Tuesday, 4 of April of 2006
Why the towers of movable telephony are much less dangerous that the terminals
This morning reading the news in the Palm I have been in Genciencia with the results of the nth study on the relation of the intensive use of the movable telephone and the risk of suffering a cancer. The data that the study presents/displays do not seem to be very conclusive, but I have liked much the explanation that Esteban Viso gives envelope why the turrets of movable telephony (stations base) are very many less dangerous for the population that the own terminals (the telephones), and for that reason I have decided to share it here:
A station base of movable telephony
The turrets of communications use very directive antennas, that is to say, antennas that radiate in very specific directions, in no case in the direction of the ground, directly. These directive antennas follow a philosophy opposed, for example, the antennas that make the diffusion of radio or television possible, that tries that the signal is transmitted in the greater possible rank of directions. The interest of the antennas of radio link, and the one of the antennas of movable telephony, is “to connect itself” with another antenna, so that there is cover in the greater possible amount of land.
Some will think how it is that then the signal arrives at the moving body? Then, either by reflection in the buildings, or a portion arrives from the signal that has a small fraction of the power that travels in horizontal (that is to say, that the greater amount of power is sent towards the following repeating antenna). Also it arrives from direct form, but for this it is necessary to be to a so great distance of the antenna that the direct power that arrives to us is ridiculous (this is pure geometry). The electronics of the moving bodies does possible to recover of the received signals of very small power the information necessary to recover the voice of our interlocutor. The real power of the antenna that arrives to us is the smallest fraction, so the problem is in the terminals that stick to our skull. Of very small that is the used power, it is in favor so close that their effects will be possibly majors that those of the turrets. Of there to that they are cancer cause, if they say it to the studies will be necessary to verify it. Pity that makes lack hope to that the long term finishes.
Extremely directive radiation pattern
For that they want to know more about the danger or of the stations it does not base, in this page they will find a very good list of explained frequent questions. There am a sample here:
Exist tests of risks for the health associated with living or working near antennas of stations base of movable telephony?
No. The stations base operate to very low power, in comparison with other radiation sources; therefore, the electromagnetic fields that they emit are very weak. The stations base emit to a maximum of 300 watts. That power is minor who the one of a television and half that the one of a washing machine. In any case, the power output of the typical radio equipment is of about 20 watts. All the scientific committees of reference in this matter agree in excluding any risk for the health so low power. On the areas near stations it bases, the field levels are very below the limit values established by the ICNIRP. In agreement with the present scientific researches, the established limits guarantee the protection against electromagnetic fields.
He is safe to in the last live floor on a building that has a station antenna base of movable telephony?
Yes. The radioelectric emissions of the antennas of movable telephony go neither upwards, nor downwards, nor backwards, only forwards and losing their intensity in very few meters.
In addition the roof or tile roof is a natural barrier and absorbs great part of the radio frequency energy. Normally, the roof reduces the signal in a factor from 5 to 10 (or more in the case of armed cement or metallic ceilings).
The real measurements that become in apartments and corridors located in the last floor confirm that the densidad of power is very below the limits marked by all the norms of security on radio frequencies.
I recommend the complete reading of this page, so that when in generalist means they speak on the subject, they do not make of the public opinion his toy due to ignorance on the subject.
By: generally
RSS commentaries | Trackback | 
To print this post
Related articles
Suscríbete to be to the current of the new features in this blog
You have finished somehow well, with the reference to that page Web that next will watch, but at the outset have contrado a great lie between the directive radiation patterns of the emissions of the antennas and things thus. A thing is the antenna of cover emission gsm, we go the one that it emits to us, and very different other is the radio link between stations. These last ones are those of the directive radiation beam not them cover antennas.
Pain is one that people want to know of everything and idea does not have nor puta don't mention it.
Firstly, in post it is possible to be read clearly that the point-to-point directional connection is the one that uses a very directive diagram, whereas at the terminals the signal by simple reflections in the buildings arrives to them, of indirect way. So not where you find the great lie.
On the other hand, even if it is only by the free time that I dedicate to write things that attempt are interesting, would deserve a little more gentleness when criticizing posts.
Finally, this one that writes is an Engineer of Telecommunication just titled what, although does not guarantee for that is infallible, it contributes something of credibility when I write on subjects of my field.
Without embaro, if I am rquivocado I am enchanted to read your reasoning, for anything it has seemed me bad the detailing, besides which she is correct or no, only the way to do it.
A greeting.
