Physicians for Safe Technology

Wireless Technology and Public Health

5G Telecommunications Science

Scientific Literature

Updated 9/2/23

Please scroll down to view the scientific literature.                                                          

For information on how to read the scientific literature and convert units in electromagnetic frequencies go to PST Conversion Chart

5th Generation (5G) Telecommunications Uses Gigahertz (GHz) Millimeter Sized Wavelengths

The Telecommunications Industry promises fast, ubiquitous and unlimited mobile internet access with the next generation of 5G technologies by 2020, along with removal of cheap, secure and safer landlines. This 5G network is designed to provide faster downloads, streaming movies, wireless virtual reality, in addition to being the platform for the Internet of Things, whereby all our household devices are connected to this system wirelessly for remote control. While there may be limited medical applications, 5G will mainly be used for more immersive entertainment, surveillance and data mining with much greater public exposure, especially in “Smart Cities”.

Military uses have also been discussed. This 5th generation (5G) system will add high frequency electromagnetic radiation with Gigahertz (GHz) wavelengths in the millimeter range utilizing beam steering technology, along with low and mid band frequencies used n 2G, 3G and 4G communications. These high frequency tiny wavelengths penetrate only the outer layer of the skin, unlike 2G, 3G and 4G technology which passes through the body.  Major health concerns with exposure to 5G are to skin, eye and adverse systemic metabolic signaling through skin sensors, as well as heat effects. In a the March 2020 European Parliament Briefing on health effects of 5G they admit that the “European Commission has not yet conducted studies on the potential health risks of the 5G technology.” 

5G Health Impacts Review -European Parliament

In July 2021  The European Parliament published a comprehensive review of 5G Health Effects. The author, Dr Fiorella Belpoggi, BSC, PhD, International Academy of Toxicologic Pathology Fellow (IATPF), Ramazzini Institute in Italy, looked at 1861 studies on cancer ( 950 human and 911 rodent) and 7886 studies on reproduction.  There was evidence of cancer and reproductive harm although in some categories it was limited.  Dr. Belpoggi notes, “The literature contains no adequate studies that would rule out the risk that tumours and adverse effects on reproduction and development may occur upon exposure to 5G MMW, or to exclude the possibility of some synergistic interactions between 5G and other frequencies that are already being used. This makes the introduction of 5G fraught with uncertainty concerning both health issues and forecasting and or monitoring the actual exposure of the population: these gaps in knowledge justify the call for a moratorium on MMW of 5G, pending completion of adequate research.” 

Belpoggi suggests studying “ their effects before exposing the whole world population and environment.”

Some in the U.S. Congress have seriously questioned the lack of independent research on 5G safety.  Considering 5G will be added to an enlarging spectrum of radiation in the lower frequency range our exposure to this complex mix of non-ionizing but biologically active radiation will only increase. Without monitoring  overall RF levels, monitoring cell towers or providing health or environmental surveys we continue to be n the dark about the true science of harm.

Manufacturing Demand: Industry Questions the “Race” to 5G

The race to 5G  deployment is now being questioned by industry experts, as it is complex, will cost more (over $500 billion), requires much more infrastructure, is driven by supply not demand, and requires substantial buy-in. They state in their report, 5G Deployment: State of Play in Europe, USA and Asia 2019,

“As 5G is driven by the telecoms supply industry, and its long tail of component manufacturers, a major campaign is under way to convince governments that the economy and jobs will be strongly stimulated by 5G deployment. However, we are yet to see significant “demand-pull” that could assure sales. These campaign efforts are also aimed at the MNOs but they have limited capacity to invest in the new technology and infrastructure as their returns from investment in 3G and 4G are still being recouped.”

Here is a discussion from the telecom industry regarding 5G RF compliance and safety, Preparing for 5G: Evolution of RF Compliance Standards and Regulations for Mobile Devices.

Precautionary Advice on 5G From Expert, Joel Moskowitz, PhD

Dr. Joel Moskowitz, a scientist who has studied and written on tobacco, as well as radiofrequency radiation, gives a different and precautionary view in his 2019 article, We Have No Reason to Believe That 5G is Safe, published in Scientific American. He has presented very clear review of radiofrequency and health impacts at the UCSF Occupational and Environmental Medicine Grand Rounds called “Radio Frequency Radiation Health Risks: Implications for 5G” on Sept 24, 2020.  Slide Share is here.  

Dr. Moskowitz highlights the blatant dismissal of health concerns by industry as it pushes forward in his piece in the Washington Spectator Sept 18, 2020, Regulators Steamroll Health Concerns as the Global Economy Embraces 5G.

