Somewhere I have a list of how professional sock puppets destroy intelligent online conversations here in the US.
One of a long list of what they do is post arguments known to be sketchy or pseudoscience to make legitimate forums or posts appear to be less credible.
Whats happened here in the US is basically, the problem of deep pocketed industries hiring people, (which is easy because we have lots of unemployed people here with kids they need to feed) to drown out opposition. The "throw money at it" approach. And it works.
Also, I was told by a friend who used to be part of this world that they create fake people in large numbers who make efforts to 'smell right" and then those people pretend to be doing whatever it is that is against the body of people they want to convinces best interests, to make it appear to be a better course of action than it actually is. Because of the herd instinct.
We would hope however that whenever something REALLY important was on the line that we all would speak out and not let that happen. But it isn't.
--------
So, the other day I found a long list of interesting references to the 5G rollout and various aspects of the technology and one thing stands out to me. The scale thats being contemplated is not at all comparable to existing systems. Its much more ambitious and really in a class by itself.
(basically very very short distances between base stations, power levels (it seems several orders of magnitude higher than the current system) , bandwidth (very wide bandwidths) and diversity of frequencies (600 MHz up to over 70 GHz here in the US - and it seems the signals will contain multiple kinds of signals all at the same time)
So I have a question to the people who are making the "if a little bit of RF is okay - what we have now- then a lot more
must be okay too".. Thats not logical thinking. How can you say that? Have you done any reading on this?
This is a situation where I suspect that is a very irresponsible jump in logic to make.
Also, for your information, RF of different kinds does create both measurable biochemical changes that are known to make the difference between free radical quenching (no damage), apoptosis (programmed cell death) and carcinogenesis.
AND signs of DNA damage. (DNA repair adducts) They can all be measured at environmentally relevant levels present today. Those are the levels research is typically done at. So it will be relevant.
So, there is a problem with the blanket statements being made, they are not well grounded in fact.
Also, it seems this is being done in order to create a network thats going to support an absolutely mind numbing amount of bandwidth between devices. It seems the intent is that this bandwith is mostly expected to be used for machine to machine communications. Why? Are these machines intended to be totally tied to manufacturers? (Heres one of my worries- Its not wise to sell a product that insnt a product like a car or phone, its a thinly disguised cash machine).
That makes me worry. Currently when one buys a product, one usually gets a product that has mostly self contained functionality, such as a car.
One doesnt buy a product or shouldnt simply to buy a set of buttons that is a cash machine for services which are actually produced and computed elsewhere.
Like I was really pissed when a phone I bought came with a "GPS" that didnt work as a GPS at all. get a location fix when I was out in the woods, Nope.
Why? It required network connectivity to work.. At all, (plus a data plan) (And this was a phone that was clearly being marketed to hikers!)
Now I know for a fact that no GPS chips I was aware of did not have the ability to give you a fix from GPS data available from satellites. So it must have been deliberately disabled.
There are only a few possible reasons why 5G 'needs' this much bandwidth and power, and they are all bad in various ways. None of them is good for the consumer and some of them are scary, so much so that I don't want to go down that path and discuss them.
Also, a lot of bullying seems to be going on in the regulatory community when the facts really are not at all clear - as some people are trying to say they are. The health issues are not clear, certainly not given the massive increases in power that are being contemplated. Is it even possible for objective research to be done under the cloud of pressure it seems may exist now. I don't know.
This is an electronics forum but its also an engineering forum. To me that means use of the scientific process to investigate deeply, and do things in the best way possible.
When the precautionary principle seems appropriate its good to apply it.
Fine tuning and optimization of ideas to make them work is what engineering is all about.
An engineer should have a skeptical mind and also should investigate all potential gotchas of an idea, thats their job. Resisting groupthink.
being the best engineer you can be means investigating all potential problems.
Right?
This is a good read on groupthink and how destructive it can be is illustrated by the Challenger disaster. I suspect that may apply with 5G also. In any case, caution is an especially good thing to practice when its impossible to reverse a mistake as it is now with anything involving corporations that operate across borders.
https://williamwolff.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/griffin-groupthink-challenger.pdf