5G: Public Safety or Public Harm?
“Man is not the lord of beings. Man is the shepherd of Being.” – Martin Heidegger
“We want to make sure these networks are fast, reliable, but also secure.” – U.S. FCC Chairman
Chairman, Sir, a machine, weapon, vehicle, or airplane fit these criteria. But is 5G safe?
User and the Dasein in the world. 5G Time and Being. German philosopher, Martin Heidegger’s Dasein is said to have been inspired by Chinese philosopher Zhuangzi and Japanese scholar Okakura Kakuzō. They may be smiling as to how the Dasein “connects” in a controlled sentience, part of a utilitarian state of a digitized 5G “smart city.”
Why the Push for 5G?
→Public Safety? According to Patrik Ringqvist, principal solutions architect for Ericsson North America “The push to evolve public-safety communications is driven not only by the rapid advance of technologies but by the evolving needs of emergency responders.”
→Profit? Why do corporations “push” their product if not for profit? Where’s the harm in that?
→Political? U.S. Election 2020 presents high-stakes where contenders may see 5G speed instrumental in their communications as well as guarantee their party seat by 5G lobbyists.
→U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) Long-Term Strategy? Distraction from imminent 2020 decision of “Universal expectation of national military, national or public service.”
Public Safety: Promises, Promises, Promises
The promise is that “With 5G technologies public-safety personnel will be able to benefit from an enhanced version of the Internet of Lifesaving Things (IoLST).” How so? By “enhancing the next generation of MCPTT technology.” Public safety is a strong argument.
What’s “the driving force”? According to Ringqvist, “a recent Ericsson survey found 71% of public safety decision-makers plan to invest in 5G technology because of its ability to improve operational efficiency.” Not to mention the increase of vendor and contractor bids. Delivery on promises stands to be seen.
Europe, Will the U.S. hear you NOW?
Halt! Brussels and Switzerland did not appear to be making an immediate “push for 5G.” For Brussels’ environment minister Céline Fremault, concerns of radiation rules initially stopped the advancement of 5G. According to Fiercewireless, Fremault reported in The Brussels Times, “The people of Brussels are not guinea pigs whose health I can sell at a profit. We cannot leave anything to doubt.” Apparently, the U.S. may be doing just that.
Taking a cue from Brussels, Switzerland seems to have followed suit. In the Heise article, “Schweiz: Genf stoppt Aufbau von 5G-Mobilfunkantennen,” Tom Sperlich reports that the Parliament ordered the government of Geneva suspend 5G towers until completion of independent studies by the World Health Organization (WHO).
The hold did not appear to halt Swisscom, Switzerland’s largest mobile operator, from announcing its plans: by year’s end, 90% of the country will be 5G ready. Adds Sperlich, “und bietet bereits das neue 5G-Smartphone Reno von Oppo an.” That is, Swisscom already offers Oppo’s new 5G smartphone. Looks like T-Mobile/Sprint need to speed up with the merger.
5G Pushers: U.S. Congress and the FCC
“Politics is about governing men, not about morally transforming them.” – Han Feizi, Chinese political philosopher
Nancy Pelosi, House Speaker, reportedly tweeted that “House Judiciary will begin a long overdue investigation to determine if dominant digital platforms have harmed Americans…” If Nancy Pelosi put forth this tweet, then her apparent concern is misdirected. No, Madame Speaker, what’s actually “harmed Americans” are the inactions of the EPA and FDA; failure to regulate and enforce laws.
Speaking of harm, it is interesting that on the same day that proposed Federal probes of social medial and tech companies were announced, a hearing on 5G Wireless Development was underway where FCC Commissioners were pushing 5G and Wi-Fi 6.
FCC, among other stakeholders, has made speed the priority in deploying 5G. FCC Commissioner Jessica Rosenworcel (D) “Even if you don’t find our interest in having more Wi-Fi in our skies credible, that in last year’s appropriations law, Congress actually directed the FCC to find a 100 Mhz of spectrum below 8 Grz by the end of 2022 for unlicensed airways.” Commissioner, interesting use of the word “credible.” Oh, and thank you for acknowledging that it is Congress who “actually directed the FCC” with a remaining 3 ½ year deadline. Yes, the clock is ticking.