Dr. Moskowitz has complied a plethora of scientific information at SAFEREMR.com  Electromagnetic Radiation Safety- https://www.saferemr.com/2016/06/index.html

The First Report of 5G Injury is in Switzerland

The first reported injury of 5G in a news report comes from Switzerland, where 5G has been launched in 102 locations.  The weekly French-language Swiss magazine L’Illustré  interviewed people living in Geneva after the 5G rollout with alarming details of illness. In their article, With 5G, We Feel Like Guinea Pigs, posted July 18, 2019, they report neighbors met to discuss their many common symptoms and many unanswered questions. See also First Report of 5G Injury from Switzerland

Noah Davidson spoke out about debilitating electrosensitivity  symptoms that developed in his two children after a 5G tower was placed directly in front of their home in Sacramento, California.  He hired a building biologist to help shield his house and move the children farther away to mitigate the problem. An article about this was published in Public News Service Oct 9, 2020.

What is the Difference Between  5G and 4G Wireless Technology?

Many confuse 5G or Fifth Generation Technology with the 5Gigahertz (GHz) frequencies used in wireless devices.  Some devices state they are 5G, but at this point in time, for most devices, it is meant to be 5GHz frequency of transmission. 5G technology has been said to use much higher frequencies (10-300 GHZ), and for the new 5G cell “small cell” towers it may contain these frequencies, but not always.  Companies have realized that the shorter wavelengths do not travel as far or penetrate buildings well, thus telecom companies have purchased low and mid band RF spectrum as well as 5G high frequency bands through government auctions. These longer wavelengths (used in 2G, 3G and 4G) travel farther, through buildings and serve as backhaul for 5G short wavelengths. They are calling all these wavelengths 5G or small cell technology without being specific.  See Bill Nye 5G Facts About 5G Explained- T Mobile. They plan to put the low and mid band band spectrum in rural areas where it will travel farther. These longer wavelengths penetrate living organisms even deeper and are accompanied by an abundance of robust science showing biologic harm at non thermal levels. 5G technology along with lower frequency emitting cell antennas are now being rolled out internationally.

Unfortunately the definition of 5G/ small cells is variable and cities are not asking for specific frequency data or adequate monitoring for small cell towers that are being rushed through city permitting processes. See also What’s the Difference Between 5G and 5GHz Wi-Fi?.

Confusion mounts as most “small cells” placed in cities will have the same 4G technology, at least initially, although people are calling them 5G or small cell towers. As explained, telecom companies are using longer wavelength (600 and 700 MHz), or low band, in addition to current 2.5to 5 GHz Wi Fi, or mid-band, as well as small millimeter high-band (6 to 300 GHz) frequencies scientists have been especially concerned about. Thus 5G Spectrum, when fully implemented, will consist of a much broader range of frequencies people will continuously be exposed to and with closer proximity. When talking about 5G or small cells one needs to be specific about which bands will be used. Will it be 5G millimeter high band technology or 5G low band or mid band technology placed on a utility pole near you? Equipment to measure low and mid bands is affordable for cities but the high frequency band (10–300GHz) equipment is very expensive and even independent building biologists have difficulty obtaining the meters. There is thus no monitoring of the radiation emissions from this technology by cities or individuals.

Note: The telecom industry admits that these so-called “small cells” are the same as those mounted on high poles with almost the same power, only much closer to people (6 to 10 feet from homes, not the 150 feet distance they now are when on tall poles).

Does Anybody Really Know What 5G is? Telecom’s Moving but Enlarging Target

Telecom argues that because the wireless frequency bands are more crowded along with the fact that they wish to expand the amount and speed of data that can be transmitted,  more bandwidth needs to be used.  We have been told for years by telecom companies that 5G would only use novel tiny millimeter wave technology that does not penetrate the skin, however, companies such as Verizon, T Mobile and AT&T have already purchased previously unused lower-band, mid-band (sub-6GHz) as well as high frequency GHz spectrum for their nationwide rollout. These are a similar section of the current spectrum we use now in 4G technology but different frequencies. Typical cell phone frequencies are 900MHz and 1800MHz, with 2.5GHz and 5 GHz used for Wi Fi. These currently used frequencies have been tested in the literature and found to be biologically active and harmful. See chart below.

