Issue link: http://cp.revolio.com/i/1291190
Page 20 | Abby's Magazine - www.AbbysMag.com short, in which everything from vehicles to thermostats to household appliances will be able to communicate with one another (and we'll be able to communicate with many of these objects remotely, probably through apps). Applications of the IoT will be very diverse in scope and scale: hospitals, power plants, warehouses, and even entire cities will be transformed. It is estimated that by the end of 2020, 31 billion objects around the world will be a part of the IoT–and by 2025, that number will grow to over 75 billion. e goal in creating this massive network of "smart" objects is greater convenience, greater control, greater efficiency, etc. To the average consumer, this probably all sounds exciting, until one becomes aware of the frightening fact that 5G network EMF radiation emissions have in no way whatsoever been tested for short or long-term effects on human health. Dr. Joel M. Moskowitz has compiled more than 30,000 research publications on the effects of non-ionizing EMF radiation, but has only found 41 that talk about the health effects of 5G. Considering what we know now about the effects of 4G and WiFi, this is a major oversight. Higher Frequencies Broadcasting from Every Street Corner Like the wireless generations before it, 5G will need its own frequency bands to occupy as it travels across cities everywhere. is is because the frequency bands of current 4G networks simply don't have room to accommodate the enormous amounts of data 5G will be transferring around. Typically, each generation has occupied a higher frequency band than its predecessor. 4G and all those before it fell within frequencies of 300 megahertz to 3 gigahertz. Low-Band and Mid-Band 5G signals operate at frequencies up to 6 GHz. High-Band frequencies will use 24 GHz and higher, and will introduce the millimeter wave, which starts at 30 GHz and goes up to 300 GHz. Millimeter waves have a major downside. ey don't travel as far as lower frequency waves–they are unable to pass through buildings, and are absorbed by trees, earth's atmosphere, and even the uppermost layers of human skin. To get around this issue, telecom companies will install small cells (which essentially are short range cellular antennas) in huge numbers. ere are a few different types of small cells, all of which have different broadcast ranges. e shortest range type, femtocells, reach less than 10 meters, and the longest range type, microcells, broadcast to roughly 2 kilometers. Due to limited area that small cells can provide coverage for, they will need to be installed at a much higher density – around one per every 10 to 12 households. So, if you aren't living near a source of cellular transmission now, you almost certainly will live and work near several once 5G becomes widely available. Of course, this will make it all but impossible to avoid sources of EMF radiation. A Quiet Controversy e push for 5G networks to go live highlights the astounding amount of disregard that corporate interest can have for the well-being of people and the planet. ough for years now, scientific studies and research have increasingly shown that exposure to EMF radiation has a long list of harmful health effects, telecom companies and the FCC (the government agency that is supposed to be looking out for public safety by regulating wireless communication) have not only failed to pay attention; they are now deliberately doing everything they can to minimize findings that cast wireless technology in a negative light. e ways in which 5G will vastly improve our lives are proclaimed at every opportunity, with little talk of ill effects, or any commitment to making sure the technology is safe. Worse, it is clear that the highest priority of those pushing the 5G technology is making sure that nothing else can get in the way, while leaving the "regulating" to telecoms. Take it from the chairman of the FCC Tom Wheeler at a July 2016 press conference: "Rule number one is that the technology should drive the policy rather than the policy drive the technology… Unlike some countries, we do not believe we should spend the next couple of years studying what 5G should be, how it should operate, and how to allocate spectrum based on those assumptions. […] Turning innovators loose is far preferable to expecting committees and regulators to define the future. We won't wait for the standards to be first developed in the sometimes arduous standards-setting process or in a government-led activity. Instead, we will make ample spectrum available and then rely on a private sector-led process for producing technical standards best suited for those frequencies and use cases." is effectively demonstrates the FCC's perspective on how important 5G is. It mirrors the agency's quiet efforts to create legislature that blocks local governments from restricting the implementation of 5G (essentially eliminating oversight and taking away the rights of citizens to choose otherwise). is will include streamlining the approval of small cell installation. Another major shortcoming in ensuring 5G's safety is that the FCC standards for safe levels of EMF exposure have long been obsolete. For one, the guidelines claim that the main threat posed by EMF radiation to the human body is through the heating of tissues. But it has long been proven that ill-effects can occur at EMF radiation levels well below what it would take to create changes in temperature. e guidelines also focus only on acute exposure, ignoring the possibility that chronic, lower levels of exposure are equally (if not more so) likely to cause harm (and overlooking the fact that the latter more closely reflects how we interact with wireless technology today).