# Health Impacts of 5G technology **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 9, 2019, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728 "2019-05-09T15:43:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Arjuna34](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/eb8c5e/32.png) [@Arjuna34](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Arjuna34)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2019, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/41 "2019-05-11T00:14:46Z")
> [@engineer\_comp\_geek](#): > > The bit about peak-to-average is meaningless. Maybe it is based on something real, but as written, it doesn’t say anything useful. Overall, this paragraph is saying that someone thinks they are allowing the power levels to be too high, and maybe someone should look at the standards again. Note that it isn’t saying conclusively that the power levels are too high, just that someone thinks they might be and they should take a closer look at it. Again, written in such a way as to imply something much worse than what they are actually saying. Peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR) is a real thing for EEs designing RF power amplifiers. [OFDM](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthogonal_frequency-division_multiplexing) modulation produces signals that end up with a high peak power vs. average power. WiFi and 4G protocols are both based on OFDM, so this is nothing new. There’s a lot of info online about PAPR and how to reduce it, but it’s geared towards easing the burden on the engineers designing hardware, not for any real health reasons. I’m not sure where the OP’s link gets the “1000” PAPR ratio from, and the paper it links to talks about timescales of 30 seconds and longer. The peak power spikes are far shorter than that with OFDM (more like microseconds). Also, the proposed 5G protocols have a PAPR that’s not much higher (if any) than 4G (e.g. see [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPE4XNysSpM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPE4XNysSpM), good info unfortunately in video format). Anyway, like **engineer\_comp\_geek** said, the page is bunk. ---
**Author:** ![engineer\_comp\_geek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/engineer_comp_geek/32/504_2.png) [@engineer\_comp\_geek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/engineer_comp_geek)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2019, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/42 "2019-05-11T00:57:49Z")
> [@Arjuna34](#): > > Peak-to-average power ratio (PAPR) is a real thing for EEs designing RF power amplifiers. [OFDM](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orthogonal_frequency-division_multiplexing) modulation produces signals that end up with a high peak power vs. average power. WiFi and 4G protocols are both based on OFDM, so this is nothing new. There’s a lot of info online about PAPR and how to reduce it, but it’s geared towards easing the burden on the engineers designing hardware, not for any real health reasons. Yep, I definitely understand the concept. It’s relating it to health issues that I can’t find any meaningful connection with, at least not without some specific information about what either the peak or the average power level is. Stated alone like that, it seems kinda meaningless to me. ---
**Author:** ![EdelweissPirate](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8491ac/32.png) [@EdelweissPirate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EdelweissPirate)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2019, 1:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/43 "2019-05-11T01:07:06Z")
Yes, we know what it means when _they_ don’t tell us about the health impact of IP-over-carrier-pigeon. It means the impact is guano. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2019, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/44 "2019-05-11T01:09:03Z")
> [@Darren\_Garrison](#): > > > [@Dewey\_Finn](#): > > > > I read an [article](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/06/smarter-living/wirecutter/dont-buy-a-5g-phone-yet.html) about the 5G rollout (and why you shouldn’t rush to buy a 5G phone just yet) and it said that the major carriers are deploying 5G using millimeter wave spectrum but that this doesn’t penetrate buildings well, so indoor antennas will be needed. What I’m wondering is what happened to the analog television spectrum that was auctioned off a few years ago? My experience was that this spectrum was pretty good at penetrating buildings (judging by the fact that a cheap pair of rabbit ears gave a pretty good picture). Wouldn’t that spectrum be useful for mobile communications? > > Not for high bandwidth communications, which is the only advantage that 5G is offering. The higher the frequency, the higher the bandwidth. UHF is 0.3 GHz to 3 GHz. 5G can reach [far beyond that](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/5G#New_radio_frequencies)–the AT&T version is at 39 GHz. And yes, 5G has enormous technical problems, and unless future phones support dynamic switching between 5G and 4G, I expect 5G to be a boondoggle on a beyond New Cokeian magnitude. Tiny coverage map. Constantly dropped signals. The phones themselves have to have multiple antennas distributed throughout the phone because holding the phone blocks it from receiving the signal! Thank you for the explanation. 5G sounds like it’s going to require a lot of work to be ready for the market. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2019, 5:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/45 "2019-05-11T17:05:34Z")
Here is a recent review of research related to biological impacts of non-ionizing radiation: > **[Biological effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields: Two sides of a coin](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079610718301007?via%3Dihub)** > > Controversial, sensational and often contradictory scientific reports have triggered active debates over the biological effects of electromagnetic fie… ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2019, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/46 "2019-05-13T00:39:25Z")
The New York Times has an [article](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/12/science/5g-phone-safety-health-russia.html) today that RT America, a Russian propaganda network, is trying to spread fears about 5G technology. ---
**Author:** ![jasg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@jasg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jasg)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2019, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/47 "2019-05-13T14:36:10Z")
> [@Dewey\_Finn](#): > > The New York Times has an [article](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/12/science/5g-phone-safety-health-russia.html) today that RT America, a Russian propaganda network, is trying to spread fears about 5G technology. … and from what we have seen in this thread, it is a successful campaign. What is it we say on the Dope banner? ---
