Global leap to 4G and 5G would cut off phone access for millions of vulnerable people.
- Telecom companies aim to profit from the 2G-to-5G transition as governments worldwide face pressure to free up mobile spectrum.
- Vietnam is the latest country to shut down 2G by offering free 4G phones to the poor.
- India and South Africa have expressed concern that the strategy would cut off phone access for millions of vulnerable people.
You will be surprised how many old people rely on health monitoring devices that use 2G to send basic data.
Not just old people. I had a heart monitor a couple years ago that’s only made for 2G.
Alright maybe I’m getting old but that’s not the point.
When I was visiting the Caribbean they also had a lot of 2G infrastructure still operating.
It sounds like there’s a really big market opportunity for somebody to make a portable transceiver that converts 2G and 3G signals into 5G…
Really really difficult to do that at scale. You don’t want random companies making cell signal transceivers.
You’d be better off just replacing the 2g transceivers entirely.
While I agree with you in principle, that’s a hard sell to somebody with an embedded 2G medical device.
Setting “companies” aside, I don’t see why it couldn’t be some sort of DIY project. Like, a small computer with a both a 2G and 5G modem, a set of antennas for each, and some middleware…
In fact, there are some phones that support both networks… So why couldn’t a spare phone be used? They technically already have all the hardware to make it work.
Because it’s the cellphone equivalent of creating a pirate radio station, to put it in terms better understood. In all developed nations that is outright not allowed.
You’re saying to create a 2g cell tower which then retransmits on 5g. That 2g portion needs to emit as if it were a real cell tower, it’s not just a phone-to-phone connection.
What I’m saying is those medical device companies just need to upgrade hardware. Not the user.
That is a valid perspective, but it doesn’t take into account the burden on end users. Would you still feel that same way if you were the user, and the “update” required literal surgery on your body - not because the device failed, or expired, but simply because network standards have changed?
Why not use the analogy of a Wi-Fi repeater or extender that can handle multiple Wi-Fi standards simultaneously?
For that matter, it should be rather simple to limit it to only “listen” for connections from known medical devices (though it’s not like there are a bunch of 2G phones running around these days).
I’m listening, but so far, I haven’t seen anything that explains why this would actually be a bad idea, or how it could cause any harm.
Can you give me an example of a medical implant with 2g embedded? I’m not sure that’s a thing. They usually use other RF signals to talk to something outside the body.
I’m not sure there would be an advantage. The signals are very different. That might be approximately equal to building a new one.
…you don’t see the advantage in avoiding open heart surgery to replace an embedded medical device?
I think the thing you’d have to replace is outside the body. Something like this:
https://www.mobihealthnews.com/content/biotronik-launches-portable-cellular-transmitter-implantable-heart-devices
I’m not sure an implanted cellular transmitter would even work, given how human tissue absorbs that spectrum.
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Penetration-depth-of-radiofrequency-into-human-tissues-28_tbl2_323083486
Ooohhh! You know what, I learned something new today! Thank you so much for taking the time to explain it in a way that made sense to me.