
That being said, one advantage of these small base stations is that because they cover a smaller area, they don’t need to transmit as much power as current cell towers.
“It would be a cause for concern if a 5G base station at a bus stop was transmitting the same amount of power that a cell tower currently transmits 30 metres above the ground,” Waterhouse says. “But that’s not the case.”
Replacing a 750 MHz 4G radio with a 5G radio, with no changes to the antennas, will provide the same coverage as the 4G radio, but of course the data rates will be higher and network response times will be faster, Witkowski said.
Waterhouse predicts that 5G will be rolled out in two phases. The first phase, he said, will operate in bands close to the sub-6 GHz spectrum region where 4G equipment operates. “It’ll have a little bit more bandwidth and faster data rates,” he said. “And 5G base stations will only be in certain small areas, not everywhere.”
The next phase, which he calls 5G-plus, will use more base stations and millimeter wave frequencies, resulting in significantly higher bandwidth and data rates.
Witkowski said U.S. carriers that already have dense deployments in the sub-6 GHz bands will begin to roll out 5G in the K/Ka bands and mmWave, and will also begin replacing their 3G and 4G radios with new 5G radios.
“For US operators with access to vacant/reallocated spectrum, such as T-Mobile at 600 MHz and Sprint at 2.5 GHz, their deployment strategy will likely be to leave 3G/4G alone for now and add 5G to these lower bands,” Witkowski said.
Existing Regulations
Waterhouse cites two international documents that set safe RF exposure limits. The first is the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines, which have been around since 1998. IEEE C95.1, “IEEE Standard for Safety Levels for Human Exposure to Electric, Magnetic, and Electromagnetic Fields,” was developed by the IEEE International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety and released in 2005. IEEE C95.1 covers the spectrum from 3 kilohertz to 300 GHz. The Future Networks report details the various human exposure limits found in these documents.
The regularly updated ICNIRP and IEEE guidelines were both updated this year, with localized exposure limits (above 6 GHz) now lower, and even stricter limits have been set in Belgium, India, Russia and other countries.
As for whether mmWave is safe, Waterhouse explains that RF from cell towers is on the non-ionizing radiation spectrum, so it’s not the kind of radiation that can damage DNA or cause cancer. The only biological effect RF has on humans is tissue heating. Too much exposure to RF can overheat a person’s entire body to dangerous levels. Localized exposure can damage skin tissue and the cornea.
“The higher the frequency, the smaller the actual effect on the human body and the depth of penetration,” he says. “The advantage is that millimeter waves reflect off the surface of the skin, so the skin is not damaged.”
Waterhouse acknowledged that while mmWave is used for a variety of purposes, including astronomy and military applications, the impacts of its use in communications are not fully understood. Ensuring 5G is safe is the responsibility of the regulatory bodies that oversee telecommunications companies, Waterhouse said. The general consensus is that mmWave is safe but needs to be monitored, Waterhouse said.
“The majority of the scientific community doesn’t think there’s a problem,” Waterhouse says, “but it would be unscientific to say there’s no reason to worry.”
Many opponents argue that 5G must be proven safe before regulators will allow it to be rolled out. The problem with this argument, Witkowski said, is that it’s logically impossible to prove something with 100% certainty.
“Everything we do carries risk: taking a shower, making breakfast, commuting to work, eating at a restaurant, going out in public,” he says. “Whether it’s 3G, 4G, or 5G, the question of electromagnetic radiation safety (EMR) is whether the risks are manageable. The first medical studies on the health effects of EMR began almost 60 years ago, and since then, literally thousands of studies have reported no health risks or are inconclusive. A relatively small number of studies claim to find evidence of risk, but those studies have not been replicated. Reproducibility is a key component of good science.”
Although the health effects of electromagnetic radiation need to continue to be considered, the preponderance of evidence indicates that there is no reason to suspend deployment.”
