5G – Pandora’s Box Is Open!

This subject has fired up a lot of controversy, since it’s introduction. So much so that it has resulted in massive public protests worldwide. However, if you ask most people what is 5G they will struggle to give a clear answer, or be able to explain why this may more dangerous to your health, than previous technologies.

In this article, I will answer your questions and explain why the word “5G” should raise concern, as it’s affect on the community is not without some serious consequences.

In addition to the wide-scale deployment of 5G, another system of data communication was rapidly deployed over this period and it also has potentially similar problems. Hundreds of Starlink satellites have been deployed worldwide. This article will briefly explore the technology behind this venture and compare it to 5G.

What Is 5G Really?

As 5G networks spread across our cities and countryside, people are asking what this technology actually is, how it impacts us, and how it’s different from the 4G or Wi-Fi connections we’re used to. Contrary to popular belief, “5G” doesn’t refer to a specific frequency or even a higher level of radiation; rather, it’s the fifth generation (thus “5G”) of mobile communication technology. Let’s break down what this means in practical terms, so you can better understand the changes and potential of this new technology.

The term “5G” refers to a suite of technology standards designed to provide faster, more reliable mobile internet and enhanced device connectivity. Previous generations, like 4G and 3G, introduced improvements in data speed and voice call quality. But 5G’s improvements go beyond speed alone; it aims to support the Internet of Things (IoT) by allowing more devices to connect simultaneously and improving the responsiveness of connections (latency).

So, 5G is not about a specific frequency. Rather, it’s a technology that uses a range of frequencies to deliver faster speeds and better connectivity.

Breaking Down 5G Frequencies and Ranges

5G technology operates on three general frequency bands:

1. Low-band (below 1 GHz): This band includes frequencies similar to those used by 4G. Low-band frequencies are ideal for covering large areas, including rural and suburban regions. They offer reliable coverage, but data speeds are moderate, not the fastest 5G can offer. In the USA, T-Mobile have launched a 600MHz 5G service which it is intending to roll out across the US.
2. Mid-band (1 GHz to 6 GHz): Mid-band 5G frequencies strike a balance between range and speed. This band includes frequencies from 2.5 GHz to around 3.7 GHz. While mid-band signals can penetrate walls and provide good indoor coverage, their range is shorter than low-band, covering up to several kilometres depending on the density of the area.
3. High-band (24 GHz and higher, sometimes called mmWave): This is where 5G’s highest potential speeds are found, as mmWave allows for very high data transfer rates. However, high-band frequencies have a limited range and are easily blocked by buildings and even trees. This means high-band 5G is primarily used in densely populated urban areas and can cover distances of only a few hundred meters.

The important thing to note here is that communication transmission is technically referred to as “coherent RF”. This means that it is pulsing with regular patterns and the frequencies are not random. Our bodies are able to safely handle “non-coherent RF”, prevalent in sunshine and other natural radiation sources, but it is effected in a completely different way to these new man-made transmission sources.

5G Health Studies – Nothing to See Here

I have previously published articles (EMF Exposure – WHO Cares?) and ( EMF Exposure – Our Ticking Bomb) which go into detail about the great “cover-up” of health risks associated with EMF transmission sources. In summary, the conclusion was:

1. The safety standard in most countries are out-of-date and significantly inconsistent with current health observations. The original safety studies used to draft RF safety standards, concluded that there were no health risks as they simply regarded the RF radiation as a mechanism that generates heat in the human body. No regard was ever given to the fact that coherent radiation sources such used for 5G and other modern RF sources, have measurable affects on both cellular chemical reactions and neuron function (brain and gut). (In contrast, background environmental and atmospheric radiation are incoherent and do not affect human physiology)
2. Telecommunications company’s have brokered deals to indemnify themselves from health damage due to their installed equipment.
3. Government health authorities are only quoting hand-picked out-of-date studies to justify the general safety claims made for wireless technology use.
4. The level of damage is substantial, varies from person to person, however it is 6 times more significant in children, due to the lower body mass and deeper penetration of signals to vital organs.
5. Rather than accept that there is a tangible health risk that needs further studies, companies stop any research which has shown an unfavourable conclusion.
6. Manufacturers do not have to specify EMF levels of consumer devices. This is the worst form of deception. Simply side-stepping any public scrutiny by not disclosing the technical data.

There is now a large body of scientific evidence that RF EMF exposure is a significant health risk, in particular to infants, children, pregnant women and workers near cell towers.

