一些阴谋论者最近在网上宣称,5G无线服务与新型冠状病毒的爆发密切相关。尽管科学家明确表示,这项无线通信技术和新冠疫情没有任何联系,但这些阴谋论终究在现实世界酿成了一些可怕的后果。上周,英国的纵火犯点燃了伯明翰、利物浦和默西塞德郡的5G信号发射塔,并把这些破坏行为的视频上传到社交媒体。
尽管这些阴谋论实在是不值一驳,但一场更具理性的大规模辩论仍在持续进行中。争论的焦点是,无线电话设备究竟对人类健康有何影响。
移动电话和手机信号塔以远低于X射线和紫外线的频率传输无线电信号。X射线和紫外线的强度足以破坏人体细胞和DNA,属于电离辐射。而较低的波段,包含AM收音机、手机和微波炉等所有日常用品在内,被归类为非电离辐射,不会直接伤害DNA。它们一直被认为是无害的,除非你脑洞大开,近距离地给电池加热。
这是数十亿人开始对手机产生严重依赖,几乎不间断地使用无线网络之前的事情。迄今为止,对手机的科学研究提供了一个大体上令人放心的观点。美国食品和药物管理局、国家癌症研究所和联邦通信委员会等国家级权威机构坚持认为,考虑到业已到位的辐射安全限制,使用手机几乎没有任何健康风险。
但这并没有阻止一些城市和国家以健康顾虑为由,放缓甚至禁止安装5G设备。一些华尔街分析师表示,这种担忧可能会对那些指望5G来提振销售业绩的公司造成实质性影响。
为此,《财富》邀请业内专家逐一解答人们最关心的无线技术安全问题。
5G会导致或传播新冠病毒吗?
《财富》杂志采访的每一位科学家和医生都表示,5G与冠状病毒的关系非常简单明了。他们笃信,5G和这种被称为COVID-19的新型冠状病毒之间根本没有联系。无线技术不可能导致某种病毒突变成致命的流行病,无线电波也不可能传播病毒。正如英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)医疗总监斯蒂芬·鲍威斯所说,“这完全是一派胡言。”
一些人声称,5G无线网络可能削弱了人类的免疫系统,从而使我们更容易感染冠状病毒。生物学家埃里克·范荣根表示,这种理论“毫无依据可言”。数十年来,他一直在潜心研究电磁场对健康的影响,目前担任国际非电离辐射保护委员会(ICNIRP)主席。这家非营利性组织成立于上世纪90年代,专门就这一问题向决策者提供科学建议。
“没有科学研究表明5G或任何其他无线网络技术会影响免疫系统,”他说。“倘若如此,我们早在几十年前就会目睹规模和惨烈程度堪比这波新冠疫情的传染性疾病了。但我们并没有看到这一幕。”
加州大学洛杉矶分校流行病学教授利卡·凯费茨补充说,随着各国为抗击疫情纷纷采取封锁措施,无线技术总体上是有益于社会的。凯费茨曾经专门研究过手机对健康的影响。无线设备“让更多人得以居家工作,从而让社交距离成为可能。这些设备也有助于人们与亲戚朋友保持联系,让社交距离变得不那么难以忍受。”她说。
手机会致癌吗?
大约9年前,世界卫生组织将手机使用的无线电频率列为“可能致癌物”。2011年发布的这项法令基于早期的研究成果,即一些手机用户罹患一种名为神经胶质瘤的脑癌的几率高于正常情况。迄今已有300多种物质被世卫组织列为“可能致癌物”,其中包括芦荟提取物、传统的亚洲腌菜和干洗烟雾。
然而,随后的研究并没有证明这种联系,也没有促使世卫组织将手机升级到风险更高的类别。
在今年2月份发表的一份报告中,美国食品和药物管理局对2008年至2018年所有相关研究进行了一番回顾,并总结称:“没有一致或可信的科学证据表明,暴露在手机发射的射频能量下,会导致健康问题。”同样,联邦通信委员会也表示:“迄今为止的科学证据,并不支持手机会对人类健康产生不利影响这种说法。”一份发布于国家癌症研究所官网,旨在揭示手机健康问题的长篇研究报告指出:“就使用手机而言,最常见的健康风险莫过于分心驾驶和交通事故。”
考虑这种风险的另一种方法是,观察普通人群可能因使用手机导致的脑癌和其他疾病发病率。对癌症趋势的大型研究发现,手机使用量的大幅增加并没有导致癌症发病率上升。例如,临床观察到的神经胶质瘤发病率“保持在相对稳定的水平上”,供职于休斯敦贝勒医学院的资深癌症流行病学家奎恩·奥斯特罗姆这样说道。“如果使用手机会增加患脑瘤的风险,诸如此类的肿瘤发病率理应显著上升,但事实并非如此。”
难道就没有研究表明手机辐射与癌症有关吗?
