A Meta-Integrative Qualitative Study on the Hidden Threats of Smart Buildings/Cities and Their Associated Impacts on Humans and the Environment

Abstract

A Meta-Integrative Qualitative Study on the Hidden Threats of Smart Buildings/Cities and Their Associated Impacts on Humans and the Environment Raveendran R, Tabet Aoul KA. A Meta-Integrative Qualitative Study on the Hidden Threats of Smart Buildings/Cities and Their Associated Impacts on Humans and the Environment. Buildings. 2021; 11(6):251. doi.org Abstract Smart buildings deploying 5G and the Internet of Things (IoT) are viewed as the next sustainable solution that can be seamlessly integrated in all sectors of the built environment. The benefits are well advertised and range from inducing wellness and monitoring health, amplifying productivity, to energy savings. Comparatively, potential negative risks are less known and mostly relate to cyber-security threats and radiation effects. This meta-integrative qualitative synthesis research sought to determine the possible underlying demerits from developing smart buildings, and whether they outweigh the possible benefits. The study identified five master themes as threats of smart buildings: a surfeit of data centers, the proliferation of undersea cables, the consternation of cyber-security threats, electromagnetic pollution, and E-waste accumulation. Further, the paper discusses the rebound impacts on humans and the environment as smart buildings’ actualization becomes a reality. The study reveals that, although some aspects of smart buildings do have their tangible benefits, the potential repercussions from these not-so-discussed threats could undermine the former when all perspectives and interactions are analyzed collectively rather than in isolation. Excerpt 4.4. Master Theme 4: Electromagnetic Pollution This is generally an identified problem with the deployment of smart buildings using 5G and IoT devices. Many countries have called to ban 5G in general until impartial research data can be made available, and several researchers around the globe have submitted a “5G appeal” [105]. The radiation effects could range from causing headaches, insomnia, to DNA alteration, along with the possibility of creating other biological damages such as hormonal imbalances, reproductive issues, tumors, nerve damage, and eye damage [65,106]. Belpomme (2015) concluded from a comprehensive study that the EMF effect could worsen health conditions related to oxidative stress, a deficit in melatonin metabolism, and is more reflected among electro-sensitive people [107]. Several studies by bio-chemical and medical researchers found that high frequencies can significantly change the heart rate, chromatin (DNA complex and proteins), and melatonin, as well as other hormonal changes [59,71,108]. Kojima et al., (2018) revealed that though most of the effects were thermally related as millimeter frequencies are quickly absorbed by water, it can induce damaging effects without the heating of the tissues, i.e., nonthermal effects that are more dangerous [109]. As a guideline, the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) adopted the SAR (specific absorption rate) limit value of 1.6 W/Kg for 1 g of tissue approved by ANSI and IEEE [110]. However, current FCC regulations check only the SAR value, which is only a measure of the thermal effects; on the contrary, several studies have concluded that evaluations other than SAR are necessary to fully understand the impact of biological effects other than the thermal effect [111,112]. Scientific evidence suggests that even radiation limits well below the regulatory standards cause severe damage to health even from 2G and 3G [67,105]. Hardell (2017) pointed out that the World Health Organization (WHO) and International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) have only classified the risk from wireless cellphones as carcinogenic 2B (for instance, potentially cancerous). Buildings are generally subjected to electromagnetic radiation (EMR) pollution from two sources: extremely-low- frequency (ELF) and high-frequency wireless devices. Leukemia in children, immunization loss, genes and DNA alteration, cancers, and tumors have been associated with increased exposure from these indoor sources since the 1960s [112]. A smart building that is operated wirelessly with very high frequencies (up to 300 GHz) can put the occupants at risk, particularly the most vulnerable. Moreover, humans have natural bio-electromagnetism [113] in them, and cells, tissues, and skin regeneration, including the sleep process, rely on natural frequencies from 0 to 30 Hz [114,115,116]. It has been reported that, regardless of the frequency level, being exposed to artificial frequencies is detrimental to human health [112]. Furthermore, 5G cellular networks deploy many small cells placed at shorter distances on poles and buildings [117], which can easily aggravate, to a greater extent, the biological effects [68,72]. Hence, many scientists, health professionals, and environmentalists have enquired about the potential problems of continually being in a smart building with numerous IoT devices emitting radiation at high frequencies, including bio-wearable devices [73,94]. Electropollution radiation can also be a hazard to the living organisms of the ecosystem [61,66,69,70]. This problem is specifically crucial for organisms (living on land and in water) that depend strongly on Earth’s natural electromagnetic field for their nutrition and survival [63,112]. The most significant example of such phenomena is the collapse of bee colonies as their navigation is affected by wireless radiation, making them unable to return to their hives or even find food [62,118]. A study spanning almost a decade by Selsam et al., (2016) found out that trees are significantly damaged by radiation, particularly those situated near cellular base stations, and the damage intensifies with aging [119]. Open access paper: mdpi.com

