Is 5G Wireless Dangerous? Hundreds Of Birds Die During 5G Experiment In The Netherlands

originally posted by: Moravec
a reply to: PublicOpinion

They have tested negatively on Usutu- and West Nile Virus the news is reporting here. The initial story broke and a phone shop on the corner of the station was mentioned as the test site. This is such a small shop it's quite unlikely that it is connected to bigger companies. Although to be honest looking on the roof is difficult, it is quite high.

I was thinking maybe some subcontractor used a round-up like poison, since it is forbidden by city council. But the legislation does not reach a third party, only working directly for the city. But to be honest I don't know, the size of the birds have been mentioned what makes them susceptible for this kind of wave. Then again I'm not buying the story an I live in The Hague, it originated with 1 person with no back-up only conjecture.

To kill huge flocks of Starlings in America the farmers used to use soapy water and spray them. It washes their oil off then they freeze to death. The flock gets so large that people get diseases like Histo plasmosis from them.

a reply to: shawmanfromny

I was a radar engineer during my time in the military. Here's my answer:
Yes and no. The effects of the 6+ ghz signals which will be used in 5g have been studied immensely. 6ghz wifi was just approved and it will be everywhere within a couple of years.

Radiation is divided into two different types: Ionizing and non-ionizing.
What this gets at is how powerful the radiation is. If the radiation is strong enough to knock an electron off an atom (making it an ion) then it is ionizing radiation. If it is not strong enough to do so, it is non-ionizing. Ionizing radiation starts the middle of the ultraviolet light spectrum. These types of radiation waves can cause all sorts of problems in people, from deformity to cancer.

Non-ionizing radiation is generally safe. That's what we use in everything from TV and radio to microwave ovens and infrared technologies. The danger with non-ionizing radiation is burns (like if you stuck your arm in the microwave and turned it on for a minute or two, physical burns). Most all of the technology we use today is too low power to cause radiation burns and is therefore safe for people to use.

There are some unforeseen problems we've encountered with in the UHF and SHF bands. Not necessarily to do directly with health but with interference. Take the birds you've described in your OP for example. The idea that they suffered some sort of health problem mid flight strains credulity. More likely they experienced some sort of interference. We've seen this happen before with birds and RF technologies. It throws their internal navigation systems off and they get lost. Much like light pollution causes sea turtles to head towards the land rather than the ocean. If I were to guess, I'd say that the 5G system caused some sort of interference for them and they starved themselves or flew into danger of some sort, but I haven't investigated it fully.

Here's the thing about 5G, it's extremely weak radiation. It doesn't pass through barriers well at all (compare this with many types of ionizing radiation which requires something extremely dense to stop it from passing through) a simple hand between the transmitter and receiver will completely kill the signal. So the radiation is not passing deeply through your tissues like it does with older cell phone technologies. So if it does cause issues with people it's most likely going to be some sort of interference issue, rather than an issue cause by deep penetration of radiation.

a reply to: CosmicAwakening

It doesn't matter what frequency it uses. The battery in your phone and the transmitter are not capable of delivering that much radiation. It would fry the circuitry. The ADS uses 100kw (that's 100,000 watts). Your phone is capable of about 10 watts (It usually only transmits a couple watts).

a reply to: Moravec

They have tested negatively on Usutu- and West Nile Virus the news is reporting here. The initial story broke and a phone shop on the corner of the station was mentioned as the test site. This is such a small shop it's quite unlikely that it is connected to bigger companies. Although to be honest looking on the roof is difficult, it is quite high.

Thanks for the heads up, that sounds intriguing.
Care to share the news you mentioned?

Haven't the easily frightened and technology naysayers been predicting mayhem, death and destruction every time there's been change in mobile phones. I recall 3G was going to fry your brain, then 4G. Now it's 5G's turn. Remember kitchen microwaves - it's a wonder we all survived that predicted calamity.

I hate starlings. Nasty, invasive rats with wings. They poop all over everything, and seem to make nests in every crack they can find. People complain about pigeons, around here starlings are way worse. Wish I could go back in time and thump those bird lovers that brought them from Europe to the US.

If 5G kills all starlings, as long as it don't affect other animals and humans, bring it on. The only good starling is a dead starling.

a reply to: solve

We don't need your negative waves, Moriarty.

That said, we are working on cleaning up our mess. It's the Third World you should be looking at for the majority of the filth and indifference to the environment.

I have 5g with Frontier in So Ca , It sucks unless you are right on top of it you cant even go 50 feet from the router and that may be giving it a few feet .

5G as in not 5GHz wavelength unfortunately. I'm really concerned by the milimeter wavelenghts. As my work mostly consists of setting up many types of wireless devices I must say that I hate anything that uses wavelenghts higher than 17GHz. Everytime I have to configure such device I'm getting a small headache and start to feel a bit dizzy in about 15 minutes of work. So far this happened every time that I had to deal with such equipment. I have no idea what will happen if they start rolling out such tech inside the cities. Maybe we'll get some protective clothing? Nothing normal comes to mind... Bad times ahead.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: JinMI

And you couldn't even text on it lol.