Different portions of the Spectrum have been purchased through auctions from the FCC and each telecom company will use their own specific frequencies that are longer wavelengths, that penetrate not only buildings and trees, but us as well. According to an article dated May 28, 2019, In Nationwide 5G, It Will Be AT&T’s 700MHz vs. T-Mobile’s 600MHz, discussing 5G industry strategies, T Mobile will use 600MHz to 700MHz and AT&T will use 700MHz. Sprint says it will use their own 2.5GHz for the 5G rollout. Verizon has not said what it will use, but acknowledges that it cannot use millimeter technology for broad coverage.  As the mysterious “Small Cells” begin to populate every city street, where does that leave scientists who would like to see monitoring and studies of all these wavelengths (and their mixes) before further deployment of 5G or 4G?   Have there been any health surveys  done before or after the deployment of these cell towers? That would surely tell us a lot about the health effects, but no health studies or surveys have been done.  It is “assumed” 5G is safe.  The graph below explains different frequencies and proposed “G” uses.

5G is Short Wavelength RFR Mixed With Longer 2G, 3G and 4G:

5G high frequency wavelengths are short and in the millimeter range (fractions of an inch), although they will be mixed with current lower (longer wavelength) frequencies.  Industry states the deployment of 5G will increase productivity, boost the economy and give us a sense of well-being. They will integrate 5G with current 3G and 4G systems, with plans to add much of the remaining spectrum in the microwave frequencies. Industry states this will operate fluidly in a highly dense cell antenna arrangement throughout neighborhoods and cities. This cell antenna network will accommodate multiple types of access technologies, multi-layer networks, multiple types of devices, multiple types of user interactions including self-driving automobiles and massive industrial automation.

5G technology is different than prior 2G, 3G or 4G technology in the following ways:

  • Frequencies (Cycles per second):  One MHz is 1 million cycles per second. One GHz is 1 billion cycles per second. 4G uses several different frequencies from 750MHz to about 2,400-5,000 MHz(2.4 GHz to 5 GHz- typical Wi Fi and cell phone) – 5G (proposed 5th generation) uses10GHz to 300GHz,  but lower frequencies will also be used and the frequencies and speed will vary with each carrier i.e. 600 MHz will be used by T Mobile.    Sprint will use 2.5GHz, called mid-band, which will penetrate walls.  PC Magazine on April 16, 2019 notes,  “The actual 5G radio system, known as 5G-NR, isn’t compatible with 4G. But all 5G devices in the US, to start, will need 4G because they’ll lean on it to make initial connections before trading up to 5G where it’s available. That’s technically known as a “non standalone,” or NSA, network. https://www.pcmag.com/article/345387/what-is-5g
  • Length of the Wave: 4G electromagnetic wavelengths are inches to feet long – 5G (6 to 300GHz) frequencies are very short and measured in centimeters to millimeters, but again lower frequencies will also be used, creating a mix of frequencies and therefore wavelengths.
  • Depth of Skin and Body Absorption: 4G microwave radiation (2.4GHz and 5 GHz) passes through bodies and the energy is absorbed by anything that contains water (can’t cook dry rice in a microwave oven), while 5G (6 to 300GHz) penetrates only the outer layers of the skin in humans. Again the mix of frequencies in cell towers and cell phones will have a mix of skin and body penetration
  • Distance Radiation Travels: 4G can travel dozens of miles in a line of sight and if poles are placed high. In experiments 5G (6 to 300GHz) can travel a few miles but is easily blocked by objects, trees and plants thus poles are planned for every 300 feet in cities
  • Mechanisms of Harm: 4G and low band 5G (600MHz) emissions can cause oxidation of tissues (93 of 100 studies), 5G (6 to 300GHz)millimeter wavelengths can have their effect through heat (tissue destruction), through a resonance effect of increased vibration in an object the size of the wavelengths, and at low power levels through signaling of skin structures that can affect metabolism, the nervous system, the endocrine system, the reproductive system (Declassified Military studies)
  •  Amount of Testing Done: 4G technology has been tested by the military and by international scientists with an abundance of studies showing broad harm to animals, humans, plants, insects and bacteria. 5G (6 to 300GHz) technology has been studied by some in the military showing broad harm and some newer studies are showing damage to insects, tissue burns and overheating with streaming of data, but there has been no independent safety testing of 5G before it is rolled out.

Size of Wavelengths with Varying Frequencies

In general the higher the frequency the sorter the wavelength. One conversion chart is here that shows the different wavelengths and frequencies for 3G, 4G and 5G.

