Messages of concern and alarmism about the Internet are circulating on the Internet 5G, the soon to be introduced cellular technology, but the treatment of the subject in a rigorous and competent manner highlights the complete groundlessness of any catastrophic hypothesis.
First of all, it must be clarified that the fear derived from the consequences of the immersion of human beings in the sea of electromagnetic fields can be countered thanks to the data accumulated over decades of exposure to propagating waves. We have data of all kinds: high or low frequencies, wavelengths of all kinds, analyses, tests, statistics onexposure for more or less prolonged times to different types of sources electromagnetic.
But what is an electromagnetic field, exactly?
Each electric or magnetic charge creates a "perturbation" or "condition" in the surrounding space such that another charge that may be present in the vicinity feels a force. This condition of space, which has the capacity to produce a force, is called a field. It is generated by a single charge and exists whether or not another charge is present in the field and feels its effect.
Il electric field and magnetic field are closely linked to each other: an electric field can be generated not only by a distribution of electric charge, but also by a magnetic field that varies over time. Similarly, a magnetic field can be generated not only by a passage of electric current, but also by an electric field that varies over time. In other words, under very specific conditions, the electric field and the magnetic field become each other's source. They can, in this case, be considered as two aspects of asingle physical quantitycalled the electromagnetic field.
The electromagnetic field is capable of causing electric currents in conductive materials and therefore also in tissues of biological organismsthrough the phenomenon of the propagation of electromagnetic waves.
But what are the sources of these electromagnetic fields?
All matter is fundamentally characterized by a certain emission of electromagnetic field that derives from atoms and their nuclei which continuously exchange energy through their particles. All living beings are therefore comparable to very high frequency oscillating circuits capable of emitting and receiving electromagnetic radiation. In some cases, these emissions are visible to the human eye. For example, in the case of the energy that the Sun sends through its light towards our planet, it is possible to distinguish the propagation waves based on the oscillation frequency of the electromagnetic field of the light itself. Each color has its own different frequency and therefore its own different wave length. Other artificial sources of electromagnetic waves involve more or less frequent oscillations, so that one can literally draw one spectrum of all possible frequencies of electromagnetic radiation.
But be careful: the energy radiation in the electromagnetic field should not be confused with the radioactivity. In no case are the radio signals emanating from any transmitting device, from the TV remote control to the smartphone subject to radioactive decay.
Now, the basic physical principles that make radios and televisions work are the same ones used to make 5G work which, in turn, is no different from currently applied cellular technology. What changes, for the purpose of determining the risk for exposure to electromagnetic fields, is only one parameter (from which others derive): the oscillation frequency of the wave. This value clearly influences that of the wavelength, but the values achieved in these cases are by no means new for the experts who conduct tests and analyzes on effects due toabsorption of such waves.
Precisely for this reason, whoever invokes the principle of prudence, all he has to do is go and observe and read the outcome of what has emerged in all these years of experimentation with broadband cellular technology. 5G is just an updated, more efficient and better performing version of technologies that we have already been using for some time. The frequent misunderstanding is to believe that higher speed necessarily implies greater power and therefore greater health risks. In reality, 5G makes better use of resources: instead of spreading the signal in all directions, it actively concentrates it where it is needed at that moment. Furthermore, the mathematical algorithms have been chosen for a more efficient yield, just as the transmission frequencies are higher, precisely to pass more data using the same energy, or even use less energy to pass the same amount of data.
In Italy, the frequency bands assigned to mobile phone operators are three: 694-790MHz, 3600-3800MHz e 26,5-27,5 GHz. The first two are nothing new while the frequency between 26,5 and 27,5 GHz is. The lower frequencies allow more agile overcoming of obstacles, but the highest guarantee higher data transfer speeds. As can be seen, the novelty brings with it characteristics that in theory should make those who are worried about an excessive penetration of the waves into the human body feel more relaxed.
In any case, all wavelengths lower than those of (visible) light are typical of so-called radiations "non-ionizing” that is, there is no risk of alteration of the molecules that make up the tissue of the human body. The study must be moved only and exclusively to thethermal effect of this radiation.
To date, the Italian 5G network has many urban centers - in all regions - which have been able to access the new technology for some time now. The operators have concluded their competitive race and updated their offers: the first was Vodafone, butt with Tim and Wind.
The main benefits offered by the 5G network are: higher speed, lower latency and the possibility of organizing multiple devices at the same time. This means that the applications multiply dramatically, some from revolutionary scope: Internet Of Things, self-driving cars, definitive elimination of the digital divide, services for smart cities, digital public administration and much more.
The hoaxes on 5G
Yet on the Internet, the sources that speak of high risks, if not apocalyptic tragedies, are numerous. The best false alarm response, fortunately, is provided by one study lasted 10 years and elaborated by the NIH (National Institutes of Health) in the United States in which the results of an analysis are presented which sought some causality or even alone correlation (spurious) cell phone radiation and cancer: there is no way to put the two into a cause-and-effect relationship.
Sometimes the suspicion arises that the spread of hoaxes is one leverage for business of alleged devices to defend oneself from the waves, antidotes for completely invented diseases and devices to carry out useless "remediation" in environments, and even paid courses to learn about the best protection, up to and including hats and shielded underwear.
The gravestone on the matter is perhaps precisely that of the Italian Association for Cancer Research (AIRC) which classifies electromagnetic fields as group 2B carcinogens, i.e. as “possibly carcinogenic to humans: agents for which there is limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and insufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in laboratory animals”. This means, as specified in addition to "there is currently not enough scientific evidence to support a direct cause and effect relationship between exposure to electromagnetic fields and cancer, but the scientific community agrees that further studies are needed”. And again: “The main biological effect of the penetration of electromagnetic waves into the human body is the warm-up, I look at the detectable limit by holding a smartphone to my ear for hours. However the levels we are normally exposed to are too low to cause significant warming. There are currently no known health effects from long-term exposure."
A term of comparison? Microwave oven. The microwave heats food only thanks to a power of about 1.000 Watts confined almost entirely to the internal compartment. No smartphone can deliver all that power to send its signals, especially concentrated in the direction of the human body. Another example? With a field detector, one can clearly see how the electromagnetic signal decreases significantly as the distance from the emission source increases: if a router transmits with a power of 100 mW (0,1 W), the maximum allowed in Italy and in Europe, at a distance of two meters will absorb just 0,025 Watt, four meters 0,00625 Watt and so on. The physical law governing these values has the “distance squared” in the denominator!
In short, research has established that the main biological effect of the absorption of electromagnetic waves in the human body is heating. And that's the only problem we can ask ourselves. Excessive tissue heating is not good for you. It is necessary to ensure that electromagnetic exposure does not increase body temperature beyond certain levels. For this reason they have been fixed exposure limits e usage instructions for the mobile. These are standards defined by commissions of international experts, if applied correctly the body temperature should not rise above one degree centigrade.
The electromagnetic waves of 5G networks only penetrate the epidermis (previous technologies were more invasive), i.e. for a couple of millimetres. So the impact, if any, is not on the internal organs, but on the skin (which is still an important organ). The problem is that the skin of the face is different from that of the feet, there are old skins, young skins, diseased skins. It will be necessary to carry out other experiments, with the help of dermatologists, even in extreme cases, enlisting volunteers to understand if there is a negative effect caused by heating the skin. It will take some time. A one degree Celsius increase in temperature shouldn't cause any problems. But you need to check.
The bottom line is that the implementation of 5G networks will not lead to an increased health risk of citizens bearing in mind that the highest exposure is not caused by the mobile phone mast but by theexcessive use of the smartphone.
