Hello everyone,
We are considering buying a house (already completed). However, there is a mobile phone mast with several antennas about 40 meters (130 feet) away from the house.
Buy or leave it? How would you decide?
We are considering buying a house (already completed). However, there is a mobile phone mast with several antennas about 40 meters (130 feet) away from the house.
Buy or leave it? How would you decide?
WilderSueden schrieb:
There is no scientific evidence that mobile phone masts (apart from the nocebo effect) are actually harmful.There are studies from Brazil indicating an increased risk within a 500m (1,640 ft) radius. Otherwise, I agree with you. It’s best to avoid them if you feel uneasy.About 200m (650 ft) from our building site, there is a mast 25–30m (82–98 ft) tall. The constant exposure on our property was between 200 and 300 microwatts per square meter. That’s relatively high. To address this, we applied a protective coating with 45 decibels attenuation on the exterior walls facing the mast. This reduced the exposure to nearly zero. In theory, this is also possible in existing buildings.
Urlauber schrieb:
Thanks for the responses so far, we are still in the decision-making process.Get a measuring device, for example an HF35C, and take some measurements. Depending on how the antennas are positioned, the exposure can be higher or lower. I can also lend you my device for a small cost contribution.N
nordanney16 Jan 2021 16:09WingVII schrieb:
There are studies from Brazil suggesting an increased risk within a 500m (1,640 feet) radius.... and experts almost classify these as alternative facts due to significant methodological flaws and conclusions. Please take a look at the professional literature on the study and don’t simply ignore it here. It’s similar to various COVID-19 studies. By the way, at a distance of 100m (330 feet), the risk of dying from cancer according to the study was only 1.35 times higher than without a mast. With approximately 230,000 deaths per year in Germany, this increased risk is very marginal. Assuming the study is accurate ;-)Don’t let this cause unnecessary alarm. Otherwise, you would have to tell 80-90% of Germans that they are exposed to radiation (in cities, 100% of inhabitants live within 500m (1,640 feet)).
For those very concerned about radiation, avoiding cell phones, Wi-Fi, high-voltage power lines, and trains (due to overhead currents) would be the logical consequence.
A more interesting and less trivial warning would be about radon. Radon accounts for about 50% of lung cancer cases. This is scientifically proven. Unlike the unclear effects attributed to electromagnetic pollution.
W
WilderSueden16 Jan 2021 18:13WingVII schrieb:
There are studies from Brazil indicating an increased risk within a 500m (550 yards) radius.On the other hand, the rule of thumb for 5G is 2 cell towers per square kilometer (0.4 square miles). Simply put, if you want reliable reception, you will hardly avoid living closer than 500m (550 yards) to a mast. Ultimately, the frequencies and power levels used in mobile communications are relatively unproblematic when looking purely at the physics. There is not much energy involved, so it is difficult to cause genetic damage. Much more critical is the nocebo effect. Anyone who believes they will sleep poorly because of something (neighbor’s wind chime, Wi-Fi, bells from idyllic grazing cows, mobile networks) will indeed end up sleeping poorly because of it.nordanney schrieb:
A more interesting and less trivial warning would be about radon. Radon accounts for about 50% of lung cancer cases. This is scientifically proven, unlike the vague concerns around electromagnetic pollution.And then you go to the Black Forest on the weekend and see advertisements for the radon spa in St. Blasien 😉N
nordanney16 Jan 2021 18:19WilderSueden schrieb:
And then on the weekend you drive to the Black Forest and see ads for the radon spa in St. Blasien 😉 😎 As always, the amount matters too! You can even die from too much chocolate...H
hampshire16 Jan 2021 18:28The regulations and limits say: no cause for concern.
But what does your feeling say? – that is what matters and does not have to be rationally justified, because if you cannot feel completely comfortable, don’t build a house there. This is simple pragmatism. After all, you don’t marry the person who looks better on paper, but the one you can genuinely imagine living with.
Subjectively: if it’s not a dream plot, I would keep looking, but I wouldn’t move immediately just because a mast was built near our house.
Here comes Paracelsus: "The dose makes the poison."
But what does your feeling say? – that is what matters and does not have to be rationally justified, because if you cannot feel completely comfortable, don’t build a house there. This is simple pragmatism. After all, you don’t marry the person who looks better on paper, but the one you can genuinely imagine living with.
Subjectively: if it’s not a dream plot, I would keep looking, but I wouldn’t move immediately just because a mast was built near our house.
nordanney schrieb:
😎 As always, the amount matters! You can even die from too much chocolate...
Here comes Paracelsus: "The dose makes the poison."
Similar topics