I’d like to see an EPA or FDA employee project the same level of eagerness, determination, and confidence as that of Ms. Rosenworcel. Ideally, such characteristics are best suited to argue for speedy preemptive measures against corporate corrupt policies that lead to harming the public.
Is 5G safe?
CBS News, Tony Dokoupil reported, “5G service is coming – and so are health concerns over the towers that support it.” How will these towers be built? AT&T, Melissa Arnoldi says, “We’re going to use our existing infrastructure today. Whether its light poles, whether it’s street lights.” How will this play out in cities with inferior infrastructure? What do city officials think about this?
It readily appears that, “The wireless industry is in a race to roll out 5G service. It’s supposed to be up to 100 times faster than current data speeds…” Wow! Government cannot work up to 1 time faster to address infrastructure or build faster highways on the ground.
When asked if Arnoldi had any 5G antenna in her neighborhood, she responded, “No, not yet, I’m waiting for it. It’s coming soon, though.” Is that a promise, Arnoldi? How about we wait and see how that pans out for you?
Self-Regulation or Self-Aggrandizing?
Pelosi reportedly tweeted, “The era of self-regulation is over.” Is that what Democrats call it? Did the U.S. government agree to adapt regulations to support 5G deployment? What are the radiation rules? Will it enforce strict regulations to meet them?
Or, will the House Speaker reassure Americans that, to use Fremault’s words, the “people of [U.S.] are not guinea pigs whose health I can sell at a profit…” Right, that power has been given to the medical device industry and “Big Pharma.”
Consensus on 5G safety has not been reached. Rose Behar of Digital Trends asks in her 2.11.19 article, “Is 5G dangerous?” Let’s consider the experts, “The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) also have not formally classified RF radiation as cancer-causing.” The key word here is “formally” meaning officially or legally. It begs the question, How many other products on the market have not been “formally classified” as cancer-causing?
It is important to point out that “NTP senior scientist John Butcher warned that 5G likely differs dramatically from 2G and 3G, so further studies are necessary.” But proponents of 5G do not appear to want to wait for results of further studies.
In the meantime, the public is expected to take the word of the FDA who “continues to believe that the current safety limits for cellphone radio frequency energy exposure remain acceptable for protecting the public health.” Are you, the public, going to accept the EPA’s classification and FDA’s belief and end the debate on the dangers of 5G?
Where Regulation May Have Failed
Just ask any of the reported millions of people who are victims of other debated products, substances, minerals, and chemicals (tobacco, coal, asbestos, and pesticides). Had they to do it all over again knowing what they know now and given a choice, would they smoke, work in coal mines or with asbestos products, and use pesticides?
The film industry rarely portrays these victims on the big screen, with the exception of documentaries. Instead, it has profited from countless films where the U.S. saves the world.
Storytellers ignore the stranger that looks to your fiction to turn into fact becoming your reality. Vigilance requires one know the stranger – Friend or Foe? Victims from technology may be seen as a “hot” topic in the future. Here are some possible titles: The Day After 5G, The Tower’s Center, and G-Storm.
In time, Pelosi’s reported tweet that “digital platforms have harmed Americans…” may need to be revisited as the coming decades will either disprove or substantiate the harms from 5G or technological devices. If it’s the latter, will U.S. courts be prepared for unprecedented litigation? Stakeholders who stand to profit may surely be prepared. Will you?
Net Neutrality? For all of the “push” for a neutral net, it appears to have been pure posturing. Users, think about how 5G is going to affect those with 2G, 3G and 4G if “by 2023, Cisco is projecting globally, 3.4% of mobile connections will be 5G.” Right, little g, it’s going to be a Big 5G world, you’re just a little being in it.
5G→ Ready or not, here it comes!