>>13557832 LB
Have you read the reports that you linked? They are all for a modulation method that has become obsolete in the cellular industry. They applied power at ridiculous levels that any normal person would never be exposed to. In the first report, Melnick, in his own words, states that the NTP used levels 20 times higher than the ICNIRP recommended maximum levels. Then he states that there was no discernible effects on the rats that they were tested on. There are several other problems too. The reports actually state that they were conducted using older technology and and at higher power levels that that technology was capable of producing. They refer to 3G &4G (LTE) but don't make the acknowledgement that both of these technologies useLOWER POWERthan the older technology that they used in their testing. They don't even refer to 5G which uses an even lower power saturation than the 3G and 4G technologies. That aside, the reports fail to reach any provable results that RFR (RF Radiation, if you read the reports) actually resulted in a consistent and peer repeatable experiment to create carcinogenic heart schwannomas and brain Gliomas as claimed from the NTP report. In their test of 110 weeks, they found evidence but where is the peer repeated study that proves their result was not just a "once off occurrence"? Also to note is that schwannomas are normally not cancerous and are normally ignored until neurological problems are reported. Then they are scraped and the nerves can function as before. Melnick's name also does not appear on the report from the NTP so I'm inclined to believe that this is an old man that is bitter in his retirement and is seeking relevancy at the expense of an evolving technology.
I would really prefer these studies to be current, with current technology or theyaretruly irrelevant because the new technology is all about reducing the power used in the RF link to the minimum needed to maintain the requested service. that's the reason why the 5G towers are so much closer to together. they have a lower power output and range but they can maintain the throughput better because they don't need to reach for miles, its less than 1/4 mile in most cases.
RF is "expensive" to make so it is not just sprayed around without a care. Every bit of RF costs battery life in the handset and also has to be manufactured on site at the base station from mains electricity. That is not a cheap eventuality. The antennas have been increasing in size on the base station masts because they must have a bigger aperture to be able to capture the ever decreasing signal levels from the handsets. "You need big ears to hear tiny sounds".
Your entire posting is unaccepted and unproven. It may have had exposure to peer review but until corroborating experimentation is done, it is simply a theory and cannot be used as factual evidence.