5G New Radio Requires the Best Possible Risk Assessment Studies: Perspective and Recommended Guidelines

Abstract

5G New Radio Requires the Best Possible Risk Assessment Studies: Perspective and Recommended Guidelines Mats-Olof Mattsson, Myrtill Simkó, Kenneth R. Foster. 5G New Radio Requires the Best Possible Risk Assessment Studies: Perspective and Recommended Guidelines. Frontiers in Communications and Networks. Vol 2:49. 2021. doi: 10.3389/frcmn.2021.724772. Abstract The development and establishment of mobile communication technologies has necessitated assessments of possible risks to human health from exposures to radio-frequency electromagnetic fields (RF EMF). A number of expert committees have concluded that there is no evidence for such risks as long as exposures are at or below levels that do not allow tissue heating. These assessments have been based primarily on studies investigating frequencies up to 6 GHz including frequencies similar to those used by two of three major bands of fifth generation (more accurately 5G New Radio or 5G NR) of mobile communication. Bioeffects studies in so-called high-band at 25–39 GHz are particularly sparse. Future assessments relevant for these frequencies will need to rely on still unperformed studies. Due to few available studies at 5G NR “high band” frequencies, and questions raised by some existing studies, a recent review recommended a wide range of RF biostudies be done at 5G NR “high band” frequencies. It is of importance that such studies be done using the best possible science. Here we suggest factors to consider when performing future studies in this area. The present focus is on laboratory studies to clarify biological effects of radiofrequency (RF) energy at 5G “high band” frequencies and, more generally at millimeter wave (mm-wave) frequencies (30-300 GHz) which will be increasingly used by communications technologies in the future. Similar comments would apply to epidemiology and exposure assessment studies, but those are not the focus of the present Perspective. Open access paper: frontiersin.org

AI evidence extraction

Main findings

This perspective notes that expert committees have concluded there is no evidence for human health risks from RF EMF exposures at or below levels that do not allow tissue heating, based mainly on studies up to 6 GHz. It states that bioeffects studies at 5G NR “high band” (25–39 GHz) are sparse and recommends that future laboratory studies at 5G high-band/mm-wave frequencies be conducted using the best possible science, outlining factors to consider for such studies.

Outcomes measured

• human health risk assessment (general)
• biological effects (laboratory studies)

Limitations

• Perspective/guidelines article rather than primary empirical study
• Focus is on laboratory study considerations; epidemiology and exposure assessment are noted but not the focus
• States that relevant future assessments for 25–39 GHz will need to rely on still unperformed studies due to sparse existing evidence

Suggested hubs

• 5g-policy (0.9)
  Focuses on 5G NR high-band/mm-wave risk assessment needs and recommended study guidelines.

{
    "study_type": "policy",
    "exposure": {
        "band": "mmWave",
        "source": "mobile phone",
        "frequency_mhz": null,
        "sar_wkg": null,
        "duration": null
    },
    "population": null,
    "sample_size": null,
    "outcomes": [
        "human health risk assessment (general)",
        "biological effects (laboratory studies)"
    ],
    "main_findings": "This perspective notes that expert committees have concluded there is no evidence for human health risks from RF EMF exposures at or below levels that do not allow tissue heating, based mainly on studies up to 6 GHz. It states that bioeffects studies at 5G NR “high band” (25–39 GHz) are sparse and recommends that future laboratory studies at 5G high-band/mm-wave frequencies be conducted using the best possible science, outlining factors to consider for such studies.",
    "effect_direction": "unclear",
    "limitations": [
        "Perspective/guidelines article rather than primary empirical study",
        "Focus is on laboratory study considerations; epidemiology and exposure assessment are noted but not the focus",
        "States that relevant future assessments for 25–39 GHz will need to rely on still unperformed studies due to sparse existing evidence"
    ],
    "evidence_strength": "insufficient",
    "confidence": 0.7399999999999999911182158029987476766109466552734375,
    "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
    "keywords": [
        "5G New Radio",
        "5G NR",
        "radio-frequency electromagnetic fields",
        "RF EMF",
        "millimeter wave",
        "mm-wave",
        "25–39 GHz",
        "risk assessment",
        "laboratory studies",
        "guidelines"
    ],
    "suggested_hubs": [
        {
            "slug": "5g-policy",
            "weight": 0.90000000000000002220446049250313080847263336181640625,
            "reason": "Focuses on 5G NR high-band/mm-wave risk assessment needs and recommended study guidelines."
        }
    ]
}

Comments

Log in to comment.

No comments yet.