Like Engineer of Telecommunication, and with a slight endorsement of to have worked in an operator of movable telephony, I give faith of which the information of Marks is perfectly correct. I summarize quickly in case some ambiguous interpretation exists: on the turrets two types of antennas exist normally: the rectangular ones, that is dipole panels cruzados, are the ones in charge of the connection telephone-equipment BTS, and the parabolas, that generally connect BTSs until arriving at the BSC (the following level of the hierarchy).
First (arrays of dipoles) they are relatively directive (cover sectors with 120º, that not necessarily they must add 360º but it can exist overlaps in his capture areas; this way the signal reception is optimized as much, in the uplink (it takes care of the users wherever they are) as in the descendent one (the received signal is reinforced using different contributions that arrives at the telephone, coming from different trajectories, that are combined in which receiver is denominated rake, based on principles of digital modulation of the signal).
Second (parabolas) they only transport the signal, connecting different stations bases until arriving at the node from hierarchy superior (BSC: It bases Stations Controller). These connections are always point-to-point, and quite directive antennas are required: based on the distance to that are separated two stations are used parabolas of 30, 60 and 120 cm. to guarantee an aiming all the perfect one that is required (commitment necessity-price). The connections become superfluous, reason why he is very frequent to see 3, 4, 5 or more parabolas laying for different directions (the extreme case - and logical it is the location where is the BSC).
Like curiosity, in the case of the photo that appears in the article, most probable it is than the space diversity is an old installation of GSM, where 3 antennas by sector were placed, being useful, but with the disadvantage of which the coverage areas are not so flexible (aside from the price and the space necessary to place this contraption in roofs) and it scored at noninteresting zones.
Enhorabuena by blog Marks and continues in this line; certainly one only is a misunderstanding.
A hug.
Thank you very much by your Iván explanation
Opinions that I read are referring to antennas located in the roofs of the buildings, I I ask and agradecerè responds to me, on the antennas installed bases of telefonìa mòvil in the back patios of the houses, adjacent, twin to other houses where hundreds of families reside. Osseous perforating the Earth about two or three meters to be installed. Què effects can produce that for health of old children mainly and, the human beings who remain all the almost dìa within the houses? On the other hand, you permitirian something thus, to the flank of his twin houses? THANKS…
Ángela, not yet has demonstrated that these towers have some injurious effect on the people, and personally fodder, as express in post, that is much more dangerous the movable telephones that we took above, that the telephony turret.
IT PLEASES SUBJECT TO ME PORQ WORKS INSTALLING RADIO BASES AND NOT YET I INCLUDE/UNDERSTAND WELL AS ALL THE EQUIPMENT WORKS
BUT GOOD Q Q ARE PEOPLE AS YOU Q TOOK THE TIME TO CLARIFY DOUBTS
These tests I presented/displayed expert them before the Office of the public prosecutor of Valencia: -Why Go'mez Perretta prohibited itself to Doctor D.Claudio, to present/display laboratory information before the Court Superior of Justice, at the same time to also prohibit him that she continued with his investigations. -Why the same Companies that make antennas of movable telephony, also manufacture and recommend the electromagnetic inhibitor use, to avoid the injurious effects of the radiations. -Why the tobacco growers are boycotted of brutal form, but nevertheless a total permisivilidad with the antennas of movable telephony. -Why the Insuring Companies establish in their clauses and small letter, not to insure the risks that are come off the activity of the antennas of movable telephony. -Why the City councils do not wish to extend city-planning licenses (alleging technical deficiencies), not to do against the subsidiary responsibility that could be derived from the antennas of movable telephony. -Why safe distances of 100 meters for schools and hospitals settle down, but nevertheless to other they expose to us remote of security “0 ″. Why the simple approval of the World-wide Organization of the Health is pronounced, to the installation of antennas of movable telephony, but nevertheless the recommendations in the matter of safe distances, parameters of emission, and responsibilities are omitted that must assume the Administrations, at the same time to serve of attention to the citizenship. -Why only it turns out viable to initiate a legal cause, by means of the constitution of a share capital in the designation of a Lawyer and Solicitor, at the time of formulating complaint deprived in defense of the primary legal good bound to the public health. Why many offended are seen in the necessity to contract the services of an engineer in telecommunications (licensed), to be able to have a valid perital report, and that it can be contrasted with which they extend the technicians of the City councils (at the time of protesting before the justice bodies). -Why the sanitary authorities assert upheavals of hypochondriac, merely psychosomatic character, and autosugestivo… when many eminences of medical science also assert: reduction of bony calcium, alteration of the nervous cell, and reduction in the segregation of hormone Melatonin (immunological system). -Why Delegado de Telefónica Móviles S.A. certificó before one interviews journalistic in video, the injurious effect of the antennas of movable telephony (youtube).