医学专家和权威机构审阅的研究报告,确实包含一些令人不安的发现。但这些研究都带有局限性,有的甚至存在严重缺陷。
就细致程度而言,在所有宣称手机存在致癌风险的研究中,隶属于美国国家卫生研究院的国家毒理学计划(NTP)于2018年完成的研究颇具代表性。这项研究让大鼠和小鼠连续几年每天接受长达9小时的手机信号。尽管小鼠和雌性大鼠并没有出现足以引起警觉的症状,但雄性大鼠的心脑肿瘤发病率明显升高。更令人不安的是,这些老鼠患上的肿瘤类型,跟斯堪的纳维亚国家早前研究人类癌症和使用手机的关系时所发现的肿瘤高度相似。
“我们最初研究的问题是,从生物学的角度看,使用手机究竟有没有致癌风险。结果发现,动物患上这些肿瘤的可能性是存在的,”参与该研究的NTP资深科学家约翰·布赫表示。“但我们的研究是在非常特殊的条件下进行的。”
在每天18个小时的清醒时间内,这些大鼠有9个小时都在接受大而稳定的手机信号辐射。他说:“必须指出的是,这并不直接适用于人类使用手机的方式,但它确实提出了一些我们必须注意的问题。”NTP正在利用设计得更加细致的研究项目来探查这一问题。
加州大学洛杉矶分校的流行病学家凯费茨说,NTP的研究有些令人担忧,但使用无线技术的总体好处仍然大于风险。尽管如此,她仍然同意布赫的观点,即“学术界需要加强对手机潜在健康风险的研究,而不仅仅是癌症。”
5G会带来独特的风险吗?
5G使用的一些波段与4G和早期移动网络有所不同。新的5G频段被称为毫米波频段,其传输距离不及4G频段,这一特点已经促使无线通讯行业在主要城区部署了数万个较小的蜂窝基站。
然而,对这类辐射的研究并没有显示出任何独特的危险。以确定手机辐射安全标准著称的国际非电离辐射防护委员会,最近发布了一些针对5G技术的新建议。这些建议与它在1998年发布的手机指南大体相似。其主席埃里克·范荣根表示,该组织审阅了学术界近年来对所有不良健康影响的研究。
“大量的科学研究表明,只要遵守手机辐射安全标准,5G信号就不会造成伤害,”新西兰梅西大学研究员法拉兹·哈桑补充说。他专门研究过5G技术对健康的影响。
怎样使用手机才是安全的?
鉴于一些研究发现了很小程度的致癌风险,关心手机使用安全的用户可以采取一些预防措施来尽可能地减少辐射。布赫指出,哪怕稍稍离手机远一点,其辐射影响也会迅速减弱。
他说:“最简单的方法就是不要把手机放在身体附近,不要放在头旁边或口袋里。”布赫建议用户接听电话时,让手机离耳朵稍微远一点,最好戴上耳机,不要把手机放在裤兜里。“跟手机保持一定的距离,哪怕只有几英寸远,也有益健康。”(财富中文网)
译者:任文科
一些阴谋论者最近在网上宣称,5G无线服务与新型冠状病毒的爆发密切相关。尽管科学家明确表示,这项无线通信技术和新冠疫情没有任何联系,但这些阴谋论终究在现实世界酿成了一些可怕的后果。上周,英国的纵火犯点燃了伯明翰、利物浦和默西塞德郡的5G信号发射塔,并把这些破坏行为的视频上传到社交媒体。
尽管这些阴谋论实在是不值一驳,但一场更具理性的大规模辩论仍在持续进行中。争论的焦点是,无线电话设备究竟对人类健康有何影响。
移动电话和手机信号塔以远低于X射线和紫外线的频率传输无线电信号。X射线和紫外线的强度足以破坏人体细胞和DNA,属于电离辐射。而较低的波段,包含AM收音机、手机和微波炉等所有日常用品在内,被归类为非电离辐射,不会直接伤害DNA。它们一直被认为是无害的,除非你脑洞大开,近距离地给电池加热。
这是数十亿人开始对手机产生严重依赖,几乎不间断地使用无线网络之前的事情。迄今为止,对手机的科学研究提供了一个大体上令人放心的观点。美国食品和药物管理局、国家癌症研究所和联邦通信委员会等国家级权威机构坚持认为,考虑到业已到位的辐射安全限制,使用手机几乎没有任何健康风险。
但这并没有阻止一些城市和国家以健康顾虑为由,放缓甚至禁止安装5G设备。一些华尔街分析师表示,这种担忧可能会对那些指望5G来提振销售业绩的公司造成实质性影响。
为此,《财富》邀请业内专家逐一解答人们最关心的无线技术安全问题。
5G会导致或传播新冠病毒吗?
