All you need to know to understand 5G

[@erichodge567]

Man, there must be some kind of award we can all insist be given to Sabine. She is doing precisely what is needed to enable the public to make informed decisions in a democracy. Thank you so much, Sabine.

[@mcmjr405]

@Schlomo Baconberg the Sir John Templeton award is better, and offers more $ in recognition of accomplishments as well.

[@theephemeralglade1935]

Yes, The Most European Looking Woman Award, lol.

[@mcmjr405]

@Brand Ex and the one that’s easiest to follow because the individual listener is excused from being required and demanded or expected to take even the tiniest degree of personal responsibility for themselves.. instant gratification means zero discipline or sacrifice. Such is the reality of “group think.”

[@k7iq]

Eric, I agree that Sabine is explaining this in the way that is needed for the public. Unfortunately, I do not think that most of these 5G phobes would sit through Sabine's lesson, much less understand what she is saying. But this is a very good explanation. I am not afraid one little bit of 5G RF radiation

[@nealtauss1715]

@erichodge....no she's not (giving the Public what is needed for making 'informed' decisions in a 'democracy').... what we NEED are CONCLUSIVE clinical studies for 5G.... what we're getting INSTEAD is.... a BLIND roll-out.... TONE-deaf too....

[@zhaziralala]

Explaining difficult concepts in such a clear and concise manner is a skill and a talent. I watch a ton of scientific channels, only a few that manage to make it stick like this one. Massive respect and thanks!

[@jackandblaze5956]

So all it does is irritate the eyes and damage the skin?... No problem! Where do I sign up for yearly corneal replacement surgery?

[@dogwalker666]

@@jackandblaze5956 nope and nope, next question?

[@i.mikulasek3315]

I couldn’t watch all of this but at no point am I seeing her address the polarization of natural frequencies from the sun vs the polarization of man made electromagnetic frequencies. Two entirely different things which have entirely different effects on cells. Essentially one allows the molecule to remain on its natural path (sun) & the other acts as a magnet and interferes with the natural “spin” of the electrons within the atom. To say that exciting a molecule, such as an oxygen molecule, will cause no harm from a non-ionizing radiation stand point is not true and reversing or interfering with the electrons of that molecule will cause harm and atomic collapse, especially at extended exposure. It changes the whole structure of the atom. Basic 6th grade science, the electrons DEFINE the atom. Changes to those electrons cause atomic collapse and cell death or in bodily case oxidative stress. Up your antioxidants. Oxidation is literally defined as the loss of electrons. Grounding brings electrons back to the body. Interfering with, or exciting the electrons of an oxygen molecule WILL hinder it from “uptake” by hemoglobin. Leading to oxygen starvation and coagulation of the blood cells(as we’ve seen non stop during the last two years) think of the insane amounts of strokes and heart attacks even prior to the waxxinations. Don’t let this “teach or relieve fears.” There’s a whole other side to the quantum physics of this she didn’t even touch. She gave the tip of the iceberg for lay people so they wouldn’t dig deeper.

[@dogwalker666]

@@i.mikulasek3315 lol so you have organic radiation and man made lol, You could win a Nobel prize with your new discovery, tell us how do you measure if your EM's are organic?

[@dogwalker666]

@@i.mikulasek3315 lol pure word salad.

[@traiecto]

I am 2 years late to the conversation but whoa! This is the best, simplest explanation to a very complex issue. Can’t thank you enough!

[@Abstractor21]

and she is so clear and concise! i love her

[@Showmetheevidence-]

It’s not _that_ complicated unless you’re really into the nuts & bolts of it.

[@marshalmcdonald7476]

Sabine is one of the most interesting people on youtube. Clear, concise, funny, insightful, optimistic, warm, intelligent....and so on. Grateful for her.

[@uploadJ]

And maybe, she is a simpleton?

[@rickkearn7100]

Phenomenal presentation, per usual, from Sabine. In less than 20 minutes I was more educated about 5G than if I'd spent two months of my life perusing network news websites.

[@tonycs-9]

95% of media in most nations is propaganda ,gaslighting and lies.

[@obivankeno2068]

Her husband?

[@MrsaviMacak]

they are not telling you everything 5g is really about... they left out the mind control part

[@obivankeno2068]

Realy True Rick Kearn.Matrix reloaded

[@MrsaviMacak]

@@obivankeno2068 It sadly is true.... the worst part is they are keeping it a secret, your body vibrates when they use it on you when they force you to move.... It is a little messed up sadly

[@SvenSchumacher]

Since the new frequencies are not ionizing and cannot penetrate deeply (a few mm at most) into the body, one must presumably concentrate on thermal effects. Far higher frequencies like infrared and light reach our skin in powers of 1-2kW/m², at noon in summer or close to a big campfire. This is what we perceive as "nice and warm". There is no way the small 5G radio cells will even come close to such energy densities. So I tend not to see any danger in it. However, I agree that this should be covered as soon as possible and comprehensively in studies to make absolutely sure that nothing is overlooked and to bring this discussion back to a factual level. Thank you Ms. Hossenfelder, for your really well done videos. This is really a helpful contribution to the topic!

[@JosefK2275]

Wifi/cellphone signals affect calcium channels on the skin. This does have an effect on the body in the long term. Look up how calcium is used by the body and which organs.

[@flyfin108]

hello mr sven, why did US airport workers who were operating mm bodyscanners became seriously ill after few weeks?

[@chronosschiron]

you didnt watch this did ya look at her talk to dmg to molecules

[@chronosschiron]

eg put an egg in microwave it doesnt ionize either

[@thomasscream4179]

@@flyfin108 You're probably thinking of backscatter X-ray scanners which use x-rays, more energetic than mm waves by more than 5 orders of magnitude. They're banned in the EU, whereas mm waves have been used worldwide since the late 2000's with no discovered side effects. If the US airport workers actually got seriously ill working with mm scanners, they should probably eat a salad and exercise every now and then, rather than blame mm wave scanners.

[@torifmdox]

A clear voice, unbiased and excellent description of what should be of concern. I am now a subscriber. (Engineer and ex radio operator)

[@richardfecteau4490]

Thanks!

[@markdavis7397]

I’m a lifetime cellular engineer. Your explanation is wonderful, but a couple comments: 1. This biggest issue here is that high bands don’t propagate well, and therefore must use a highly directive antenna. And since the wavelength is small, it is possible to make a highly directive antenna in a reasonable size. Since is both feasible and necessary, all deployments use beamforming antennas. So even at moderate total transmit power, the power in one direction can be extremely high. To me, that is the overwhelming key point that is different from low bands (where such highly directive antenna is neither needed nor feasible). 5G antennas I worked with had max EIRP around +65dbm, which is approaching 4000watts (higher than a microwave oven). The total power is much lower, but EIRP is the “effective” power including the directional focus. And if you are standing in the beam, the fact that the power outside the beam is much lower is irrelevant. 2. I don’t think it is a fair characterization to say that people “missed the point” that these new bands presented new risks. Perhaps a few people missed that point, but certainly none of us in the industry did. This was one of the first topics to receive attention and discussion. I am not arguing that letting industry stakeholders make such a call is appropriate; I’m just saying we were well aware that it was a (new) issue. See for example to the work of Ted Rappaport (long time expert in cellular channel characterization). wireless.engineering.nyu.edu/mmwave-health-effects/ 3. I always thought it was funny that these bands are called “millimeter wave.” 30GHz is a centimeter. That is marketing, I guess -- millimeter sounds cooler than centimeter.

[@grantaum9677]

Great comment. It often gets missed but it can use up to 100GHz. Depending on the antenna type

[@twinwankel]

Well if you were really concerned about 2. wouldn't your industry study this before creating the standard? The fact is that money drives your decisions and not safety concerns. Your profession lacks ethics or morality. You do whatever your boss tells you to do. You are like robots without souls.

[@DaylanTheAngrySauerkraut]

@@twinwankel i think you miscontrue engineers with the rest of humanity as a whole. Humanity has no morals and is driven purely by capitalism and brutal acquisition of wealth and power , often knowing at the expense of others. So get back in your box and have another long think about your life.

[@kakistocracyusa]

Sabine's usual sub-freshman-level, vague presentation doesn't help. My understanding on 5G is more varied and that it still employs lower fequency microwave, less than 30GHz.

[@nIrUbU01]

@@twinwankel "You do whatever your boss tells you to do" Lol, I bet when your boss tells you to do something you tell him to go to hell instead. See how much you can keep your job in that "ehtical profession" of yours.

[@bowu]

Seriously, Sabine has to be one of the few who can explain ideas with such impressive logic and clarity.

[@skywatcher7272]

Looks like an A.I. robot. That might explain it. And if so. It's Always going to soften you up to the agenda. Do your own research. Read NASA's silent weapons for quiet wars. For starters.

[@buckwylde7965]

Agreed 100%. Teachers like her are very rare.

[@uploadJ]

You have not seen Electroboom's channel.

[@a-k9161]

There are plenty others but she's the only one you know.

[@ProjectPhysX]

You should compare the power recieved from 5G to other heat / (non-ionizing) radiation sources. 5G tissue heating is negligible compared to standing under the sun or the isolating effect of wearing warm clothing, or even compared to the heat generated by the body itself.

[@hyperplastic]

Agreed, I’m surprised Sabine left it where she did. It leaves the impression that we know less than we do, that all the studies at previous frequencies now mean very little.

[@robguyatt9602]

I've a dangerously small education in electronics communications. I studied microwave coms. So I'm about the be a smart arse LOL. Seriously but, as I see it, the power level of radiation received by a device is minuscule compared to the power level transmitted. This is due to the inverse square law. But even if you said transmitted rather than received, I'd prefer to see the actual numbers rather than just such accepting such a claim. As she said, very few studies have been done to date. And frankly, I'd be surprised if you were shown to be wrong if such studies were done. Not placing bets but :)

[@hyperplastic]

@Matthew Morycinskiyou’re just playing concern-troll. Each one of those questions you pose has well defined answers written in industry standards. The maximum allowable power directed at human tissue is also well defined and is very very low. This is what we’re disappointed that Sabine did not go into detail about

[@deanevans7637]

'Knowledge' is so beautiful to me when explained rationally and understood without bias. Thank you Sabine from this new subscriber.

