5G Conspiracy Loons?
Not sure that everyone commenting on this post understands how different in shape and extent the 5G exclusion zones are from those for 2,3 & 4G antennas and the impact of the exclusion zone upon the site itself, let alone neighbouring buildings.
Cornerstone are designing sites to comply only with ICNIRP occupational limits and classify all members of the working population as "Occupational". ICNIRP on the other hand class only workers in the industry who are trained in rf, understand rf and the risks, as occupational. All other workers are classed as members of the public. So it appears that Cornerstone are not applying the correct ICNIRP standards to their sites.......
Why is this relevant? Because if your air con contractor for instance wants access to the plant on the roof, he may well be working in the public exclusion zone. He won't have an rf monitor. He won't be trained in rf so he will refuse to go out on to the roof. For street masts the 5G exclusion zone could now well include the bedrooms of adjacent buildings, or offices.
5G exclusion zones are massive in comparison and of a totally different shape to 3/4G. Hence the requirement to raise the antennas higher than existing 3/4G systems. So, surely the operators know this? Well, yes, and perhaps that is why they are refusing to disclose drawings that show the ICNIRP exclusion zones for 5G sites and MBNL are marking them with "NOTE; ANY DRAWINGS SHOWING ICNIRP EXCLUSION ZONES MUST NOT ("NOT" is underlined and in red) BE SENT TO THE SITE PROVIDE, SITE PROVIDERS AGENT OR PLANNING DEPARTMENTS".
You have to ask yourself- "Why?"