The assumption of safety is being used to justify the rollout of 5G technologies
Abstract
The assumption of safety is being used to justify the rollout of 5G technologies McCredden JE, Weller S, Leach V. The assumption of safety is being used to justify the rollout of 5G technologies. Frontiers in Public Health. 11. 2023. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1058454. No Abstract Conclusions The potential long-term health risks from global EMF continue to rise as exposures in the built environment increase in time and density. Mankind has chosen to base the justification for this rollout on shaky foundations, where there is minimal understanding of the impact of new radiofrequencies being introduced into the environment on long-term human and planetary health. The evidence presented above suggests that there are credible risks of biological interference effects for frequencies planned for 5G, occurring well-below ICNIRP reference limits. Given the ubiquitous and often non- consensual nature of man-made wireless radiation exposures, the presence of even a small number of significant bioeffects requires follow up with more focused research. The communication of existing investigations has not been fully clear or transparent. It is the responsibility of government review panels, regulatory bodies, scientists, public advocates, industry and policy makers to clearly communicate the research and its implications, so as to ensure that no fallacious conclusions can be drawn. If these are allowed to continue, both those delivering the message and the unsuspecting billions using their new 5G devices may be led in a direction that places global public and environmental health at risk. The mmWave evidence base that has been made visible in this article suggests that plausible health effects cannot be ruled out, and that urgent action is needed on two fronts: 1. Further sound scientific research, done carefully, using the best laboratory practices and sufficiently large samples to produce significant results, funded and overseen by trusted bodies with appropriate expertise (38). 2. Precautionary actions to be taken by policy makers via use of risk aversion strategies such as the actions recommended in an EU commissioned report [(47), p. 152–153]. Risk aversion constitutes good leadership. The limitations of scientific knowledge imply moral courage in taking precautionary action in time to avert harm [(17), p. 687]. Open access paper: frontiersin.org
AI evidence extraction
Main findings
The article argues that the rollout of 5G is being justified by an "assumption of safety" despite limited understanding of long-term impacts of new radiofrequencies. It states that evidence discussed suggests credible risks of biological interference effects for frequencies planned for 5G occurring below ICNIRP reference limits, and that mmWave health effects cannot be ruled out. The authors call for further research and precautionary policy actions.
Outcomes measured
- Long-term human health risks
- Planetary/environmental health risks
- Biological interference/bioeffects below ICNIRP limits
Limitations
- No structured abstract or methods are provided in the supplied text, limiting assessment of how evidence was identified and evaluated.
- Specific exposure metrics (frequency, power density/SAR) and study details supporting claims are not included in the provided excerpt.
- The text is advocacy/argumentative in tone, and does not present new empirical results in the provided excerpt.
Suggested hubs
-
5g-policy
(0.95) Focuses on 5G rollout, precautionary actions, and policy recommendations.
-
who-icnirp
(0.72) Discusses effects below ICNIRP reference limits and critiques safety assumptions tied to guidelines.
View raw extracted JSON
{
"publication_year": null,
"study_type": "review",
"exposure": {
"band": "mmWave",
"source": "5G technologies",
"frequency_mhz": null,
"sar_wkg": null,
"duration": null
},
"population": null,
"sample_size": null,
"outcomes": [
"Long-term human health risks",
"Planetary/environmental health risks",
"Biological interference/bioeffects below ICNIRP limits"
],
"main_findings": "The article argues that the rollout of 5G is being justified by an \"assumption of safety\" despite limited understanding of long-term impacts of new radiofrequencies. It states that evidence discussed suggests credible risks of biological interference effects for frequencies planned for 5G occurring below ICNIRP reference limits, and that mmWave health effects cannot be ruled out. The authors call for further research and precautionary policy actions.",
"effect_direction": "harm",
"limitations": [
"No structured abstract or methods are provided in the supplied text, limiting assessment of how evidence was identified and evaluated.",
"Specific exposure metrics (frequency, power density/SAR) and study details supporting claims are not included in the provided excerpt.",
"The text is advocacy/argumentative in tone, and does not present new empirical results in the provided excerpt."
],
"evidence_strength": "low",
"confidence": 0.61999999999999999555910790149937383830547332763671875,
"peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
"stance": "concern",
"stance_confidence": 0.85999999999999998667732370449812151491641998291015625,
"summary": "This review/opinion piece argues that 5G deployment is being justified by an assumption of safety despite limited understanding of long-term impacts of new radiofrequencies. It claims the evidence discussed suggests credible biological interference effects for 5G-relevant frequencies at levels below ICNIRP reference limits. It concludes that mmWave health effects cannot be ruled out and calls for more rigorous research and precautionary policy measures.",
"key_points": [
"The authors argue that increasing EMF exposures in the built environment may raise potential long-term health risks.",
"They state that understanding of long-term impacts of new radiofrequencies introduced for 5G is minimal.",
"The article claims bioeffects relevant to 5G may occur below ICNIRP reference limits.",
"It emphasizes that ubiquitous and often non-consensual exposures warrant follow-up research even if only a small number of significant bioeffects exist.",
"The authors argue communication of existing investigations has not been sufficiently clear or transparent.",
"They call for further carefully conducted research with sufficiently large samples and trusted oversight.",
"They recommend precautionary/risk-averse actions by policymakers while scientific uncertainty remains."
],
"categories": [
"5G",
"Millimeter Waves",
"Policy & Regulation",
"Risk Assessment"
],
"tags": [
"5G Rollout",
"Assumption of Safety",
"Millimeter Waves",
"ICNIRP Reference Limits",
"Bioeffects",
"Precautionary Principle",
"Risk Aversion",
"Policy Recommendations",
"Research Transparency",
"Built Environment Exposure"
],
"keywords": [
"5G",
"mmWave",
"ICNIRP",
"bioeffects",
"precautionary action",
"risk aversion",
"wireless radiation",
"public health"
],
"suggested_hubs": [
{
"slug": "5g-policy",
"weight": 0.9499999999999999555910790149937383830547332763671875,
"reason": "Focuses on 5G rollout, precautionary actions, and policy recommendations."
},
{
"slug": "who-icnirp",
"weight": 0.7199999999999999733546474089962430298328399658203125,
"reason": "Discusses effects below ICNIRP reference limits and critiques safety assumptions tied to guidelines."
}
],
"social": {
"tweet": "Frontiers in Public Health review argues 5G rollout is being justified by an “assumption of safety,” claiming bioeffects may occur below ICNIRP limits and that mmWave health effects cannot be ruled out; calls for more research and precautionary policy.",
"facebook": "A Frontiers in Public Health article argues that 5G deployment is being justified by an assumption of safety despite limited understanding of long-term impacts. It claims evidence suggests possible bioeffects below ICNIRP reference limits and urges further rigorous research plus precautionary policy actions.",
"linkedin": "This Frontiers in Public Health review/opinion piece critiques the “assumption of safety” used to justify 5G rollout, asserting that bioeffects may occur below ICNIRP reference limits and that mmWave health effects cannot be ruled out. The authors call for clearer communication, stronger research, and precautionary policy measures."
}
}
AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.
Comments
Log in to comment.
No comments yet.