Those who oppose 5G networks cite radiation concerns

In its latest round of spectrum testing, the U.K.’s Office of Communications, or Ofcom, measured electromagnetic field (EMF) emissions at 16 5G sites in 10 cities across the U.K., concluding that 5G networks do not pose a health risk.

The regulator been testing mobile and wireless equipment EMF emissions for several years at this point, recently expanding its program to cover the bands used to deliver 5G and which have proven to be particularly controversial.

High-band 5G requires the need for small antenna systems, or small cell systems, to be deployed in large numbers and in close proximity to one another. These frequently placed small cell towers are being met with hesitation — and in some cases, downright disdain — worldwide, by end-users or local officials who at best, consider the towers an eye sore and at worst, think they represent a serious health risk.

In the U.S., from California to Colorado to New York, concerns are pouring in. It’s no different in Europe, where just recently, 100 demonstrators and 200 scientists in Brussels gathered to protest 5G. And South Africa’s 5G rollout has been hindered by Stop 5G South Africa, an organization of supporters from more than 31 major South African cities fighting to put an end to the deployment 5G antennas around the world and 5G satellites in space.

Many hope that Ofcom’s findings, which assert that none of the locations tested demonstrated any cause for concern, might be able to change the conversation around the risk of 5G.

“At every site, emissions were a small fraction of the levels included in international guidelines set by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). And the maximum measured at any site was approximately 1.5 per cent of those levels,” the organization commented.