It's complicated, so people don't try to understand, they just have opinions.
The millitant action against 5G seems to have come out of nowhere.
The problem is, if you explain to people with deeply held beliefs why they are wrong they are incapable of absorbing the information. It's fine with people who are neutral, but when someone asks you "Is it safe?" and you say "Limits are not yet fully harmonised within the EU but the upper limit, which applies to the total power from all sources, recommended by ICNIRP is f/200 W/m^2 between 400 MHz and 2 GHz, then 10 W/m^2 up to 300 GHz which is an electric field strength of 61.4 V/m." you can't be surprised when they switch off. And go back to their beliefs.
I'm in a twitter war with someone who has oblected to my blog, who won't accept any argument on the basis that I work in the industry so I'm biased. But if the industry doesn't do any resarch it's accused of ignoring the problem.
This is complicated by the people ho know about biology not tending to know about rado physics and vice versa. I've worked with people who understand the physics and they have critised the methodology of some of the biologists doing research, and I guess if I found some good biological people they would make similar claims of the physicists.
We've looked very, very hard, there are something like six billion phones in use and we've not found anything yet, but that doesn't seem to carry any weight.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
