[Comment] Notes on parliament hearing in Tallinn, Estonia June 4, 2019 as regards the deployment of the fifth generation, 5G, of wireless communication

Hardell,Lennart

doi:10.3892/wasj.2019.28

[Comment] Notes on parliament hearing in Tallinn, Estonia June 4, 2019 as regards the deployment of the fifth generation, 5G, of wireless communication

Authors:
- Lennart Hardell
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Oncology, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Örebro University, SE‑701 82 Örebro, Sweden
Published online on: November 18, 2019 https://doi.org/10.3892/wasj.2019.28
Pages: 275-282
Copyright: © Hardell . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The fifth generation (5G) for wireless communication is about to be deployed worldwide in spite of no thorough studies being made on the potential risks to human health and the environment. The implementation seems to be driven mainly by business interests, not considering mounting public anxiety on the associated risks. In Estonia, an appeal on a moratorium was signed by 1,122 subjects, forcing a hearing in the Social Affairs Commission and the Environment Commission of Estonian Parliament on June 4, 2019. The hearing lasted for 1 h and 40 min. The whole hearing may be found on the web. It clearly demonstrated that decision‑making bodies base their decisions and act on expert statements that tend to be biased and formed by a cartel of members instead of their own science‑based evaluation. Thus, the hearing revealed a lack of knowledge among the Commission members on the risks involved with the use of 5G wireless communication that is exemplified herein. This may create negative consequences for human health and the environment in the future.

