“We have no reason to believe 5G is safe”
Radiation dosimetry is a combination of:<p>* Frequency of radiation<p>* Power of exposure<p>* Duration of exposure<p>* Where in the human body absorption is occurring<p>While the effects of the latter three are pretty well understood for certain kinds of radiation (ionizing and non-ionizing) ranging from &quot;acute radiation sickness due to gamma burst&quot; to &quot;listening to the radio your whole life doesn&#x27;t have a link to cancer&quot;, there is truth that a specific band of millimeter 5G has been less studied than others.<p>However, science follows patterns, and interpolating the existing data to this sub-infrared region opens a kind of wiggle room similar to, but in fact the opposite to, low dosimetry of ionizing radiation that has given the Linear No Threshold model a run for it&#x27;s money. Except in this case, skeptics are typically concerned about chemical effects due to subdermal heating (not really as compelling as ionizing radiation effects), or debating the &quot;non-ionizing-ness&quot; (which is less common because its even less supported by evidence).<p>It comes down to a persons personal risk. In my opinion, the sun beats out all non ionizing radiation concerns, particularly when it comes to heating of the skin and subdermal tissues. Wear a hat and sunscreen (against the sun).<p>Still worth researching and acknowledging the data gap, as the EU does in its metastudy of 40+ years and X00 scientific papers [0], but there&#x27;s no reason to be alarmed based on the existing corpus of evidence.<p>[0] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;url=https:&#x2F;&#x2F;ec.europa.eu&#x2F;health&#x2F;scientific_committees&#x2F;emerging&#x2F;docs&#x2F;scenihr_o_041.pdf&amp;ved=2ahUKEwiCttyFoK3lAhVKL1AKHU4SB7IQFjAAegQICRAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw1qjeNEXhMye0UL-K6Azv7s&amp;cshid=1571657533347" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;url?sa=t&amp;source=web&amp;rct=j&amp;url=https:&#x2F;...</a><p>Edit to add citation