  • 5G: 600 MHz = cm microwaves of 50cm ≈20 inches   (“MHz” = Megahertz)
  • 4G/5G: 700 MHz = cm microwaves of ~43cm ≈ 17 inches  (“cm” = centimeter)
  • 3G/4G/5G: 800 MHz = cm microwaves of 37.5cm ≈ 15 inches
  • 3G/4G: 900 MHz = cm microwaves of ~33.3cm ≈ 13 inches
  • 3G/4G: 1800 MHz = cm microwaves of ~16.7cm ≈6.6 inches
  • 3G/4G: 2100 MHz = cm microwaves of ~14.3cm ≈ 5.6 inches
  • 4G/5G: Wi-Fi: 2450 MHz = cm microwaves of ~12cm ≈5 inches
  • 5G: 3100 MHz to 3550 MHz = ~9.7 to ~8.5cm ≈ 3.8 to 3.3 inches
  • 5G: 3550 MHz to 3700 MHz = ~8.5cm to ~8.1cm ≈3.3 to 3.2 inches
  • 5G: 3700 MHz to 4200 MHz = ~8.1cm to ~7cm ≈3.2 to 2.8 inches
  • 5G: 4200 to 4900 MHz = ~7cm to ~6cm ≈2.8 to 2.4 inches
  • 4G/5G: Wi-Fi: 5800 MHz = ~5cm microwaves of ~2 inches          (“mm” = millimeter)
  • 5G: 24,250 to 24,450 MHz = mm microwaves of ~12mm ≈0.5 inch
  • 5G: 25,050 to 25,250 MHz = mm microwaves of ~12mm ≈0.5 inch
  • 5G: 25,250 to 27,500 MHz = mm microwaves of ~11mm ≈0.4 inch
  • 5G: 27,500 to 29,500 MHz = mm microwaves of ~10mm ≈0.4 inch
  • 5G: 31,800 to 33,400 MHz = mm microwaves of ~9mm ≈ 0.4 inch
  • 5G: 37,000 to 40,000 MHz = mm microwaves of ~8mm ≈ 0.3 inch
  • 5G: 42,000 to 42,500 MHz = mm microwaves of ~7mm ≈ 0.3 inch
  • 5G: 64,000 to 71,000 MHz = mm microwaves of ~5mm ≈ 0.2 inch
  • 5G: 71,000 to 76,000 MHz = mm microwaves of ~4mm ≈ 0.2 inch
  • 5G: 81,000 to 86,000 MHz = mm microwaves of ~3.6mm ≈0.1 inch

Old and New Research on Millimeter Waves is Alarming

New research by Neufeld and Kuster 2018  highlights the significant tissue heating generated by 5G technology with rapid short bursts of data transfer on a device, prompting them to call for reevaluation of  thermal safety standards (let alone biological standards). The researchers state, “The results also show that the peak-to-average ratio of 1,000 tolerated by the International Council on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection guidelines may lead to permanent tissue damage after even short exposures, highlighting the importance of revisiting existing exposure guidelines.”  When looking at safety, researchers often average the radiation over time to show a lesser effect, when the short high intensity bursts are the most harmful, similar to tornado winds.

In addition, there is convincing emerging scientific evidence causing great concern for the environment, with harm to mammals, insects and bacteria, prompting scientists around the world to call for a moratorium on 5G.  This 5G technology is complex, likely to be costly, accompanied by privacy concerns and will also consume significant amounts of energy, contrary to global climate goals.  Despite this scientific evidence, the FCC is accelerating the deployment  of wireless antenna infrastructure by limiting local governments ability to refuse these towers, limiting charging fees and shortening the shot clock for approval, effectively blocking the power of local authorities.

In a new review article, 5G Wireless Communication and Health Effects… by Simko and Mattsson (2019), 94 in vitro and in vivo millimeter wave studies were examined. There were no epidemiological studies found to review. The authors state, “The available studies do not provide adequate and sufficient information for a meaningful safety assessment, or for the question about non-thermal effects. There is a need for research regarding local heat developments on small surfaces, e.g., skin or the eye, and on any environmental impact. “

They conclude, “In summary, the majority of studies with MMW exposures show biological responses. From this observation, however, no in-depth conclusions can be drawn regarding the biological and health effects of MMW exposures in the 6–100 GHz frequency range. The studies are very different and the total number of studies is surprisingly low. The reactions occur both in vivo and in vitro and affects all biological endpoints studied.

There does not seem to be a consistent relationship between intensity (power density), exposure time, or frequency, and the effects of exposure. On the contrary, and strikingly, higher power densities do not cause more frequent responses, since the percentage of responses in most frequency groups is already at 70%….Regarding the quality of the presented studies, too few studies fulfill the minimal quality criteria to allow any further conclusions.” Note that this study was funded by a grant from Deutsche Telecom, the largest telecom provider in Europe, and one of the largest in the world.