[@davidgray6999]

I look at more than a dozen videos every day on a huge number of things, space, history, mechanics, architecture, on and on. This is one of the very best ones I have ever seen for being informative, relevant, timely, and easy to understand (though I admit to being an engineer). Thanks Dr. Hossenfelder

[@davidhand9721]

Try PBS Space Time. Way more in depth usually.

[@ThePowerLover]

@@davidhand9721 Their videos about the "mind" are garbage, but it's usually an excelente channel.

[@Bryan-Hensley]

Big problem, she didn't explain 5g. She basically talked about the mm wave capacity expansion. 99 percent of the 5g market will use the exact same frequencies they were using with 4g. 5g is simply advanced multiplexing. 4G phones could only receive and transmit one band at one time. 5G phones can receive multiple bands and transmit on multiple bands also on multiple towers simultaneously. That's the reason for the phase array antennas. It's all about capacity distribution. By the way the 5G system was in place over 2 years ago. I helped install it. Former cellular tower equipment tech.

[@ThePowerLover]

@@Bryan-Hensley phones like the iPhone 12 in US use the mm wave 5G. And almost all the controversy about health risk is because the higher energy of the mm wave of the 5G technology.

[@davidgray6999]

@@Bryan-Hensley THANKS!!! Are there articles I can read (and post) about this?

[@tomthumb9959]

I wish I had you as a professor when I was in college. Thank you for your devotion ro science and people

[@knutritter461]

M.Sc. of chemistry from Germany here: Awesome video! When you mentioned the interaction of photons with molecules and spoke about direct damage by breaking the bonds.... you said that if the energy was not high enough the molecules just wiggle. That's right! And this actually IS a form how molecules 'heat up'. The more the molecule wiggles the "hotter" it gets. I wrote in " because single molecules do not have a temperature.

[@andreah6175]

Humanity - see my vids, read the descriptions

[@deadpiratetattoo2015]

Exciting the outer valence shell of a molecule does not necessarily heat up. That's not how it happens.

[@knutritter461]

@@deadpiratetattoo2015 Heat has hardly anything to do with electrons directly.

[@deadpiratetattoo2015]

@@knutritter461 not true. All chemical reactions are either Endo or ectothermic. The act of exciting the outer valence shell is not the same as replacement or reduction, which does involve ∆. Final edit

[@knutritter461]

@@deadpiratetattoo2015 By definition molecules have no valence shell.... only atoms have it. And btw: Electrons have 'no mass', better: They have a negligible mass. Whereas other atoms in the molecule do and their inertia is a prerequisite for 'storing' energy. Excitement of electrons is only important for HIGH temperatures where molecules start ceasing to exist. At common temperatures it is negligible.

[@jrluckett]

Sabine is always highly informative and down to earth. Thank you! Always a joy to watch and learn!!

[@vhawk1951kl]

You call believing or accepting without question learning? Interesting, no wonder the manufacturers of cosmetics or sliced white bread and confidence tricksters make such healthy livings

[@jjcrittmd2]

I am a physician turned educator. I am a patron of physics. Sabine is a joy to listen to. She is right on the issues and has a nice touch.

[@NorfolkSceptic]

I like Sabine's ability to state that she doesn't know (which usually means no-one else does either :) ) and that it should be a time reassess progress and to consider all options, new and old, which is a sign of truly participating in the mode of enquiry called Science.

[@danmart1879]

Sabine, you are a genius and an angel !!!! God Bless you always !!! We love all your programs.

[@jimjohnson9728]

Taking risk is one thing. Having risk forced upon you is another.

[@lucidhominid2190]

Like cars. They rarely even put barriers between sidewalks and roads. Its fucked.

[@WalkingEmDry]

@@lucidhominid2190 no one forced you to use sidewalk

[@BubeslaaB]

Like she said, you get the biggest exposure by holding a 5G-operating cell phone close to your head. This risc you can avoid.

[@lucidhominid2190]

@@WalkingEmDry They literally have actually. The government has required me to move my body from one location to another in a situation where a sidewalk was the only option.

[@lindajackson3413]

Agreed!

[@Duh6666666]

Now, that is a great, clear, factual, and rational way of talking about a muddled controversial subject, thank you! Loved it, subbed.

[@bastabey2652]

the first video i watched for sabine dates years ago concerning the fundamental nature of light ...in this video like her first video, she is always clear, thoughtful and engaging ...

[@Shaqelnatan]

What about the simple fact that these antennas are already being rolled out in every city on a worldwide scale while “the available studies do not provide adequate and sufficient information for a meaningful safety assessment”. ??

[@TS-mq1fj]

I've learned and understood more about physics and science from Sabine that my children are reading and subscribing. Thank You for making learning exciting and enjoyable.

[@vhawk1951kl]

Have you any way of verifying, or falsifying what she tells you or do you just accept what she tells you without question? why are humans so credulous? Is it not the case that if X can be perfectly certain that his audience or interlocutors are in no position either to verify or falsify what he tells them, may he not invent anything he pleases?-They can never know whether or not he is lying or just inventing what he says. Is that not exactly correct?

[@vsiegel]

@@vhawk1951kl No, because your argument breaks down before reaching half way through its first sentence. "Is it not the case that if X can be perfectly certain". A physical human can sever be perfectly certain of anything.

[@jwcarnal]

​@@vhawk1951kl You cannot trust anyone I take it? How can you learn anything because you know deep down that every successful person attempting to share their knowledge with you became so by intentional deception. Have I summed up your understanding of the impossibility of sharing knowledge or misinterpreted your attempt at sarcasm?

[@user-pg5rt7ju4f]

@@vhawk1951kl U ever asked the same q's in church ?

[@vhawk1951kl]

@@user-pg5rt7ju4f I don't do church, Jews don't go to" church", not do we understand why some that are not Jews suppose our book to be magic. If you suppose our jewbook to be magic, why don't you chsnge from whatever you imagine yourself to be to Judaism, if its book is all you crack it up to be. Seemingly Brian was a Jew so if you imagine you are a Brianist or christian(which you could no more be than you can fly)it would be logical to adopt his religion, would it not? Particularly if you suppose the jewbook to be magic, which it is not, it is just another book but written by rabbis -Is *that* what makes it magic?

[@mjhzen8313]

Sabine's explanations are always excellent. She's one of those rarities: when she doesn't know something, she says so. I have great confidence in her intelligence and judgement.

[@hiankun]

Off topic: This is one of the few channels which can persuade me to watch the sponsor ad part without any impatience.

[@allanbarsness6076]

Is that what FB said

[@981porsche3]

I don’t know what that is like because I have YT Red. Totally worth it, if you can afford it.

[@VijayPTChary]

Damaging other people's property is certainly a "legitimate response", when the said property is of the nature of weapons ! :-)

[@rogerjones332]

Our smart phones are fast enough now. I don't see why we really need 5G before more health risk studies are done.

[@rachelarmel7547]

They don't care about our health. It's about surveillance and control. Stop being naive.

[@lazergurka-smerlin6561]

@@rachelarmel7547 I mean I do need you to explain how you got to that conclusion. If you mean that 5G would allow the internet of things which would then in turn allow more privacy invasion then yeah, but I'm not entirely sure that's what you mean

[@devorrio2]

You are constraint by your data bandwidth. You might not realize it until a new technology appears that uses more bandwidth.

[@Marcin_Kulpa]

@Dalej Lama wonder where we hurry

[@classesanytime]

I was perfectly happy with my disc phone ☎️ because I still had some personal freedom and could go out without being emotionally harassed !! Everything has to go faster and faster until we ram into a wall or run out of gas !! Either way, it's going to end in disaster !!

[@aionus9699]

You speak clearly, concisely, with perfect timing and on topic , consistently, So easy to easy to understand, and I am no rocket science. Cheers, & Thank You.

[@jacquesdemolay2699]

As you well said --- it is a decision for politics --- unfortunately, politics only serve big interests --- so for the sake of profit --- we might get sacrificed.

[@malcolmtaylor7074]

Heheh that sounds about right. But reading your comment made me think, "what is profit?" Most people would think money. Maybe that's right but maybe it's more than that as well

[@jacquesdemolay2699]

@@malcolmtaylor7074 profit, in my understanding, would be, getting out more assets than you have put into the scheme. Could be money, knowledge, increased well-being or more satisfaction whatever makes you tick.

[@melaniec5764]

Yes,Jacques…you are correct!🥺

[@tomtd]

There’s a flaw in that logic, how do those that “profit” avoid (pernicious?) radiation? They share the same space as their “victims” they are not going to walk round in lead lines suits are they?

[@anuarbin]

Sensible comment.

[@Eden639]

My Prius car made me sick. In 2012, I had a brand new Prius, I noticed it was hard to concentrate, it made me very tired and my kids riding in the back were wiped out after going on trips of 1-2 hours. I was also getting like beams of energy directed at my legs, I develop hard skin spots in my legs and the lack of concentrations increased. One day I was running out of gas and put it in the saving mode running more on the electric and was like a shock to my system I actually had to pull over and turn the car off. Needless to say I barely used the car and return it when my lease was up. The hard skin areas in my legs took time to dissolve and that was the first and last I drive a hybrid or electric car.

[@neuroguru5955]

Who is this woman. This is the most complete explanation I’ve ever had. I was a safety engineer and dealt with noise issues frequency and a lot of formulas. This is so well laid out I can’t believe it. I get questions about 5G all the time from my clients and mindbody medicine. I can’t find her bio she is excellent. Some people think she’s a artificial intelligence she’s definitely real because I can feel the passion thank you whoever

[@buddhasattva]

Look up her wiki on Google. Enjoy.

[@Dasha-lr4mv]

This video deserves having subs in different languages, so that more people can learn more about 5G

[@federicopeconi8095]

planning on doing it for Italian subs

[@northsouthpaw]

@@Dasha-lr4mv ty. My mistake.

[@douglashoward4206]

so put that microwave oven to your head. and don't complain about being cooked? it's just a "conspiracy theory".

[@lenny108]

so, there is nothing to worry about 5G but what about when birds start falling from the sky?

