
Radiation concerns halt Brussels 5G development, for now - k0t0n0
http://www.brusselstimes.com/brussels/14753/radiation-concerns-halt-brussels-5g-for-now
======
holografix
Having lived in Brussels for a year now and witnessing sidewalks covered in
trash and bad air quality I’m quite cynical of politicians waxing lyrical
about protecting their constituent’s health. I think the last paragraph in
that article holds more weight.

“Last week, the various governments in Belgium once again failed to reach
agreement on the auctioning of the 5G licences. The file remains stuck on the
_distribution of the proceeds_. It will be up to the next government to handle
the proposal, said Telecom Minister Philippe De Backer (Open VLD) last week.“

~~~
stevev
I’ll take trash and bad air quality over cancer.

~~~
tim333
It's more do you prefer bad air which is proven to cause measurable numbers of
cancer cases over some 5G towers which probably don't.
([https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/air-pollution-
a-l...](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/air-pollution-a-leading-
cause-of-ca/))

------
xchip
I live in Brussels, internet over 4G works great and nobody complains about it
being slow.

I am willing to change my mind if somebody proves why we need to upgrade but
(and as much as I love new tech) "if ain't broken dont touch it", if anything
just make it cheaper.

~~~
marios
4G, just like 3G before it will get slower over time. The spectrum is still
shared, and the more devices are connected on the 4G bands, the less bandwith
there is for each device.

IMHO, 5G is not so much about speed as it is about latency and better handling
of devices in high density areas. Regarding the speed aspect, keep in mind
that most smartphones (which are the primary 4G connected devices) are not
equipped with modems that can reach the speed limits of 4G. They certainly
could, but that would kill battery life. I expect something similar with 5G
(although one the promises of 5G is lower power consumption). VoIP over 3G is
often terrible. It's better on 4G, but, in my experience, it's often hit and
miss. Having improved latency and speed means VoIP (and video calls) are,
theoretically, less of a gamble.

(My experience with 3G/4G is a single datapoint and should not be taken too
seriously, evidently)

However, cheap 4G is a good option for areas that have decent cell coverage
but poor broadband (I refer to the usual copper lines for DSL). 5G can make
the situation better, if only by making 4G cheaper. Deploying 5G means that an
operator may have to upgrade their backbone ... which is good for 4G users
too.

~~~
oneowl
> 4G, just like 3G before it will get slower over time.

You are correct but that will happen again with 5G and then with 6G and so on.
After a period all networks will saturate.

I'm not sure if I'm right about this, but I think one solution could be to
increase the network density with the deployment of small cell networks that
provide a better local coverage and bandwitdh. A few companies like nokia [1]
and ericsson [2] are taking that route.That also requires upgradation on
hardware form the operator but at least spares the customer from buying a new
equipment.

[1] [https://networks.nokia.com/products/small-
cells](https://networks.nokia.com/products/small-cells)

[2][https://www.ericsson.com/en/networks/offerings/small-
cells/o...](https://www.ericsson.com/en/networks/offerings/small-
cells/outdoor-small-cells)

~~~
kalleboo
One of the features of 5G is support for high-frequency (30 GHz+), high-
bandwidth, small cell networks. Most(?) of the 5G deployments are planned to
be of this type.

~~~
Jhsto
> Most(?) of the 5G deployments are planned to be of this type.

I am a software researcher in the field and I do not think this is the case.
Most 5G deployments for the foreseeable future will be on 3.5Ghz. I do not
think mmWave (30Ghz+) has been accepted for commercial use in any country. In
fact, in many roadmaps mmWave is referred to as 5G NR (new radio), which to my
understanding was left for later deployments. To give you an idea why: the
mmWave receivers and transmitters (at my current facility) are the size of a
door. I think the problem is shrinking those doors to fit your smartphone, but
then again, I do not work on the physical layer nor have much insight
regarding regulations.

~~~
phonon
5G NR is already available in the US on Verizon with a Moto Mod

RF bands 5G: n261 (27.5-28.35 GHz); n260 (37-40 GHz)

4G: B2, B4, B5, B13, B46, B48, B66

Verizon launched 5G New Radio (Nonstandalone) at 28 GHz with 400 megahertz of
TDD spectrum — which doesn’t include the LTE anchor carrier, SRG said. Based
on its initial survey, the firm estimated that there are close to 100 5G nodes
in downtown Minneapolis, although it had yet to confirm how many of those were
on-air. Each node has two Ericsson AIR 5121 5G radios, according to SRG.

[https://www.motorola.com/us/products/moto-
mods/moto-5g#specs](https://www.motorola.com/us/products/moto-
mods/moto-5g#specs)

[https://www.rcrwireless.com/20190405/test-and-
measurement/pu...](https://www.rcrwireless.com/20190405/test-and-
measurement/putting-verizons-mobile-5g-through-its-paces/amp)

~~~
Jhsto
How interesting! Thank you for correcting me. In my country, the government
never auctioned the mmWave spectrum thus I assumed this to be the case
elsewhere. Very excited that Verizon has decided to make the densely deployed
infrastructure to work.