True, but back when real phreaking was a thing, most of us who were really into that scene got really good at decoding numbers just by hearing the tones. I never really took the time to get really good at it, but I knew several guys that could just KILL it. Every time. As long as they could stand close enough to hear the tones, they knew what number you were dialing.

Those guys knew lots of tricks like that. Not really a skill that you could use to impress the ladies.


As far as the 5G question, I'll come back and check out the OP, but at first glance, I'm pretty skeptical. If someone who is "sensitive" to RF can stand with their back to me and know when I turn a router on and off, then we'll talk.

Otherwise, yeah, I'm a skeptic.

The shell of your car should somewhat catch and buffer the energy as would the aluminum siding and metal roof on your house.

Gee, I have vinyl siding and asphault shingles, good thing I live over the distance it can be transmitted from here out in the woods. I suppose they will use directional towers and blast us with signals someday.

a reply to: Dfairlite

Both types of these radiations interact differently depending on other things in the environment. If you look at a straight line approach in a lab instead of interactions in the real world, things will look peachy, but many times the test conditions or parameters do not apply. Even non-iodizing radiation can cause a material to heat if it acts like a catalyst somehow.

There are variables everywhere in everything. One shoe does not even fit all on things proven to not interact once you throw combinations of things into play. Mix Ammonia and bleach together, two fairly safe chemicals, and it can cause lots of damage. Do acids or bases react different than neutral things as related to radiations?

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: shawmanfromny

I was a radar engineer during my time in the military. Here's my answer:
Yes and no. The effects of the 6+ ghz signals which will be used in 5g have been studied immensely. 6ghz wifi was just approved and it will be everywhere within a couple of years.

Radiation is divided into two different types: Ionizing and non-ionizing.
What this gets at is how powerful the radiation is. If the radiation is strong enough to knock an electron off an atom (making it an ion) then it is ionizing radiation. If it is not strong enough to do so, it is non-ionizing. Ionizing radiation starts the middle of the ultraviolet light spectrum. These types of radiation waves can cause all sorts of problems in people, from deformity to cancer.

Non-ionizing radiation is generally safe. That's what we use in everything from TV and radio to microwave ovens and infrared technologies. The danger with non-ionizing radiation is burns (like if you stuck your arm in the microwave and turned it on for a minute or two, physical burns). Most all of the technology we use today is too low power to cause radiation burns and is therefore safe for people to use.

There are some unforeseen problems we've encountered with in the UHF and SHF bands. Not necessarily to do directly with health but with interference. Take the birds you've described in your OP for example. The idea that they suffered some sort of health problem mid flight strains credulity. More likely they experienced some sort of interference. We've seen this happen before with birds and RF technologies. It throws their internal navigation systems off and they get lost. Much like light pollution causes sea turtles to head towards the land rather than the ocean. If I were to guess, I'd say that the 5G system caused some sort of interference for them and they starved themselves or flew into danger of some sort, but I haven't investigated it fully.

Here's the thing about 5G, it's extremely weak radiation. It doesn't pass through barriers well at all (compare this with many types of ionizing radiation which requires something extremely dense to stop it from passing through) a simple hand between the transmitter and receiver will completely kill the signal. So the radiation is not passing deeply through your tissues like it does with older cell phone technologies. So if it does cause issues with people it's most likely going to be some sort of interference issue, rather than an issue cause by deep penetration of radiation.

Well here is the thing, while there may be "two types" of radiation, there are MANY implementations of those types of radiation, which can change the effects on living tissue. An example is Pulsing vs Non-Pulsing. Pulsing factually causes damage to living cells even when it's non-ionizing radiation. We knew this all the way back in the 1950's. Then there is more to it than frequency. Not all 6+ghzs waves are the same, it depends on the spectrum emission. I.E. The way the radiation beam is formulated. 5g uses millimeter waves. MMW's are proven to do damage to living tissue all on their own, and have affected the skin and eyes of rabbits and mice in the lab at frequencies NO WHERE NEAR the levels 5G is pushing. You're talking about 6ghz, but Los Angeles just got approved for 27ghz in their 5g test zone.

In the case of 5G, the current plans are to utilize the entire frequency range all the way up to 72GHZ. Not only that, but we're going to Pulse it. Not only that, but we're going to use harmful millimeter waves, which we currently use as a crowd control weapon, specifically because it causes your pain receptors to trigger.

There is no way on earth 5g will ever actually launch. It was supposed to launch in 2017, got pushed to 2018, was supposed to see AT&T drop 5g in Texas by the end of 2018, which has now been pushed to 2020. It's not going to happen anywhere.

It's incredibly dangerous, it's incredibly expensive, and incredibly non-feasible. As you said, since 5G has trouble penetrating buildings and solid mass objects [not soft tissues] you wouldn't get 5G signals inside your car, let alone your office building. The proposed solution to this is to build micro cell towers every 350 feet, because MMW's especially at high frequency ranges actual have terrible range. This means we would need close to a million cell towers just to cover NY city, which would be bombarding you at all times with no safe spaces.