Zalyubovskaya (1977)

An older Russian paper, “Biological Effects of Millimeter Wavelengths” by Zalyubovskaya (1977) was declassified by the CIA in 2012. This paper disturbingly describes the research on both humans and animals showing a myriad of adverse effects of millimeter wavelengths.  The author notes that millimeter wave technology had been used for years without any studies on biological effects. The researchers found that “millimeter waves caused changes in the body manifested in structural alterations in the skin and internal organs, qualitative and quantitative changes in the blood and bone marrow composition, and changes in the conditioned reflex activity, tissue respiration…and nuclear metabolism. The degree of unfavorable effect of millimeter waves depended the duration of radiation and individual characteristics of the organism.”  The author confirmed that millimeter waves do not penetrate skin but act in a different way to cause systemic harm. This could be due to skin nerve receptors in the skin, or release of biochemical molecules, that could cause the observed diverse biological and metabolic effects as a reduction in hemoglobin and erythrocytes, higher blood cortisol levels, adrenal stimulation, mitochondrial dysfunction, and suppression of the central nervous system with notable changes in liver, kidneys, heart and brain.  The declassified paper is  Biological Effects of Millimeter Wavelengths. Zalyubovskaya-Declassified by CIA -1977

May and Faith Report on Soviet Research 1993

The CIA commissioned a report on the science of Radiofrequency Radiation which included millimeter wavelengths in 1993. The report is titled The Effects of Electromagnetic Radiation on Biological Systems:Current Status in the Former Soviet Unionand is detailed in its research and conclusions.  The authors note that the US and Soviet Union were interested in this research for space exploration in the early 1960’s. The Soviet Union presented about 60% of the studies. In the introduction the authors state, “The analysis of the literature, more than 6,000 studies, demonstrates the ability of many living organisms to respond to the changes in natural and artificial, increased decreased, EMF. It is considered that every particular biosustem responds to the influence of this global factor. It has been established that every system of the organism of all mammals, above all the nervous, vascular and endocrine systems, can respond to EMF.”

The 2018 European Commission Scientific Committee on Health, Environmental and Emerging Risks (SCHEER) Lists 5G Electromagnetic Radiation 

SCHEER regularly updates emerging risks to public and environmental health. They have specific methods to identify hazards. In their 2018 European Commission Statement on Emerging Health and Environmental Issues lists e cigarettes, perflourinated compounds, plastics, nanoparticles and also includes virtual reality and electromagnetic radiation, especially 5G technologies.   They state “The lack of clear evidence to inform the development of exposure guidelines to 5G technology leaves open the possibility of unintended biological consequences.” https://ec.europa.eu/health/scientific_committees/scheer_en    or https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/health/files/scientific_committees/scheer/docs/scheer_s_002.pdf   or SCHEER Report Emerging Concerns 2018-

European Parliamentary Research Briefing on 5G and Human Health: More Questions than Answers 

The European Parliament released a short report on human health effects of wireless communications and 5G. They state that while the European Commission’s goal is to advance the digitalization of the EU to increase its competitiveness there are serious concerns with 5G deployment. With regards to security of data the report notes, “the military, hospitals, the police and banks continue to use wired connections, at least for their most essential communications, mainly for security reasons. Wired networks generally offer a faster internet speed and are considered to be more secure.” Because of densification 5G will cost much more to deploy.  they highlight the many unanswered questions with regards to the true need and uses for 5G, who will pay for this expensive technology along with the critical unknowns about health and environmental effects.

Effects of 5G Wireless Communications on Human Health. European Parliamentary Research Service Briefing.  March 2020, or Here

New Danish Legal Compendium of Health and Environmental Effects of 5G

The Danish Institute for Public Health and the Council for Health-Safe Telecommunications has prepared legal document related to the broad harm from 5G as well as other wireless technologies. They state, “The legal opinion is based on the rules of law in the European Convention on Human Rights, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the EU directive on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, the EU directive on the conservation of wild birds, on the precautionary principle as well as on the Bern- and Bonn-conventions on the protection of animals and plants.”

The Compendium can be found and downloaded here.5G Danish legal opinion Jensen 2019

Summary of Research on Harm by Ronald Kostoff, PhD.

Ronald Kostoff, Ph.D., Research Affiliate, School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, has a new thorough summary of the research on this broad and complex topic. He explains carrier waves and why research regarding the harm of wireless technologies appears so conflicted. He includes a wealth of research as well on 5G and other wireless frequencies. The summary is here – 2019-Kostoff-Adverse-Effects-of-RF-EMR-Exposures From 5G and Other 

No Testing, No Regulation, No Safety Guidelines

There has been no premarket testing of this technology or the mix of frequencies we will be exposed to. There are no protective regulations to assure monitoring of radiation levels for each antenna or a registry to document reported health effects. The Departments of Public Health are not informed about any potential health or environmental effects and have not given any guidance with regards to non-ionizing wireless radiation safety except to tell people to reduce their current exposure (California Department of Public Health).  Effects on our most vulnerable populations i.e. children, pregnant women, the elderly and those with chronic diseases, have not been taken into account.