[@Skibbityboo0580]

@@douglashoward4206 The problem is that real concerns get drowned out in nonsensical ones. This is the one and only time I took the health risk concerns seriously because the overwhelming amount of info I see about the health risks are obviously bunk. Things like 5G causes coronavirus, and the huge panic about cell phones causing cancer before that. I will always take a calm, objective, scientific, voice way more seriously than some yahoo screaming about 5G in his teeth, or some shit.

[@stevenmellemans7215]

I can only imagine how much effort and time it took to find and compile this information so clear and compact. Well done and very interesting.

[@bobfake3831]

probably half an hour, this is very basic physics

[@jeschinstad]

@@bobfake3831: But if you ignore the time she spent becoming a physicist, then you're ignoring most of the time she's spent gathering the information.

[@bobfake3831]

@@jeschinstad lel, no, this and its maths are maybe one course in a semester

[@jeschinstad]

@@bobfake3831: I don't think that would've given her the hundreds of thousands of viewers, so I think you're still ignoring the context.

[@jaimeescalera2026]

The information comes from the telephone companies themselves. May be a conflict of interest.

[@enderarchery2153]

Oooo, IT-professional here: VPNs more or less don't do anything for safety in on public wifis nowadays. And if they do, it's not for the reasons you'd think. But they are useful, to make it harder to see which sites you're visiting (only the "youtube.com" bit can be seen, not the part behind it identifying the specific video) and they're useful for accessing content only available in another country. Explanation for those who care (In terrible English... sorry) Pretty much all websites establish a secure connection between the client and the server, before they start exchanging not just important information, but rather ANY information. Your client only trusts the specific cryptographic keys of any server you want to connect to, because the public key has the name of the server you're trying to reach on it (ie. youtube.com) and the validity of that key and the name is verified by a valid signature from a certification authority, that makes sure, you're the owner of the site before issuing the signature. If any change is made to that public key name pair, the signature becomes invalid and using someone else's public key makes the traffic useless, as the private key from the original server is needed to decrypt it. If anything goes wrong, the browser doesn't display the site and show's you a big error message. If the server doesn't offer an encrypted connection, the lock left to the address bar displays a warning instead. And many modern sites use something called HSTS which, among other things, tells the client that it's supposed to remember, that this server supports encryption. If it doesn't anymore, it means that you're not talking to the server you wanted to and the browser refuses to display the site, even preventing the user from continuing regardless. I apologize for my bad English. (It's not my main language)

[@hesitantjaguar7897]

Science with Sabine, always makes for a good Saturday

[@smc64130]

Any day with a smart lady like Sabine is a good day.

[@anderstopansson]

Remember, Monday you have to work!

[@Docsailor1]

Amen! (kidding)

[@YashChoukse]

Agreed. 🤗

[@jesuschristislord77733]

www.scientificamerican.com/article/mind-control-by-cell/

[@ashroskell]

Great, informative video. I love your genuine open mindedness, your capacity to separate what is, “science,” from other provinces, such as, “politics,” and your unflustered way of dealing with reality; “The facts, ma’am. Just the facts.” Awesome. And, sadly, rather unique. Popular science dissemination needs more people like you, Sabine.

[@andreah6175]

Humanity - see my vids, read the descriptions

[@lisaschuster686]

I wholeheartedly agree. I’m so tired of being told when to feel awed by “the fabric of reality” and that I am “made out of e=mc2” - when I was taught that equations describe reality, not the other way around - and how soon we can expect the end of the world, when we will meet other “intelligent life” as though we can call ourselves “intelligent” without stopping to look at the horrific damage we do whenever aliens are encountered here on earth, and so on. The battle for science in the States is not going to be won with swelling orchestral music and other attempts to turn physics into a religion. She isn’t having any of that. The scientific method by definition doesn’t take sides, make blind assumptions or jump to conclusions.

[@dogwalker666]

@@lisaschuster686 you appear to be very confused about reality.

[@carlesricart7452]

Doctor "but" Sabine :-), I like your explanations because you are pure logical sense, pure science. Not a bit of unwarranted faith. Thank you for share it.

[@okdoomer620]

How would you know? I'm not disagreeing, I'm just suggesting to be less confident in your ability to recognize it "the truth".

[@mrpedrobraga]

@@okdoomer620 He didn't mention 'truth'. But even then, trust, which is still tricky, but slightly different from faith, given that scientific facts can be tested again for confirmation. It's not affordable to do experiments every single time we watch another of her videos, so trust her :) It is alright as long as you don't use it as a source for a formal paper.

[@dvuemedia]

For 15 years I used to tune and test microwave filters for telecom radios at frequencies 2/5/6/7/8/10/11/18GHz. In the first 5 years it was an everyday job, for 8hrs a day exposed to these frequencies. We did have a basic safety understanding, like don't point the open waveguide at your crotch, or stare into it when it's powered on etc. These telecom microwave radios are used for many decades, but I guess people don't know about it. So far no cancer, and if I ever get one, I'll update the comment.

[@DavidBruno]

Dr. H. thanks so much, my son has been asking me about this since months!

[@jayeff6712]

@@SHREDTILLDEAD Where did you get the 1 watt from?

[@andarted]

@@SHREDTILLDEAD Haven't you watched the video? First, your 1 Watt for 1 hour for 20 years is BS and BS and BS. Second, a closed box like a microwave traps any electromagnetic waves in a tiny room, while an antenna spreads it widely.

[@jayeff6712]

@Jesusfreak Computergeek Nice, that you have so much experience in technology. Unfortunately the second you start to talk about physics and chemistry you are going straight towards the field of pseudoscience. You are a true master in that field as well, as you are able to make utter nonsense sound as if you have something to say. You are talking about a spin rate. Spin is something related to quantum physics and it that realm your story is complete nonsense as spin has no rate, because it has nothing to do with rotation. A quantum spin can only have an orientation. If you talk about rotating molecules my question would be whether you made this up or if you have some source you are getting it from. If you have this story from somewhere else it is definitely not a scientific source. You seem to be saying that microwaves make oxygen molecules rotate in a way they can't be absorbed by the lung. Molecules in gas always rotate more or less. So what is your point? The rotate to fast? If that's your claim, how would microwaves do that? And how would regular light not do the same and even faster? As far as I know I don't suffocate when the light is on. BTW. I have seen this in other places where pseudoscientists associate quantum spin with rotation.

[@jayeff6712]

@Jesusfreak Computergeek It sounds more like you don't understand or you don't know the correct terminology. If you had an understanding of physics you wouldn't use spin in a context where the term is misleading. Now you switched from spin rate to energy state. What happened to the spin rate? Please point me to an article anywhere in the internet where your "spin rate" is used. Or did you invent that term? Your words truly are pseudo science and not because the language is not good enough. It is because you just write things that appear to describe a representation of the physical reality, but they really don't. You use "higher spin rate" and "increased energy state" to refer to something unusual or even dangerous. Please explain in what regard you describe something different than the air simply getting warmer.

[@user-pg5rt7ju4f]

@@andarted A closed box w/ reflective walls for waves to bounce around & a (screened) window where optical waves can leak out (that's how you see your cat inside !)

[@joelifeanyi3384]

I realy love her unbiased nature. I see sincereity...

[@metatronheraldofthealmight3968]

sincerity can come from a lack of information ijs

[@metatronheraldofthealmight3968]

@@tsquared334 thats not at all what i said...nice try tho. in the spirit of sincerity, acknowledging that you were not, i noted the separation of sincerity and knowledge base. they have nothing to do with each other.

[@wealthychef]

It's common among scientists, which is why I think a bit more attention should be paid in school to how to think rationally. Science is humble.

[@bigfletch8]

With this subject and the virus issue, there are generally two sources of info. One from the mainstream (governments following " best medical advice" for example, usually tied up to big pharma), a bit like the army...follow orders or else..loose funding for example; and independent groups and individuals who are aften called whistleblowers.

[@metatronheraldofthealmight3968]

@@bigfletch8 Cant be a whistleblower....noooooo way. Gotta tow the line for the big guy if you want to make money. Which is fundamentally incorrect because your future can never be certain as long as the guy smiting is the guy paying.

[@sameer26121980]

The most unbiased video on 5G. Thank you. I think, if there are not enough tests/research done on 5G effect on human body, it will be very high risk to use them in public applications. It means, there should be more studies done to make sure humans are not affected. Otherwise, the consequences might be irreversible and apocalyptic. What is the use of technology if it harms human health in any way? Businessmen wont understand this.

[@politicalhorizon2000]

I concur. I think more studies are needed, and if it proves safe then it should be rolled out.

[@scotto541]

​@@politicalhorizon2000 I don't agree. The raw science suggests that this radiation doesn't have enough energy to damage cells. It could be sensible to roll it out with that understanding and then also do very good research into the long-term effects. The problem is that if we were to always wait for long-term studies of every new technology then we would not progress very fast. If we waited for 10-year to 20-year studies before rolling our radio, flight, power lines, etc. we would still be living like we did in the 1950s today. Since the overall science indicates it should not be possible to damage cells with 5G, roll it out but force good, long-term studies also.

[@mohawk49]

Sabine - Thank you for a very lucid presentation. One answer is to keep as much distance between you and the emitter of 5G radiation. In other words do not keep your ear touching your 5G mobiles for long periods of time. Use wireless pods instead if you use your mobile for very long periods of time.

[@shandatwogood8321]

Thank you Sabine for explaining how 5g works and possible effects it can have on humans. I have listened to others, not really getting anything out of it. You did a wonderful job.

[@chrisostling805]

It is so nice to hear an intelligent explanation of basic things that we should all understand.

[@SHREDTILLDEAD]

I am sorry when and where did she explain the effects of 5g on single cells and, the formula to calculate the risk increase due to the erection of more arrays over a smaller distance? Also how does this affect pollinators, considering the possibility of food shortages. I mean science has got to eat right ?

[@klowen7778]

'Fer sure, and she seems to have a knack for doing this, whether it's explaining Quantum Physics, or the science behind Telecommunications 'controversies'!

[@awakelastchance3333]

@Kev Backwoods Yes...... They Turned up the FREQUENCY and people dropped DEAD ‼️ your Absolutely correct 💯,.... I have started to do research on FREQUENCY 😉🙌🏽💜😇

[@SHREDTILLDEAD]

@vctjkhme that is a lie. The studies have been done. She is either lying or she is ignorant of them.

