UPDATE on HEALTH: Australian Parliament inquiry into 5G

Important update, September 23, 2019see below.

On Friday, 13 September 2019, the Minister for Communications of Australia announced an inquiry into the deployment, adoption and application of 5G in Australia.

Any individual or organization can make a submission to a parliamentary committee. The deadline for submissions is 1 November 2019. Detailed information and forms for submission are available here.

The Terms of Reference for this inquiry are as follows:

The Committee will

      1. Investigate the capability, capacity and deployment of 5G;
      2. Understand the application of 5G, including use cases for enterprise and government.

UPDATE on HEALTH (made on September 23, 2019)

Health is not specified in the text of the Terms of reference but… after I contacted the Committee, I was informed that:

The terms of reference relating to the deployment of 5G may include topics such as health and safety concerns.

Advertisements

13 thoughts on “UPDATE on HEALTH: Australian Parliament inquiry into 5G

  1. It has been checked. It’s ok for submissions to address health effects (and environment)

  2. 5G is a conspiracy against us the common people We will unite, when all those environmentalists , today 20/9 in Melbourne, all realise that protesting 5 G will protect their children and the ENVIRONMENT ! We are awakening!!!

  3. Colin and Mel,
    One of 5G applications is in telemedicine. However, terms of reference mention only enterprise and government. They seem to avoid using word ‘health’ as it would automatically trigger submissions concerning health effects and not ‘health enterprise’.

  4. I agree with Mel, nowhere does it state that health affects are out of scope. The statement “Understand the application of 5G..” is vague. “Understand” could also include an understanding of the possible health effects of the application of 5G.

  5. Where in the terms of reference does it say Health Impacts are excluded? I have had a look and cannot find this information. The only thing excluded is National Security. Please clarify.

  6. This happened also in April 2019 with the Underwriter Laboratories “Sustainability of Mobile Phones” voluntary standard. Suddenly, and without warning, the last day of the STP (Standards Technical Panel) meeting in Research Triangle Park, NC, it was announced that Chris Cleet of Information Technologies Industry Council (ITI–an international industry lobbying group) had filed a complaint with UL the week before stating that human health was not part of the standard, and therefore we should not be discussing any such criteria for this standard. His group, and the UL lawyer, had interpreted some previous meeting’s discussion as eliminating health from the scope. However, several people who had been at that meeting were dumbfounded, as their understanding was completely different. I have participated on this standards panel for 4 or 5 years, and human health has always been in the scope, and we were reassured that it was. This is another ploy in the industry’s disinformation playbook. Unfortunately, UL is not without conflicts of interest, as they do testing for cell phone companies, and as we have witnessed several times, they tend to make sure that the industry is happy.

  7. 5G is a costy con job by the telco$.

    My home setup is fixed Home Wireless Broadband (4g)  
    which worked well for the usual streaming and gaming and endless updates that multiply devices seem to need.

    But living in a regional postcode, my provider (uses the optus network), can only offer the throttled speed which optus supply’s
    “12 mbps for metro areas and 5mbps for outside the metro area”

    Yes 4g can go faster but the telco (optus) has chosen to cheapstake it.
    with 5G it’ll be the same,
    great in the cities but cost vs number of people covered regionally
    will factor in their $$ plans and speed offerings.

    Also with 5G the higher the frequency the shorter the range.
    there’ll need to a 5G tower every 500 meters.
    (closer if there are a few trees, buildings, metal fences)

    So its not cost effective for the telcos to build everwhere for everyone.
    (if it was worth it to them $$, but they have had over a decade to fix the 4G blackspots)

    your mobile at say the footy, or a large concert may work better?, with half the crowd on 5G and the other half on 4G.
    but the telcos will be putting the infrastructure in place for the average use vs peak use.)

    The customer will have to upgrade $$$$ their mobiles and other devices to be able to connect at the “faster” 5G

    But will ? 5G have a city vs country speed/download limit that is in place with 4G (optus)
    (cause the telcos cheapskate on current 4G infrastructure)

    If we had the fast NBN that was promised years ago, our home internet would be able to do the bulk of the 4k Streaming/updating/downloading/etc.

  8. Q, you are absolutely correct. We are writing brief opinion concerning mmWaves and skin. It is simply amazing that based on this nearly non-existent evidence ICNIRP, WHO and telecoms claim that they know that mmWaves are safe… They do not know at all what mmWaves will do to normal human physiology… It is simply scientific SCANDAL of major proportions!

  9. Governments and industry do not learn from previous experience. The health data base of 5G is minimal.

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.