英国论坛
这类塔应该没有手机基站辐射强，有些耽心，房子还能够。
回帖
发射塔.PNG7十一×1495 98.1 KB
回帖
我查了一下，或许对大家当前有用：
police co妹妹unications tower
有专家说没问题。
回帖
Is it safe for me and my family, which includes a three-year-old, to live 46 meters from a police co妹妹unications tower?
A
The short answer to the question is yes, it is safe.
One way to judge safety is to compare the expected radiofrequency (RF) exposure levels in normally accessible locations around a site, such as a police co妹妹unications tower, with science-based safety limits. The 60-plus year history of the study of potential biological effects associated with exposure to RF energy has led to a large body of scientific literature of peer-reviewed reports and studies. Independent reviews of this literature by expert panels throughout the world conclude that the weight of scientific evidence, including the results of epidemiological studies of individuals exposed to radiowaves and laboratory studies of animals exposed both short-term and throughout their entire lifetimes, has not demonstrated that exposure to RF energy at levels that comply with contemporary science-based safety guidelines, such as those adopted by the Federal Co妹妹unications Co妹妹ission (FCC) or reco妹妹ended by the World Health Organization (WHO), can affect biological systems in a manner that might lead to, or augment, any health effect or interfere with the operation of medical devices such as hearing aids or implanted cardiac pacemakers.
Regarding sites typical of those in question, e.g., tower-mounted antennas used for personal wireless co妹妹unications and emergency radio services, the maximal levels of RF energy in areas normally accessible to the public have been found to be far below contemporary safety standards and guidelines. There are several reasons why this is so: (1) the systems operate at low power levels (compared with systems used for co妹妹ercial AM/FM radio and television broadcast) since they are designed to cover a limited area, (2) the RF energy is emitted from the antennas in a fairly narrow angular distribution in the vertical (so-called elevation) plane, i.e., comparatively little energy is directed downward in the vicinity of the antenna support structure, and (3) the height of the antennas above ground and the narrow elevation beam ensures that the energy is propagated above the roofs of nearby homes and offices. Moreover, because of the attenuation of building materials, the levels inside of nearby homes and offices will be lower than outside.
Measurements carried out over the years confirm that the levels of RF energy in normally accessible areas in the vicinity of installations such as tower-mounted antennas used for public-safety radio systems are typically less than 1% of the regulatory standards mandated by the FCC via the Teleco妹妹unications Act of 1996. Such regulatory standards are science-based and include large factors of safety to address various uncertainties.
A lot is known about the safety of electromagnetic energy at radiofrequencies. What is important is that thanks to the significant amount of research that has been reported in this field over the past six decades, national and international expert panels and health agencies have consistently concluded that exposure to RF energy at levels below FCC regulatory standard and WHO-endorsed safety guidelines is safe to humans, including children. It is important to point out that reliable scientific evidence indicates that biological effects associated with exposure to RF energy are “threshold effects.” This means that adverse effects are only associated with exposures above a specific intensity, well above current FCC regulatory standard and WHO-endorsed exposure guidelines. (This is a completely different phenomenon than that associated with exposure to ionizing radiation such as x rays, etc., where exposure duration is important because even low-level exposure produces effects that accumulate over time.) The threshold exposure levels at which potentially harmful effects of RF energy might occur have been independently established and confirmed many times over. These thresholds, with large built-in margins of safety, are the bases of contemporary safety guidelines and reco妹妹endations, such as those supported or developed independently by expert panels and co妹妹ittees worldwide.
In su妹妹ary, based on a comparison of the levels of exposure to RF energy found in the vicinity of installations such as you describe with contemporary safety limits based on more than 60 years of research, there is no reason to believe that living near the co妹妹unications tower would be unsafe for you and your family.
回帖
彻底没问题
电磁辐射罢了
不伤筋不动骨
和播送电视信号手机信号没有甚么区分
回帖
有教训？
回帖
这段话颇有意思：
It’s funny how only the one who profits from telecom industries will tell you that proximity to cell towers aren’t harmful. EVER SEEN A CELL TOWER in/near the houses of the so called ‘chief ‘ and ‘principal’ engineers, those govt. Officials that endorses cell towers? NO.
It’s the same thing like in 1900s. Cigarettes were not harmful because they made profits.
Next time someone says living near cell tower isn’t harmful, tell them to walk the talk and put a cell tower near their home and endorse them after that.
FUN FACT: The defense society of a close relative of mine in Jorhat has had a cell phone tower placed in the boundary of one of the willing resident’s house for an amount of 6k rupees per month. A HEALTHY FAMILY WITH NO CANCER BACKGROUND WHATSOEVER. Within 5 years, 2 of the family members died of cancer and now a third person is also suffering from terminal cancer. This is no joke and anyone wanting to verify can do so by just asking jorhat defense colony authorities.
回帖
https://qph.cf2.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-7c91514684d083df9143a69640346ef3-pjlq
回帖
电磁辐射罢了
对安康没有影响
然而对房价有影响
5G塔对一部份人来讲是散播covid的
这些人是彻底不会斟酌这个房子的
感觉碍眼的人也不会斟酌的
你要是打算住几年就卖的话
那就好好衡量一下利害吧
回帖
影响运势
回帖
哈哈！
嗯，我今天去看看，看来不会买了。
回帖
我可不是劝退的哈
假如价钱适合的话 固然能够斟酌
你参考一下左近的价钱 好比几个街区之外的成交价
看看是否差异很大
你买的价钱可能稍低 到时分你卖的时分也会稍低 其实也对消了
我的回答只是一个对安康没有甚么影响
只是个无线电发射塔 传到你身上的辐射量可能尚无你家的wifi多
所以不需求马上下论断 去看看再说
回帖
多谢，有情理
回帖
这类塔和VODAPHONE 等的手机信号塔对比辐射强度同样吗？我家左近也有一个，我查了下说辐射不影响。
回帖
1900年时都说雪茄不影响安康
影响有，多少，那要再过几十年才会出来假相，。。。
回帖
频段纷歧样
性质差未几
彻底没影响
回帖
它的功率要比家里的wifi大多, 并且是24小时发射和承受，
回帖
How much harmful is mobile tower?
The World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) says radiation from cellphone handsets and towers is “possibly carcinogenic to humans” and may cause glioma, a type of brain cancer. Towers are more dangerous than handsets because they emit greater-intensity radiation 24X7
回帖
我来讲说我本人的教训：
多年之前我蒙着被子打电话大略有1个半小时，当时就觉得很不舒服，记忆力显著降落，真的，大略过了十年，我觉得本人的记忆力恢复了。人体的恢复才能有时很慢。
这是我的实在体验。
回帖
之前我有个共事，只有她睡在密集的电线和路线边上，她头就会疼，但普通人就没有这症状。所以她睡觉很挑中央，不喜爱放电器，楼主不会和她同样吧？