[@turkishmaid]

@@SHREDTILLDEAD - show us!

[@JulieMelville]

I'm a lay-person with an ability to understand scientific perspective. I appreciate this so much. It was clear to me and the link came from friends who ARE scientists in this area. I'm posting for nervous friends.

[@christianlingurar7085]

given what you're writing about yourself: subscribe! (if not yet done so) :-) she's brilliant.

[@pendlelancashire]

*direct phase array, beam-forming, mm waveform penetrance, fortran, fourier transform.*

[@brightsideofmaths]

Okay, this is the video I will share every time these discussions come up. I will save so much time! Thank you!

[@michaelsutter8207]

I thought the same

[@richardsilva-spokane3436]

Me, too! I immediately shared with five people 👍

[@LydianMelody]

Well... this is unexpected. I was firmly in the “5G skeptics are all insane” camp. 😅 Thank you for the unbiased information!

[@AuntAlnico4]

Do you see how you ignorance of the issue made you a danger to the righteousness of the educated on the subject !? Humbled I hope as well as educated 👍

[@LydianMelody]

Yeahhhh I suppose. However I don’t consider myself an expert on almost anything. I stay humble for this reason. I changed my mind because it was open for change.

[@vipertube7182]

@@AuntAlnico4 ehhh kinda iffy the super skeptic are kinda uneducated as well, I’m a light skeptic

[@vipertube7182]

@@AuntAlnico4 most of the super skeptics are retarded non physicists that think google can replace decades of research and theorizing

[@vipertube7182]

The video was basically ... to be continued

[@asomaskanda]

Hi Sabine, Thank you very much for the clarity that you have brought to bear on this very important subject. I think most people can easily understand your brilliant presentation!

[@mayank8387]

Wow, I learned so much from this video. The information was concise and to the point. Thank you so much for sharing.

[@kimadams2995]

Thank you. You are my new physics teacher. I only tripped over your channel recently, but I am permanently hooked. I appreciate the no-sensationalism, non-bullsh*t presentation, and even on the subjects where I can follow maybe 1/3 of what you are actually telling us (I did great on my sole physics class in telecom...but not THAT great) I can hang in there long enough to find the parts I can follow. Also, your coronavirus song was a scream😂.

[@dream431ca]

People have been baking themselves with 1000 Watt infrared space heaters for decades which have a frequency of 430THz-300GHz and wavelength of 700nm-1mm. 5G antennas have a transmission power anywhere between 250mW and 120W for the largest arrays. The only danger from 5G I can think of is getting injured climbing the antennas to disable them.

[@kensurrency2564]

Resonant frequency vibration should be an area for further research. I don’t know of many studies about these effects. Every molecule and by extension group of molecules has a resonant frequency. This is why bridges fail over time, and why objects can be shaken apart with the right vibrational frequency. Sure, microwave or mm waves don’t have the correct energy to break chemical bonds, but you can absolutely get the correct frequency to shake molecules apart due to resonance (vibration).

[@maythesciencebewithyou]

"I burned myself trying to burn down a 5G antenna, those things are dangerous" is something I can imagine some people saying

[@XMickyMouseX]

If you ask about a topic if its dangerous you'll find enough people getting very scared and trying to avoid anything to do with it at all costs, regardless of any proven fact or not, and even if the answer is no.

[@En_theo]

I remember studies where apes had been submitted to various EM radiations. Even if it didn't damage their tissues, it did change their behaviors in a significant way and that something to consider. Our brain also uses EM waves to function properly, and people close to antennas may experience the same effect as these apes. It really should have been studied deeper before using a tech on such a large scale.

[@firefly618]

Millimeter waves in the 30-50 GHz range are more penetrating than infrared, so they would affect deeper layers of the body. As Sabine said, it is _reasonable_ to expect them to be innocuous, but it is arguably _unreasonable_ to deploy them throughout entire cities (and more importantly people's hands and pockets) without sufficient safety tests, which have not been done.

[@oldspammer]

--> Konstantin Meyl scalar waves pdf It is not just about the frequency, but also about the wave shape. Penetration, propagation, etc, apparently change. A scalar wave can penetrate a Faraday shield, but conventional waves cannot.

[@illustrious1]

I just want to give her a friendly hug of appreciation for her wisdom and honesty. 🤗 Thank you!

[@SHREDTILLDEAD]

The simp is strong with this one.

[@Eteriaa]

@@SHREDTILLDEAD _someone compliments a woman_ oMG he'S A SiMP. Do you even know what that means? I think her videos are great and thinking this doesn't make me a simp. Grow up.

[@trollop_7]

@@Eteriaa It does though.

[@adrianbrice]

Please start regarding: 1) FREQUENCY, WAVELENGTH 2) POWER DENSITY 3) RESONANCE, INTERFERENCE, STANDING WAVE-FORMS 4) GROUNDING / ABSORPTION / EMBEDDING / COMPRESSION 5) APPLICATION 6) PULSE, MODULATION, POLARIZATION. DIGITALISATION (you may argument with “RHYTHM”) 7) ELECTROMAGNETIC REALITY AND MIND BENDING “STUFF” The sympathetic resonance or anharmonic oscillation between proportional frequencies not only transmits energy, but also impulses (information). We are talking: stress (non-thermal) effects of pulsed microwaves. *Properties of membranes and voltage-controlled (dependent) ion-channels and crystalline structures (in the human body and synergists including insects, bacteria, etc.) in DNA, membranes, mitochondria, microtubules may be "disrupted". *In his lectures, Prof. Martin Pall explains how the electrochemical gradient (potential) in cells can be amplified by approximately 7.2 million times due to electromagnetic influences. *Young tissue has a much higher extracellular water content than older tissue. This leads to a much deeper penetration of the effects (Dr. Devra Davis). Children have a higher surface to volume ratio, so their tissues are much more exposed to radiation. This makes them more susceptible to radiation. Children have a brain that is still developing, They have less thick bones (particularly relevant on the head). *DNA and stem cells are increased in children (studies by Dr. Igor Belyaev) *Single nucleotide polymorphism (SNPs "snips") are the most common type of genetic variation in humans. The American Cancer Society (Yale) has shown that such genetic factors make a difference in how and whether different people are more or less susceptible to certain environmental influences, especially cell phone radiation. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stuff like: Wavelength divides evenly into circumference giving rise to two main geometric forms, the octave and the golden ratio. There is a quasicrystalline(penrose tiling) relationship between the octave and golden ratio (stellated dodeca/icosa) Geometries based only on the octave produce maximum destructive wave interference. The golden ratio minimizes destructive interference and maximizes constructive wave interference, because it’s the path to the still point/perfect damping. The optimal solution to sphere packing (compression to distribution) is in the dodecahedron, twelve spheres of equal volume all meeting/touching one in the center, as opposed to cubic/octave packing. A 180 degree phase shift between waves is what produces/translates longitudinal waves from transverse waves, through translation of vorticity. This phase shift is also part of how phase conjugate heterodyning produces self organization and negentropy. Golden ratio optimizes this compression process as described in the solution to the Klein-Gordon equation. Because golden-ratio optimizes this compression, this entails a generalized solution to maximum constructive wave interference, origin of centripetal forces, origin of negentropy, mass and gravity. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Most people cannot cognize “wifi” so here is a compilation (edutainment): kzbin.info/www/bejne/fWOkmaSHntaol9E of "REAL LIFE*": recorded pictures and videos and ARTISTIC SIMULATIONs (*TRANSLATIONS, INTERPRETATIONS, AUGMENTED REALITY) ... translating pulsed, polarized, modulated, digital, multiplex ... electromagnetic (microwave = radar) radiation INTO noises, sounds and visual. I would love to have a talk about the specifics on *dopamine vs. the physics of electromagnetic reality * electromagnetic reality and consciousness states Anything else seems “childish”.

[@jamesalexander5588]

I'd like to give her a good hugging aswell.

[@AleksandarStefanovic]

Thank you for this video! You helped me understand electromagnetic radiation better, and also gave me the tools to explain the 5G technology to concerned relatives.

[@stevemartin4249]

This is scary for the reason that is stated at the end of the video. How much risk are we willing to tolerate is not a question of science. It is a question of politics. In other words, as individuals, we will not have the autonomy to determine risk, and those attracted to politics tend to be driven by dark-triad personality traits ... pathologically narcissistic, machiavellian opportunistic, and morphologically defined psychopaths. Between pandemic policies which are also based on the self-interest of concentrations of political-economic power, not science ... and the trend towards concentrating information towards monopolies of internet platforms, hardware platforms of 5G, and digital fiat currency ... we are on the fast track to either redefining homo sapiens from social primates to 'herding-herded primates' or extinction. I am not optimistic.

[@patrickbooten7028]

Same here , we are just kettle . While the elite can hide in underground cities . Which is no secret .

[@BetterDeadThanRed99]

Congratulations! You have been preselected as a candidate in the proactive eugenics program of 2021 to further refine the human genome and save humanity from extinction! Unfortunatly participation is obligatory and you will be visited shortly by strange masked men in an unmarked minivan. Now calm down. You will be briefly returned to your natural environment unharmed. And thank you for your cooperation.

[@BetterDeadThanRed99]

@Message Posted What is it like failing to articulate legitimate criticism? It was a joke derelict. Remind me why I should care what you think? I seem to have forgotten what makes you so important... my apologies...

[@diskgrinder]

Plutocratic elites the problem? Why not use new power Marx. Cleans out 99% of all known oligarchs.

[@BetterDeadThanRed99]

@@diskgrinder Yeah, just like Stalin and the B0l$hev^ks, right? XD hahahahahahahaha

[@elkanaajowi9093]

The presentation is simply mesmerizing. Clear-cut and does not presume any prior knowledge.

[@brooksiefan]

"Know first, use later". History of mankind: " Uh?"

[@chrisgriffith1573]

Wisdom: Know first, use later... Man: Invent profit widgit, profit by it, use profits to protect the investment, repeat.

[@KazmirRunik]

Knowing the technology doesn't mean knowing the societal implications of the technology. It works, it's safe for the user, and people are willing to buy it at a higher price than it takes for you to make it. That's what it means to know first. As for what it'll do when you release it onto the world, then in most cases, it would be unwise to think that you know what will happen. Every new venture is a surprise.