So it comes as no surprise that when it was publicly announced that 5G was being deployed worldwide, there was considerable objections raised. There were numerous incidents of public protest and concern regarding its safety.

Here is a recap of some specific examples of protests, vandalism, and other public statements that occurred once it was widely publicised that 5G had been rolled out without public review, or critical health studies conducted.

Protests and Demonstrations

United Kingdom
In 2019 and 2020, several protests against 5G took place across the UK. In London, hundreds of people gathered outside Broadcasting House to protest the rollout of 5G networks. Similar demonstrations occurred in other cities like Birmingham and Manchester.

Switzerland
In September 2019, around 3,000 people protested against 5G in Bern, the Swiss capital. Protesters expressed concerns about potential health risks and called for a moratorium on 5G deployment.

United States
Protests against 5G occurred in various U.S. cities. In April 2019, for example, demonstrators in San Diego gathered outside a telecommunications company’s office to voice their opposition to 5G deployment.

Vandalism and Attacks on Infrastructure

United Kingdom
In April 2020, several 5G masts were damaged or set on fire across the UK, including incidents in Birmingham, Liverpool, and Melling. By May 2020, it was reported that over 77 mobile phone masts had been attacked.

Netherlands
In April 2020, several incidents of arson targeting telecommunications masts were reported across the Netherlands, including in Rotterdam, Liessel, and Beesd.

Cyprus
In July 2020, a 5G antenna in Limassol was damaged in an arson attack.

Public Statements and Petitions

International Appeal
In 2019, an international appeal called “Stop 5G on Earth and in Space” was launched, garnering signatures from scientists, doctors, and environmental organisations from multiple countries.

Belgium
In April 2019, the Belgian Environment Minister announced that Brussels was halting its 5G plans due to radiation concerns.

Switzerland
In February 2020, the canton of Geneva implemented a three-year moratorium on 5G rollout.

These incidents reflect the range of public responses to 5G technology in various parts of the world, highlighting the concerns and opposition that emerged during its initial rollout phase.

How Much Radiation (EMF) Is Required for 5G?

Power Levels of 5G Towers

Many people are concerned about the power output of 5G towers, particularly in urban areas. Here’s a general idea of the power levels and what they mean for ambient signal strength:

• Power at the Tower: 5G cell towers typically emit power levels ranging from a few watts to tens of watts per carrier, which is comparable to 4G towers. Because 5G networks rely on a higher density of smaller, lower-power antennas in many cases (particularly for mmWave), the power levels around these towers are generally lower, especially in populated areas. This approach reduces the overall ambient radio frequency (RF) exposure in the area, as these small cells emit targeted signals rather than blanketing a large area with high-powered transmissions.
• In Built-Up Areas: Because of signal limitations, 5G antennas in built-up areas often require placement closer together. The result is low-powered signals, but many of them in a concentrated area. A person in a city might be within range of several antennas, but each will be operating at a relatively low power. Ambient signals typically range within safe exposure limits defined by health standards.
• In Open Country: In rural areas, where antennas are placed further apart, low-band 5G is often used to cover wider distances. This band has a longer range but operates at lower speeds. Because towers in rural settings are spaced out, ambient exposure in open country areas is also low, and towers emit higher power only to cover wider distances.

Power Levels of 5G Mobile Devices

The power output of 5G-enabled smartphones and devices is tightly regulated to ensure safety. These devices typically operate within power limits similar to 4G devices, ranging between 0.1 and 1 watt. The device’s power adjusts dynamically based on signal quality; if a strong signal is available, it uses lower power to save battery and reduce exposure.

Since 5G operates on higher frequencies (especially mmWave), signals don’t travel as far or penetrate buildings as effectively. This has led to innovations like “beamforming,” where devices use focused beams instead of sending out signals in all directions. This enhances connectivity while managing power output efficiently.

Unfortunately, since the devices are usually very close to your body (skin, brain, etc.) and you have no control of the signal strength of the cell towers in your vicinity, you are likely to be exposed to the maximum power output from your device more often than not. As indicated previously, this is where the outdated, inadequate safety standards are going to let you down the most.

​How Does Starlink Fit In?

Starlink, developed by SpaceX, is a satellite-based internet service that’s gaining traction alongside 5G. Unlike cellular networks that rely on ground-based antennas, Starlink uses a constellation of low Earth orbit (LEO) satellites to provide internet coverage across large areas. These satellites orbit at about 550 kilometres (km) above the Earth, much closer than traditional geostationary satellites (which orbit at around 35,000 km). This close proximity enables Starlink to offer lower latency and higher speeds than traditional satellite internet.

