Tuesday, April 4th, 2006
Why mobile phone towers are much less dangerous than the terminals
This morning reading the news on the Palm I've found in Genciencia with the results of yet another study on the relationship of the intensive use of mobile phones and the risk of cancer. The data presented in the study did not appear very conclusive, but I really liked the explanation given Esteban Viso on why mobile phone towers (base stations) are much less dangerous for the people that own terminals (cell) , so I decided to share it here:
A mobile phone base station
The turrets of communications antennas using a very direct, ie antennas that radiate in very specific directions, in any case toward the floor directly. These antennas directives follow a philosophy opposed to, for example, antennas that enable the dissemination of radio or television, trying to transmit the signal in the largest possible range of addresses. The interest of radio communication antennas, and antennas for mobile telephony, is to "connect" with other antenna, so that within range of the maximum amount of land.
How can anyone think that then comes the cell phone signal? Well, or by reflection in the buildings, or reaches a portion of the signal that has a small fraction of the power that travels horizontally (ie as much power is sent to the next relay antenna). It also comes directly, but this requires to be at a great distance from the antenna to direct the power that comes to us is ridiculous (this is pure geometry). Mobile electronics makes it possible to recover from very low-power signals received information necessary to recover the voice of our party. The real power of the antenna that we get is a tiny fraction, so the problem is the terminals that are attached to our skulls. For very small the power used is so close that their effects are likely to be higher than those in the turrets. From there to be a cause of cancer, if studies say it will have to check. Too bad it takes wait to finish the long term.
Extremely radiation pattern steering
For those who want to know more about the dangerousness or base stations, on this page you will find a very good list of frequently asked questions explained. Here's a sample:
Is there evidence of health risks associated with living or working near antennas of mobile phone base stations?
No. The base stations operate at very low power compared to other sources of radiation, therefore, that emit electromagnetic fields are very weak. The base stations emit a maximum of 300 watts. That power is lower than that of a TV and half that of a washing machine. However, the output power of radio equipment is typically about 20 watts. All relevant scientific committees in this area agree to exclude any health risk at such low power. In areas close to base stations, the field levels are well below the limits set by ICNIRP. According to current scientific research, the limits ensure protection against electromagnetic fields.
Is it safe to live on the top floor of a building that has an antenna of mobile phone base station?
Yes radio emissions from mobile phone masts are not directed or upward or downward, or backward, only forward and losing its intensity in a few meters.
Besides the roof or roof is a natural barrier and absorbs much of radiofrequency energy. Normally, the roof reduces the signal by a factor of 5 to 10 (or more in the case of reinforced concrete or metal roofs).
Actual measurements made in hallways and apartments located on the top floor confirm that the power density is well below the limits set by all safety rules on radio frequencies.
I recommend reading this entire page so that when the general media talk about it, do not make public opinion through ignorance toy on the subject.
By: Mark Gonzalez Troyes in General
| Comments RSS | Trackback | 
Print this post
| Share: |           |
You somehow ended well, with reference to that web page and then look at, but at first you made a great lie between the radiation patterns of the managers of satellite broadcasts and the like. One thing is the broadcast antenna gsm coverage, let the issues we, and quite another to the radio link between stations. The latter are the direct radiation beam antennas not covered.
It's a shame that people want to know everything and I have no fucking clue.
First, in the post can be read clearly that the directional point to point link is a diagram that uses highly directive, while the terminal signal reaches them by simple reflections in buildings, indirectly. So do not where to find the big lie.
On the other hand, if only because I spend my free time writing things that are interesting attempt, deserves a little more finesse to criticize the posts.
Finally, this writer is a newly qualified Telecommunications Engineering which, although no guarantee that it is infallible, gives some credibility when I write about topics in my field.
Not pregnant, if I am rquivocado I will be happy to read your reasoning, for I found nothing wrong remark, whatever it is correct or not, the only way to do it.
A greeting.
As Telecommunication Engineering, and a slight backing of working in a mobile operator, I certify that the information of Mark is perfectly correct. Resumo quickly if there is any ambiguous interpretation: on the turrets there are normally two types of antennas: the rectangular panels that are folded dipoles, are in charge of phone-computer link BTS, and parables, which generally bind BTSs to reach the BSC (the next level of the hierarchy).
The first (dipole arrays) are relatively directives (covering sectors of 120 º, which need not add the 360 but there may be overlap in their areas trapping thus optimizing signal reception, both in the uplink (attends to users wherever they are) and the downstream (received signal is enhanced using various contributions that come to the phone, from different paths, which are combined into what is called rake receiver, based on principles of digital modulation signal).
The second (parables) only carry the signal, different base stations linking up to the upper hierarchy node (BSC: Base Stations Controller). These links are always point to point, and it takes quite directives antennas: depending on the distance that separated two stations are used parables, 30, 60 and 120 cm. to ensure a perfect pointing everything that is required (commitment need money). The links are made redundant, so it is very common to see 3, 4, 5 or more parabolas pointing in different directions (an extreme case and is the logical location where the BSC).
