![\"Telecommunications](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/07\/Telecommunications-radio-tower-mast-signal-or-mobile-cell-by-123rf-ID-22893935-600x600.webp.webp\")
<\/p>\n\t\t<\/p>\n
The issue of mobile broadband networks and human health just cropped up again after the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) published the outcome from its \u201cextensive programme of research\u201d to assess exposures from 5G Base Stations. The study found exposure to radio waves from 5G remain \u201cwell below the guidelines\u201d and is \u201cgenerally lower or similar\u201d to 4G<\/a> EMF exposure.<\/p>\n At present, the only known health impact from radio (wireless) signals in a low power non-ionizing mobile network environment is a minuscule amount of heating. But your body experiences massively more heating from the natural electromagnetic (EM) environment, such as via the Sun, or infrared radiation from your home\u2019s central heating system during winter etc. (we\u2019ve covered all of this before<\/a>).<\/p>\n NOTE: When an object absorbs any kind of light (e.g. from the EM spectrum) it heats up as it now has more energy than before (this is normal), but often this effect is so small that you can\u2019t feel it unless it\u2019s very energetic.<\/p>\n Science generally classifies everything from radio waves, microwaves, infrared and visible light as non-ionizing radiation, which means it won\u2019t normally have enough energy (low energy) to knock electrons off the atoms that it interacts with and won\u2019t do damage, such as breaking chemical bonds in molecules (i.e. it\u2019s not usually harmful to humans). You could of course still put masses of energy behind some of these waves and thus do damage (e.g. military weapons), but that\u2019s a completely different application from low-power wireless communications.<\/p>\n By comparison ultraviolet (only the top end from around 3000 TeraHertz), X-rays and gamma rays are all classified as ionizing radiation, which is more of a health hazard to humans because it involves changing the basic makeup of atoms in cells (e.g. the DNA molecules inside of cells). But it normally takes a higher dosage of ionizing radiation before any negative health impacts start to show (e.g. spending too long in the sun \u2013 a source of all types of EM).<\/p>\n Despite all this and plenty of past research, some people have continued to be concerned that the newer 5G mobile networks could cause harm, which is despite the technology and its implementation in the UK being broadly similar to past 3G<\/a> and even 4G mobile networks (i.e. the same sort of antenna designs, signal distances, radio bands and power levels). But it never hurts to conduct more research.<\/p>\n The New Study<\/p>\n The UKHSA has now updated its guidance to include the results of their in\u2010situ measurements of radiofrequency EM fields around 5G Macro Base Stations in the UK, which has been published in the peer-reviewed journal Bioelectromagnetics (here<\/a>). This conducted various RF EM field spot measurements in line-of-sight to 56 active 5G macro base stations across 30 publicly accessible locations in the UK.<\/p>\n Four different exposure scenarios were assessed: background (no traffic instigation), streaming videos, downlink speed test, and extrapolation of SS-RSRP decoder measurements. Power density measurements across the 420MHz \u2013 6GHz frequency range were also performed at each site to assess the total exposure from various RF sources in the environment (most UK mobile networks tend to use between 700MHz and 4GHz).<\/p>\n