View Figures

View References

1	Starkey SJ: Inaccurate official assessment of radiofrequency safety by the Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation. Rev Environ Health. 31:493–503. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
2	Hardell L: World Health Organization, radiofrequency radiation and health - a hard nut to crack (Review). Int J Oncol. 51:405–413. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
3	Baan R, Grosse Y, Lauby-Secretan B, El Ghissassi F, Bouvard V, Benbrahim-Tallaa L, Guha N, Islami F, Galichet L and Straif K: WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer Monograph Working Group: Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Lancet Oncol. 12:624–626. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
4	International Agency for Research on Cancer: Non-Ionizing Radiation, Part 2: Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans Volume 102. IARC, Lyon, 2013. urihttp://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol102/mono102.pdf.simplehttp://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol102/mono102.pdf. Accessed August 21, 2019.
5	Belpomme D, Hardell L, Belyaev I, Burgio E and Carpenter DO: Thermal and non-thermal health effects of low intensity non-ionizing radiation: An international perspective. Environ Pollut. 242 (Pt A):643–658. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
6	Miller AB, Morgan LL, Udasin I and Davis DL: Cancer epidemiology update, following the 2011 IARC evaluation of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (Monograph 102). Environ Res. 167:673–683. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
7	NTP technical report on the toxicology and carcinogenesis studies in B6C3F1/N mice exposed to whole-body radio frequency radiation at a frequency (1,900 MHz) and modulations (GSM and CDMA) used by cell phones. National Toxicology Program, Research Triangle Park, NC, 2018. urihttps://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/about_ntp/trpanel/2018/march/tr596peerdraft.pdfsimplehttps://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/about_ntp/trpanel/2018/march/tr596peerdraft.pdf. Accessed August 29, 2019.
8	NTP technical report on the toxicology and carcinogenesis studies in Hsd:Sprague Dawley sd rats exposed to whole-body radio frequency radiation at a frequency (900 MHz) and modulations (GSM and CDMA) used by cell phones. National Toxicology Program, Research Triangle Park, NC, 2018. urihttps://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/about_ntp/trpanel/2018/march/tr595peerdraft.pdfsimplehttps://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/about_ntp/trpanel/2018/march/tr595peerdraft.pdf. Accessed August 29, 2019.
9	Falcioni L, Bua L, Tibaldi E, Lauriola M, De Angelis L, Gnudi F, Mandrioli D, Manservigi M, Manservisi F, Manzoli I, et al: Report of final results regarding brain and heart tumors in Sprague-Dawley rats exposed from prenatal life until natural death to mobile phone radiofrequency field representative of a 1.8 GHz GSM base station environmental emission. Environ Res. 165:496–503. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
10	Carlberg M and Hardell L: Evaluation of mobile phone and cordless phone use and glioma risk using the Bradford Hill viewpoints from 1965 on association or causation. BioMed Res Int. 2017(9218486)2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
11	International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection: Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields (up to 300 GHz). Health Phys 74: 494-522, 1998.
12	International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection: ICNIRP statement on the ‘Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields (up to 300 GHz)’. Health Phys 97: 257-258, 2009.
13	ICNIRP Note: Critical evaluation of two radiofrequency electromagnetic field animal carcinogenicity studies published in 2019. Health Phys: August 27, 2019 (Epub ahead of print).
14	Yakymenko I, Tsybulin O, Sidorik E, Henshel D, Kyrylenko O and Kyrylenko S: Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagn Biol Med. 35:186–202. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
15	Panagopoulos DJ: Comparing DNA damage induced by mobile telephony and other types of man-made electromagnetic fields. Mutat Res. 781:53–62. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
16	Melnick RL: Commentary on the utility of the National Toxicology Program study on cell phone radiofrequency radiation data for assessing human health risks despite unfounded criticisms aimed at minimizing the findings of adverse health effects. Environ Res. 168:1–6. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
17	Smith-Roe SL, Wyde ME, Stout MD, Winters JW, Hobbs CA, Shepard KG, Green AS, Kissling GE, Shockley KR, Tice RR, et al: Evaluation of the genotoxicity of cell phone radiofrequency radiation in male and female rats and mice following subchronic exposure. Environ Mol Mutagen: October 21, 2019 (Epub ahead of print).
18	Coureau G, Bouvier G, Lebailly P, Fabbro-Peray P, Gruber A, Leffondre K, Guillamo JS, Loiseau H, Mathoulin-Pélissier S, Salamon R, et al: Mobile phone use and brain tumours in the CERENAT case-control study. Occup Environ Med. 71:514–522. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
19	Hardell L and Carlberg M: Comments on the US National Toxicology Program technical reports on toxicology and carcinogenesis study in rats exposed to whole-body radiofrequency radiation at 900 MHz and in mice exposed to whole-body radiofrequency radiation at 1,900 MHz. Int J Oncol. 54:111–127. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
20	Le Drean Y, Mahamoud YS, Le Page Y, Habauzit D, Le Quement C, Zhadobov M and Sauleau R: State of knowledge on biological effects at 40-60 GHz. C R Phys. 14:402–411. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar
21	Russell CL: 5G wireless telecommunications expansion: Public health and environmental implications. Environ Res. 165:484–495. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
22	Feldman Y, Puzenko A, Ben Ishai P, Caduff A and Agranat AJ: Human skin as arrays of helical antennas in the millimeter and submillimeter wave range. Phys Rev Lett. 100(128102)2008.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
23	Betzalel N, Ben Ishai P and Feldman Y: The human skin as a sub-THz receiver - Does 5G pose a danger to it or not? Environ Res. 163:208–216. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
24	Soghomonyan D, Trchounian K and Trchounian A: Millimeter waves or extremely high frequency electromagnetic fields in the environment: What are their effects on bacteria? Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 100:4761–4771. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
25	Neufeld E and Kuster N: Systematic derivation of safety limits for time-varying 5G radiofrequency exposure based on analytical models and thermal dose. Health Phys. 115:705–711. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
26	Koppel T, Ahonen M, Carlberg M, Hedendahl LK and Hardell L: Radiofrequency radiation from nearby mobile phone base stations-a case comparison of one low and one high exposure apartment. Oncol Lett. 18:5383–5391. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
27	Belyaev I, Dean A, Eger H, Hubmann G, Jandrisovits R, Kern M, Kundi M, Moshammer H, Lercher P, Müller K, et al: EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses. Rev Environ Health. 31:363–397. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
28	INTERPHONE Study Group: Brain tumour risk in relation to mobile telephone use: Results of the INTERPHONE international case-control study. Int J Epidemiol 39: 675-694, 2010.
29	Hardell L and Carlberg M: Mobile phone and cordless phone use and the risk for glioma - Analysis of pooled case-control studies in Sweden, 1997-2003 and 2007-2009. Pathophysiology. 22:1–13. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
30	INTERPHONE Study Group: Acoustic neuroma risk in relation to mobile telephone use: Results of the INTERPHONE international case-control study. Cancer Epidemiol 35: 453-464, 2011.
31	Hardell L, Carlberg M, Söderqvist F and Mild KH: Pooled analysis of case-control studies on acoustic neuroma diagnosed 1997-2003 and 2007-2009 and use of mobile and cordless phones. Int J Oncol. 43:1036–1044. 2013.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar