Cell tower next to construction site

There is no scientific evidence that mobile phone masts (apart from the nocebo effect) are actually harmful.

There are studies from Brazil that suggest an increased risk within a 500m radius. Otherwise, I agree with you. Stay away if you have a bad feeling. About 200m next to our building site, we have a 25-30m mast. The permanent exposure on our property was 200-300 microwatts/sqm. So relatively high. We applied a 45-decibel protective coating to the exterior walls facing the mast. This allowed us to reduce the exposure to nearly zero. Theoretically, this is also possible in existing buildings.

Thank you first for the answers, we are still in the decision-making process.

Get a measuring device, e.g. HF35C, and measure it. Depending on how the antennas are aligned, the load can be higher or lower. I can also lend you my device for a cost contribution.

There are studies from Brazil indicating an increased risk within a 500m radius.

... and which experts almost classify as alternative facts due to serious methodological flaws and conclusions. Please read the specialist press on the study and do not simply omit this here. It is like with various Corona studies. Oh yes, at a distance of 100m the risk of dying from cancer according to the study was only 1.35 times higher than without a mast. With around 230,000 deaths in Germany per year, the increased risk is really quite manageable. If there is anything to that study ;-) Please don’t get worked up about this. Otherwise you would have to tell 80-90% of Germans that they are being irradiated (in cities at 500m it would be 100% of the inhabitants). A consistent avoidance, if one is so afraid of radiation, of mobile phones, WLAN, high-voltage lines, trains (because of high voltage) is the consequence for such people. More interesting and less trivial would be the warning about radon. Radon accounts for about 50% of lung cancer cases here. This is scientifically proven. Not nebulous like electrosmog.

There are studies from Brazil suggesting an increased risk within a 500m radius.

On the other hand, the rule of thumb is 2 radio cells per square kilometer for 5G. In plain English, if you want reception, you will hardly be able to avoid living closer than 500m to the mast. Ultimately, the frequencies and power levels in mobile communications are relatively unproblematic if you look at it purely from a physical point of view. There is not much energy involved, and accordingly it is difficult to alter genetic material. Much more critical is the nocebo effect. Whoever believes that something causes them to sleep poorly (neighbor's wind chime, WLAN, bells of idyllic pasture cows, mobile communications) will indeed sleep poorly because of it.

More interesting and less trivial would be the warning about radon. Radon accounts for about 50% of lung cancer cases here. That is scientifically proven. Not nebulous like electrosmog.

And then on the weekend you go to the Black Forest and see advertising for the radon spa in St. Blasien ;)

And then you drive to the Black Forest on the weekend and see advertising for the Radon Spa in St. Blasien ;)

:cool: as always, the quantity also matters! You can even die from too much chocolate...

The regulations and limit values say: harmless. What does your feeling say? - that is decisive and does not have to be rationally justified, because if you cannot feel completely comfortable somewhere, do not build a house there. That is simple pragmatism. You also do not marry the person who looks better on paper, but the one with whom you can imagine living well together.

Subjective: I would continue searching if it is not a dream plot, but I also would not move immediately if a mast were to be built near our house.

:cool: as always, quantity also matters! You can even die from too much chocolate...

Here he is, Paracelsus: "The dose makes the poison."