------
squarefoot
Someone should tell politicians about how radio waves propagate and the
inverse square law: the cellphone kept in their pocket, very often more than
one, expose them to a lot stronger EM fields than any tower they might have
nearby. Or maybe they already know that, but banning or imposing restrictions
on cellphones would destroy their careers.

~~~
wongarsu
In the EU the technical data of any phone already include a "radiation value"
that measures your radiation exposure from using the phone. So regardless of
whether this is something to worry about, it's aready covered by existing
legislation.

Cellpone towers are also different in that you can't choose not to expose
yourself to them. In contrast you can choose not to get a mobile.

------
mcguire
" _The Brussels region has particularly strict radiation standards for telecom
applications. The standard of 6 volts per metre has already led to problems in
the past with providing fast mobile internet via 4G in the capital._ "

On one hand, 6V/m seems like a lot; I haven't been able to find a reliable
regulation site. On the other, 20V/m is apparently common
([https://www.arpansa.gov.au/understanding-radiation/what-
is-r...](https://www.arpansa.gov.au/understanding-radiation/what-is-
radiation/non-ionising-radiation/low-frequency-electric-magnetic-fields)).

------
crudbug
I looked at some trial 5G gNB; you definitely feel nauseated if u r standing
near these units. This will be a concern.

~~~
hannob
have you also tried to blind-test standing beside one that's switched off and
on? Because plenty of people say they can "feel" cellphone radiation (so-
called electrosensitivity), yet noone has ever been able to show this under
controlled scientific conditions. As soon as they don't know if the radiation
is there they stop feeling it.

~~~
typon
Similar to the studies done on infrasound, which seems to bother residents
living near wind farms. The studies show that the biggest indicator of whether
you're affected by infrasound is if you're told there is infrasound being
emitted...

~~~
AnthonyMouse
That's not really the question though. If you have someone eat food
contaminated with lead or mercury, they may not be able to taste the
difference, but that doesn't mean it's harmless.

The question isn't whether you can immediately sense its presence, the
question is the effects of sustained exposure.

And the fact that the placebo effect is a real thing doesn't really tell you
that one way or the other.

~~~
andybak
Except we're specifically replying to a comment from someone claiming they
could feel 5G.

~~~
AnthonyMouse
> Except we're specifically replying to a comment from someone claiming they
> could feel 5G.

By standing next to _the tower_. That is a known effect from high power radio
transmitters. You can feel that because it's starting to cook you the same way
a microwave oven does, to varying degrees depending on the transmitter power.
If you stand too close to a large military RADAR transmitter it can kill you
dead on the spot.

Then the response is referring to studies done at the power levels of an
individual cell phone, and no surprise it's difficult to feel that. But the
effects of long term exposure are a different matter.

Moreover, with 5G they're increasing the density of the towers, which implies
building towers with closer proximity to people.

------
w0mbat
It looks like there are a couple of disinformation campaigns against cellphone
infrastructure and particularly 5G right now. One is aimed at retargeting
environmentalists to fight harmless cell towers instead of bothering industry
by fighting global warming. The other looks like the usual Russian campaign to
slow down the tech progress of other nations. For example there was a widely
shared story that a 5G test killed a flock of birds in The Hague, which was
completely false (check Snopes).

~~~
xchip
Can you explain why we need 5G when 4G is already working very well?

~~~
zzzcpan
As consumers we don't need it. If it was up to us we would never agree to
invest so much into this tech for so little gain.

But all those giant corporations always want to sell you more devices, more
expensive services, show you ads faster, track you and spy on you better, make
more excuses to raise prices, harm competition, etc.

------
xchip
1) Your eyes and testes are at risk

    
    
      "Two areas of the body, the eyes and the testes, are particularly vulnerable to RF heating because of the relative lack of available blood flow to dissipate the excess heat load."
    

source: [https://www.fcc.gov/engineering-
technology/electromagnetic-c...](https://www.fcc.gov/engineering-
technology/electromagnetic-compatibility-division/radio-frequency-
safety/faq/rf-safety#Q5)

2) The WHO has an article written in 2014 that says:

    
    
      "Several studies investigating potential health effects in children and adolescents are underway."
    

I'd say that the lack of updates 2 years later is concerning.

source: [https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-
sheets/detail/electrom...](https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-
sheets/detail/electromagnetic-fields-and-public-health-mobile-phones)

------
walkingolof
Wonder what this decision is baserad on, its non-ionized radiation and may
confuse bees etc but humans ....?

~~~
swader99
Try sleeping for a week with your cell phone on airplane mode and your wifi
unplugged. It certainly won't kill you but it causes oxidative stress on your
cells. 5G just ups the intensity to 11.

~~~
saagarjha
> Try sleeping for a week with your cell phone on airplane mode and your wifi
> unplugged.

What is this supposed to do?

~~~
swombat
Presumably, offer a sense of relaxation and peace - mostly through a
combination of the placebo effect and not spending so much time looking at the
internet, I guess!

------
csuld223
We live in a culture where there is an normally an intense focus on the
benefits of technology and not really a lot of regard for any of the possible
the negatives. I.e. there is a huge bias at a cultural level. I guess this a
lot to do with idea that consumerism is _the_ solution when things get
difficult in life. If you study history you can see how this normally presents
itself - and even effects the science c.f. the smoking industry.

------
mateo1
Is there a good (and short) technical summary of the 5G specifications?

I've seen some (very disturbing) values of 20W/square meter reported. Is this
true?