AI evidence extraction

Main findings

This meta-integrative qualitative synthesis identifies five master themes described as threats of smart buildings, including electromagnetic pollution, and discusses potential impacts on humans and the environment. The authors argue that potential repercussions from these threats could undermine the benefits of smart buildings when considered collectively, and they cite prior literature suggesting possible biological and ecological harms from wireless radiation and limitations of SAR-based compliance focused on thermal effects.

Outcomes measured

• Electromagnetic pollution concerns
• Reported symptoms (e.g., headaches, insomnia)
• DNA/chromatin changes (as discussed)
• Hormonal/melatonin changes (as discussed)
• Cancer/tumor risk (as discussed)
• Ecosystem impacts (e.g., bees, trees)
• Cyber-security threats (theme)
• E-waste accumulation (theme)

Limitations

• Qualitative synthesis; no primary exposure measurements or new health outcome data are described in the abstract/excerpt
• Claims about health and ecological effects are presented largely as cited statements from other studies, without details on study selection, quality appraisal, or effect sizes in the provided text
• Exposure parameters (frequencies, intensities, durations) for smart-building scenarios are not specified in the provided abstract/excerpt
• Population and sample size are not reported in the provided abstract/excerpt

Suggested hubs

• 5g-policy (0.86)
  Focuses on 5G deployment in smart buildings/cities and discusses regulatory limits and calls for bans/appeals.
• who-icnirp (0.55)
  Mentions WHO/IARC classification and critiques standards focused on SAR/thermal effects.