That's BILLIONS of cell towers just for nationwide coverage, which is just not feasible. The cell towers would have to be on private property, and each one would still be subject to normal maintenance. If we took every working person in the country, there would still be a people shortage to service a network this size.

This also doesn't even begin to mention the satellite level, where we'll have to launch thousands of satellites a year flooding the atmosphere with carbon and chemicals that neutralize ozone every 6-9 months.

5G won't happen. At least not the proposed version of it. If we ever do get a 5G cell service, it will be a rebranding of a completely different idea, and since they are still working within the pipe dream that 5G is possible, we haven't even started thinking about an alternative.

It's much more likely we'll see LiFi replace cell networks all together.

I've said this from the second 5G was revealed; they want my cell phone to provide internet speeds of 1 gbp/s when internet service providers can't even do that, outside of special straight run lines of intranet? Psh, please. To think we'd go from 5mbp/s practical 4g, to 100 gbp/s 5g overnight is this biggest lie big telecom ever told.

a reply to: PhyllidaDavenport

My brother who's a radio operator and ham radio guy alerted me to this worrying development after a local council in Sheffield decided that 20,000 trees had to be cut down for 5g masts and antenna as these waves don't travel very far and far more antenna are needed than usual, and my research started from there.

that is 100% bull#. i've working in the telecom industry for 12 years. that didn't happen, and if it did, not for the reason he made up

he was covered in tumours and said he didn't have much longer to live but needed to get the information out there.

again b/s. its non-ionizing radiation... only thermal effect.

a reply to: Kalsek

what 800k towers emitting microwave would do to the ambient water molecules in the air.

they already operate at the 2.4 ghz frequency and look whats happening to the water molecules now... nothing.

see what everyone fails to realize is you countertop microwave operates at 1000 - 1500 watts 120 VAC. a typcal panel antenna operate at 2.4 Ghz at MAYBE 100-200 watts 12VDC.

a reply to: CosmicAwakening

Studies I have seen claim 5G is capable of using the exact same frequencies as directed energy microwave weapons. One minute they are for phones, flip a switch and then you got area denial, etc. Final nail for total control?

your failing to consider power levels. the hardware in your typical cell site would burn out if you pump anything close the amount of power requireed for an active denial type system thru it. they are all saturated with surge suppressors to protect the electronics. you would blow a thousand fuses if you tried.

As a Dutch:
There is no word of 5G in de 'news' segment in the OP. They think of poisoning, but the cause in unclear. I have my reservations on the 5G phenomenon, but this seems like a false link between this bird-death and 5G.

a reply to: SRPrime

You bring up some valid concerns and observations.
The eyes are the most dangerous part of this imo. Unlike the skin protecting the rest of the body, the eyes are designed to allow high frequency radiation in. The one thing you did leave out is that the damage caused to the eyes has been proven to be reversible by simply removing the subject from the environment. Of course, with the idea of 5g being everywhere it would be very difficult to remove yourself from the environment.

One other thing to note: Most of the studies about MMW's ocular effects use much more powerful and direct exposure than what people would be exposed to.

However, your prediction about 5g technology never launching will be completely wrong because it's already completely wrong. Samsung has successfully set up a 5g network that gives 100% outdoor coverage using the exact same number of cell towers as they would use for 4g by using a 28ghz spectrum. They achieved 1gbps consistently. So the only reasons for delay are health concerns or technical hiccups. Also, I'm not sure where you live but my ISP offers speeds up to 2.5Gbps.

I did get a chuckle out of your lifi comment. Lifi will never go anywhere other than niche application uses.

a reply to: SRPrime

Somehow I missed this paragraph in your reply which deserves its own response:

In the case of 5G, the current plans are to utilize the entire frequency range all the way up to 72GHZ. Not only that, but we're going to Pulse it. Not only that, but we're going to use harmful millimeter waves, which we currently use as a crowd control weapon, specifically because it causes your pain receptors to trigger.

First: millimeter wave spectrum is not different than frequency. What you've said here implies a difference which does not exist. The wavelength and frequency are inversely proportional. MMW is the frequencies whose wavelength is 1-10mm (thus 30-300ghz).
Second: The entire frequency range? what do you mean by that? The entire EHF range is 30-300ghz all of which is millimeter waves. Current applications are anywhere from 6ghz to 72ghz. I see no way to interpret this other than you're talking about things you don't really understand.
Third: we pulse everything. Wifi is pulsed, 1g/2g/3g/4g are all pulsed. Yet nothing is dying from it. The plant sitting next to my wifi router doesn't seem to mind.
Fourth: I covered this already. The power used in ADS is 10,000x stronger than what your cell phone is capable of, furthermore, ADS is praised because it doesn't cause any permanent damage. So this would seem to fully rebut the entire case you've laid forth about the inherent danger.

a reply to: rickymouse

Yes and no. Obviously variables can change outcomes, however, they can't change physics. Non-ionizing radiation can only induce heat. That heat can cause other reactions but it is not the radiation that is responsible for those reactions, per se, it is the heat.

Do acids or bases react different than neutral things as related to radiations?

They react the same way they would to heat from any other source.