ICNIRP Guidelines’ Exposure Assessment Method for 5G Millimetre Wave Radiation May Trigger Adverse Effects

Abstract

ICNIRP Guidelines’ Exposure Assessment Method for 5G Millimetre Wave Radiation May Trigger Adverse Effects Redmayne M, Maisch DR. ICNIRP Guidelines’ Exposure Assessment Method for 5G Millimetre Wave Radiation May Trigger Adverse Effects. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 5267. doi.org. Abstract The current global roll-out of 5G infrastructure is designed to utilise millimetre wave frequencies (30–300 GHz range) at data transmission rates in the order of gigabits per second (Gbps). This frequency band will be transmitted using beamforming, a new introduction in near-field exposures. The International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) has recently updated their guidelines. We briefly examine whether the new approach of the ICNIRP is satisfactory to prevent heat damage and other adverse bio-effects once millimetre wave 5G is included, and we challenge the use of surface-only exposure assessment for local exposures greater than 6 GHz in part due to possible Brillouin precursor pulse formation. However, this is relevant whether or not Brillouin precursors occur from absorption of either 5G or future G transmissions. Many significant sources conclude there is insufficient research to assure safety even from the heat perspective. To date, there has been no published in vivo, in vitro or epidemiological research using exposures to 5G New Radio beam-formed signals. Conclusions Surface radiofrequency exposure assessments including mmW radiation are insufficient to ensure safety; there are several reasons assessment of SAab is also needed. A real danger of the ‘expert’ assurances of a lack of risk is that they discourage the necessary research to evaluate risk properly. They may also discourage review of apparently outmoded/questionable approaches being taken in RF exposure standards. Once the 5G mmW band is internationally operational, a significant proportion of the world’s population will be exposed to new hazards. The intensity and complexity of near-field exposure, such as when carrying a phone in a pocket or using it next to the head, will be different for 5G, and this is the first time mmW have been used for public telecommunications and the first time beamforming has been deliberately introduced for near-field use. Without research on the impact of near-field 5G, this global step is an experiment at the population level. Bearing this in mind, there is a vital and urgent need for targeted research and for a re-evaluation of the scientific relevance of the current RF human exposure standards’ basic approach and assumptions. Open access paper: mdpi.com Foster, KR, Balzano Q. Comment on Redmayne, M. Maisch, D.R. ICNIRP Guidelines’ Exposure Assessment Method for 5G Millimetre Wave Radiation May Trigger Adverse Effects. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 5267. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 7029. doi:10.3390/ijerph20227029. Abstract This article discusses the contention in the commented-upon paper that Brillouin precursors generated by 5G New Radio (5G NR) and other cellular systems are a possible cause of tissue damage at deeper layers of tissue than the power penetration depth of the carrier frequency. The original theory for Brillouin precursors from pulsed radiofrequency signals (RF-EMF) and speculation about their possible health effects dates back to the 1990’s and was based on studies of the propagation of very short (nanosecond) ultrawide-bandwidth RF pulses through water. This assumption is not correct for cellular telephone signals due to their narrow bandwidth. The commented-on paper provides no alternative rationale as to why Brillouin effects should cause tissue damage from RF-EMF radiation from cellular and other communications systems. Other inaccuracies in this paper concerning thermal responses of tissue to RF-EMF are also noted. Open access paper: mdpi.com Redmayne M, Maisch DR. Reply to Foster, KR, Balzano Q. Comment on “Redmayne, M.; Maisch, D.R. ICNIRP Guidelines’ Exposure Assessment Method for 5G Millimetre Wave Radiation May Trigger Adverse Effects. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 5267”. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 7031. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20227031. No abstract Open access paper: mdpi.com

AI evidence extraction

Main findings

The paper argues that ICNIRP’s surface-only exposure assessment approach for local exposures above 6 GHz may be insufficient to ensure safety for 5G millimetre-wave exposures, and suggests assessment of SAab is also needed. It states that many sources conclude there is insufficient research to assure safety even from a heat perspective and notes that, to date, there has been no published in vivo, in vitro, or epidemiological research using exposures to 5G New Radio beam-formed signals. A published comment included in the provided text disputes the Brillouin precursor rationale for cellular signals and notes other alleged inaccuracies regarding thermal responses.

Outcomes measured

• Adequacy of ICNIRP exposure assessment methods for >6 GHz local exposures
• Potential for thermal damage and other adverse bio-effects
• Need for additional exposure metrics (including SAab) beyond surface-only assessment
• Research gaps for 5G NR beam-formed signals

Limitations

• Narrative/argumentative focus rather than reporting new experimental or epidemiological data
• Abstract states no published in vivo, in vitro, or epidemiological studies using 5G NR beam-formed signals, limiting direct evidence
• Key mechanistic concern (Brillouin precursors) is explicitly challenged in a published comment included in the provided text

Suggested hubs

• who-icnirp (0.92)
  Paper critiques ICNIRP guideline exposure assessment methods.
• 5g-policy (0.78)
  Discusses implications of 5G mmWave rollout and calls for re-evaluation of standards.

