Has anybody here suggested a conspiracy? A conspiracy by who?

The general thrust of that article, and it's conclusion, seems to be very much what Andrew said. Somebody or bodies in Switzerland causing panic that isn't supported by any evidence.

Nobody can prove that radiation in general isn't harmful. Over-exposure to sunlight kills. Under-exposure to it kills. Nobody really knows the limits either way. From the article:-

Bafu will examine exposure through adaptive [5G] antennas in depth, if possible, in real-world operational conditions. This work will take some time.

It'll take an infinite time if the real world conditions are not created in a mass market.

It all sounds like the Bafu top brass are covering their backsides, so that when the rollout is authorised they can say "Not our fault" if there is an occasional problem.

In reply to a post by RobertoS:

Has anybody here suggested a conspiracy? A conspiracy by who?

The general thrust of that article, and it's conclusion, seems to be very much what Andrew said. Somebody or bodies in Switzerland causing panic that isn't supported by any evidence.

Nobody can prove that radiation in general isn't harmful. Over-exposure to sunlight kills. Under-exposure to it kills. Nobody really knows the limits either way. From the article:-

Bafu will examine exposure through adaptive [5G] antennas in depth, if possible, in real-world operational conditions. This work will take some time.

It'll take an infinite time if the real world conditions are not created in a mass market.

It all sounds like the Bafu top brass are covering their backsides, so that when the rollout is authorised they can say "Not our fault" if there is an occasional problem.

No, one actually said conspiracy theories, but i am aware of them,i can form my own opinions , This 5G has not been scrutinised enough imo and i don't want to be a Guinea pig for them,

In reply to a post by tommy45:

FTTP doesn't present any potential risk to health, it could be argued it's another stop gap and isn't really needed they could upgrade 4g

FTTP is end game for networking. There is nothing better that will EVER come along. The likes of Gigaclear and B4RN which have done P2P installations could upgrade a customer tomorrow to 50Gbps symmetric with a swap out of optics either end of the link using 50G BiDi QSFP28's. Ok that's pricey £2000 if the link is under 10km and £4000 if the link is between 10km and 40km but no change of the fibre required. However those 50Gbps BiDi are brand new to the market, expect them to be much cheaper a decade from now.

It's much cheaper for 10Gbps, you are looking at £100 for 20km capable SFP+'s and the switches needed either end are a lot cheaper too. Even 25Gbps BiDi SFP28's are not that expensive at around £250 for the pair.

No amount of radio will ever achieve those speeds outside large point to point line of sight microwave links. I would note that bang in some CWDM and you could get 450Gbps out of a single fibre using off the shelf components (though this will be pricey).

Finally note some fibre links use lasers beyond Class 1 and do present a risk to human health (that is they can blind you). However all the GPON stuff is Class 1 as is at least 1Gbps BiDi optics for <20km. The further the high power the lasers in general.

What 5G?

The one thats at 700 MHz bands? Uses masts just like now, but a need fewer to cover UK than you do today.

The one thats in the 1800 to 5 GHz bands? Similar mast density to today and will usually be an upgrade to existing mast, or even re-use some frequencies already in use.

The one thats in the 8 GHz to 28 GHz bands? This is the new bit and will be no different in mast density to the Wi-Fi networks that cover a number of city centre areas e.g. Square Mile in City of London and similar frequency bands are in use for things like Sky TV already

So nothing much is particularly new in terms of radiation.

The highest bands such as 28 GHz are such that a coat blocks the signal, does not even need to be foil lined.

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

What 5G?

The one thats at 700 MHz bands? Uses masts just like now, but a need fewer to cover UK than you do today.

The one thats in the 1800 to 5 GHz bands? Similar mast density to today and will usually be an upgrade to existing mast, or even re-use some frequencies already in use.

The one thats in the 8 GHz to 28 GHz bands? This is the new bit and will be no different in mast density to the Wi-Fi networks that cover a number of city centre areas e.g. Square Mile in City of London and similar frequency bands are in use for things like Sky TV already

So nothing much is particularly new in terms of radiation.

The highest bands such as 28 GHz are such that a coat blocks the signal, does not even need to be foil lined.

Then why is there any need for 5g being installed into street lighting ? https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/476049/respon... it's this implementation that is a cause of concern

Edited by tommy45 (Mon 17-Feb-20 17:45:57)

In reply to a post by tommy45:

In reply to a post by MrSaffron:

What 5G?

The one thats at 700 MHz bands? Uses masts just like now, but a need fewer to cover UK than you do today.

The one thats in the 1800 to 5 GHz bands? Similar mast density to today and will usually be an upgrade to existing mast, or even re-use some frequencies already in use.

The one thats in the 8 GHz to 28 GHz bands? This is the new bit and will be no different in mast density to the Wi-Fi networks that cover a number of city centre areas e.g. Square Mile in City of London and similar frequency bands are in use for things like Sky TV already

So nothing much is particularly new in terms of radiation.

The highest bands such as 28 GHz are such that a coat blocks the signal, does not even need to be foil lined.

Then why is there any need for 5g being installed into street lighting ? https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/476049/respon... it's this implementation that is a cause of concern

For the higher frequency, high speed, short distance links.

Its only remotely economically viable for high density areas such as city centres or for building wide WiFi/wired LAN replacement. (I kinda think that's bonkers personally, but it is one of the suggested uses for a business to outsource their whole LAN to the mobile networks)

Back in the 1990s there was similar concern in our village when the installation of a first-generation mobile mast was proposed. This led to a public meeting where there was a large vote against the installation due to the "undoubted" dangers to children's health.

The residents of the village have spent the last 20 years trying to persuade the mobile phone networks that they didn't really mean it and could we have a mast please. We still remain a mobile free zone. Be careful what you wish for and what you wish to block on the basis of speculation.

Perhaps you need to look at why lamp posts are a common wi-fi hotspot location in cities...

i.e. have power and some height and are existing furniture with small space inside.

The height means line of sight to a lot of people nearby when using the 8 GHz to 28 GHz bands and this also means while more masts that lower power levels than a bigger 4G mast on top of a block of flats or office building.

In reply to a post by tommy45:

they could upgrade 4g

Which is what 5G is, taking over from 4G+, which added on to 4G, which took over from DC-HSPA, HSDPA, HSUPA, UMTS, which took over from GRPS, which took over from HSCSD, took over from standard CSD, and that took over from acoustic coupler over mobile (sometimes worked on analogue).

In reply to a post by gary333:

In reply to a post by jchamier:

How? It can be faster by using different technology. VDSL is capped at 80Mbps in the UK and will have a lot of loss on a 1-mile length of copper. Most people are 500metres or less from their local cabinet.

5G is radio, so it will depend how many users there are using the service at the same time.

Why?

On a side note when Origin operated via Digital Region you could get up to 100mb connection via FTTC (although probably a small proportion).

Indeed.