Misleading opinion on 5G small cells presented by the ABC News in Australia

Misleading opinion on 5G small cells presented by the ABC News is simply a lie.

On January 6th, 2019 (with an update on Jan. 7th) ABC News in Australia posted a story on installation in residential areas of small cells that will be used by the 5G networks. The story was aimed at assuring the residents, who are having small cell boxes installed by Telstra and Optus in the vicinity of their homes, that there is no health problem whatsoever because radiation emitted by the small cells is the same as 4G network radiation that is already emitted by the large antennas.

ABC News was saying, in the Australian way, “no worries mate”…

However, there is something badly wrong with the opinion presented by the ABC News’ journalists, Ashleigh Raper and Nick Sas, and by the scientific expert used by the ABC News, Dr. Geza Benke of the Monash University in Melbourne.

Raper and Sas said:

“…The small cell boxes are used for 4G and mobile services in suburban areas, and are less powerful than the larger telecommunication towers generally used by companies such as Optus and Telstra…”

“…Small cell boxes will become commonplace as the 5G rollout gathers pace…”

Geza Benke’s opinions were presented in the ABC News’ story as follows:

“…Monash University Occupational and Environmental Health Geza Benke said although the “perception of risk” differed from person to person, from his perspective, residents living near small cell boxes had nothing to worry about.

“The exposure which people get from these antenna is no more than you would get from a large antenna,” Dr Benke said.

“They’re operating at the same frequencies.”

He [Dr.Benke] said over the next two years the small cell boxes would become commonplace, as they are considered a critical component of “filling in the gaps” for the high-speed 5G network…”.

Both opinions, presented by Raper, Sas and Benke, are misleading and might be simply lies.

Firstly, the primary purpose for installation of the small cells is not the 4G but the future 5G networks that will emit both, the same radiation as 4G networks and additionally new kind of radiation – millimeter waves.

Of course, small cells currently emit radiation used in 4G networks. However, in the future the small cells will emit novel kind of radiation, the millimeter waves, that are the basis for the rapid transmission of huge amount of data over the 5G network. This will facilitate the development of the Internet-of-Things (IoT), including self-driving cars.

It is absolutely misleading, or simply a lie (because the expert knows it), the statement by Geza Benke that small cells “They are operating at the same frequencies [as large antennas].” This statement is to assure residents that there is nothing new with small cells, same radiation as earlier… but weaker…

Indeed, right now, for the relatively short period of time, the small cells emit solely the same radiation as large antennas but their purpose is to emit millimeter waves for the 5G networks, and this will happen very soon, as soon as 2020!

Why the small boxes do not emit now millimeter waves? Reason is very simple, there are no commercially available hand-held devices that can use millimeter waves. Mobile phones that will be able to receive 5G network-emitted millimeter waves are still being developed and will become available in the near future.

Therefore, the falsely assuring comments, where journalists and expert state that the small cells emit the same radiation as large antennas, is misleading or a lie.

The small cells’ purpose is to emit millimeter waves, once the 5G networks are activated by the operators… and this will happen only after the mobile phones able to receive 5G signal become commercially available for the general public (see story & story)

Therefore, small cells are not “the business as before”. The small cells will emit different radiation than the radiation emitted by the large antennas currently used in the 4G networks.

Do we know what might be health effects of the 5G millimeter waves? The answer is simply – no, we do not know, because we did not research this topic. Assurances, presented by the telecoms, that research has been done are false. Research concerning technology has been done but research concerning biological and health effects has not been performed sufficiently to provide scientific assurances of safety.

[for more information on what we know about the health effects of millimeter waves see  slides of my lecture presented on May 8th, 2018 at the ARPANSA in Melbourne, my report from the EMERG meeting at ARPANSA, and Guest Blog from Steve Weller]

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “Misleading opinion on 5G small cells presented by the ABC News in Australia

  1. Darius,
    I have been asked to submit a textbook to CRC press on Directed Energy which will also cover cellphone hazards. I would appreciate it if you could submit a Chapter on your crusade to warn the world of cellphone hazards especially 5G! I can send you the outline of Chapter authors by private email if you wish! The usual time period is 6-8 months for submission! I am also thinking experimenting with paraphrasing software whichcan change a previous published manuscript if you have something already published. Most of our research on NIR Light Helmets and Neurofeedback is on Quietmind Fnd.org.

    Best regards

    Trent W Nichols MD

  2. Pingback: Trustworthiness of telecoms (it is a sarcasm!) | BRHP – Between a Rock and a Hard Place

  3. Pingback: Why the Australian government will not advise the public on wireless technologies’ risks to health – at least for now | Stop Smart Meters Australia

  4. Pingback: Funny business across the Tasman as Huawei 5G small cells are deployed in Sydney | 5g.org.nz

  5. Hi Dariusz. Did you read the fact sheet that TPG produced in response to public concern (link to it in the ABC article). Total garbage. This is why the general public are clueless and also why they think anyone who expresses their concerns over wireless technologies is a lunatic. What about getting together with your expert peers who have have done independent research in this area and write a petition (preferably using a platform that is well known by the public, eg Change.org), direct it to all governments in all countries (include the health ministers), then make this petition well known to the public and major newspapers around the world. I know there has been/are appeals by the scientific community regarding wireless technologies prior to talk of 5G and appeals specifically on 5G however the general public are not aware of these appeals. I feel that if the general public heard directly from the expert scientific community, the public would put more pressure on governments to exercise the precautionary principle and put a halt to 5G until sufficient testing has been done. The public also needs to know about the bias that exists in the bodies that set the standards. If you don’t tell them this information, many will rely on those bodies for the ‘facts’. They also need to be informed about the problems with the existing standards. Many people still think non-ionising radiation is not harmful as it is non-thermal, so they won’t even bother listening to experts expressing their concerns if they do not receive the facts that falsify this belief. I am merely an individual who has been following the independent research in this area for the last 6 years, I have tried to get schools to listen to no avail. My social media posts on this subject don’t get any likes. The expert opinion of yourself and your peers needs to get through to the public, and major newspapers and it needs to be a relentless campaign so that the majority of the public receive the truth.

  6. Pingback: Why the Australian government will not advise the public on wireless technologies’ risks to health – At least for now. | Smart Meter News

  7. Deborah, I have no idea… Necessary to inquire among building biologists… and you are correct, reliable measurements require both know-how and expensive equipment. Such measurements should be performed by the government regulatory agencies that have both, expertise and equipment.

  8. Have any private building biologists sweeped the field around small cells for all frequencies and the strength of the different frequencies being emitted? Who truly knows what is being emitted–extremely low to high– without very expensive equipment and proof? No one. I would want to know.

  9. Dear Anonymous, I am guessing that your offer is directed at Q alone… However, if you are interested in new research ideas, please, do not hesitate to contact me… Dariusz

  10. Q, no surprise… It is standard behavior of telecoms. When no research is done , no detrimental effects will be found… no matter whether such effects exist or not. Then, the standard statement is: research did not show detrimental health effects… just without mentioning that research has not been done… Telecoms’ games. They “own” ICNIRP and can do whatever they want…

  11. Have tried to sollicit bioeffect research at 5G frequencies. So far, no funding from operators or manufacturers.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.