By Catherine J. Frompovich

In the Abstract of the IEEE Access paper “Exposure to RF EMF From Array Antennas in 5G Mobile Communication Equipment” https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=7546896 , we find some rather ‘telling’ information that was brought to my attention recently by Eric Windheim, BA, EMRS, BBEC, a Certified Electromagnetic Radiation Specialist, Certified Building Biology Environmental Consultant, in Sacramento, California, after reading one of my recent articles regarding 5G.

Mr. Windheim and I have been in contact before, so he apparently thought the information below would be germane to any articles I could write regarding 5G radiofrequency exposures.

ABSTRACT In this paper, radio-frequency (RF) electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure evaluations are conducted in the frequency range 10-60 GHz for array antennas intended for user equipment (UE) and low-power radio base stations in 5G mobile communication systems. A systematic study based on numerical power density simulations considering effects of frequency, array size, array topology, distance to exposed part of human body, and beam steering range is presented whereby the maximum transmitted power to comply with RF EMF exposure limits specified by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, the US Federal Communications Commission, and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers is determined. [1] [CJF emphasis]

In the highlighted pdf copy of the above article Mr. Windheim emailed, he was kind enough to point out certain important relevancies which I would like to reiterate, since I respect his area of expertise and feel it is important consumers have access to information which they should know may adversely affect their health, welfare and wellbeing.

In the Introduction to the above article, IEEE points out that “mobile traffic is expected to increase dramatically in the coming years.”  And the specific absorption rate (SAR) for non-ionizing microwave radiation will increase greatly, especially with the introduction of 5G.  Windheim highlighted:

As a consequence, to be compliant with applicable exposure limits at frequencies above 6 GHz, Pmax [maximum possible transmitted power] might have to be several dB below the power levels used for current cellular technologies.

[Due to increase in skin temperatures from RFs?]

What I found totally thought-provoking, if not scientifically remiss, was:

Until now [2016], no systematic study on EMF exposure for phased arrays transmitting above 10 GHz has been presented where effects of frequency range, array size, scan angle, distance to human body, and all major exposure standards are considered. [CJF emphasis]

But the military was working on producing its “microwave weapons of war” and probably realized how effective “burning skin sensations” can become in controlling humans!

I’m deliberately hopscotching around the above paper, as I would like microwave tech and 5G supporters to read it in order to understand what’s going on.  I skip to the article’s Discussion wherein this important admission is made:

For devices intended to be used in the immediate vicinity of the human body, the ICNIRP and FCC exposure limits results in a maximum transmitted power significantly below what is specified today for existing mobile communication technologies, e.g. 23 dBm and 24 dBm for Long Term Evolution (LTE) [23] and WCDMA [24], respectively. This is in line with the findings in [16] where a single dipole element was considered. To circumvent these problems, and also to improve the link budget by reducing body losses, it is conceivable that technical solutions are employed whereby the transmitted energy is always directed away from the human body. [CJF emphasis]

The Conclusion section of the article states:

[…] in 5G mobile communication systems. Effects of frequency, array size, distance to human body, scan range and array topology have been considered. The obtained results constitute valuable input to the design of future mobile communication systems employing array antennas with beamforming capabilities.  [….]

In order to allow larger power levels, technical solutions, whereby the transmitted energy is always directed away from the human body, are conceivable.

But here’s the real crux of the 5G matter and which consumers must hold the Federal Communications Commission’s feet to the fire along with the vested interests of ALL microwave industries:

Furthermore, for UE [user equipment] intended to be used in close proximity of the body, the ICNIRP and FCC exposure limits results in a maximum transmitted power significantly below what is specified today for existing mobile communication technologies. If not resolved, these findings may have a large negative impact on the performance and cost of future mobile communication systems. A global harmonization of the RF EMF exposure limits for frequencies above 6 GHz is desirable with a similar margin of safety as for frequencies below 6 GHz to protect from established adverse health effects. [CJF emphasis]

The above IEEE paper documents, in my opinion, what most independent researchers have been warning about, plus what I have been pointing to as the source of the denial of non-thermal radiation adverse health issues: the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and its ‘microwave science muse’ ICNIRP (International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection).

Shouldn’t microwave technology consumers be given real science, real protection and immediate precautionary measures before the roll out of 5G and the Internet of Things?