Fiberoptic Networks  provide even faster broadband speeds, are safer, more cybersecure, and more reliable in rural areas, however, telecommunications companies are abandoning these to push for a cheaper alternative, wireless antenna, which emit biologically harmful radio frequencies. Critical secure and sophisticated landlines are also planned for removal by AT&T by 2020 to further force customers into wireless systems. Some cities are moving to community owned fiberoptic networks with Municipal Open Fiber Networks,

5G Mobile Telecommunications to Use a Blanket of Fixed Antennas Networks 

The 5G deployment proposes to add frequencies in the microwave spectrum in the low- (0.6 GHz – 3.7 GHz), mid- (3.7GHz – 24 GHz), and high-band frequencies (24 GHz and higher) for faster communications.  They call this mobile communication, however, because these wavelengths travel only short distances, this system will need to use a dense network of fixed antennas outdoors every 300 meters as well as indoor systems, as the gigahertz radiation is blocked by buildings. This radiation, like the 2G, 3G, 4G telecommunications systems, has not had pre market testing for long term health effects despite the fact that people will be exposed continuously to this microwave radiation. Environmental effects have also been ignored. Published scientific literature is listed below. See also PST 5G “Mobile” Communications

Risks from 5G include:

  • Damage to the eyes- cataracts, retina
  • Immune system disruption
  • Metabolic disruption
  • Damage to sperm
  • Skin damage
  • Collapse of insect populations, the base of food for birds and bats
  • Rise in bacterial resistance and bacterial shifts on skin and in ecosystems
  • Damage to plants and trees

Increase in Frequencies With Constant Exposure   

This means that the human population as well as pets and other species will be exposed to an even larger mix of frequencies continuously inside and outside the home. Industry is fast-tracking placement of cell antennas for this new technology by promoting new legislation on a local, state and federal level.  This will preempt local authority to place antenna on potentially every public utility pole and preexisting cell tower structure.

More Questions than Answers: Health and Environmental Effects

What are the public health implications of this novel technology? What research supports its safety? What research indicates harmful effects? What are the implications for the unsolved privacy and security issues that are also related to health as products are being developed to interface with the medical community and patients? What are the contributions to global climate change? What are the societal and mental health effects in a population increasingly addicted to this technology and disconnected with each other? Patients and physicians are becoming increasingly aware of these related issues and concerned about the long term consequences of our convenient yet problematic wireless technologies. There appear to be more questions than answers.

Millimeter Wavelengths Hazards: Cell Membranes, Internal Signalling, Skin Changes 

Millimeter wavelengths (MMW) have been used in non-invasive complementary medicine in many Eastern European countries, typically to therapeutically heat the tissues over a short time frame. Millimeter wavelengths (at high intensity) have also been used in military applications in Active Denial Systems (95 MMW for non-lethal crowd control weapons) that create heat to repel persons. Studies show these systems can burn the skin.

Some research on non-thermal effects has shown that millimeter wavelengths target cell membranes and have adverse biological effects as well as clinical effects such as cataracts, immune system alterations and physiological effects on the heart and blood pressure.  Betzalal et al (2018)  have demonstrated that the sweat glands  which are coiled structures in the upper layers of the skin can act as antenna receiver for 5G sub-THz band wavelengths. The presence of sweat glands in skin significantly increase the specific absorption rate (SAR), or heat absorption,  for millimeter radio frequency radiation.  This varies depending on factors such as perspiration and stress levels.  Le Quement (2012) looked at non-thermal skin genome effects of 60.4 GHz exposure for 1, 6 or 24 hours and found at 6 hours there was differential expression of 5 transcripts. He states , “this is the first large-scale study reporting on potential gene expression modification associated with MMW radiation used in wireless communication applications.”

Adverse effects have also been found in bacteria and insects Soghomonyan (2016). The cellular and organism effects are nonlinear and depend on a variety of individual factors as well as specific wavelengths, phasing and modulation of the wavelength signals. With widespread exposure even small physiologic alterations would be magnified in a population and contribute to a negative public health outcome.

5G and Health: Research Lacking

A 2018 review of the literature reveals that there is inadequate research into 5G health and environmental effects. There is science which shows both harmful and beneficial effects but no independent long term studies have been performed on 5G or any research on the mix of frequencies we would be exposed to. Critical long term health studies are lacking for 3G and 4G wireless technologies as well as 5G. Current FCC standards are based only on heat effects for all telecommunications radiofrequencies and not biological effects seen with low level exposures that do not heat or burn tissues.

