More on 5G

Ms. Crews (“Is 5G bad for us?,” March 9) did not fully describe my opinions from the Gonzaga 5G Forum; this is a summary.

5G small cells will cause public exposure to radio frequency (RF) electromagnetic fields to decrease, not increase. Further, the possibility of adverse health effects due to the higher frequencies of 5G will be reduced, not increased due to absorption of RF energy in human skin.

For 5G, the largest exposure would come from one’s own and nearby mobile phones, not base stations. The best strategy to reduce 5G RF exposure is not to purchase a 5G phone (similar strategy for 3G and 4G). That said, I plan to keep my mobile phone and believe that I and those near me who need emergency services are safer.

The FCC bases its RF exposure limits on the standard produced by the IEEE Committee on Man and Biology. Their standard is equivalent to that of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (formally related to the World Health Organization). These committees have the proper composition of experts and have properly and publicly evaluated the entire body of relevant research and established reasonable exposure standards. If the FCC standard is followed, I believe that the public is safe.

Finally, I note that Prof. Pall’s hypothesis has not been tested in conditions equivalent to 5G electromagnetic fields. I couldn’t oppose 5G based on his hypothesis before it is evaluated in the appropriate conditions. Gonzaga’s Smart Antenna Laboratory is equipped to support such research.

Robert G. Olsen

Pullman