[@bodan1196]

Strangely enough, it always seems to be that it is the people who don't know much, that claim to know for certain. (And yes, there is a psychological term for that condition.) The old saying; "The most dangerous is to know a little, and think it's enough", comes to mind. If you are scared of something, study it, learn about it, instead of believing anything and everything said that confirms your fear. Know Thine Enemy...

[@janne-mans8295]

What we know is plasma effect to water molecule bonds, as demo'ed by mv ovens and John Kanzius (burning water with RF) Cells consist for most part of confined 4th state structured water Difference 4th state gellyfied water has never been properly studied So as long as this has not been properly researched, there nobody with enough knowledge to roll out something that emits 24/7, unless providing for free, sufficient protection gears and measuring devices to each and every person plus relocation compensation to people that want to move eslewhere

[@sciencetroll6304]

Also Mankind . . . " Throw bone at Moon, rain come. No argue, it science. "

[@dimitriskaraiskos8559]

This is the best explanation of 5G I have ever seen!!!

[@dwighthawkins5955]

I was troubled with 3G and 4G intrusions (facial recog.,spying, voting, foreign hackers etc). With 5G it's now possible for a Fussian to know when my bills are due and how I voted just by walking my dog.

[@ronrendon]

@@dwighthawkins5955 Fussian? Like, from France?

[@dimitriskaraiskos8559]

The problem is not technology it's self, you wouldn't ban knifes for example because with them someone can kill you, as also can cut a slice of bread, it is the use of technology and the legislation that has to follow in order for that use to be for good and not evil... Unfortunately legislation comes very slow and corruption in politics is present all over the place. We just have to learn our rights and vote for them who will defend them. And also keep watching Sabine and stay informed !

[@dwighthawkins5955]

@@ronrendon No. It's my way of skirting around political correctness. I did not want to offend the many Gussians that are living among us.

[@dwighthawkins5955]

@@dimitriskaraiskos8559 Sometimes a new angle will appear amid "fast and more reliable technology". Today, at breakfast (retail Denny's), a long line to pay at the register started a unique discussion about how technology has slowed things down so very very much. So how much slower is cashier 5G gonna take us? Dr. Sabine has helped me through more math and Quantum dilemmas than I can count. I think its ok to discuss 5G social ramifications while standing 8 deep at any given retail checkout stand.

[@MantisShrimp80]

You're a wonderful educator, thanks Sabine.

[@bjornmagnusson4967]

One should point out that in Europe and many other parts of the World the mm band is not used. E.g. the 5G iPhones sold outside of the USA are not including the mm bandwidth. You pointed out correctly that outside the mm band there is no issue. So if you mention attacks against 5G towers in Europe, you could also mention that they are senseless.

[@gustavohermandio1440]

this person is amazing. the way she explains is incredible. she talks and it makes sense, even if the topic is complicated. this is clearly the mark of intelligence. she should be an example to all youtubers.

[@gstormcz]

4G is ok for my use, KZbin with Sabine in max res on my phone. I really dont need more bandwidth for this, rather closer distance. Seriously, if there is some study or productivity need I am not against 5G, I just doubt there is some current need for 5G for general public. Do those selfdriving cars need 5G?

[@stewartknight7464]

This is a great explanation video for people to a understand 5G concepts and other spectrums of microwave technologies etc, I was a Telecom Engineer for many years and find the advancement fascinating but not without concern, these 5G node antennas will be on every other lamp pole this is the next stage of 5G to implement mm waves plus the installation of about 4000 orbiting satillites. The total saturation of the planet of many different spectrum of frenqencies is a concern foresure, thankyou for sharing a very accurate and informative video.

[@markhewitson9767]

My new favourite presenter. Well done Sabine for making technical subjects accessible and interesting.

[@Aufenthalt]

Balanced, documented report from a person who knows what she is talking about.

[@clmasse]

Save that 5G is utterly useless for ordinary people. It is but a commercial thrust, and as such is unwelcomed.

[@cybisz2883]

​@@clmasse I'm not so sure about that. Even now, it's actually needed to stream virtual reality games wirelessly. There's a significant performance difference when using the Virtual Desktop app with a Quest 2 to connect to your PC on the 2.4 GHz band vs. the 5 GHz band, due to the high bandwidth demand of this setup.

[@nagualdesign]

@@clmasse As I understand it, 5G will enable a multitude of new web applications, many of which haven't even been dreamed of. Having all your personal data on solid state drives in your home and having near-instantaneous access to them from miles away will be a game changer. It would be like having terabytes of storage on your phone. To use an analogy, if the CPUs that we use are like racing cars the current data highways are like dirt roads.

[@clmasse]

​@@nagualdesign No, it will enable nothing. Already the existing applications require much more ressources than necessary. When they are abundant, no effort is done. If they become scarse, better designed application will follow. Images and sounds already surpass our sensory capabilities. . Solid state drives are so light that you can carry them with you, like a wallet. It is only a commercial argument without any foundation. . And there remains the question as whether all that is useful. The answer is to figure out what is really useful for *us* and not only for business. The obvious answer is peace, job, and a clean Earth, the 5G is detrimental to all.

[@nagualdesign]

@@clmasse Surely you must accept that it will enable _something,_ and that _some_ effort is made by developers to do more with less? I can't speak for everyone, but as someone who's been programming computers for over 35 years and designing websites for nearly 20 years I can tell you that optimization accounts for a significant proportion of my work. Having said that, there are indeed an inordinate number of websites where the page contents load quickly thanks to the efforts of developers but the browser is left hanging due to all the advertising that's tacked on without much care.

[@sageinit]

To quote Allan H. Frey, discoverer of the microwave hearing effect (discovered all the way back in the 60, after Radar techs doing maintenance work in front of active antennas started reporting hearing clicking & buzzing noises) from a very hard to find Usenet mail thread in 1996: "There is a microwave hearing effect that occurs at very low power densities and a skull vibration effect that occurs when very high energies are applied to the head. There is some confusion in the literature because the vibration effect has often been referred to as a microwave hearing effect, but it is not the same phenomena." In one of these two cases, we're talking about power densities as low as 0.1 mW/cm² of pulsed microwave radiation here, with further dependence on the pulse repetition frequency and the peak power densities (~300 mW/cm²). The right combination of these parameters suffices to cause local thermoelastic expansion of brain tissue without raising global mean brain temperature. This expansion then leads into an acoustic pressure wave detected by the hair cells of the organ of Corti inside the cochlea audible even while exposed to ambient noise levels of around 65 dB. (Which btw. makes the Mythbusters episode where they 'debunked'/'busted' the microwave hearing effect a total sham, they didn't match EITHER of these conditions. Additionally, Frey originally experimented in the 200-3000 MHz range, they used a 4.7 GHz dish if I recall correctly, and didn't match any of the other parameters above either). For the other effect, well, check the literature yourself. But to further quote Frey, from www.the-scientist.com/?articles.view/articleNo/32648/title/Opinion--Cell-Phone-Health-Risk-/ in 2012: "… For example, after my colleagues and I published in 1975 that exposure to very weak microwave radiation opens the regulatory interface known as the blood brain barrier (bbb), a critical protection for the brain, the Brooks AFB group selected a contractor to supposedly replicate our experiment. For 2 years, this contractor presented data at scientific conferences stating that microwave radiation had no effect on the bbb. After much pressure from the scientific community, he finally revealed that he had not, in fact, replicated our work. We had injected dye into the femoral vein of lab rats after exposure to microwaves and observed the dye in the brain within 5 minutes. The Brooks contractor had stuck a needle into the animals’ bellies and sprayed the dye onto their intestines. Thus it is no surprise that when he looked at the brain 5 minutes later, he did not see any dye; the dye had yet to make it into the circulatory system. …" Much of Frey's research (itself quite often funded by the DoD) was suppressed in manners similar to the above to safeguard advanced radar technology during the cold war. Personally I really don't think there's any big conspiracy to actually CoNtRoL MiNdS, but I do think a lot of people want to escape responsibilities for the consequences of suppressing research like that in the interests of nAtIoNaL SeCuRiTy. Sure, doing so may have very well saved lives in the short run, but… Well, feel free to draw your own conclusions about how to end that sentence.

[@ChiDraconis]

Aw gee com'on; You order the $19.95 Space ray cannon from Pulp Fiction and the world is yours!!! Everyone wants to rule the world until they find out how difficult it is · DDNI Wiley does not sell Boiling Frogs despite claims to the contrary

[@leonvanderlinde5580]

The thing is, cellphones transmit between 100 mW and 2 W of power. It depends how far you are from the tower. If you have 2 Watt of energy at 48 GHz right next to your ear for hours as most people do, I see a very high risk for brain cancer. I worked in the two way radio industry for 43 years and we used microwave equipment and we saw damage from 1 Watt microwave transmitters to birds and the likes.

[@joorde]

Thank you for this video. As a former industrial radiographer I have always been careful with radiation exposure, and am well versed in the differences. However trying to explain concerns for this untested implementation has been difficult and I plan on sharing your link with people who have asked me.

[@QuantumFengShui]

I think this is most simple decision to make. Just ask government officials who in charge of this will they be the cute little lab mouse tell us is safe or not.

[@la7dfa]

@@derrickmcadoo3804 The reason he was careful is because IONISING radiation is dangerous. The radio spectrum is NON ionising, so its a completely different story. Why are you not more afraid to walk out in the sunlight than of radio waves? I have climbed live LORAN-C towers, with 250kW pulses. According to conspiracists I probably should have been fried or dead? :) :) Irrational fear is a part of being human I guess, but knowledge should keep us from hiding in the basement.

[@dogwalker666]

Except it is fully tested and been in use for decades, if you were a radiographer how is it you don't understand the difference between ionising and non-ionising radiation? Very suspicious.

[@dogwalker666]

@@QuantumFengShui it's safe, well tested and been in use for decades.

[@davidrobbins3018]

We are swimming in radioactive soup and it will have consequences beyond imagination, like Covid-19.

[@BruceThomson]

Very useful, thanks. 'Background in telecom and IT, I agree - health impact needs more study before implementing it.

[@johndough2363]

They did study it in the 1970s Russia declassified their 5g info it's somewhere on the net and Russia does not use 5g on its people like the west does they know what it does to our bodies...

