[Podgajski]

Yes that’s at the dish but I’m wondering the 15 miles around the dish which I have confirmed from someone who is knowledged on the subject that it does transmit that same power over 15 mi.². So essentially it’s exposing me to five bars of 5G millimeter wave radiation over 15 mi.² does that sound right?

[ksaj]

Make up your mind. You keep saying one thing, then the other. People have proven over and over again that the radiation from the satellites is too low to be a danger to you at this distance, and the same goes for the terminals, which are what you are on about this time. Literally all points have been discussed in this thread. None of it is risky unless you are literally sleeping on the antennae.

The risk from ALL parts of the communication is very, very low. How many times and ways do you need to be shown this?

You even ignored my initial comment hours ago about old radio towers. Those were measured in megawatts. Modern digital delivery doesn't need nearly the bandwidth, which is why it is safer than what you are worrying about. Even old children's walkie talkies expose you to more radiation.

At a distance, analog fades out and the sound or image suffers. Digital is crystal clear right down until you can't differentiate the digital signal from the noise anymore. No noise is added because it is so easy to ensure a correct digital signal, versus analog that has no error correction and audibly/visually suffers from static and other interference from distance.

You're trying very hard to keep this thread going, but it's proven over and over again here that your worries are unfounded.

[Podgajski]

In my original question I directly asked “ I’m trying to understand EMF exposure from Starlink satellites. Am I right to assume that anyone within the 15 mile cell area would be exposed to EMFs if someone is using a Starlink receiver?”

I’m not changing anything you are misunderstanding. The phased beam form is directed in area That’s an area of 15 mi.². And a hexagon. I showed you the map and I showed you the link.

You keep saying it’s too weak but two weak compared to what.? there are zero study showing at safety for people with different genetics.

I don’t care what measurement term you use I care about the effect. It’s like saying a drop of cyanide is only a drop.

I’m not trying to keep the thread going. Your answers are nonsensical or you’re just misunderstanding what I’m pointing out. These are being discussed constantly in scientific circles and they’re not answered. But you will come here with, some either knowledge of physics or some propaganda given by cell phone companies and think you know everything and that’s frustrating.

I’m not even saying that I know 100% that these things affect me but your comparisons are illogical. And that’s why I’m keeping going .

[ksaj]

Do a study on your special DNA to see why it is so different than normal DNA from everything that has DNA. That's the only way to get to the end of this, apparently.