1. If https://carson-branch.blogbright.net/how-far-away-can-a-single-be-from-a-new-5g-mobile-structure-before-becoming-harmful-1682482459 've ever walked through a town, you may have seen tiny 5G cell towers on street light poles. They look like little boxes, but they're actually broadcasting wireless signals from cell phone providers to your phone.
2.  
3. Click here to find out more are being replaced by the larger specially-designed cell towers. While they're less noticeable, they still can cause issues for users.
4. The Federal Communications Commission's Radiation Exposure Thresholds
5.  
6. The FCC's Radiation Exposure Thresholds determine the maximum amount of time a person can be exposed to electromagnetic energy from wireless devices. The limits for exposure are based on scientific data which show that the energy of RF could be harmful to human health.
7.  
8. The rate of absorption called the specific absorption rate (SAR) is an indication of the radiofrequency energy absorption by tissues. It is typically 1.6 Watts per kilogram calculated over one kilogram of tissue.
9.  
10. But, since 5g operates at higher frequencies and has the potential to increase the intensity of energy on the skin and other exposed body areas. This could result in many possible harms, such as an increase in appearance of skin conditions like dermatitis, cataracts, and skin cancer.
11.  
12. Because of the potentially harmful effects of radiation from 5G, PSU has chosen to create a general power density limit of 4 mW/cm2 averaged over 1 cm2, and never to exceed 30 minutes, for all 5G services at 3000 GHz. This localized limit is consistent with the maximum SAR that is spatially averaged at 1.6 W/kg, averaged over one grams of tissues at six GHz.
13. The FCC's Maximum Exposure Thresholds for Maximum Exposure
14.  
15. If you've ever used a mobile phone, you're probably aware that the safest distance from the tower is at least 400 meters. This is because the transmitting power of the cell tower is significantly increased the further away the tower is.
16.  
17. Although this may sound like a good idea, the reality is that people living in close proximity to towers might be more susceptible to health issues. For instance, a study conducted in 2014 in India discovered that people who lived within 50 meters of cell towers experienced significant more health issues than those who were away from the antennas.
18.  
19. But, the study showed that residents who moved into areas farther away from the cell towers saw their symptoms return to normal within a couple of days. Other studies have demonstrated that exposure to extreme amounts of electromagnetic field radiofrequency (EMFs) could cause cancer, brain tumors as well as other health issues.
20.  
21. This is because RF radiation, used in wireless communications, may penetrate the body's outer layer, which is the skin. It is crucial to know since the skin serves as a protective barrier against mechanical injury, infection by pathogenic microorganisms, and infiltration of toxic substances. Additionally, it is the biggest organ of the human body. https://zenwriting.net/beliefhouse8/how-far-can-you-proceed-coming-from-a-5g-mobile-tower-without-being-unsafe is accountable for keeping the integrity of the other organs.
22. The FCC's Minimum Exposure Thresholds
23.  
24. The FCC's Minimum Exposure Thresholds rely on a variety of assumptions that are not supported by evidence from science. This includes the false assumption that exposures of a short duration to RF radiation are safe due to minimal penetration into the body (i.e. thermal heating of tissue).
25.  
26.  
27. This assumption does not take into account the greater penetration of ELF parts of modulated RF signals as well as the consequences on the body of short bursts from pulsed RF waves. These theories are not compatible with the current understanding of biological consequences of RF radiation. Therefore they shouldn't be relied upon for health-protection exposure guidelines.
28.  
29. Additionally, the ICNIRP and FCC limit 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 radiation exposure. Particularly it is inconclusive for frequencies above 6 GHz. Furthermore, psSAR has not been evaluated for RF radiation exposed to other environmental agents , such as sunlight. Interactions of RF radiation with other agents in the environment could cause synergistic or antagonistic results. This would result in an increased risk of adverse health effects. For example, co-exposure to RF radiation along with exposure to sunlight can increase the risk of skin cancer, and may also exacerbate other skin disorders, such as acne.
30.  
31. Website: https://pastelink.net/ojt49wbk