As a curiosity, in the case of the photo that appears in the article, it is likely that this is an old installation of GSM, which were placed 3 antennas per sector, taking advantage of spatial diversity, but with the disadvantage that the areas coverage are not as flexible (apart from price and space needed to put this contraption on rooftops) and pointed to areas not interesting.
Congratulations on the blog Mark and continues in this vein; sure it's just a misunderstanding.
A hug.
Thank you very much for your explanation Ivan
Reviews I read is related to antennas located on rooftops of buildings, I ask and thank you answer me on the mobile base antennas installed in the backyards of the houses adjacent paired to other houses where hundreds of families reside. Bone drilling land two or three meters to be installed. Effects can be seen that for the health of children and the elderly especially, human beings remain almost the whole day inside homes? In addition, you allow something like this, next to their homes paired? THANKS ...
Angela has not yet been shown that these towers have a harmful effect on people, and personally I think, as expressed in the post, are much more dangerous than mobile phones we carry over, that the telephone turret.
I like the PORQ WORK UNIT INSTALLING RADIO BASE AND STILL DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW IT WORKS WELL ALL EQUIPMENT
Q BUT THERE ARE GOOD PEOPLE LIKE YOU Q Q took the time to clarify questions
These expert evidence presented to the Prosecutor's Valencia: - Why was forbidden to Dr. Claudio Gomez Perretta, laboratory reporting to the High Court of Justice, while also forbidding the continuation of their investigations?. - Why are the same companies that manufacture antennas for mobile telephony, also manufacture and advise the use of electromagnetic inhibitors to prevent harmful effects from radiation?. - Why did the tobacco companies are boycotted in a brutal, yet full permisivilidad with mobile phone masts?. - Why are insurance undertakings established in its clauses and fine print, not cover the risks arising from the activity of mobile phone masts?. - Why did the Councils not willing to extend planning permission (ground technical deficiencies), for not addressing the vicarious liability that might arise from mobile phone masts?. - Why is establishing a safe distance of 100 meters for schools and hospitals, yet others expose us safe distance "0"?. Why is manifest the mere adoption of the World Health Organization, the installation of mobile phone masts, yet are ignored recommendations regarding safety distances, emission parameters, and responsibilities that must take Administrations while providing care services to citizens?. - Why only feasible to initiate a legal case through the creation of social capital in the appointment of a Solicitor and Advocate, in formulating the private lawsuit in defense of legal interests linked to primary health?. Why many are injured on the need to engage the services of a telecommunications engineer (graduate) in order to have a valid perital report, and can be contrasted with the technician to extend the municipalities (at the time of complaints with the justice)?. - Why health authorities allege purely hypochondriac disorders, psychosomatic, and autosuggestive ... when many eminent medical science also assert: reduction of bone calcium, alteration of the nerve cell, and reduction in the segregation of the hormone Melatonin ( immune system)?. - Why is the CEO of Telefónica Móviles SA, certified to a newspaper interview on video, the harmful effect of mobile phone masts (youtube)?.
I have great doubt, my mother died of leukemia last year and year and a half ago they put a cell tower base to the front of my house, just 100 meters away, my fear is getting sick of leukemia, like my son of 10 years as leukemia can be biased and some descencadenarlo factor, thanks in advance for your opinion
I too am a telecommunications engineer and the text you have chosen the full article, is easily misinterpreted, the clarification of Ivan quite clear what, but the extraction of text you've done, you have not been very successful.
The text refers constantly to the antennas used for radio links between BTS and BSC and then goes directly to explain how the signal arrives at a terminal in mind when we have only the radiation pattern of an antenna used in a radio.
I believe the intent of frames and not think that is not manipulating information. I certainly I agree that the terminal can become more hazardous by the distance that we use, but in the case of the antennas we do not choose when to use or how and common channel information of these bursts emitted each medium second that we get like it or not.
Next to the school of my children is a mobile phone Torrre about 70 feet high. I have read enough about the issue and see that there are widely differing opinions, but in general it appears that electromagnetic radiation itself is harmful to health. just not "scientifically proven" largely because it is very difficult to reproduce the conditions for laboratory testing. But it is also true that it is a subject on which more research every day and there is still much to discover.
It's like a murderer which still can not prove who is guilty for lack of evidence, but this does not mean he's innocent necesariamnente.
Should I change to school children? They spend 8 hours a day there 5 days a week ... need advice!
CYC TELECOMUNICACUONES WANT IS MY BUSINESS who know me and we could work
To all these people concerned about the antennas and their emissions as enn technical measurements of the German company to recommend solutions GHz-specific measurements, and after studying the measurements recommend a base fabric protection or special curtains and / or paintings applied to reduce some 99% proven, I am available for any consultation, we continue or we rely on measurements of biocontrucción of Germany and the Salzburg congress called with specific recommendations of physicians on the subject