[@candersson7419]

@The Bumble Bee without it the fourth industrial revolution would be impossible pharos.stiftelsen-pharos.org/global-goals-and-the-global-reset-for-global-technological-control/#more-2822

[@melray8223]

Look how they rushed that deadly poke with no concern for human life so they'll roll it out when they're damn good and ready and everyone can suck it up like everything else. Bastards

[@drums911]

@The Bumble Bee I agree and I suspect it has something to do with activating the IoT and transhumanism - which somehow involves the graphine oxide in the jabbbb. Will have to wait and see.

[@andreah6175]

Humanity - see my vids, read the descriptions

[@paulristow3454]

Finally, an objective explanation of 5G implications without the spin.

[@johnnyViDeO]

The takeaway is, are you willing to risk exposure to technology THAT HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN HARMLESS? I don't need the speed of 5G, or the risk. I'll make my 4G phone last as long as possible, and keep it at a distance from my body. Telecoms care about profits over health. And they are protected by laws which allow them to harm without repercussions.

[@KenJohansen]

I live in Norway. No sun for moths. So mabye I can get some heat from 5G during the winter.

[@cecilevale4694]

Hahah...!))

[@wolfgangk2824]

That is what Putin said about global warming: it will be good to need fewer winter coats.

[@KenJohansen]

@@wolfgangk2824 Was meant more ironically since we are bombarded by similar and even more harmful radiation from the Sun.

[@raymondfrye5017]

@@KenJohansen Can you get a suntan in Norway?

[@KenJohansen]

@@raymondfrye5017 Yes we can. In the summer the sun shine almost 24 houres 🙂

[@fredflickinger643]

Thank you Sabine, I couldn't have said explained the significant facts any better. Your multi-faceted prospective gives a very comprehensive picture of the knowledge state on this 5G subject.

[@rpadia2885]

Yes, as someone else indicated this is not all you need to know. I work for a company that offers test equipment for this tech. Here's two key points not given in this video. 1. Heating molecules is related to the current SARs test standard used for microwave ovens, called the Thermal Effect. Handheld transmitters need a new safety test standard since these devices are transmitting at low power levels. 2. Our body is an electro-neural network that relies on uninterrupted communications. The concern is the signal Modulation methods being used by these communication devices. This "Pulsed" signal effects our neural communication network of all biological entities like us. Some entities are impacted more than others. www.aaemonline.org/pdf/emfpositionstatement.pdf 2. The five-g antenna is a targeted 'beam' that scans in order to keep connected to the network as you move around. This beam focuses, concentrates the bean on you device to maintain good signal strength as you move, unlike an older Omni-direction comm network. As you walk around with your device the nearby antenna tracks your device with this focused beam. An USA FCC filing to alert commissioners of this new Bio Hazard in 2013: ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7022117660.pdf As with many unhealthy products of the past, like lead-tobacco-ddt..., they were thought to be harmless for decades due to disinformation by the companies that profit from them.

[@josephc6588]

The 2 websites you have given come up as errors or unreachable, why is this happening ?

[@MrProsailor]

Very well presented research. My major concern with 5G is actually the amount of 5G devices that'll be in use 24/7 like antennas, surveillance equipment, mobile devices etc etc. The exposure to individuals over a period of time, once all the various devices have been implemented, is, in my opinion a very serious health issue. Everything about existence is vibrations. Exposure to a different vibration over time is for better or worse life changing.

[@goatsinker347]

Frequencies in this 5G range, plus then the fact that they require a network of closely spaced service providing transceivers will allow for pinpointing cell phone locations very accurately.

[@photoniceudaimonia842]

I have written a lengthy document that goes through 16 areas of concern related to the rollout of 5G and overexposure to EMFs. The claim that there are only thermal effects from non-ionizing radiation is, simply put, not true at all. Despite what some say, there are in fact a couple of thousand peer-reviewed studies showing significant negative biological effects from exposure to non-ionizing EMFs. You can find links to 8 compilations of studies in the document. When I tried to post links, a longer text and use paragraphs my comment was flagged as spam (because of the settings of the channel owner) and didn't appear for others, so the solution was to post a link to the document in the description of the only video on my channel. Some of the topics / areas of concern: An astounding lack of studies on the health effects of 5G, the studies that has been done show harmful effects - Thermal vs non-thermal effects, studies on EMF-effects on humans, insects, plants and animals - The two biggest studies to date show clear negative effects from exposure to EMFs - The current safety standards - Appeal from 250+ EMF-scientists - Oxidative Stress - Conflicts of interest and other major issues within the agencies that set the standards - Our sweat ducts and eyes may act as antennas for milli-meter waves - Brillouin precursor phenomena - Potential effects of EMF and millimeter-waves on the cells mitochondria - Push for AI integration and IOT - Security and privacy issues

[@photoniceudaimonia842]

Apparently on some channels, it's possible to post links here in the comment section! Link to the full document: docs.google.com/document/d/1L9jEFSIUW5S-bsgtFkVaOtOFA-QJSE8x57H8ABkPtNo/edit?usp=sharing Link to the document without introduction and final words (only the list of 16 areas of concern): docs.google.com/document/d/1SNwE8aNbhtIZvsZuWSF_w9UfEXwFGL2vxlnNbr-Al6g/edit?usp=sharing Below you can find the beginning of the document which includes links to 8 compilations and reviews of peer-reviewed studies (each one referencing between 500-3000 studies) showing harmful biological effects from non-ionizing RF-radiation. It's not only about power. There are multiple potential mechanisms of harm. While non-ionizing radiation isn’t strong enough to break chemical bonds, it is proven that low-intensity non-ionizing RF-radiation results in other harmful effects on biological systems. I'm not saying it will kill us all, or something like that, of course not. But it's a slow burn and we should all be mindful of our exposure, just like we should be mindful with too much sugar, carbs, alcohol, PUFAs etc. Stating that it's perfectly safe to expose oneself 24/7 is not very responsible. Also parts of the population seem to be MUCH more sensitive to the frequencies (EHS). We need to balance our time indoors and our use of technology with being in nature, in the sun and walking barefoot / grounding to discharge (where do you feel most at peace, in front of the computer or walking in a forest at sundown?). Much more in the full document, which can be found in the description of the video on my channel. 1. Health Effects of 5G The health effects of 5G have not been studied enough. Actually, they have barely been studied at all and the studies that have been done are far from reassuring. No large-scale studies have taken place before the rollout of the technology. This in itself, is of course completely outrageous. At the very least, it violates basic human rights against mass population experimentation. www.blumenthal.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/at-senate-commerce-hearing-blumenthal-raises-concerns-on-5g-wireless-technologys-potential-health-risks Review some of the studies that has been done on milli-meter waves (the coming frequencies that will be used for 5G) - These preliminary studies show clear adverse health effects: “Preliminary observations showed that MMW increase skin temperature, alter gene expression, promote cellular proliferation and synthesis of proteins linked with oxidative stress, inflammatory and metabolic processes, could generate ocular damages, affect neuro-muscular dynamics.” pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29402696/ 2. Studies on different wireless technologies 2G, 3G, Wi-fi and the radiation from current cell towers etc. have been studied to different extents (see point 3 below) with very mixed results. There is currently no clear scientific consensus as claimed by certain regulatory bodies. As with scientific research on other environmental pollutants, EMF research is complex and contains inconsistencies; some studies show very significant negative effects while others are showing no effects, depending on what kind effects were being studied. 4G on the other hand hasn’t been studied very much at all (!) and with 5G “we are flying blind”. Excerpt from Scientific American, “we have no reason to believe 5G is safe”: “Since 5G is a new technology, there is no research on health effects, so we are “flying blind” to quote a U.S. senator. However, we have considerable evidence about the harmful effects of 2G and 3G. Little is known of the effects of exposure to 4G, a 10-year-old technology, because governments have been remiss in funding this research.” blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/we-have-no-reason-to-believe-5g-is-safe/ 3. Thermal Effects vs Non-Thermal Effects - Studies on EMF-effects on humans, insects, plants and larger animals The claim that there are only thermal effects from non-ionizing radiation is simply put, not true at all. Despite what some say, there are in fact at least a couple of thousands peer-reviewed studies from credible sources showing significant negative biological effects of non-ionizing RF-radiation. On this website you can find a very good summary of much of the research that has been done, I highly recommend checking it out: ehtrust.org/science/research-on-wireless-health-effects/ ehtrust.org/scientific-research-on-5g-and-health/ One of the best papers written arguing against 5G, by ORSAA - Oceania Radiofrequency Scientific Advisory Association (ORSAA): ORSAA submission to ICNIRP - “Inquiry into 5G mobile telephony” www.orsaa.org/uploads/6/7/7/9/67791943/orsaa_submission_to_5g_inquiry_oct__2019_final_v2.pdf ORSAA database with more than 3000 studies: n431.fmphost.com/fmi/webd#Research_Review_V4 Link to more than 500 peer-reviewed studies showing harmful health effects and biological effects: drive.google.com/file/d/19CbWmdGTnnW1iZ9pxlxq1ssAdYl3Eur3/view An evaluation of 2266 studies from one of the world’s oldest and most well-known general science journals showed that 68,2% of the studies demonstrated significant biological or health effects: “A recent evaluation of 2266 studies (including in-vitro and in-vivo studies in human, animal, and plant experimental systems and population studies) found that most studies (n=1546, 68·2%) have demonstrated significant biological or health effects associated with exposure to anthropogenic electromagnetic fields." www.thelancet.com/journals/lanplh/article/PIIS2542-5196(18)30221-3/fulltext Appeal to stop 5G on earth and in space, with links to a couple of thousands of studies on health effects and effects on insects, plants and animals: www.5gspaceappeal.org/the-appeal#fn10b New Hampshire Report (Nov. 1 2020) - Documents Scientific Evidence That Questions the Safety of 5G “President of the Senate Donna Soucy summarizing its findings that safety assurances for 5G have “come into question because of the thousands of peer-reviewed studies documenting deleterious health effects associated with cellphone radiation exposure.” “The report referred to the FCC as a “captured agency with undue industry influence,” citing the Harvard Press Book “Captured Agency: How the Federal Communications Commission is Dominated by the Industries it Presumably Regulates,” which compares the wireless industry to the tobacco industry.” “The FCC and FDA did not respond to the Commission’s request for testimony, and the FDA did not fully answer the Commission’s questions. The National Cancer Institute response to the Commission was that NCI does not make safety recommendations or issue guidelines and is not aware of any federal agency mandated to ensure wireless signals are safe for trees, plants, insects or birds. The New Hampshire 5G Report contains an extensive list of research studies, medical organizations and scientists in support of calling for a halt to 5G. “ www.gencourt.state.nh.us/statstudcomm/committees/1474/reports/5G%20final%20report.pdf Dr. Martin Pall’s (Professor of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences - Washington State University) - Compelling Evidence for Eight Distinct Types of Great Harm Caused by Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Exposures and the Mechanism that Causes Them www.radiationresearch.org/research/dr-martin-palls-latest-compilation-of-emf-medical-research-literature/ Prof. Martin Pall - Cellular Effects of Wi-fi and 5G (feb. 2019) kzbin.info/www/bejne/mKTEc2qbrKumhJI&feature=emb_title Dr. Devra Davis - 5G, Wireless Radiation and Health: A Scientific and Policy Update (feb. 2020) kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y3LIhKJ5a9GUb8U

