In-Situ Measurements of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields Measurements Around 5G Macro Base Stations in the UK

Bioelectromagnetics · 2025 · No effect · Low evidence

← Research stream

No effectLow evidencePaper 2611

Study snapshot

PublicationBioelectromagnetics · 2025

Study typeexposure_assessment

Reported directionNo effect

Evidence ratingLow

Abstract

Category: Environmental Health/Exposure Assessment Tags: 5G, radiofrequency, electromagnetic fields, power density, base stations, United Kingdom, exposure assessment DOI: 10.1002/bem.70012 URL: onlinelibrary.wiley.com Overview This study conducted radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic field spot measurements in line-of-sight to 56 active 5G macro base stations across 30 publicly accessible locations within the United Kingdom (UK). - Four different exposure scenarios were assessed: - Background (no traffic instigation) - Streaming videos - Downlink speed test - Extrapolation of SS-RSRP decoder measurements - Power density measurements were performed across the 420 MHz–6 GHz frequency range at each site to assess total exposure from various RF sources present in the environment. Findings - Both total RF and 5G-specific power density levels were found to be well within the 1998 ICNIRP public reference levels, even when extrapolating to worst-case scenario (= 5%). - 4G downlink was identified as the dominant contributor to total RF exposure, with 5G contributing on average less than 10%. - No statistically significant difference was observed between beamforming and non-beamforming sites. - Streaming did not appear to materially contribute to exposure levels, indicating that background measurements reflect typical downlink exposure at current urban and suburban 5G sites. Conclusion The study underscores the importance of monitoring and reporting on environmental exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMFs), as continuous assessment helps to inform public health guidelines and understand potential health risks, particularly with expanding 5G infrastructure.

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typeexposure_assessment

Effect directionno_effect

PopulationNot supplied

Sample size56

ExposureRF

Evidence strengthLowConfidence: 78% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Spot measurements in line-of-sight to 56 active 5G macro base stations at 30 UK public locations found total RF and 5G-specific power density levels well within the 1998 ICNIRP public reference levels, including extrapolation to a stated worst-case scenario. 4G downlink was the dominant contributor to total RF exposure, with 5G contributing on average less than 10%, and no statistically significant difference was observed between beamforming and non-beamforming sites; streaming did not materially change exposure compared with background.

Outcomes measured

Total RF power density
5G-specific power density
Contribution of 4G vs 5G to total RF exposure
Difference in power density between beamforming vs non-beamforming sites
Effect of streaming/downlink activity on measured exposure

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "exposure_assessment",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "RF",
    "source": "base station",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": null,
  "sample_size": 56,
  "outcomes": [
    "Total RF power density",
    "5G-specific power density",
    "Contribution of 4G vs 5G to total RF exposure",
    "Difference in power density between beamforming vs non-beamforming sites",
    "Effect of streaming/downlink activity on measured exposure"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Spot measurements in line-of-sight to 56 active 5G macro base stations at 30 UK public locations found total RF and 5G-specific power density levels well within the 1998 ICNIRP public reference levels, including extrapolation to a stated worst-case scenario. 4G downlink was the dominant contributor to total RF exposure, with 5G contributing on average less than 10%, and no statistically significant difference was observed between beamforming and non-beamforming sites; streaming did not materially change exposure compared with background.",
  "effect_direction": "no_effect",
  "limitations": [],
  "evidence_strength": "low",
  "confidence": 0.78,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "5G",
    "radiofrequency",
    "electromagnetic fields",
    "power density",
    "base stations",
    "United Kingdom",
    "exposure assessment",
    "ICNIRP",
    "beamforming",
    "4G"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "5g-policy",
      "weight": 0.86,
      "reason": "In-situ exposure measurements around 5G macro base stations with comparison to ICNIRP public reference levels."
    },
    {
      "slug": "who-icnirp",
      "weight": 0.74,
      "reason": "Findings explicitly benchmark measured power density against 1998 ICNIRP public reference levels."
    }
  ]
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.1002/bem.70012
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library