1. If you've ever wandered through a city, you may have seen tiny cell towers for 5G on street light poles. They look like small boxes however they're actually sending wireless signals from cellular providers to your mobile.
2.  
3. what is a safe distance from a cell tower are replacing larger, purpose-built cell towers. While they're not as noticeable, they still can create problems for those who live nearby.
4. A Federal Communications Commission's Radiation Exposure Thresholds
5.  
6. The FCC's Radiation Exposure Thresholds establish the safe distance that one can expose to electromagnetic energy from wireless devices. The limits for exposure are based upon scientific research that show that RF energy could be harmful to health.
7.  
8.  
9. The rate of absorption called the specific absorption rate (SAR) is an indicator of the radiofrequency energy absorbed by tissue. It's usually 1.6 milliwatts per kilogram calculated over one Gram of tissue.
10.  
11. However, because 5g transmits at higher frequencies and has the potential to increase the intensity of energy on the skin and other directly-exposed body areas. This could result in a wide range of possible harms, like the appearance of skin conditions such as dermatitis and cataracts, and skin cancer.
12.  
13. Due to the possible negative effects of 5G radiation, PSU has chosen to create a general maximum power density of four mW/cm2 measured across 1 centimeter, but not exceeding 30 minutes for all 5G services at 3000 GHz. This limit for localization is in line with the highest SAR spatial-average of 1.6 W/kg, which is averaged over 1 g of tissue at 6 GHz.
14. The FCC's Maximum Exposure Thresholds
15.  
16. If you've ever used a cell phone, you're probably aware that the safest range from the tower is around 400 meters away. This is due to the power of transmission from cell towers increases drastically the further you are from it.
17.  
18. While this sounds like something that's good however, those living close to towers could be more prone to health problems. For example, a study from 2014 in India found that residents who lived within 50m of cell towers had significantly more health complaints than those living further distance from them.
19.  
20. But, the study showed that residents who moved to areas further away from cell towers noticed their symptoms improve within a couple of days. Other studies have shown that exposure to high frequencies of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) can cause cancer, brain tumors as well as other health issues.
21.  
22. This is due to the fact that RF radiation, which is used for wireless communication, has the ability to be absorbed by the body's outer layer of skin. It is vital to be aware of this since the skin serves as a barrier to protect against injuries caused by mechanical forces, infections from pathogenic microorganisms, as well as the entry of harmful substances. Additionally, it is the largest organ of the human body. It is accountable for maintaining the integrity of other organs.
23. The FCC's Minimum Exposure Thresholds for the Minimum Exposure
24.  
25. The FCC's Minimum Exposure Thresholds rely on numerous assumptions that aren't supported by evidence from science. what is a safe distance from a cell tower include the erroneous assumption that short-term exposures to RF radiation are safe due to the limited absorption into body (i.e. the heating of tissues).
26.  
27. The assumption is also ignoring the more extensive penetration of ELF elements of modulated radio signals, as well as the effect of short bursts of heat from pulsed RF waves. These assumptions do not correspond with current knowledge of the biological consequences of RF radiation. Therefore, https://turtlelevel6.bravejournal.net/post/2023/04/26/Are-usually-safest-distance-from-the-5G-cell-Tower should not be relied upon for health-protection exposure standards.
28.  
29. Additionally there is the fact that both ICNIRP and FCC limit their maximum limit of exposure to the local SARs that are based on the peak spatial specific absorption rate (psSAR), which can be described as not a sufficient dosimetric tool for determining the level of radiation exposure. Particularly it is inconclusive for frequencies above 6 GHz. In addition, psSAR is not been tested for RF radiation with co-exposure to other agents of the environment such as sunlight. Interactions of RF radiation and other agents in the environment could result in antagonistic or synergistic results. This could result in an increased risk of negative health adverse effects. For example, co-exposure to RF radiation and sunlight could increase the risk of developing skin cancer and exacerbate other skin conditions like acne.
30.  
31. Website: https://ctxt.io/2/AACQ2TLoEg