《财富》杂志采访的每一位科学家和医生都表示,5G与冠状病毒的关系非常简单明了。他们笃信,5G和这种被称为COVID-19的新型冠状病毒之间根本没有联系。无线技术不可能导致某种病毒突变成致命的流行病,无线电波也不可能传播病毒。正如英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)医疗总监斯蒂芬·鲍威斯所说,“这完全是一派胡言。”
一些人声称,5G无线网络可能削弱了人类的免疫系统,从而使我们更容易感染冠状病毒。生物学家埃里克·范荣根表示,这种理论“毫无依据可言”。数十年来,他一直在潜心研究电磁场对健康的影响,目前担任国际非电离辐射保护委员会(ICNIRP)主席。这家非营利性组织成立于上世纪90年代,专门就这一问题向决策者提供科学建议。
“没有科学研究表明5G或任何其他无线网络技术会影响免疫系统,”他说。“倘若如此,我们早在几十年前就会目睹规模和惨烈程度堪比这波新冠疫情的传染性疾病了。但我们并没有看到这一幕。”
加州大学洛杉矶分校流行病学教授利卡·凯费茨补充说,随着各国为抗击疫情纷纷采取封锁措施,无线技术总体上是有益于社会的。凯费茨曾经专门研究过手机对健康的影响。无线设备“让更多人得以居家工作,从而让社交距离成为可能。这些设备也有助于人们与亲戚朋友保持联系,让社交距离变得不那么难以忍受。”她说。
手机会致癌吗?
大约9年前,世界卫生组织将手机使用的无线电频率列为“可能致癌物”。2011年发布的这项法令基于早期的研究成果,即一些手机用户罹患一种名为神经胶质瘤的脑癌的几率高于正常情况。迄今已有300多种物质被世卫组织列为“可能致癌物”,其中包括芦荟提取物、传统的亚洲腌菜和干洗烟雾。
然而,随后的研究并没有证明这种联系,也没有促使世卫组织将手机升级到风险更高的类别。
在今年2月份发表的一份报告中,美国食品和药物管理局对2008年至2018年所有相关研究进行了一番回顾,并总结称:“没有一致或可信的科学证据表明,暴露在手机发射的射频能量下,会导致健康问题。”同样,联邦通信委员会也表示:“迄今为止的科学证据,并不支持手机会对人类健康产生不利影响这种说法。”一份发布于国家癌症研究所官网,旨在揭示手机健康问题的长篇研究报告指出:“就使用手机而言,最常见的健康风险莫过于分心驾驶和交通事故。”
考虑这种风险的另一种方法是,观察普通人群可能因使用手机导致的脑癌和其他疾病发病率。对癌症趋势的大型研究发现,手机使用量的大幅增加并没有导致癌症发病率上升。例如,临床观察到的神经胶质瘤发病率“保持在相对稳定的水平上”,供职于休斯敦贝勒医学院的资深癌症流行病学家奎恩·奥斯特罗姆这样说道。“如果使用手机会增加患脑瘤的风险,诸如此类的肿瘤发病率理应显著上升,但事实并非如此。”
难道就没有研究表明手机辐射与癌症有关吗?
医学专家和权威机构审阅的研究报告,确实包含一些令人不安的发现。但这些研究都带有局限性,有的甚至存在严重缺陷。
就细致程度而言,在所有宣称手机存在致癌风险的研究中,隶属于美国国家卫生研究院的国家毒理学计划(NTP)于2018年完成的研究颇具代表性。这项研究让大鼠和小鼠连续几年每天接受长达9小时的手机信号。尽管小鼠和雌性大鼠并没有出现足以引起警觉的症状,但雄性大鼠的心脑肿瘤发病率明显升高。更令人不安的是,这些老鼠患上的肿瘤类型,跟斯堪的纳维亚国家早前研究人类癌症和使用手机的关系时所发现的肿瘤高度相似。
“我们最初研究的问题是,从生物学的角度看,使用手机究竟有没有致癌风险。结果发现,动物患上这些肿瘤的可能性是存在的,”参与该研究的NTP资深科学家约翰·布赫表示。“但我们的研究是在非常特殊的条件下进行的。”
在每天18个小时的清醒时间内,这些大鼠有9个小时都在接受大而稳定的手机信号辐射。他说:“必须指出的是,这并不直接适用于人类使用手机的方式,但它确实提出了一些我们必须注意的问题。”NTP正在利用设计得更加细致的研究项目来探查这一问题。
加州大学洛杉矶分校的流行病学家凯费茨说,NTP的研究有些令人担忧,但使用无线技术的总体好处仍然大于风险。尽管如此,她仍然同意布赫的观点,即“学术界需要加强对手机潜在健康风险的研究,而不仅仅是癌症。”
5G会带来独特的风险吗?
