It’s the biggest threat to your health right now…
It’s going to make you sick (it could even kill you, apparently).
According to some, it’s more dangerous to your wellbeing than smoking!
What the heck am I talking about?
Well, I’ve been here for less than two weeks. And I am already worried about my position at Agora Financial Australia.
I am getting swamped with complaints. I dare to say something positive about this topic!
That’s what sparked this anger in the first place.
One of our readers remarked it was hilarious garbage. Another said this fearful development was going to be the culling of humanity in the name of greed. And yet another suggested this is a game-changer that we have no chance of winning.
I agree with that last one, to a point. Right now, the world is transitioning.
And as with any change, it can cause great concern for many. Perhaps it concerns you.
That’s why today’s Profit Watch is going to dispel this great myth once and for all… I’ll address this very important topic head-on, and explain how it’s blinding investors from a huge opportunity.
What am I talking about and will it give you cancer?
There’s a rumour swirling that 5G technology causes cancer.
However, there is still no conclusive evidence to suggest this.
So why are people so worried?
Five Ways to Turn a Falling Market to Your Advantage
Get your free report now and learn five ways to take advantage of a falling market. Plus, get a free subscription to Australia’s newest, most forward-looking daily investment email, Profit Watch. Enter your email address below and click ‘Send Me My FREE Report’.
Well, here’s what you need to know.
Unbeknown to most, mobile phones emit non-ionising radio wave radiation.
This form of radiation is normal, and in fact it is around us daily.
But what is non-ionising radiation?
Well, radio-frequency radiation is a form of electromagnetic radiation (EMR). And EMR is then split into two different categories: Ionising and non-ionising.
Ionising radiation is dangerous, and consists of X-rays and cosmic rays, while non-ionising radiation consists of low-frequency technology such as radio frequency or power frequency.
When it comes to EMR, wavelength and frequency is often used to determine if it is ionising or non-ionising.
And wavelength and frequency refer to how many cycles or waves are passed per second.
–Do I still have your attention?
So, if you want to remember what ionising and non-ionising radiation refers to, remember this:
Ionising radiation is high frequency, carries a lot of energy and is dangerous. Non-ionising radiation is low frequency and has low energy. It also does not cause cancer on its own.
I don’t expect you to believe me. That’s why I’m going straight to the source.
The experts tend to agree: The research is not conclusive
Here is what www.cancer.gov says (emphasis is mine):
‘Exposure to ionizing radiation, such as from x-rays, is known to increase the risk of cancer. However, although many studies have examined the potential health effects of non-ionizing radiation from radar, microwave ovens, cell phones, and other sources, there is currently no consistent evidence that non-ionizing radiation increases cancer risk in humans.’
Non-ionising radiation is the form of radiation emitted from mobile phones. And currently, there is no consistent evidence suggesting it increases cancer risk in humans.
It’s not just that one source, either.
Here is where 5G comes in.
University of Swinburne Professor Andrew Wood researched the effects of 5G and found no conclusive evidence that radio frequencies harm you.
After all, exposure to various forms of radio frequency, such as radio and TV, has occurred for decades.
The ACEBR has concluded…
Professor Wood is part of the team at the Australian Centre for Electromagnetic Bioeffects Research (ACEBR).
He states, ‘Wireless technologies bring enormous benefits, and being over-cautious would potentially deny these benefits to needy communities.’
While Professor Wood is optimistic about the technology, he did tackle the much-asked question: Is it a health risk? Here is his response (emphasis is mine):
‘As the frequency goes up, the depth of penetration into biological tissues goes down, so the skin and eyes, rather than the brain, become the main organs of health concern.
‘The major hurdle is that the power levels involved in mobile and wireless telecommunications are incredibly low, which, at most, produce temperature rises in tissue of a few tenths of a degree. Picking up unambiguous biological changes is therefore very difficult.’
The ACEBR is a key contributor to the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) review (can’t they shorten these names?). That report is due this year.
I’m inclined to agree with Professor Wood. The upside of 5G will dwarf the modest health risks.
(If you are interested in reading a recent article by Professor Wood, you can do so here. Skip ahead to page 28 for the most interesting part.)
The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has come to a similar conclusion.
Here’s their take (my emphasis)…
‘We have not found sufficient evidence that there are adverse health effects in humans caused by exposures at or under the current radiofrequency energy exposure limits.
‘Even with frequent daily use by the vast majority of adults, we have not seen an increase in events like brain tumors. Based on this current information, we believe the current safety limits for cell phones are acceptable for protecting the public health.’
It can be hard to change your opinion on something. Especially when it involves your very own livelihood.
But the evidence from three different sources all reaches the same conclusion: There is no compelling evidence to suggest that non-ionising radiation is a direct cause of cancer.
Though, even I wasn’t satisfied with that.
A colleague of mine, Jeff Brown, is a recognised expert on technology. I asked for his opinion on this matter. He pointed to a study in Denmark published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.
The study investigated the risk of tumours in the central nervous system among more than 358,000 Danish mobile phone subscribers.
This was the outcome (my emphasis):
The analysis ‘found no association between cell phone use and the incidence of glioma, meningioma, or acoustic neuroma, even among people who had been cell phone subscribers for 13 or more years.’
So, there you have it.
It’s time we profit from it
I have provided you with research from a range of sources, and they all suggest the exact same thing.
There is no conclusive evidence to suggest that non-ionising radiation (in this case, 5G technology) causes cancer.
As investors, this means we can look past all the negativity surrounding this subject and aim to profit from it.
And that’s exactly what we intend to do!
In fact, I’m actively searching for companies on the ASX that may benefit from 5G technology.
Until next time,