What is the safest distance from a 5G cell Structure

If you've ever wandered through a town and spotted tiny mini 5G cell towers on the poles of street lights. They look like little boxes, but they're actually broadcasting wireless signals from cell phone providers to your phone.

They are replacing larger, purpose-built cell towers. While they're less noticeable however, they could cause problems for people.
It is the FCC's Radiation Exposure Thresholds

The FCC's Radiation Exposure Thresholds define the safe limit at which an individual can be exposed to electromagnetic radiation from wireless devices. The limits for exposure are based upon scientific research that prove that electromagnetic energy could be harmful to health.

<img width="353" src="https://gwdata.cdn-anritsu.com/images/tm/technologies/5g/5g-cellular-tower.jpg?la=en-us">
The rate of absorption called the specific absorption rate (SAR) is an indicator of the amount of radiofrequency energy that is absorbed by tissue. It's typically 1.6 watts per kilogram, spread over a gram of tissue.

But, since 5g operates at higher frequencies and has the potential to create more energy on the skin and other directly-exposed body parts. This could result in a wide range of possible harms, such as an increase in appearance of skin conditions such as dermatitis, cataracts, and skin cancer.

Due to the potential for negative effects of 5G radiation, PSU has chosen to establish a general, localized maximum power density of four mW/cm2 measured across 1 centimeter, and not to exceed 30 minutes, for the entire 5G spectrum at 3000 GHz. This limit for localization is in line with the peak spatial-average SAR of 1.6 W/kg, which is averaged over 1 g of tissue at 6 GHz.
The FCC's Maximum Exposure Thresholds for Maximum Exposure

If you've ever used a mobile phone, you probably know that a safe location from the tower should be at least 400 meters. https://blogfreely.net/haileagle16/very-best-safest-distance-from-the-5g-cell-tower is due to the power of the transmission of the cell tower is significantly increased the further away your location from the tower.

Although this may sound like an ideal idea, the reality is that people who live close to towers might be more prone to health issues. For instance, a study conducted in 2014 in India discovered that people who lived within 50 meters of cell towers had significant more health issues than those who were away from the antennas.

However, https://fnote.me/notes/XHmk6d found that people who moved into areas farther away from the cell towers saw their symptoms improve within a few days. Studies have also revealed that exposure to high levels of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) could cause brain tumors, cancer and other health issues.

This is due to the fact that radiofrequency radiation, which is used in wireless communication, can penetrate the human body's outer layer, the skin. This is important to understand since the skin serves as a shield against injuries caused by mechanical forces, infections caused by pathogenic microorganisms and infiltration of toxic substances. Additionally, it is the most important organ in the human body, and is accountable for protecting other organs.
https://squareblogs.net/winejumper80/how-long-can-you-get-from-a-5g-mobile-tower-without-staying-unsafe for the Minimum Exposure

The FCC's Minimum Exposure Thresholds rely on several assumptions that are not supported by evidence from science. They include the false belief that exposures to RF radiation are safe because of the minimal penetration into the body (i.e., tissue heating).

The assumption is also ignoring the greater penetration of ELF components of modulated RF signals as well as the effect of short bursts of heat from pulsed RF waves. These assumptions are not in line with current understanding of the biological consequences of RF radiation, and thus they shouldn't be considered for health protection exposure standards.

Furthermore there is the fact that both ICNIRP and FCC restrict their exposure limits to local peak SARs, based on the maximum spatial specific absorption rate (psSAR), which can be described as not a sufficient dosimetric tool to assess the amount of exposure to RF radiation. In particular, psSAR is inaccurate for frequencies above 6 GHz. Additionally, psSAR hasn't been evaluated for RF radiation with co-exposure to other environmental agents such as sunlight. The interactions of RF radiation with other agents in the environment could produce synergistic or antagonistic results. This could result in an increased risk of negative health consequences. For example, co-exposure to RF radiation and sunlight could cause an increase in the incidence of developing skin cancer, as well as aggravate other skin disorders, such as acne.

Edit

Pub: 26 Apr 2023 03:16 UTC

Views: 26