5G使用的一些波段与4G和早期移动网络有所不同。新的5G频段被称为毫米波频段,其传输距离不及4G频段,这一特点已经促使无线通讯行业在主要城区部署了数万个较小的蜂窝基站。
然而,对这类辐射的研究并没有显示出任何独特的危险。以确定手机辐射安全标准著称的国际非电离辐射防护委员会,最近发布了一些针对5G技术的新建议。这些建议与它在1998年发布的手机指南大体相似。其主席埃里克·范荣根表示,该组织审阅了学术界近年来对所有不良健康影响的研究。
“大量的科学研究表明,只要遵守手机辐射安全标准,5G信号就不会造成伤害,”新西兰梅西大学研究员法拉兹·哈桑补充说。他专门研究过5G技术对健康的影响。
怎样使用手机才是安全的?
鉴于一些研究发现了很小程度的致癌风险,关心手机使用安全的用户可以采取一些预防措施来尽可能地减少辐射。布赫指出,哪怕稍稍离手机远一点,其辐射影响也会迅速减弱。
他说:“最简单的方法就是不要把手机放在身体附近,不要放在头旁边或口袋里。”布赫建议用户接听电话时,让手机离耳朵稍微远一点,最好戴上耳机,不要把手机放在裤兜里。“跟手机保持一定的距离,哪怕只有几英寸远,也有益健康。”(财富中文网)
译者:任文科
Online conspiracy theories linking 5G wireless service to the novel coronavirus outbreak had some dangerous real-world consequences last week, despite scientists saying there is no connection between the technology and the spread of the disease. Arsonists in the U.K. set on fire 5G wireless towers in Birmingham, Liverpool, and Merseyside and then uploaded videos of the vandalism to social media.
There's no connection between 5G, the new, superfast successor to 4G wireless, and the deadly pandemic sweeping the globe, scientists say. But the vandalism and false connections between the disease and 5G come as a larger and more rational debate continues over the broader impact of wireless phone gear on human health.
Mobile phones and cell towers transmit radio signals at frequencies well below those of X-rays and ultraviolet light, which are strong enough to damage human cells and DNA and are categorized as ionizing radiation. The lower bands, encompassing everything from AM radio to cell phones to microwave ovens, are categorized as nonionizing radiation and don't harm DNA directly. They have long been considered harmless except for potentially heating cells at close range.
That was before billions of people started relying on nearly constant mobile connections via cell phones. So far, scientific studies of cell phones have offered a mostly reassuring view of the situation. And leading national authorities like the Food and Drug Administration, the National Cancer Institute, and the Federal Communications Commission maintain that there is little to no health risk from using mobile phones given the safety limits already in place.
Still, that has not stopped cities and countries worldwide from slowing or even banning the installation of 5G gear due to health concerns. And some Wall Street analysts say such fears could have a material impact on companies counting on 5G to bolster their sales.
Here are answers to some of the top questions people have about wireless technology and safety:
Did 5G cause or help spread the coronavirus?
The answer to 5G involvement with the coronavirus is simple and straightforward, according to every scientist and doctor that Fortune spoke with. There simply is no connection between 5G and the novel coronavirus known as COVID-19. There is no mechanism by which a wireless technology could cause a virus to mutate into a killer epidemic and no way that wireless airwaves can transmit viruses. It is, as Stephen Powis, medical director for the British National Health Service, says, "complete and utter rubbish."
Some claimed that 5G wireless may have made people more susceptible to the coronavirus by weakening their immune systems. That theory is "based on nothing," says Eric van Rongen, a biologist who has been studying the health effects of electromagnetic fields for decades and currently chairs the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, a nonprofit formed in the 1990s to offer scientific advice on the issue to policymakers.