Gaps in Knowledge: Dr. Leszczynski Presentation 2019

Dr. Darius Leszczynski presented at a seminar 5G and Health: Gaps in Knowledge at Georges River NSW, Australia, Sept 15, 2019. His presentation highlighted the existing gaps in science that are crucial to consider before the rollout of 5G.  Dr. Leszczynski points out that there is a lot of confusion around 5G as it is “being developed as well as deployed at the same time. Even the technical standards dealing with the 5G are not all ready yet.” He asked the critical questions about physiological effects in humans and if that could lead to human health effects. Dr. Leszczynski points to his own extensive research into radiofrequency radiation and 1) stress response. 2) gene expression  3) Effects on the blood brain barrier. Epidemiologic studies, he notes, also support RF radiation as a risk for brain cancer. He concludes that there is very little research and the vast majority is done in vitro, not with human volunteers. He suggests testing sensitive  sub-populations in order to have the safest exposure limits for all people, test with chemical toxins as co-exposures, examine blood brain barrier effects, examine for DNA Damage and skin systemic responses.

IEEE: Heat is Still the Only Standard of Harm Considered in 5G Applications, not Biological Effects

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) is an industry association primarily composed of engineers, computer scientists, software developers, information technology professionals, physicists, scientists, and allied professionals. It is the world’s largest technical professional association. Their input has been pivotal in setting standards for radiofrequency exposures. The IEEE performs its own research and is involved in computer and wireless technology product development. Some of their research is included in this section. Even in their 2015 report on 5G “Safe for Generations to Come” the authors state,  “At this time, more reports of beneficial effects than detrimental effects from low-level exposure to mmWave radiation appear to exist in the literature, but this area needs to be better understood, and the specific effects need to be demonstrated reproducibly by independent investigators before any potential non-thermal effects are to be considered in determining the regulatory limits on this regime of nonionizing radiation.”  So far science is not sufficient to support the safety of this technology.

New Evidence of Significant Heat Tissue Damage with 5G: FCC Standards for 5G Gigahertz Wavelengths Urgently Need Reevaluation.

The short millimeter waves for 5G technology bring along new challenges for public safety.  To improve the performance of 5G and IOT devices,  pulsed phased antenna arrays will be used in cell towers and wireless devices- See  A Beam-Steering Antenna for 5G Mobile Phones . This beamforming technology uses a cluster of pulsed microwave antenna beams whose shape and direction can be controlled to have an individual beam pointed at a device to improve signal, similar to missile control.  5G technology will have dozens of smaller antennas packed in a single cell antenna array.  The heat generated by these antenna is a huge concern (Nasim and Kim 2017) .  New research on heat effects of 5G, by (Neufeld and Kuster 2018), demonstrates that permanent tissue damage from heating may occur even after short exposures to 5G millimeter wave pulse trains, where repetitive pulses can cause rapid, localized heating. The scientists highlight an urgent need for new thermal safety exposure standards to update current guidelines which do not adequately prevent excessive heating from pulsed millimeter wave exposure. 

If 5G millimeter wave transmissions associated with these new technologies fail to meet current public safety standards, as the authors predict, then the rollout of IOT becomes questionable on significant thermal health effects, which are regulated and felt to be the only significant health effect. Current FCC policy does not consider non-thermal biological and physiological radiofrequency effects on living organisms, despite abundant literature for 2G 3G and 4G system. This research underscores the obvious lack of meaningful public safety standards.

Physicists vs Biologists: Physicists State RF Energy is Not High Enough to Cause Damage, But Now Both Physicists and Biologists Explain Effects via Dielectric Permittivity, Radical Pairs and Oxidation

It has long been believed that non-ionizing (RF) radiation could not be harmful to living organisms as RF radiation did not break chemical bonds or have enough energy to remove an electron from (ionize) an atom or molecule. It was felt radio frequency radiation damaged tissue only through a heating or burning mechanism. We are now learning that microwave radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation from wireless devices acts as an environmental stressor with direct oxidative toxic effects on cellular processes that are not related to heat or to ionization. The effect of radiofrequency EMR is indirect, inducing biochemical changes in cellular structures and their membranes. (49,50,78)

Many physicists argue vehemently that there could not be a biologically toxic effect from electromagnetic radiation, however, toxicity has been demonstrated in many research investigations and is similar to effects from other chemical exposures. Their own publications now explain the effects of dielectric permittivity and radical pair mechanisms.

