Integrated Electromagnetic Protection of Biosphere Elements. Part 1. Prerequisites

The article examines the prerequisites for developing a comprehensive system for protecting the population and critical infrastructure equipment from exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields emitted by 5G mobile communications equipment. The need for this system stems from the anticipated widespread use of TDD (time-doubled duplex) mode in 5G/6G mobile communications systems, with a pulsed equivalent isotropically radiated power one to two orders of magnitude higher than that of mobile base stations operating in traditional (frequency-doubled duplex) mode with quasi-continuous radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. The current practice of defining protective zones and development restrictions based on average values of the energy flux density of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields does not provide protection for either critical infrastructure equipment and facilities (whose susceptibility to these fields is determined by their instantaneous field strengths) or the population, due to their significantly higher bioaggressiveness compared to quasi-continuous FDD (frequency-doubled duplex) radiofrequency electromagnetic fields.

1. Recommendation ITU-R M.2083 (09/2015). IMT Vision – Framework and Overall Objectives of the Future Development of IMT for 2020 and Beyond.

2. Report ITU-R M.2412 (11/2017). Guidelines for Evaluation of Radio Interface Technologies for IMT-2020.

3. Zhang Z., Xiao Y., Ma Z., Xiao M., Ding Z., Lei X., et al. (2019) 6G. Wireless Networks: Vision, Requirements, Architecture, and Key Technologies. IEEE VT Magazine. 14 (3), 28–41.

4. Rec. ITU-R M.2160-0 (11/2023). Framework and Overall Objectives of the Future Development of IMT for 2030 and Beyond.

5. ICNIRP Guidelines for Limiting Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields (100 kHz to 300 GHz). USA, Health Physics Publ. 2020. 118 (5), 483–524.

6. On Petitions for Review of an Order of the Federal Communications Commission. United States Court of Appeals, Decision No 20-1025, Aug. 13, 2021, Consolidated with 20-1138.

7. Grigoriev O. A., Zubarev Y. B. (2022) The Effects of Wireless Communication Electromagnetic Energy Influence on Persons: Predictions of the Growth for Conditioned Morbidity, Their Implementation and Problems of Evaluation. Concepcii. 1 (41), 3–17 (in Russian).

8. Varshavsky A. E. (2022) The Main Factors and Problems of the Transition to a New Generation of Communication Networks 5G. Concepcii. 1 (41), 18–35 (in Russian).

9. IARC Classifies Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields as Possibly Carcinogenic to Humans. WHO, Press Release, 2011, No 208.

10. Mordachev V. I. (2022) Refined Analysis of the Correlation Between the Accepted Maximum Permissible Levels of Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields for the Population and the Lethality Rate of COVID-19. Doklady BGUIR. 20 (1), 55–64. https://doklady.bsuir.by/jour/article/view/3285.

11. Hardell L., Carlberg M. (2020) Health Risks from Radiofrequency Radiation, Including 5G, Should Be Assessed by Experts with No Conflicts of Interest. Oncology Letters. 20 (15), 1–11. DOI: 10.3892/ol.2020.11876.

12. Buchner K., Rivasi M. (2020) The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection: Conflicts of Interest, Corporate Capture and the Push for 5G. Available: https://www.michele-rivasi.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/ICNIRP-rapport-FR-FINAL-JUIN-2020.pdf.

13. Mordachev V. I., Svistunou A. S., Sinkevich E. V. (2024) Electromagnetic Safety of 4G/5G Mobile Communications. Doklady BGUIR. 22 (2), 80–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.35596/1729-7648-2024-22-2-80-91 (in Russian).

14. Mordachev V., Sinkevich E., Svistunou A., Ivanchenko V. (2026) 4G/5G Wireless Systems Radiation Safety for Various Technical Equipment. Doklady BGUIR. 24 (2), 14–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.35596/1729-7648-2026-24-2-14-24 (in Russian).

15. Nokia AirScale Radio Units Description. Available: https://1com.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Nokiaairscale-5G-radio-description-datasheet-5g.pdf.

16. Hinrikus H. (2026) Nonthermal Mechanism of Low-Level Microwave Effect on the Human Brain. USA, CRC Press. Publ.

17. SanPiN 2.1.8/2.2.4.1383–03. Sanitary Requirements for the Placement and Operation of Transmitting Radio-Technical Facilities. Moscow, Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, 2003 (in Russian).

