In the last time, we are witnessing the biggest debate ever, about the future of cell phone digitalisation and modernisation of funk technology. The rise of the progressed equipment and the possibility for the whole world to be highly networked and covered with powerful frequency is in opposite with the environmental intentions and eco friendly policy. Why? Simply because each stage of the human development is so created to cause damage to the nature and wildlife. It seems that some other perspectives are not available or not enough profitable.

What do we need to know about 5G network? Due to the Covid-19 pandemics, the 5G network is getting more and more interesting for global public, in spite of fact that microbes and radial  frequencies don’t have so much in common, if anything.

5G network is a special reached level of cell frequency and data transferring that is able to offer 1000x  times the speed of 4G. This means, operative use of Internet at the highest level from any user and for any purpose. The antennas of 5G system should be directional in order to avoid noise and distortion while 4G antennas are mostly projecting the signals in 360°. The new 5G should give the real time delivery of the interchange and higher latency too. The system is shaped to be functional with more bandwidths, used in many levels and by more devices at the same time, without showing the disadvantages. In the words of technology, this is a perfect project of digitalisation that will help global communication and the cyber evolution of the human kind. What is about its negative outcomes ? In many media, there were elaborated different theories and potential futuristic scenarios that open the book of environmental chaos, based on 5G formula.

There is no such a technology that will be absolutely friendly and benign for the nature and animals. Whoever claims other is not following the pattern of honesty in informing the people. The main question is only how much it will be risky for the world around us and the ecosystem and what are the potential solutions for the problems it will bring? The conspiracy theories and hoax are also not the ideal tool in fighting something or at least mobilising the mass against it. Somehow, I always like to think that people deserve to see both sides, pros and coins and to conclude themselves what they will support more or less.

Regarding 5G network, there are certainly some important issues that have to be analysed and covered but claiming that 5G is 100% right or 100% wrong is not really wise because nobody knows or nobody still has no evidence to make a proof for its effects. It is all about assumption and ideas and I believe that scientists have their objective reasons for doubting the positive consequences on environment, humans and animals but only time will show it. For now, we can only discuss, based on the available sources of information.

The first and serous problem about 5G is energy consumptions. According to some data, U.S. telecoms use around 31 million megawatt-hours of electricity annually that is roughly equal to the electricity used by 2.6 million U.S. homes.  The expectation is that 5G will have more demand and the alternative and renewable resources of energy should be taken into consideration.  The next claims is radioactivity  of 5G network. For now on, there is no any concrete proof of it since the signal towers do not radiate the enough amount of radiation, able to cause the cancer and other kind of disease in humans.

Then, there is a theory that 5G caused the mass bird die-off in some of the 5G centres. It is definitely that 5G networks affect the bird migratory and its communication but also not the total blackout and death of them.  The science will have a lot of challenges in the future, to study this phenomena and how birds react on higher frequencies.  Personally, I do not believe that will be totally harmless because all those frequencies will interrupt the creatures that communicate on such levels. What about insects? Many believe, at this moment, that 5G networking will negatively impact the insects and their rhythm and language. If we think of bees, we know that it will be more than scary when their life and their precious work for nature is damaged and disabled. Those little things are more important than any of our 5G aspirations:“A 2018 study published in Nature, detailed the effects of various radio frequencies on simulated insect models, including that of the Western honeybee (Apis mellifera). The study found that, at higher frequencies, particularly those in the mmWave spectrum, the insect models absorbed more energy. A shift of 10% of the incident power density to frequencies above 6 GHz would lead to an increase in absorbed power between 3–370%. This could lead to changes in insect behaviour, physiology, and morphology over time due to an increase in body temperatures, from dielectric heating.”

In some media, there is shown the study research about influence of the 5G on the development of the cancer. The testing has been, as always, made on innocent animals and according to it, some rats have developed the cancer due to the constant impact of higher frequency.  It is something negative about the 5G network, indeed but the time and science will have to prove that with the time, or o deny all of our fears. I believe that each radio frequency has something malign in itself and it is only the matter of immune system, the organic adaption and the strength of exposure that will define the health risks or their absence.  It is the same when we think about environmental damage. At this moment, we don’t know anything and only we can do it guessing and hoping that it wont be even worse. There is no absolutely innocent and positive 5G networking but the question is what we could do to protect the vulnerable species and their existence within our high-tech boom ?

Instead of complaining about things we really don’t know anything about, we need to invest time and knowledge into researching the all outcomes and to learn how to make active impact and pressure on our governments to enable the environmental friendly technology, at least there where it is possible to be built. We need to learn how to take global responsibility of this beautiful Planet because we are here only guests and not the  owners.  Forget about conspiracy theories, hoax, profit or interest, be focused only on the future of the only home you have. The planet B doesn’t exist.






  1. Sarah’s informative and relative article induced me to ponder the so-called Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918-19: there were no specific scientific studies conducted on possible connections between radio waves of the the spread of the pathogen, then. Advances in technologies do affect both the human world and the natural spheres (e.g. how industrialisation affects the atmospheres of the planet), and the invisible energies on the planet (e.g. electromagnetic field) are intrinsic to these influences.

    In general, scientists and engineers prefer more time to research and test technologies, but Commerce dictate fast track implementation, and this affects how humans comprehend how the technologies might be jeopardising life on Earth (e.g. atomic and hydrogen bomb tests of the 1950s by the USA, Soviet Union, Britain, France and China continue to affect life on Earth, in certain areas [Pacific Islands]).

    All humans must decide to agree to approach this issue with mutual respect and logic…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

About Sarahowlgirl1982

I am a master of Political Sciences, with special focus on Security Studies, Islamic Counter Terrorism and Weapons of Mass Destruction. I enjoy discovering and commenting things which are " in the air" but still not spoken.I also do like science writing and planing to move myself into the pure science journalism !