Guru3D.com
  • HOME
  • NEWS
    • Channels
    • Archive
  • DOWNLOADS
    • New Downloads
    • Categories
    • Archive
  • GAME REVIEWS
  • ARTICLES
    • Rig of the Month
    • Join ROTM
    • PC Buyers Guide
    • Guru3D VGA Charts
    • Editorials
    • Dated content
  • HARDWARE REVIEWS
    • Videocards
    • Processors
    • Audio
    • Motherboards
    • Memory and Flash
    • SSD Storage
    • Chassis
    • Media Players
    • Power Supply
    • Laptop and Mobile
    • Smartphone
    • Networking
    • Keyboard Mouse
    • Cooling
    • Search articles
    • Knowledgebase
    • More Categories
  • FORUMS
  • NEWSLETTER
  • CONTACT

New Reviews
Razer Leviathan V2 gaming soundbar review
Guru3D NVMe Thermal Test - the heatsink vs. performance
EnGenius ECW220S 2x2 Cloud Access Point review
Alphacool Eisbaer Aurora HPE 360 LCS cooler review
Noctua NH-D12L CPU Cooler Review
Silicon Power XPOWER XS70 1TB NVMe SSD Review
Hyte Y60 chassis review
ASUS ROG Thor 1000W Platinum II (1000W PSU) review
ASUS ROG Rapture GT-AXE11000 WIFI6E router review
Backforce One Plus Gaming Chair review

New Downloads
AMD Radeon Software Adrenalin 22.6.1 Windows 7 driver download
ReShade download v5.2.2
HWiNFO Download v7.26
7-Zip v22.00 Download
CrystalDiskInfo 8.17 Download
GeForce 516.40 WHQL driver download
Intel ARC graphics Driver Download Version: 30.0.101.1736
AMD Radeon Software Adrenalin 22.5.2 WHQL driver download
Corsair Utility Engine Download (iCUE) Download v4.24.193
Intel HD graphics Driver Download Version: 30.0.101.1994


New Forum Topics
Info Zone - gEngines, Ray Tracing, DLSS, DLAA, TSR, FSR, XeSS, DLDSR etc. Windows 11 will now tell whether your computer is DirectStorage capable. Extreme 4-Way Sli Tuning Up to 96 cores and 12 DDR5 memory channels with AMD Zen4-based server processors. [3rd-Party Driver] Amernime Zone Radeon Insight 22.5.1 WHQL Driver Pack (Released) FSR Thread Display Driver Uninstaller Thread 10850k or 10900kf - which is better bin? AMD Radeon Software - UWP NVIDIA RTX 40 Series Might Get 800 Watts TBP




Guru3D.com » News » New Study claims 5G does not pose health risks

New Study claims 5G does not pose health risks

by Hilbert Hagedoorn on: 01/28/2020 10:11 AM | source: swr via allround-pc | 59 comment(s)
New Study claims 5G does not pose health risks

New cellular technologies are often associated with higher health risk and there has been a share of that with the upcoming 5G network. Some believe that 5G could increase radiation exposure and, with it, the risk of cancer. According to a new article, there is currently no evidence of increased risk, for example, due to higher radiation exposure.

Interestingly and the flipside of the coin, the American National Toxicology Program (NTP) has actually found a higher risk of cancer after animal experiments with rats. However, scientists like the environmental epidemiologist Professor Martin Röösli doubt that the study can be transferred to humans.

Experiments with 5G are already being carried out in parts of the country. Large-scale use of the network so far takes place in particular in Asia and the United States. The application of the 5G network is also called 'Internet of Things', whereby all kinds of devices can be connected to each other even more innovatively. For example, it would be possible to remotely control robots in hospitals, improve infrastructure with self-driving cars and adapted traffic lights, and implement smart farming techniques that create the perfect crops. In addition, fast internet with 5G becomes accessible to more people and in more areas. 

Some researchers believe that radiation warms up body tissue, causing damage to the DNA. It would be comparable to food being heated in the microwave, with molecules deforming, damaging and nutrients being lost. Other researchers think that there are other effects of radiation in addition to heat. Various studies have found effects of radiation that are independent of the heat effect, but it is still unclear what exactly is the cause. In addition, there are scientists who see no increase in public health in the increase in radiation, and in some studies multiple interpretations of the results are possible.

In the article they say that the radiation exposure of the rats in the NTP experiment was significantly higher than the expected exposure to 5G for humans. In addition, the type of cancer developed by the rats practically does not occur in humans. Röösli also contradicts a higher radiation exposure due to the increase in transmission towers, since the smartphones would find a better connection to the transmission towers and therefore would not have to emit as much radiation.

The Federal Office for Radiation Protection (BfS) is currently not assuming negative health effects. Among other things, it points out that 5G will initially be used in frequency ranges that are already used by today's mobile communications and other technologies. Sarah Drießen, head of the Research Center for Electro-Magnetic Environmental Compatibility (femu), has not been able to demonstrate any health risks from 5G based on previous studies.

The editors of the article also point out that there has been no increase in brain cancer since the introduction of cell phones. In Sweden, there was a slight increase in people over seventy, but this was related to the higher life rating.

The BfS also writes that the technology is too young for a final assessment, since cancer, for example, would develop over a period of 20 to 30 years.



New Study claims 5G does not pose health risks




« PNY releases passively cooled Nvidia Quadro RTX 6000 and RTX 8000 · New Study claims 5G does not pose health risks · Intel is rumored to be buying capacity at Globalfoundries »

12 pages 1 2 3 4 > »


fantaskarsef
Senior Member



Posts: 13078
Joined: 2014-07-21

#5754901 Posted on: 01/28/2020 10:18 AM
The BfS also writes that the technology is too young for a final assessment, since cancer, for example, would develop over a period of 20 to 30 years.


So... that study's worthless. Like most tech studies anyway :rolleyes:

AlmondMan
Senior Member



Posts: 915
Joined: 2007-09-03

#5754934 Posted on: 01/28/2020 11:27 AM
So... that study's worthless. Like most tech studies anyway :rolleyes:

Not really, no. But whatever :rolleyes:

fantaskarsef
Senior Member



Posts: 13078
Joined: 2014-07-21

#5754936 Posted on: 01/28/2020 11:32 AM
Not really, no. But whatever :rolleyes:


Well I'm sure you're particularly happy that it says 5G isn't dangerous, but in reality tech never is tested for real.
Not that I believe the dangers are there, but nothing's tested over a human's lifetime to have any real intel on long term influence on the body.
Or would you disagree?

Fox2232
Senior Member



Posts: 11809
Joined: 2012-07-20

#5754937 Posted on: 01/28/2020 11:33 AM
Well, 5GHz is not any better than 2,4 GHz. It is question of energy radiated and absorbed. And question of type of molecules which do the absorption.
For H2O, 1st "resonating" frequency is around 23 GHz, but it is tiny absorption. Big absorption is around 180 GHz and then around 320 GHz.

But then there are all those other molecules and mainly our DNA which atomic structure may be damaged due to excessive energy absorption.
And that brings us to study itself. Rats did develop cancers => DNA/protein/... damage.

Idea that cancers they did develop are not common to humans does not change fact that source of those cancers is damage to complex molecules which enable living organisms to function properly. And that's exactly same kind of damage people can expect in high enough exposure areas.

emperorsfist
Senior Member



Posts: 1684
Joined: 2018-08-29

#5754978 Posted on: 01/28/2020 01:09 PM
Spot the conspiracy nut...

12 pages 1 2 3 4 > »


Post New Comment
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.


Guru3D.com © 2022