18. Specific Sanitary and Epidemiological Requirements for the Maintenance and Operation of Facilities that Are Sources of Non-Ionizing Radiation. Approved by Resolution No 360 of the Council of Ministers of the Republic of Belarus dated June 4, 2019 (in Russian).

19. Moray Rumney (2008) LTE and the Evolution to 4G Wireless – Design and Measurement Challenges. USA, Agilent Technologies Publ.

20. ETSI TS 136 211 V18.0.2 (2025–08). LTE: Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA); Physical Channels and Modulation (3GPP TS 36.211 version 18.0.2 Release 18). Technical Specification.

21. ETSI TS 138 213 V18.7.0 (2025–07). 5G NR: Physical Layer Procedures for Control (3GPP TS 38.213 version 18.7.0 Release 18). Technical Specification.

22. Assessment of the Exposure of the General Public to 5G Electromagnetic Waves. Part 2: First Measurement Results on 5G pilots in the 3,400–3,800 MHz Band. ANFR. April 2020.

23. Schiffarth A.-M., Ta T. J., Bornkesse C., Schilling L.-M., Hein M., Heberling D. (2025) Definition and Validation of an Exposure Measurement Method for a Typical Load of a Base Station. Bioelectromagnetics. 46 (8), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1002/bem.70029.

24. ETSI TS 138 101-1 V15.7.0 (2019–10) 5G; NR; User Equipment (UE) Radio Transmission and Reception; Part 1: Range 1 Standalone (3GPP TS 38.101-1 version 15.7.0 Release 15). Technical Specification.

25. Frequency Bands for 5G NR. Available: https://5g-tools.com/5g-nr-frequency-band/?ysclid=mpnnl07b85888848312.

26. Xue X., Claeys T., Pissort D. (2023) Application of a Testing-to-Failure Approach to the Susceptibility Assessment of Electronic Systems. Proceedings of the International Symposium “EMC Europe 2023”, Krakow, Poland.

27. Mordachev V. I. (2018) Verification of the Worst Case Model for the Estimation of Average Intensity of the Electromagnetic Background Created by Base Stations of Cellular Communications. Doklady BGUIR. (1), 12–18. https://doklady.bsuir.by/jour/article/view/942 (in Russian).

28. Deprez K., Stroobandt B., Veludo A. F., Vecsei Z., Necz P. P., Politański P., et al. (2025) 5G RF EMF Spectral Exposure Assessment in Four European Countries. Bioelectromagnetics. 46 (6).

29. Statsenko L., Bakhvalova A., Zhmakina I. (2021) Electromagnetic Background on the FEFU Campus on the Russky Island: Instrumental Measurements. FEFU: School of Engineering Bulletin. 3 (48), 124–132 (in Russian).

30. Najera A., Villaescusa-Tebar A., Gonzalez-Rubio J., Garcia-Pardo C. (2025) Dual Evaluation and Spatial Analysis of RF-EMF Exposure in 5G: Theoretical Extrapolations and Direct Measurements. Bioelectromagnetics. 46 (6). https://doi.org/10.1002/bem.70020.

31. Walie S. Q., Salie A., Jaafar К., Allami J. K., Osman A. F. (2022) RF-EMF Exposure Measurement for 5G Over Mm-Wave Base Station with MIMO Antenna. IEEE Access. 10, 9048–9058.

32. Mordachev V. I. (2025) Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Background Created by 5G eMBB Systems on Dense Urban Areas. Doklady BGUIR. 23 (6), 12–23 (in Russian).

33. Mordachev V. (2024) Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Pollution of the Habitat Created by Mobile Communications. Biology Bulletin. 51 (11), 3481–3495.

34. Chiaraviglio L., Lodovisi C., Bartoletti S., Elzanaty A., Slim-Alouini M. (2024) Dominance of Smartphone Exposure in 5G Mobile Networks. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing. 23 (3), 2284–2302.

35. Delidimitriou S., Babas D., Manassas A., Wiart J., Samaras T. (2026) RF-EMF Bystander Exposure in the 5G Era Measured Across Various Microenvironments in Greece. Annals of Тelecommunications, Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007 /s12243-026-01143-2.