{
    "publication_year": 2023,
    "study_type": "review",
    "exposure": {
        "band": "mmWave",
        "source": "5G New Radio (beamforming; near-field exposures)",
        "frequency_mhz": null,
        "sar_wkg": null,
        "duration": null
    },
    "population": null,
    "sample_size": null,
    "outcomes": [
        "Adequacy of ICNIRP exposure assessment methods for >6 GHz local exposures",
        "Potential for thermal damage and other adverse bio-effects",
        "Need for additional exposure metrics (including SAab) beyond surface-only assessment",
        "Research gaps for 5G NR beam-formed signals"
    ],
    "main_findings": "The paper argues that ICNIRP’s surface-only exposure assessment approach for local exposures above 6 GHz may be insufficient to ensure safety for 5G millimetre-wave exposures, and suggests assessment of SAab is also needed. It states that many sources conclude there is insufficient research to assure safety even from a heat perspective and notes that, to date, there has been no published in vivo, in vitro, or epidemiological research using exposures to 5G New Radio beam-formed signals. A published comment included in the provided text disputes the Brillouin precursor rationale for cellular signals and notes other alleged inaccuracies regarding thermal responses.",
    "effect_direction": "mixed",
    "limitations": [
        "Narrative/argumentative focus rather than reporting new experimental or epidemiological data",
        "Abstract states no published in vivo, in vitro, or epidemiological studies using 5G NR beam-formed signals, limiting direct evidence",
        "Key mechanistic concern (Brillouin precursors) is explicitly challenged in a published comment included in the provided text"
    ],
    "evidence_strength": "low",
    "confidence": 0.7399999999999999911182158029987476766109466552734375,
    "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
    "stance": "concern",
    "stance_confidence": 0.7800000000000000266453525910037569701671600341796875,
    "summary": "This narrative paper questions whether ICNIRP’s updated exposure assessment approach is sufficient to prevent heat damage and other adverse bio-effects when 5G millimetre-wave bands are deployed, particularly for local exposures above 6 GHz. It argues that surface-only assessment is insufficient and that additional assessment (including SAab) is needed, while emphasizing a lack of published studies using 5G NR beam-formed signals. A published comment (included in the provided text) disputes the paper’s Brillouin precursor argument and notes other alleged inaccuracies about thermal responses.",
    "key_points": [
        "The paper focuses on 5G millimetre-wave (30–300 GHz) exposures and the introduction of beamforming in near-field use.",
        "It challenges ICNIRP’s use of surface-only exposure assessment for local exposures above 6 GHz.",
        "It suggests that assessment of SAab is also needed to ensure safety for mmWave exposures.",
        "It states that many sources conclude research is insufficient to assure safety even from a thermal perspective.",
        "It reports that there are no published in vivo, in vitro, or epidemiological studies using exposures to 5G NR beam-formed signals to date.",
        "It frames widespread mmWave deployment as a population-level experiment and calls for urgent targeted research and re-evaluation of exposure standards.",
        "A published comment included in the text argues Brillouin precursor assumptions do not apply to narrow-band cellular signals and criticizes other aspects of the paper."
    ],
    "categories": [
        "5G & mmWave",
        "Exposure Assessment & Dosimetry",
        "RF Standards & Guidelines",
        "Research Gaps"
    ],
    "tags": [
        "5G New Radio",
        "Millimetre Waves",
        "Beamforming",
        "Near-Field Exposure",
        "ICNIRP Guidelines",
        "Exposure Assessment",
        "Surface Power Density",
        "SAab",
        "Thermal Effects",
        "Brillouin Precursors",
        "RF Exposure Standards",
        "Research Gaps"
    ],
    "keywords": [
        "5G",
        "mmWave",
        "30–300 GHz",
        "beamforming",
        "ICNIRP",
        "surface-only exposure assessment",
        "SAab",
        "Brillouin precursor",
        "thermal damage",
        "RF-EMF"
    ],
    "suggested_hubs": [
        {
            "slug": "who-icnirp",
            "weight": 0.92000000000000003996802888650563545525074005126953125,
            "reason": "Paper critiques ICNIRP guideline exposure assessment methods."
        },
        {
            "slug": "5g-policy",
            "weight": 0.7800000000000000266453525910037569701671600341796875,
            "reason": "Discusses implications of 5G mmWave rollout and calls for re-evaluation of standards."
        }
    ],
    "social": {
        "tweet": "Review argues ICNIRP’s surface-only exposure assessment for >6 GHz may be insufficient for 5G mmWave/beamforming and highlights lack of published in vivo/in vitro/epidemiology studies using 5G NR beam-formed signals; a published comment disputes the Brillouin precursor rationale.",
        "facebook": "A narrative review questions whether ICNIRP’s surface-only exposure assessment for local exposures above 6 GHz is adequate for 5G millimetre-wave deployment, argues additional assessment (including SAab) is needed, and emphasizes a lack of published studies using 5G NR beam-formed signals. A published comment challenges the Brillouin precursor argument and notes other alleged inaccuracies.",
        "linkedin": "This review critiques ICNIRP’s exposure assessment approach for >6 GHz local exposures in the context of 5G mmWave and near-field beamforming, calling for additional metrics (including SAab) and targeted research. The provided text also includes a published comment disputing the Brillouin precursor mechanism for cellular signals."
    }
}

Comments

Log in to comment.

No comments yet.