{
    "publication_year": 2021,
    "study_type": "review",
    "exposure": {
        "band": "RF",
        "source": "5G and IoT devices in smart buildings/cities",
        "frequency_mhz": null,
        "sar_wkg": 1.600000000000000088817841970012523233890533447265625,
        "duration": null
    },
    "population": null,
    "sample_size": null,
    "outcomes": [
        "Electromagnetic pollution concerns",
        "Reported symptoms (e.g., headaches, insomnia)",
        "DNA/chromatin changes (as discussed)",
        "Hormonal/melatonin changes (as discussed)",
        "Cancer/tumor risk (as discussed)",
        "Ecosystem impacts (e.g., bees, trees)",
        "Cyber-security threats (theme)",
        "E-waste accumulation (theme)"
    ],
    "main_findings": "This meta-integrative qualitative synthesis identifies five master themes described as threats of smart buildings, including electromagnetic pollution, and discusses potential impacts on humans and the environment. The authors argue that potential repercussions from these threats could undermine the benefits of smart buildings when considered collectively, and they cite prior literature suggesting possible biological and ecological harms from wireless radiation and limitations of SAR-based compliance focused on thermal effects.",
    "effect_direction": "harm",
    "limitations": [
        "Qualitative synthesis; no primary exposure measurements or new health outcome data are described in the abstract/excerpt",
        "Claims about health and ecological effects are presented largely as cited statements from other studies, without details on study selection, quality appraisal, or effect sizes in the provided text",
        "Exposure parameters (frequencies, intensities, durations) for smart-building scenarios are not specified in the provided abstract/excerpt",
        "Population and sample size are not reported in the provided abstract/excerpt"
    ],
    "evidence_strength": "low",
    "confidence": 0.7399999999999999911182158029987476766109466552734375,
    "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
    "stance": "concern",
    "stance_confidence": 0.85999999999999998667732370449812151491641998291015625,
    "summary": "This meta-integrative qualitative synthesis examines potential downsides of smart buildings/cities using 5G and IoT, identifying five master threat themes including electromagnetic pollution. It argues that these less-discussed threats may collectively outweigh advertised benefits when interactions are considered. The excerpt emphasizes potential non-thermal biological effects, critiques reliance on SAR-only regulatory evaluation, and discusses possible ecological impacts.",
    "key_points": [
        "The study is a meta-integrative qualitative synthesis focused on potential demerits of smart buildings/cities.",
        "Five master themes are identified as threats: data centers, undersea cables, cyber-security, electromagnetic pollution, and e-waste.",
        "Electromagnetic pollution is discussed as arising from both ELF sources and high-frequency wireless devices in buildings.",
        "The paper cites literature alleging a range of possible human health effects (e.g., sleep-related and hormonal changes, DNA/chromatin changes) from wireless radiation.",
        "It notes FCC SAR limits (1.6 W/kg over 1 g tissue) and argues SAR primarily addresses thermal effects and may not capture other biological effects.",
        "The excerpt discusses potential ecological impacts, including effects on organisms relying on Earth’s natural electromagnetic field, with examples involving bees and trees near base stations.",
        "The authors frame these issues as potentially undermining smart-building benefits when assessed collectively rather than in isolation."
    ],
    "categories": [
        "5G",
        "Smart Buildings",
        "Internet of Things",
        "Radiofrequency (RF)",
        "Environmental Impacts",
        "Policy & Standards"
    ],
    "tags": [
        "Smart Buildings",
        "Smart Cities",
        "Internet of Things",
        "5G",
        "Millimeter Waves",
        "Electromagnetic Pollution",
        "Non-Thermal Effects",
        "Specific Absorption Rate",
        "FCC Guidelines",
        "WHO IARC 2B",
        "Electrohypersensitivity",
        "Small Cells",
        "E-Waste",
        "Cybersecurity",
        "Environmental Impacts"
    ],
    "keywords": [
        "smart buildings",
        "smart cities",
        "5G",
        "IoT",
        "electromagnetic pollution",
        "SAR",
        "nonthermal effects",
        "ELF",
        "wireless radiation",
        "environmental impacts"
    ],
    "suggested_hubs": [
        {
            "slug": "5g-policy",
            "weight": 0.85999999999999998667732370449812151491641998291015625,
            "reason": "Focuses on 5G deployment in smart buildings/cities and discusses regulatory limits and calls for bans/appeals."
        },
        {
            "slug": "who-icnirp",
            "weight": 0.5500000000000000444089209850062616169452667236328125,
            "reason": "Mentions WHO/IARC classification and critiques standards focused on SAR/thermal effects."
        }
    ],
    "social": {
        "tweet": "Qualitative synthesis (Buildings, 2021) flags “hidden threats” of smart buildings/cities using 5G/IoT—incl. electromagnetic pollution, cybersecurity, data centers, undersea cables, and e-waste—arguing combined impacts could undermine benefits. DOI: 10.3390/buildings11060251",
        "facebook": "A 2021 open-access paper in Buildings presents a meta-integrative qualitative synthesis on potential downsides of smart buildings/cities using 5G and IoT. It identifies five threat themes—data centers, undersea cables, cybersecurity, electromagnetic pollution, and e-waste—and discusses possible human and environmental repercussions. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings11060251",
        "linkedin": "Buildings (2021) meta-integrative qualitative synthesis examines potential demerits of smart buildings/cities deploying 5G and IoT. It identifies five master threat themes (incl. electromagnetic pollution) and discusses how combined impacts on humans and the environment could undermine advertised benefits. DOI: 10.3390/buildings11060251"
    }
}

Comments

Log in to comment.

No comments yet.