Radio Tower
For those of us who realize that the world is far more chaotic and messy than any conspiracy theorist would have you believe, 5G still creates some worrying issues. If we pay attention to what this new technology actually does, we should be able to cut through the myths and misinformation and prepare ourselves for the real consequences that are coming down the pipeline.
But What Is 5G?
So what is 5G? In the simplest terms, it's the fifth generation of wireless communication networks, and it's defined by the frequencies in which it operates and the speed of data transfer it offers. While 4G systems operate at frequencies between about 600 MHz and 6 GHz, 5G nodes will be licensed to transmit signals in the so-called "millimeter wave" range between 24 GHz and 300 GHz, which will allow for more users to share a network and transmit data at speed up to ten times as fast as 4G. Essentially, it will allow cellular networks to achieve speeds faster than even most fiber Internet plans.
Why Is That scary?
But if that's all 5G is, why are people getting so upset about it? Why are they shooting at cell phone towers? While much of the fear around the new technology is connected to the unfounded belief that it is in some way responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic, critics have been vocal about their concerns regarding 5G for years now. The fear is that the higher frequency signals have not been properly vetted and may cause health and environmental problems that we are not yet aware of. Among the fears are concerns about honey bees, cancer, and disruption of immune systems.
Most of these concerns are based on myths. While there are aspects of the honey bee decline that are still mysterious, there are a number of likely culprits that are not as interesting as the unfounded idea that cell phones are responsible, and so the cell phone story caught on. As for cancer, while it's true that higher-frequency electromagnetic signals tend to be more dangerous—like UV, X-Rays, etc.—visible light is transmitted at a higher frequency than any 5G signal, and people tend not to worry about the cancer risk of light bulbs.
But it's the concern about immune systems that has really flourished in recent months. While originally connected to the medically-dubious diagnosis of "electromagnetic hypersensitivity," the claim that certain frequencies of signal can disrupt immune function rose to new prominence in late 2019, when China's rollout of 5G happened to coincide with the first cases of COVID-19 in Wuhan. The miseducated corners of the Internet are now full of half-baked theories that the virus is being spread in tandem with the supposed immune-suppressing power of 5G for population control, tyrannical restrictions of freedom, and Bill Gates' plans for forced vaccination (AKA sterilization/mind control).
It's a misguided attempt to answer a valid question: Why is this disease so much deadlier than others? Is it because the virus is hearty, highly contagious, and has a long incubation period during which it is largely undetectable? Yes. Will we adapt and find treatments and vaccines as we have for similarly deadly contagions? Of course. But the fact that the first deadly pandemic of our interconnected era happens to align with the release of this new technology was bound to produce some paranoia about 5G. And Bill Gates—the rich nerd who says he wants to save the world—has been fitting neatly into this kind of conspiracy theory for decades.
What Are the Actual Risks?
With all this confusion and hysteria surrounding the new technology, it's important not to ignore the actual risks involved. The recent proliferation of telecommuting and the added strain on all manner of telecommunication networks are likely to speed the global adoption of 5G. As that process progresses, major changes throughout our society will result . Some of those changes will be good, but others may have disastrous unintended consequences.
One of the major areas of concern involves weather satellites. Predictions from the daily temperature in your area to the likely path of a hurricane are based on satellite mapping that tracks the natural resonant frequency of water vapor—around 23.8 GHz. The water in the air gives off a very weak radio signal at that frequency, allowing satellites to track humidity and pressure systems. But the close proximity of that frequency to some newer 5G nodes will result in significant noise in satellite readings that are likely to compromise the accuracy of weather predictions—particularly around urban centers where 5G will be most prominent. The extent of the problem and the ability of scientists to work around it remain to be seen.
RobotPhoto by Andrea De Santis on Unsplash
Another factor to consider is the problem of automation. Fast wireless speeds are necessary for coordinating complex automation like driverless vehicles and robotic warehouses. As 5G proliferates, broad sectors of the workforce are likely to become obsolete—replaced by new technologies. It's a process that has been ongoing for a while now, but 5G networks will accelerate the rate of change. Unless we have political programs in place to combat the effects of joblessness, the current economic turmoil may presage a long-term plight for our society that 5G will usher in.
What Else Are We missing?
Lastly, there are the consequences that we can't yet know. Every major country on the planet is rushing to implement this technology in their cities so as not to fall behind. We are rushing headlong toward this future that is hazy at best.
As protesters have pointed out, the high frequency range of 5G networks will cause the signals to degrade over long distances, or when passing through solid objects. This limitation may require carriers to use more cell towers and nodes, or possibly to transmit more powerful signals. What are the effects of surrounding ourselves with all those new, high-energy radio waves?
Will it be the same as adding a few more light bulbs to your home? Maybe. Or maybe long-term exposure will slightly increase the prevalence of certain types of cancer because of...who knows—some mechanism we haven't figured out yet. Or maybe it will cause subtle problems as a result of interacting with the atmospheric water vapor—altering patterns of humidity that will affect the spread of viruses… Probably not, but it is possible.
At this point we're entering the realm of wild speculation, but we don't have much choice. There is little research—if any—on the long-term effects of constant exposure to these frequencies of radiation. While there's no reason to expect any particular consequences, the amount that we still don't know about physics and biology is at least a strong case for humility. History is full of cases when new technologies had dire consequences that no one predicted—from x-ray shoe fitting to "non-addictive" opioids. Making such sweeping changes to our cities and expecting no health consequences at all—as we're being told to do—may turn out to be naive.
In the next few years 5G is going to spread throughout the US and much of the world, but it may take decades to find out.