[@photoniceudaimonia842]

Continuation of the document: 4. The current safety standards The current safety standards are based on industry modelling involving the head of a 100KG US Male (that is representative of 3% of the population only) who uses the phone for only 6 minutes. onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.4218/etrij.2018-0231 Meet the dummy: www.wearenotsam.com/ 5. The two biggest studies to date show clear negative effects Two of the biggest studies to date show clear evidence of harmful effects from EMFs, but for some reason (…) the FDA downplayed the results using arguments that don’t hold up to scientific scrutiny. Mainstream media reported only one side of the story and didn’t publish the thorough reply from the scientists. www.niehs.nih.gov/news/newsroom/releases/2018/november1/index.cfm ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/topics/cellphones/index.html Here is a link to all arguments against the study thoroughly answered: ehtrust.org/science/myth-vs-fact-national-toxicology-program-cell-phone-cancer-study/ “The US NTP results combined now with the Ramazzini study, reinforce human studies from our team and others providing clear evidence that RF radiation causes acoustic neuromaa (vestibular schwannoma) and gliomas, and should be classified carcinogenic to humans.” Article about the NTP-study: www.jrseco.com/can-cell-phone-radiation-cause-cancer-yes-says-ntp-rat-study/ “I would argue that the NTP warning was the most important RF-health development not only of 2018, but of the decade and most likely of the new millennium. Yet the expert panel chose to ignore it.” “There is a discussion of the NTP findings in last year’s Swedish (ICNIOR) update. But that was based on an earlier NTP draft where the staff had opted for a weaker designation, “some evidence” of cancer. Later, after an in-depth public peer review, the NTP strengthened the conclusion to “clear evidence” of cancer. That was the headline news of 2018. “Clear evidence” was a game changer; leaving it out of the annual update is a sure sign of bias. The NTP conclusion was now qualitatively different from the earlier draft -it could well have been the title of the panel’s 2018 update. But van Rongen, Röösli and the others ignored it.” microwavenews.com/news-center/time-clean-house 6. Appeal from EMF-scientists More than 250 EMF-scientists have signed an appeal and sent it to the UN calling for, among other things, a revision of the current international guidelines regarding EMFs. “The International EMF Scientist Appeal serves as a credible and influential voice from EMF (electromagnetic field) scientists who are urgently calling upon the United Nations and its sub-organizations, the WHO and UNEP, and all U.N. Member States, for greater health protection on EMF exposure.” www.emfscientist.org/ “The scientists who signed this appeal arguably constitute the majority of experts on the effects of nonionizing radiation. They have published more than 2,000 papers and letters on EMF in professional journals.” blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/we-have-no-reason-to-believe-5g-is-safe/ 7. Potential conflicts of interest and other major issues within the agencies that set the standards The scientists within the organizations that inform the current standards, argue that they are enough and say that there is no reason to believe 5G causes any harm (without pointing to any studies to back it up) are in comparison very few. What is called “global consensus” is in fact only “ICNIRP-consensus”. “ICNIRP is a German-registered association which, soon after its inception in 1992, became the actual standard-setter of radiation limits. Most European governments - and WHO, the World Health Organization - refer to ICNIRP’s guidelines in their national radiation exposure limits.” There are some very significant issues within these organizations: - The members of these organizations are a very close-knit group as can be seen here: www.kumu.io/Investigate-Europe/the-scientists-and-the-organisations#conflict-of-interest - There is no representation of any scientists that raise concerns about EMFs - All of them are appointed internally “ICNIRP is not open to any professional interested. Members of its scientific committee are appointed. None who claims there is sufficient scientific material to lower safety standards are represented.” - There seems to be a conflict of interest among some of its members: 98-page report from two members of the European Parliament, Klaus Buchner and Michèle Rivasi: “The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection: Conflicts of interest ,corporate capture and the push for 5G” klaus-buchner.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/ICNIRP-report-FINAL-19-JUNE-2020.pdf “This report deals with an issue of which the importance cannot be overrated: the possible health effects of Radiofrequency Radiation (RfR) or electro magnetic fields (EMF); It deals more specifically with how the scientific debate has been hijacked by corporate interests from the Telecom industry.” Dariusz Leszczynski, PHD, DSC writes: “In my two blog posts, ‘ICNIRP did it again…’ and ‘Mike Repacholi responds to ICNIRP did it again…’, I presented several reasons why the current modus operandi of ICNIRP is prone to provide unreliable and skewed evaluation of the scientific evidence on EMF and health. I was strongly opposed by Mike Repacholi, Chairman Emeritus of the ICNIRP, scientist who is responsible for the “birth” of this organization. In my opinion the major problems of ICNIRP are: - it is a “private club” where members elect new members without need to justify selection - lack of accountability before anyone - lack of transparency of their activities - complete lack of supervision of its activities - skewed science evaluation because of the close similarity of the opinions of all members of the Main Commission and all of the other scientists selected as advisors to the Main Commission.” betweenrockandhardplace.wordpress.com/2016/04/08/is-icnirp-reliable-enough-to-dictate-meaning-of-science-to-the-governmental-risk-regulators/ Recent article by Darius Leszczynski, from September 2020: betweenrockandhardplace.wordpress.com/2020/09/08/leszczynski-there-is-something-utterly-wrong-with-the-icnirp-membership/ The organization that the US FCC base their recommendations on: “The IEEE-ICES is a slam-dunk case for the conflict-of-interest.” “The safety limits developed by IEEE-ICES are designed by engineers working for the wireless telecommunications industry. Voting in this group on proposed safety limits is just a sham because telecom engineers vote on proposal prepared by the same telecom engineers. The telecom engineers always have the majority within IEEE-ICES. So, how trustworthy are these safety limits? In summary, IEEE-ICES safety guidelines are prepared by industry engineers and approved by industry engineers who later implement them in their own industries as reliable and solely science-based and industry-independent safety guidelines.” betweenrockandhardplace.wordpress.com/2020/04/08/pall-firstenberg-and-the-silent-enablers-are-responsible-for-the-current-5g-storm/ More resources about how industry funding influence research on RF-radiation and concerns about ICNIRP, FCC and the FDA: “Scientific analyses show industry funding can and does influence research on radiofrequency radiation. Please take the time to review these studies and to review the documentation provided by experts. This webpage has published citations on the influence of industry and vested interests.”: ehtrust.org/science/research-industry-influence-emfs/ “Some researchers have tried to study how conclusions on EMF radiation and health correspond with source of funding. In at least three such exercises by different people, in 2006, 2007 and 2017, the pattern was the same: The likelihood that industry-funded studies would find cause for concern, was dramatically smaller than in studies that were not industry-funded.” www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1797826/ www.seattlemag.com/article/uw-scientist-henry-lai-makes-waves-cell-phone-industry www.orsaa.org/latest-news/is-icnirp-a-closed-club ”Doubt is our product since it is the best means of competing with the “body of fact” that exists in the minds of the general public. It is also the means of establishing a controversy.” Tobacco executive (22) in Doubt is Our Product by David Michaels” mdsafetech.org/problems/industry-influence-in-science/ I suggest that you read some of what’s been referenced above and decide for yourself if the whole world should trust these people blindly without question and base their decisions about such an important issue based solely on their recommendations. Remaining topics in the full doc: 8. Oxidative stress 9. Effects of EMF and milli-meter waves on the environment, ecosystems and animals 10. Our sweat ducts and eyes act as antennas for 5G-radiation. 11. Brillouin precursor phenomena 12. Brain cancer 13. Effects on the cell’s mitochondria 14. Artificial Intelligence, IOT, social crediting system etc. 15. Security and Privacy issues with 5G and IOT 16. Legal Actions

[@youdoyouandletsgetalong1374]

@@photoniceudaimonia842 thank you, your research seems a lot more thorough than this video. I feel like we are taking a step in to the unknown. All of the bias and financial interest seems to be on one side of the argument. A conservative approach seems much more sensible, and more research BEFORE introducing 5G on a grand scale. Do you have any research on what materials can prevent 30-300GHz EMF radiation?

[@mattw9764]

Why don't you pick just one of these 16 areas of concern and explain how it works, with physical arguments of the type presented in this channel. That would provide much more focus for your claim that this video overlooking relevant science. You would be much more likely to get a serious and considered response.

[@youdoyouandletsgetalong1374]

Or you could take the time to read the actual peer reviewed journal articles written by paid academic scientists such as Dr Martin Pall, Prof. Devra Davies, or Dr Paul Ben Ishai, not scientists randomly found on KZbin. If you can be bothered to trawl through actual research, like an unbiased scientist would, then it becomes a hell of a lot easier. Admittedly it's easy for me, as luckily I have access to a university database which means I can read all the latest scientific literature for free; and easily search for the latest stuff, which Google simply doesn't give you access to. But I'm a historian, what do I know.

[@DamonMacready]

That was so thorough and well explained. Thanks, Sabine!

[@SabineHossenfelder]

Happy you find it useful! Took me quite some time to sort this out.

[@piranhaofserengheti4878]

@@SabineHossenfelder You missed one crucial point - who and why needs it. That's the real conspiracy here.

