A global raging controversy has been going on for some years now with respect to the deployment of Fifth Generation (5G) Mobile Technology Network in some countries of the world. Recently, this controversy has heightened for two main reasons. The first is the outbreak of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) in Wuhan, China which was brought to the attention of the World Health Organization (WHO) on 31st December in 2019. And the second is the subsequent speculation of a link between the virus and the use of 5G mobile technology in a tweet in January 2020.
A shocking report by Adam Satariano and Davey Alba in The New York Times (Technology section) of April 10, 2020 (updated April, 11, 2020), revealed that as a result of conspiracy theory linking COVID-19 and 5G wireless technology, ‘more than 30 acts of arson and vandalism have taken place against wireless towers and other telecom gear this month’ across Britain. It also revealed that ‘in roughly 80 other incidents in the country, telecom technicians have been harassed on their job’. The report revealed further that ‘on You Tube, the most popular 5G Coronavirus conspiracy videos posted in March were viewed over 5.8 million times’. (see https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/10/technology/coronavirus-5g-uk.html.
For us in this article, this report demonstrates that the alleged link between COVID-19 and 5G is a serious matter of international public concern that nevertheless calls for a public policy response in different national jurisdictions. This article makes no claim that there is an established or confirmed relationship between 5G and COVID-19 pandemic. But it rather contends that the controversy surrounding the emergence of 5G and the outbreak of the virus in Wuhan reported to have 5,000+ base stations at the time, should give any government enough reason to be circumspect in making a decision to issue a license telecommunication operators for the deployment of 5G technology in her jurisdiction.
This two-part article is purely a public policy advocacy against any move towards the licensing and eventual deployment of Fifth Generation (5G) Mobile Network in Nigeria NOW or in the NEAR FUTURE until the serious controversy surrounding its potential risk to healthy human life, is satisfactorily resolved. The Federal Government of Nigeria is presently confronted with the choice of whether to issue or not to issue license to enable any operator to deploy the 5G wireless technology. But judging from the pronouncements of the Honourable Minister of Technology and Digital Economy Dr. Isa Pantami, one is not in doubt that the federal government is pretty clear about the direction it wants to go. For example, in October, 2019, the Minister unambiguously stated that Nigeria is ready to deploy 5G across the country to ease network flow (see Vanguard, October 8, 2019). This statement (also according to the Vanguard) was made at the 39th Gulf Information Technology Exhibition (GITEX) in Dubai, United Arab Emirates. My policy advocacy therefore is premised on the belief that it would be unwise for anyone to harm his soul in an attempt to protect his body (mere flesh), in which case, nothing would exist at all. Nigeria’s huge market is what the foreign investors are desperately targeting at. But the health of Nigerians should be what is uppermost in the minds of policy makers not minding that we need foreign investors.
Both the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) and the supervising Ministry of Technology and Digital Economy, have dismissed the alleged link between Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and 5G technology. According to the Honourable Minister, Dr. Isa Pantami, ‘no research links 5G to COVID-19’ (see Vanguard, April 6, 2020). The question is: which research results are we actually talking about, by whom and when? Apparently, the Minister is right as there is no existing research result(s) linking 5G and COVID-19. What we have so far is still a speculation and that is why the assumed link exists in the realm of conspiracy theory.
However, the big question centers on the potential health risks which a ‘large body of research’ involving ‘more than over 240 scientists who have published peer-reviewed research on the biologic and health effects of nonionizing electromagnetic fields (EMF)’ have seriously raised (see for instance http://www.blogs.scientificamerican.com). As Joel Moskowitz (renowned expert on Electromagnetic Radiation Safety in the University of California, Berkeley) rightly observed (in his piece We have no reason to believe 5G is Safe, published in Scientific American), there are considerable evidence about the harmful effects of 2G and 3G (Ibid). We may now add that higher generations of technologies will have greater harmful effects than 2G and 3G are negatively impacting on healthy human life.
Again, as earlier as September 13, 2017, an appeal titled: Scientists warn of the potential serious health effects of 5G revealed that ‘more than 180 scientists and doctors from 35 countries recommend a moratorium on the roll-out of the fifth generation, 5G, for telecommunication, until potential hazards for human health and the environment have been fully investigated by scientists independent from industry’. It said further that ‘5G will substantially increase exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (FR-EMF) on top of the 2G, 3G, 4G, Wi-Fi, etc, for telecommunications already in place. RF-EMF has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment’ (available at: http://www.ehtrust.org/wp-content/scientistnt-5G-appeal-2017.pdf) (Note: emphasis added). According to this source again, new studies – e.g. by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) and several epidemiological investigations – including the latest studies on mobile phone use and brain cancer risks, confirm that RF-EMF radiation is carcinogenic to humans (emphasis also added).
Given this already proven harmful effects of existing mobile technologies, it is very naively catastrophic to believe that a faster 5G technology will not pose greater health risk to the people. So when we are told that there is no research linking 5G to COVID-19, you begin to wonder whether our policy makers are thoroughly methodical in amassing relevant or most appropriate historical facts that would help Nigeria take a right decision on the present policy challenge of issuing licenses for the deployment of 5G. As far back as 2011, ‘the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the cancer agency of the World Health Organization (WHO),…concluded that EMFs of frequencies 30KHz – 300 GHz are possibly carcinogenic to humans…’ However, new studies by the NTP cited above, has shown that these EMFs are now actually carcinogenic to humans.
The current rebuttal issued by WHO as widely reported in the media last week (on April 10, 2020), is as it should be. Properly interpreted scientifically, it said that there is no actual or proven health link between COVID-19 and 5G, as simple as that. In order to substantiate its thesis that there is no proven link, WHO rightly added COVID-19 has been spreading in many countries that do not have 5G mobile networks. This is well taken, but what the hundreds of scientists across the world are talking about is the potential risks of 5G, which needs more time to be investigated upon before its deployment. To say that ‘no research links 5G to COVID-19’ now, is not to categorically disavows that a link may not be established in any future research. Here lies the kernel of our policy advocacy against the issuing of any license for a deployment of 5G technology. The wise admonition that ‘when in doubt, err on the side of caution’ is the cautionary way recommended here for the Federal Government to go in this matter. We will continue in the second part of this article with a review of more evidence and objections from some great scientists across the world.
•Prof. Obasi, a public policy expert teaches Public Administration at the University of Abuja. Email: nnamdizik@gmail.com