POPULAR NEWS
The Upside of the Coronavirus: We're Finally Past Celebrity Drama
Celebrities' normal antics are not as entertaining (or as important) as they once seemed.
Kim Kardashian has lashed out at Taylor Swift, or Taylor Swift has lashed out at Kim Kardashian, but most of all, both lashed out at all of us for constantly devouring their drama.
Kardashian volleyed a bunch of tweets last night, admonishing Swift for apparently re-invigorating their briefly dead feud and then disavowing the feud on the whole. She finished, "This will be the last time I speak on this because honestly, nobody cares. Sorry to bore you all with this. I know you are all dealing with more serious and important matters."
Swift also responded negatively to the feud's resurfacing. "Instead of answering those who are asking how I feel about the video footage that leaked, proving that I was telling the truth the whole time about *that call* (you know, the one that was illegally recorded, that somebody edited and manipulated in order to frame me and put me, my family, and fans through hell for 4 years)… SWIPE up to see what really matters," she posted on Instagram. When fans swiped, they were taken to a donation page for the nonprofit Feeding America and the World Health Organization's Solidarity Response Fund.
The mind-numbing stupidity of the Taylor Swift-Kim Kardashian-Kanye West feud feels even more obvious in the light of the fact that we're living in a pandemic. Are we entering the age of the post-celebrity feud?
Everywhere, celebrities and ordinary people are expressing rage and anger at those who attempt to continue with business at usual. People who cluster on the street and hang out in parks are the recipient of angry yells from the balcony-bound self-quarantined. Those with any inclination towards the mystic are writing about how the world must change after coronavirus passes—how we cannot return to the way things were, to the way we mindlessly destroyed the planet and hurt each other, thus somehow cursing ourselves into isolation. Humans are the virus, they write; to which the activists respond, capitalism is the virus, while people facing unemployment attempt to vie for a rent freeze.
Even ordinary acts of "kindness"—of the sort we would normally associate with celebrity benevolence—are beginning to appear woefully out of touch. In essence, Hollywood's version of prepackaged, performative kindness and drama seems to be failing to placate the masses. Instead, it only serves to show that the main difference between these folks and regular people isn't necessarily hard work or talent—it's money.
Ellen's versions of "tolerance" and "kindness" were under scrutiny before the virus, but now that she's live-streaming from her couch and complaining about boredom from within her massive home, a thread about her cruel behavior has gone viral.
Madonna also faced vitriol when she made a poorly crafted attempt to comfort her fans from the safety of her bathtub. "Coronavirus is the great equalizer," she said, equating her own living situation—in a flower-filled bathtub, safe within one of her multiple large homes—with the plight of people who have no way of paying this month's rent. (She faced so much backlash that she deleted the video).
And then there's Gal Gadot's "Imagine" video, a horror that seemed to seep out of the wounds coronavirus has already made in our world and ways of life. What was the worst thing about that video? Was it Gadot's waffling intro? Was it seeing our beloved celebrities, without their stage makeup and lighting and cameramen to turn them into gods—was it seeing our celebrities' mortality and feeling some inordinate rage that we've worshiped them for so long while they were really just ordinary people? Was it the look in their eyes, the tepid sorrow overshadowed by a glossy egoism, the same look in the eyes of everyone who has taken a photograph with a child on a service trip? Was it the different keys, the lack of background music, the carelessness of the whole thing?
The "Imagine" video was awful, certainly, but would we have hated it so much if it were well-made, a professional music video with excellent harmonies and good lighting and dazzling costumes? Maybe the disappointment we feel while watching the "Imagine" fiasco stems from a feeling of falling, a realization that the person behind the curtain has always been just an ordinary man, and yet these mortals are languishing in massive air-conditioned homes while so many people sleep on the streets.
Some of the celebrity responses to coronavirus are not just disillusioned; they're truly dangerous. Vanessa Hudgens also provoked ire when she posted a video showing just how much she cared about those who might be affected by the virus. "Even if everybody gets it, like yeah, people are going to die, which is terrible... but inevitable?" she intoned in a video she later apologized for. Worse still, Evangelline Lilly is crusading against quarantining herself on the basis of some idea that it's a violation of her American-born "freedom."
And then there's Donald Trump, the reigning king of the celebrity illusionists. Everything he says sounds as painful and as hollow as the "Imagine" video to some of our ears. Recently, a man died because he tried drinking chloroquine phosphate, a fish tank-cleaner, per Trump's ill-advised recommendation. Trump has been persistently spreading false information, promising that America will be up and running by Easter as other nations tighten their regulations.
Most of the guiltiest illusionists of all aren't even visible. They're the Wall Street executives and the genuinely super-rich—not the Hollywood-level rich but the Jeff Bezos-level rich, those who possess a literally unfathomable amount of money—the ones who have already raced off to their bunkers, the ones who bought stocks at the start of the crisis instead of raising the alarm.
Collectively, maybe we're all getting tired of these folks, parading their gaudy lifestyles and tapping out their stocks, getting early access to tests while our healthcare workers can't even access tests in their own hospitals. Illusions just aren't going to cut it the way they used to. That's not to say they won't change form; certainly our new very-online lives will leave plenty of room for performance and fabrication. Still, the coronavirus feels like it's peeling back many layers of performative benevolence to reveal the insubstantiality at the heart of it all—the wealth inequality and pure selfishness that's allowing this crisis to sputter on into the disruptive mess it's become. Even Kim Kardashian, Taylor Swift, and Britney Spears are waking up to it. Are you?