[@vladimir7838]

@@piranhaofserengheti4878 who and why needs 5g? -Thats like asking who and why needs a new freeway while you are driving at 5mph on the current freeway and cant take your hand of the horn..

[@piranhaofserengheti4878]

@@vladimir7838 What you can't do now on 4G? Please be very specific, using your analogy 4G is too slow for... what exactly.

[@vladimir7838]

@@piranhaofserengheti4878 for the average consumer 5G will enable 8k60 netflix on your phone or your new 8K TV, it will reduce latency, increase download/upload speeds from few hundred up to a few thousand times, cars like Tesla with advanced autonomous driving will be able to send all the data to servers have it processed and get it back in real time, therefor having andvanced hardware in your car wont be necessary, therefor your Tesla will be way less expensive a lot more reliable.. Is real time 0 latency data transferring bad somehow? Should I go on?

[@larrywright1589]

This little lady still amazes the hell out of me!

[@shereef3823]

Very good explanation. I haven't had physics since University, and frankly, haven't used it much. This is a very understandable explanation....Thank you Sabine!

[@LEO22116]

I became a huge fan of your after this video. You're so inspiring in the way you explain and the way you present data. Much love!

[@butterfly23faith84]

Remember China caused Covid

[@ephelduath610]

Thanks Sabine for the clear and unbiased overview!!!

[@vk3fbab]

The only thing to note is that the specification for 5G stipulates that mm waves can be used but most of the current deployments are in the cm bands. mm band deployments are coming but will require quite a bit of investment from telcos and will be limited to areas which require that density of coverage. Placing femto cells every 100m or so is the realms of public transport, stadiums and airports. Maybe some in building coverage. I don't think it will be profitable to be the default deployment strategy. As SH said the biggest risk is from handsets and not towers due to the effects of 1/r2. So people can opt out by not buying mm wave handsets, not using mm wave carriers or disabling mm wave radios on their handsets. Though I can see a time when some of these options may not be possible. Great coverage of the physics.

[@oblivianation9759]

What happens when you're told to put 3 masks on because some rouge employees of Billy g. Is turning the power up? And they are working on a demagnetizer or something you'll be mandated to get.

[@jamessheppard4372]

Wonderfully produced video. Thank you ma'am

[@recreant359]

When I worked at a radio facility in the military we would often find dead birds around our microwave antennas, they would sit on or near the antenna’s likely enjoying the extra heat right up until it cooked them....

[@northsouthpaw]

Of course you would find dead birds around the area with that power. Did you know AM stations that are 100,000 Watts kill birds too?

[@rdavis184]

The power levels emitted from military communications and radar sites are many, many decimal orders of magnitude greater than what we’re talking about here! (ETR2, USN ‘66-‘70).

[@christiancampbell466]

Decades back, soldiers noticed the lobe of melted snow in front of microwave dishes and went there for warmth. The Army had to put up signs warning against irradiating one’s sperm to discourage the practice.

[@PeterJavi]

@@rdavis184 But I have no desire to sit on these antennas. I doubt the heat is even noticeable when you're standing on ground level a few dozen meters away.

[@robguyatt9602]

@@northsouthpaw Yeah it's about power levels. When the anti 5G mob sells scaremongering like "the military uses it as a weapon", it makes me scream inside. I like to reply, then stop drinking water cos riot police disperse crowds with water cannon.

[@Iampenumbra]

I really enjoy her clear, "easy to understand", and unbiased scientific explanations in all her videos. Thank you Sabine for all your enlightenments.

[@oldspammer]

Energy level certainly matters, but resonant frequencies can and do cause energy overload situations.

[@louf7178]

Thank you. I'm anticipating cellular service that is less reliable. I can transfer enough data fast enough with 4G.

[@johndough2363]

4g is slowly killing you too I remember a time when you had to use a payphone that was harmless..

[@Rohan4711]

5G will once fully implemented provide more reliable data service than 4G in densly populated areas, like city center.

[@rizizum]

@@johndough2363 The lamps you put in your house are killing you too, you should replace them with candles before you develop "skin cancer"

[@Rohan4711]

@Galavant So things like higher data speed, lower power usage and way better support functions for IoT devices is things that you consider pointless? Most operators around the world are either building up 5G nets now or are planning to build 5G nets in the near future. Nearly all phones that are sold in 2021 has 5G support. Just the fact that your phones battery will last longer without extra weight or space in the phone is a feature that is useful to everyone.

[@NorseGraphic]

@@Rohan4711 The fact that people rely so much on technology that they're essentially senile without it should cause concern.

[@davidbarton6095]

As someone who's worked in the cellular telecommunications industry for almost 30 years and before that radar, I've had to deal with these luddites the entire time at different locations throughout the country. I enjoyed Sabine's video on this subject, maybe the answer could be to better educate the public on the subject. While dealing with customers at times I would explain the propagation and penetration issues of the frequencies and how this affects their reception. Something I always found amusing was that in certain buildings they wouldn't want you to use your phone as it might interfere with various systems and when you go outside, look up, and see the roof with one or two sectorized macros. Basically we are constantly bathed in radio frequency radiation at various levels, from the milliwatts that your phone uses to the tens of watts from the cell sites to the power from radio stations, tv stations etc. Another great video, thank you Sabine.

[@Diranar851]

And no one is curious, why we got rising Cancer cases since the frequent use of EMF's. What seems to be not harmfull can get over time with long time exposure.

[@andreaswiklund7197]

@@Diranar851 I heard the opposite. No rise in cancer.

[@Diranar851]

@@andreaswiklund7197 So you say we have the same Cancer Ratio as 1984 ? No, so please stop telling Bullshit.

[@andreaswiklund7197]

@@Diranar851 I’m not saying anything. But those who know and have studied it says cancer rates PER 100000 people are going down. Of course more people have cancer now since the population is bigger and we live longer. Also the question if specifically using cell phones can give you cancer is not really answered yet. If there is a risk it’s certainly very small - that much we know.

[@jaxxonbalboa3243]

I came in to learn about 5G but I walked away feeling Einsteinish!

[@kerryman55]

I had a small business in Dublin from 1972 - 2019 until I retired. One of my clients was a man from Castle Blaney in the county of Monaghan. He told me he had visited his home town frequently and the last time he was there he saw his old friend had upgraded his transport to carry his milk to the local creamery and from one can to two. He had bought a new opal astra estate. His old transport had been an ass & cart. He commented that if Eowny Murtagh could upgrade his transport to that extent doubling his output that there must be something good about joining the EU. I think I will start looking for a donkey & cart now that I,m retired.

[@64kernel]

Thank you for such a scientific approach on a very cluttered subject.

[@SabineHossenfelder]

Happy you find it useful!

[@Jaded-Wanderer]

Fast becoming one of my favourite KZbin channels

[@mk1st]

I'm still on a 3G network. I don't need any enticement to stare at my phone any more than I do.

[@ebberman7672]

I switched my phone to 2G. Phone calls have further range and I don't use my phone as a toy computer.

[@truthmediatv1212]

lol wtf

[@Cryptonymicus]

@@jeffk4223 People who talk about sheeple are usually right-wing lemmings.

[@felixfischer312]

@@jeffk4223 damn i was just thinking that point .just before reading yr comment. i 'm so done with the lies we need to just go along with B.S.!!

[@felixfischer312]

i want to go back to3G OR 2G YOU are right stay with it..

[@LVBRXbrand]

The waves at that range will stick the inside of your eyelids to the white part of the eyeball as you sleep. When you blink, the bonded skin does an Indian burn to the anik surface. It burns.

[@theishiopian68]

Power vs energy is an interesting distinction, I often forget about it.

[@wisdomlistens2579]

What a pleasure to watch credibility speak... Thank you Sabine.

[@beamer.electronics]

I'm old and Oh, boy have I learnt several things from you with this video, thank you. With your clear and concise delivery - even complex notions are simply absorbed, and I didn't need mm waves for that :)

[@giza1081]

UK Barrie towers world's expert on microwaves and wif and 5 G he on KZbin .

[@SuperReznative]

@Jesusfreak Computergeek Thanks this was some of the info deliberately omitted in the video.. yet everyone thinks 5g is safe. False pretence.. conclusions.

[@andrewlucas6214]

WHO says nothing to worry about….now where have I heard that before? All the debate in the world is not worth a jot when we have no choice in these matters. If the powers that be want it, we will get it. On the point of damaging property, it someone points a gun at you, loaded or not, reasonable force says you can take that gun off them. If 5g could cause harm ( and it doesn’t seem to have been proved otherwise) why should we have to tolerate it so large companies can profit.

[@notlessgrossman163]

I don't recall people demanding driverless cars or connecting their refrigerator to the internet. First principles here is that technology is driven by marketing rather than real needs.

[@julianfogel5635]

"Technology is driven by marketing" is sometimes true. For example, tobacco companies poured vast sums into developing a smokeless cigarette when people started worrying about smoke causing cancer, Proctor and Gamble certainly has a large research department for making more desirable laundry detergents and dish soaps. But with disruptive technologies, the research is driven by curiosity and hope for a better future. Driverless cars were first researched in university AI departments in the 1970s, then by the military, and only recently has the auto industry paid any attention. Connecting fridges to the internet is an obvious idea almost as old as the internet and was dreamed of in university computer science departments. By the way, driverless cars will probably save about 1.3 million lives per year. That's how many people die in car accidents around the world.

[@johnmqueripel2367]

Tesla cars don't need internet connection for full self driving, although they do use the internet connection to download updates. Also we are happy to accept cancer giving frequencies called sunlight.

[@tonyhogg9839]

But can you actually find people demanding things in the few years before they came out that we use widely today? I would say in many of those cases no. When did people demand that there be vacuum cleaners, blenders, automatic coffee makers, streaming video, etc ?

[@carlosgaspar8447]

safety concerns have only been applied to humans and not the environment in general.

[@geronimo4511]

@@carlosgaspar8447 Good point, should be given equal weight to the human risk. Can I suggest you repeat this as a comment instead of a reply to a comment where it is less visable

[@alfredosolari7597]

Thank you . As always, clear, concise and professional in your explanations.

[@kushagr7132]

Every Saturday It's becoming a ritual for me