**Author:** ![Surreal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/eada6e/32.png) [@Surreal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Surreal)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2019, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/48 "2019-05-13T18:33:09Z")
> [@RaftPeople](#): > > Here is a recent review of research related to biological impacts of non-ionizing radiation: > [https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079610718301007?via%3Dihub](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0079610718301007?via%3Dihub) Good info. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [May 13, 2019, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/49 "2019-05-13T18:54:48Z")
> [@jasg](#): > > What is it we say on the Dope banner? The plane on the treadmill will take off! But that’s not important right now… ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2019, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/50 "2019-05-14T00:12:55Z")
> [@Dewey\_Finn](#): > > The New York Times has an [article](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/12/science/5g-phone-safety-health-russia.html) today that RT America, a Russian propaganda network, is trying to spread fears about 5G technology. Most interesting is that while RT is trying to tell us how horrible it is, Putin is busy rolling it out in Russia. When asked about this, an RT official said that they only worry about US things. Putin saying it is bad pretty much ensures 5G is good. I hope everyone remembers how cellphone were going to fry our brains. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2019, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/51 "2019-05-14T00:14:08Z")
> [@TSBG](#): > > Has any research been done on the health impacts? Don’t stand underneath when they fly by. [/Lehrer] ---
**Author:** ![Qwakkeddup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/90ced4/32.png) [@Qwakkeddup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qwakkeddup)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2019, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/52 "2019-05-14T01:05:48Z")
What’s really amazing is that the people who condemn cell phone radiation, emp / emf from power transmission and other such, are also big supporters of an electro-magnetic, or ultra-sonic device that stimulates broken bones to heal. Just more Homeopathetic\* crap. \*Homeopathic spelled and pronounced correctly. ---
**Author:** ![MarvinKitFox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ba0ec/32.png) [@MarvinKitFox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MarvinKitFox)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2019, 6:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/53 "2019-05-14T06:19:30Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Are there any documented negative health impacts of widespread 5G technology deployments? Most definitely yes. Increased neck, eye and thumb strain resulting from the further increased usage of highspeed devices displaying high data rate p0rn, movies and other trivia. Also increased vehicular accidents due to people not only texting, not only talking, but actually watching movies while driving. Aside from these, not so much. The frequencies used for 5g have significantly less absorption and activation in organic matter than those used for normal gsm cellphone and 3-4g. So there might be a slight _improvement_ in health impact near the towers, but there is quite insufficient longterm data yet to determine this with any certainty. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/54 "2019-05-15T01:45:47Z")
For those interested in science and data (relates to the previously linked review of NIR impact with a number of them showing increased oxidative stress or DNA break/damage): > **[Study finds direct oxidative stress damage shortens telomeres](https://medicalxpress.com/news/2019-05-oxidative-stress-shortens-telomeres.html)** > > The same sources thought to inflict oxidative stress on cells—pollution, diesel exhaust, smoking and obesity—also are associated with shorter telomeres, the protective tips on the ends of the chromosomal shoelace. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 5:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/55 "2019-05-15T05:55:03Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > I hope everyone remembers how cellphone were going to fry our brains. Well, it’s not clear that this didn’t happen. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 12:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/56 "2019-05-15T12:51:59Z")
If anything, I’d expect 5G to have even less health impact than the (already-negligible) impact of 4G, because the smaller cell size means you can use less power. ---
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2019, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/57 "2019-05-15T16:48:23Z")
> [@Dewey\_Finn](#): > > I read an [article](https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/06/smarter-living/wirecutter/dont-buy-a-5g-phone-yet.html) about the 5G rollout (and why you shouldn’t rush to buy a 5G phone just yet) and it said that the major carriers are deploying 5G using millimeter wave spectrum but that this doesn’t penetrate buildings well, so indoor antennas will be needed. What I’m wondering is what happened to the analog television spectrum that was auctioned off a few years ago? My experience was that this spectrum was pretty good at penetrating buildings (judging by the fact that a cheap pair of rabbit ears gave a pretty good picture). Wouldn’t that spectrum be useful for mobile communications? The analog TV channels were about 6 MHz wide, so all 12 of the VHF channels together total about 72 MHz, and even this is not a continuous block of spectrum. The most common 5G signal width that I see in my job is 100 MHz wide, for a single carrier signal, and these can be ganged together. 5G at mm-wave defines up to 400 MHz wide single carriers, and those can be ganged as well. There’s just not enough spectrum at the lower frequencies to give the bandwidth (and data rates) they’re looking to get. I too am concerned that there will be a 5G bust when consumers realize the challenges of the signal propagation. A year or so ago I was working, getting a 5G signal in a hotel room from the base station just 100 m away, and we were getting a decent signal. Then we closed the sliding glass door, and the signal just went away, like completely. For the near-term, 5G will only work in “non-standalone” mode, where you have to have a 4G connection established, and if you request a large amount of data, the system can send it to you on the 5G radio if you have that. ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [May 16, 2019, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728/58 "2019-05-16T03:09:32Z")
> [@](#): > > In addition, there is convincing emerging scientific evidence causing great concern for the environment, with harm to mammals, insects and bacteria, prompting scientists around the world to call for a moratorium on 5G. That last part triggers my bullshit-o-meter. What percentage of scientists want a moratorium, and what percentage of that group has expertise on the subject? You could just as accurately say that “scientists around the world reject climate change”, while leaving out that an overwhelming majority of climate scientists do not. I had never heard of the International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health (which ran one of the linked articles warning of potential 5G dangers), but I see the same journal has run articles treating “multiple chemical sensitivity” as a real disease. :dubious: [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/health-impacts-of-5g-technology/833728.md?page=2)