ANCOM has no attributions regarding the evaluation of the impact of electromagnetic fields (EMF) on the population’s health. However, whatever technologies produce electromagnetic fields, the population protection limits are the same. 2G, 3G and 4G networks have been installed in compliance with the same population protection rules, and 5G will be no exception. Moreover, the radio waves that underlie electronic communications do NOT have ionizing properties.
ANCOM takes account of views based on rigorous, recognized analyses: “There is no evidence of adverse health effects at exposure levels below the restriction levels in the ICNIRP (1998) guidelines and no evidence of an interaction mechanism that would predict that adverse health effects could occur due to radiofrequency EMF exposure below those restriction levels.” Source:Guidelines of the International Commission for Protection to Non-Ionizing Radiation (ICNIRP) for Limiting Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields (100 kHz – 300 GHz) (2020), page 523.
Furthermore, in order to take into account current technological developments such as 5G, in 2020ICNIRP revised its recommendations in the guidelines published in 1998, confirming the EU-wide limits for the exposure of the population to EMF in respect of the WBA-SAR and provides some additional power density restrictions absorbed for local exposure in the 6GHz and 30GHz bands, respectively, which 5G technology will have to comply with to protect the population.
In the European Union,the limits of exposure of the general population to electromagnetic field radiation are50 times lower than the levels at which adverse effects can be observed – Source: European Commission website, which provides answers to frequently asked questions about Frequently asked questions on 5, the answer to question 11.
„Despite extensive studies into the health effects of mobile phones over the last two or three decades, there is no indication of an increased health riskwhen exposed to electromagnetic fields below the levels specified by international bodies. There is no evidence that electromagnetic fields from existing (2G, 3G and 4G) mobile networks pose any health risks, provided that administrations enforce the exposure limits established by international bodies. There is no scientific basis of any relation between the transmission of the coronavirus and 4G or 5G or any other electromagnetic waves.”– Source: ITU – Article “5G, human exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) and health”
„To date, and after much research performed, no adverse health effect has been causally linked with exposure to wireless technologies . Health-related conclusions are drawn from studies performed across the entire radio spectrum but, so far, only a few studies have been carried out at the frequencies to be used by 5G. Tissue heating is the main mechanism of interaction between radiofrequency fields and the human body. Radiofrequency exposure levelsfromcurrent technologies result in negligible temperature rise in the human body. As the frequency increases, there is less penetration into the body tissues and absorption of the energy becomes more confined to the surface of the body (skin and eye). Provided that the overall exposure remains below international guidelines, no consequences for public health are anticipated.” – Source: Article “Radiation: 5G mobile networks and health “- section” What are the potential health risks from 5G?” available on the World Health Organization website
”By observing the exposure levels in the Order of the Minister of Public Health no. 1193 of 29.09.2006, for the approval of the Norms regarding the limitation of the exposure of the general population to electromagnetic fields from 0 Hz to 300 GHz, there will be no negative effects on health.”- Source: press release “Is 5G technology a health hazard?” published by INSP.
(ANCOM translation)“Limits for the exposure to EMFs that are currently recommended at international and EU level were classified by the World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) at the third level in a scale of five levels of risk, which puts them in the group with other‘possibly carcinogenic’ elements, such as pickled vegetables. This means that radio EMFs are less risky than eating red meat, working night shifts or drinking hot coffee, which are at the second level and assessed as ‘probably carcinogenic’. Radio EMFs are considered even less risky thanair pollution, <<wood dust or alcoholic beverages, which, being at the first level, fall into the ‘carcinogenic’ category>>”. – Source: European Commission website offering answers to5G Frequently Asked Questions (see the answer to question 13).