Starlink Frequencies and Power Levels

Starlink satellites primarily operate in the Ku-band (12-18 GHz) and Ka-band (26.5-40 GHz) frequencies. This is higher than most 5G frequencies, especially those used for broad rural coverage (low-band 5G). However, it’s similar to the higher-frequency bands of 5G, known as mmWave (millimeter-wave), which also includes frequencies above 24 GHz.

• Power Levels of Starlink Satellites: Starlink satellites are designed to cover wide areas from their orbital position, so they broadcast at relatively high power levels compared to terrestrial 5G antennas. However, because these signals travel vast distances (over 500 km to Earth), they lose much of their intensity by the time they reach the ground. The power density at ground level is typically in line with, or lower than, regulatory safety limits for human exposure to radiofrequency (RF) radiation. (Remember that these safety limits are out-dated and do not reflect the actual effect on human physiology!)
• Power Levels of Starlink Ground Stations and User Terminals: Starlink user terminals, the dish-like devices used by consumers to connect to the satellites, operate at power levels typically around 2-3 watts, which is comparable to 5G mobile devices. These devices focus their signals in narrow beams directed toward the sky, reducing ambient exposure around the user. Starlink ground stations, which connect the satellite network to the internet, are strategically spaced but are low-profile installations that generally don’t impact ambient RF levels for the public.

Comparing Ambient Radiation Levels: 5G, Starlink, and Other Sources

Now that we’ve covered the basics of 5G and Starlink frequencies and power, let’s consider what this means for everyday exposure in different environments.

In Urban Areas

In cities, both 5G and Wi-Fi networks are ubiquitous. Wi-Fi operates at lower frequencies (2.4 GHz or 5 GHz) and lower power levels than 5G, though both are common sources of background RF exposure. In cities with mmWave 5G, the network antennas are placed close together, but they operate at low power levels due to the dense network setup. (Remember that not only is the 5G signals a problem to human physiology but this addition of both Wi-Fi and Bluetooth transmissions are also common in urban areas, adding to the total exposure to radiation)

Starlink, by contrast, is not commonly used in urban settings where fiber and other high-speed internet options are already available. While Starlink may be present, it’s not as concentrated as 5G or Wi-Fi signals, making it a minor contributor to ambient RF levels in cities.

In Suburban and Rural Areas

In suburban or rural areas, where 5G coverage is expanding, most networks use low- or mid-band 5G to provide coverage over greater distances. This is due to the range limitations of mmWave. As a result, these areas see lower power 5G installations, often spaced further apart than in cities. Here, Starlink can be more common because it’s designed to reach areas where traditional infrastructure is lacking. Even so, the user terminals point directly skyward and don’t add to local ambient RF levels in the same way ground-based cell towers do.

In Remote or Outback Regions

In very remote areas, where 5G infrastructure might not reach, Starlink can provide internet service over vast distances with minimal ground infrastructure. Users with Starlink dishes are the primary recipients of the satellite signals, which are focused directly on the user terminal and directed away from general surroundings. Ambient RF exposure is typically lower in these remote areas than in urban areas, as the primary sources of RF are personal devices or infrequent ground-based infrastructure rather than high-density networks.

The issue that you should be aware of with Starlink is that you cannot escape from this radiation. Before Starlink, it was possible to give your body some rest from the negative affects of RF, by spending periods of time in outback regions. This is now no longer possible.

Final Thoughts on RF Exposure from 5G, Starlink, and Other Technologies

Across environments, ambient exposure to RF radiation remains below international safety guidelines due to the low power levels and short-range design of 5G and the long-distance limitations of Starlink satellites. While 5G and satellite technologies use different strategies to deliver connectivity, they both balance speed and efficiency with RF safety standards, allowing for safe, reliable connectivity in cities, suburbs, and remote locations alike.

However, as described above, the international safety standards are out-of-date and do not address the extent and duration of transmission, nor do they address the disruptive affect on cellular activity, brain and gut functions. Studies conducted to-date give positive correlation between these radiations sources and many common metal and physical problems manifested in humans.

Both 5G, Starlink and other emerging technologies need to be more closely scrutinised given the extent of the RF exposure world-wide. If health is a concern for yourself or your children, I would recommend getting involved in action groups the hold the organisations to account that simply hide behind these out-dated studies which evolved into “international standards”.

The “international standards” must change in order to properly account for the more holistic damage that our RF, in particular our new 5G and Starlink RF transmitters, are doing to our bodies.