"There are no indications from scientific studies that 5G, or any other G, affects the immune system," he says. "If that would be the case, we would have seen effects on the scale and severity of infectious diseases already decades ago. And we don’t."
Wireless technology in general is beneficial as societies go on lockdown to combat the virus, adds Leeka Kheifets, an epidemiology professor at the University of California at Los Angeles who has studied cell phone health effects. Wireless gadgets "make social distancing more possible, by allowing more people to work from home, and more bearable, by allowing people to stay connected with friends and family," she says.
Do cell phones cause cancer?
Almost nine years ago, the World Health Organization classified the emission of the radio frequencies used in cell phones as "possibly carcinogenic to humans." The edict from 2011 was based on early studies that some wireless phone users were getting a type of brain cancer known as glioma at a higher rate than normal. More than 300 substances share the same WHO categorization of "possibly carcinogenic," including aloe vera extract, traditional Asian pickled vegetables, and exposure to dry-cleaning fumes.
However, subsequent research has not proved the link or prompted the WHO to upgrade cell phones to a riskier category.
In a review of all studies done from 2008 to 2018 published by the Food and Drug Administration in February, the agency concluded that there was "no consistent or credible scientific evidence of health problems caused by the exposure to radio frequency energy emitted by cell phones." Similarly, the Federal Communications Commission says that the "available scientific evidence to date does not support adverse health effects in humans." And the National Cancer Institute, which has a lengthy web page about cell phone health research, notes: "The most consistent health risk associated with cell phone use is distracted driving and vehicle accidents."
Another way to consider the risk is to look at the rates of brain cancer and other illnesses in the general population that may be affected by cell phone use. Large studies of cancer trends have found no uptick that would correspond with the massive increase in mobile phone usage. The observed incidence of glioma, for example, "remains relatively stable," says Quinn Ostrom, a career cancer epidemiologist who works at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. "We would expect to see an increase in incidence of these tumors if there was an increase in risk for brain tumor with exposure to cellular phones," she says.
Aren’t there some studies that link cell phone radiation and cancer?
Among the studies included in the previously mentioned reviews by medical experts and agencies are some with troubling findings. But they all have limitations and, in some cases, serious flaws.
One of the most careful studies that found possible risks was by the National Toxicology Program, a unit of the National Institutes of Health, that concluded in 2018. The study subjected rats and mice to cell phone signals for up to nine hours daily for several years. Although the findings for mice and female rats raised no alarms, the study found elevated rates of brain and heart tumors in male rats. More troubling was that the types of tumors the rats developed were similar to those found in earlier Scandinavian studies of human cancers and cell phone use.
"The original question that we set out to study was whether it was biologically possible that this could happen, and we found it is feasible that animals could get these tumors," says John Bucher, a senior scientist at the NTP who worked on the study. "But our studies were done under extraordinary conditions."
The rats got large and steady doses for nine out of every 18 hours a day. "I would say it's not directly applicable to how humans use cell phones, but it raises questions that we have to pay attention to," he says. NTP is continuing to study the issue with even more carefully designed studies.
Although the NTP study is somewhat concerning, the overall benefits of using wireless technology still outweigh the risks, says UCLA epidemiologist Kheifets. Still, she agrees with Bucher that "much more research on changes in exposure and potential health effects, not just cancer, is needed."
Does 5G pose unique risks?
Some of the airwave bands used in 5G are different from the bands used in 4G and earlier mobile networks. The new 5G spectrum, known as the millimeter wave band, doesn't travel as far as the bands used for 4G, which has prompted the wireless industry to deploy tens of thousands of smaller cell sites scattered throughout major urban areas.
Studies of this type of radiation don't indicate any unique dangers, however. The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, which suggests safety limits for phones, recently issued new recommendations for 5G that were mostly similar to its cell phone guidance from 1998. Chair Eric van Rongen says the group reviewed years of research on all possible adverse health effects.
"An overwhelming amount of scientific research suggests that 5G signals will not cause harm, as long as the safety limits are observed," adds Faraz Hasan, a researcher at Massey University in New Zealand who has studied the health effects of 5G technology specifically.
How can I use a cell phone safely?
Given even the small degree of risk found in some studies, concerned cell phone users can follow a few precautions to minimize their exposure. The effect of cell phone signals falls off quickly with even a little distance, Bucher notes.
"The simple way of minimizing exposure is by not holding a phone near your body, to your head or in your pocket," he says, advising users to hold a phone slightly away from their ear when listening to a call, using headphones, and not carrying devices in pants pockets. "Keep some distance, even a few inches, between yourself and the phone," he says.