Jun 28, 2020
Response to Enders’ Comment on “Discussion on Spatial and Time Averaging Restrictions Within the Electromagnetic Exposure Safety Framework in the Frequency Range Above 6 GHz for Pulsed and Localized Exposures”
Esra Neufeld, Theodoros Samaras, and Niels Kuster, Bioelectromagnetics 2020, Volume 41, Issue 6, pages 483-484, online 26 June 2020; doi: 10.1002/bem.22279
In June 2020, Professor Achim Enders published a "Comment Article" in Bioelectromagnetics discussing the results and conclusions of our publication “Discussion on Spatial and Time Averaging Restrictions Within the Electromagnetic Exposure Safety Framework in the Frequency Range Above 6 GHz for Pulsed and Localized Exposures” by Esra Neufeld, Theodoros Samaras, and Niels Kuster that was published in December 2019 in the same journal.
In our response to the Comment Article, we agree with Prof. Enders that today's deployed mmWave devices will not operate in the power range that may lead to potentially hazardous thermal exposures. However, we disagreed with Prof. Ender’s argument that safety guidelines should be based solely on today's technological applications. We reiterate our opinion that guidelines should either be defined as inherently safe or any gaps and shortcomings should be explicitly stated. In addition, we clarified issues reading beam width that could easily be misunderstood.