Hinrikus (2018), a physicist and Associate Editor at the International Journal of Radiation Biology (IJRB)  explains, “The cumulative impact of coherent MW field in a medium has been convincingly confirmed by the measurable dielectric permittivity of the medium. The described mechanism of MW field-induced effect confirms that the nature of the effect differs from the thermal effect and that the exposure by MW radiation can create the specific consequences in biology and materials not characteristic for conventional heating.”

Nielson (2019) states, “Weak radiofrequency (RF) magnetic fields in the MHz-range was shown to influence the concentrations of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in living cells [1–4]. Remarkably, the energy that could possibly be deposited by such radiation is orders of magnitude smaller than the energy of molecular thermal motion. A plausible explanation to the observed effect relies on the interaction of RF magnetic fields with transient radicals within the cells, affecting the ROS formation rates through the radical pair mechanism [5–9].”

Henshaw (2020), a former nuclear physicist and former Associate Editor of the International Journal of Radiation Biology (IJRB), Denis Henshaw has criticized the assertions made by some physicists in his 2020 update on quantum energy and RFR. He States,  “This ancient assertion has been put more explicitly: radio waves used by cell phones lack the quantum energy to eject electrons from atoms or molecules and therefore cannot cause cancer.” He argues this assertion is a fallacy, and he explains the DNA damage is an indirect effect similar to chemicals and asbestos.  The carcinogenicity effect is termed “The Bystander Effect.” He goes on to explain that the Radical Pair Mechanism “is the process by which low intensity magnetic fields can alter the spin state of pairs of free radicals”, making them more available to cause biologic damage. Henshaw Update 12-April-2020 Non-ionising radiation quantum energy fallacy V2 Henshaw Update 12-April-2020 Non-ionising radiation quantum energy fallacy V2

Scientific Articles on How Non Ionizing  Radiation Can Cause Non-Thermal Damage to Cell Structures: Spin Chemistry, Oxidation and  Pulsation 

Insect Armageddon

5G Licensed to Kill: The Insect Inspector Discusses the Insect Apocalypse

As scientists are working to explain the insect apocalypse , this video highlights one common environmental toxin that is known to kill insects, that is 5G as well as 3G and 4G radiation. He points out that “the 30-year radiation from millions of cellular phone masts is the single factor present in every region of insect decline.” Science backs up this observation. Wireless radiation may not be the only factor in this “insect Armageddon” but it may be the critical one. Pesticides can be avoided and habitat can be restored, however,  once cell phone masts are placed they are rarely removed, and the continuous waves of radiation intensify with efforts to cover broader areas of land with more and more towers. The disappearance of birds and bees points to wireless technology as the yet unrecognized factor hastening this decline. 5G will be like 3G and 4G on steroids as these smaller millimeter wavelengths are the size of insects and the resonance effect of these continuous waves could set up additive vibrations that destroy the insect and essentially cook it.  Microwave radiation is known to kill insects and is already being used for insect control in stored grains and other foods. Studies in food and agriculture literature confirm this effect.  (Yadav 2014)  (Das 2013)  (Geveke 2009)  (Ponomaryova 2009)  (Zhejiang 2004)  (Geveke 2003)  (Mishenko 2000)

Scientists Urge Moratorium on 5G Technology:

It is notable that currently over 207 scientists and physicians who have researched the biological and health effects of radiofrequency radiation have signed the 5G appeal, calling for a moratorium on the use of 5G technologies until more research is conducted and proves the safety of this technology. See also Scientists call for 5G Moratorium-SaferEMR

5G Industry Spin Articles

There are those who work for, or are associated with, the chemical industry that brought us DDT, BPA, flame retardants, pesticides and a host of other toxins, and who support the telecom industry claims of safety of 5G, 4G, 3G an 2G. For the record here is one. The American Council on Science and Health (ACSH), which is purportedly a pro-science consumer group,  was backed by the American Chemical Association and now solicits funds  from corporations to support industry objectives, not objective science or public health promotion. They also funded the Deniers for Hire group.  The ACSH has defended asbestos, agent orange and DDT.  Scientists who have done robust research on radio frequency radiation continue to publish articles that show strong evidence of harm as well as mechanisms of harm.   Climate denialists use a variety of methods, including conspiracist ideation, to dismiss and gloss over robust science.

The International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF )

The International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF )was formed in 2022 as an independent scientific authority with goals similar to the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), but with a different perspective. Both address the key issue of safety and exposure standards of non-ionizing radiofrequency radiation from burgeoning wireless devices and infrastructure.  The powerful 12-member ICNIRP, however, is criticized by the ICBE-EMF, among others, for using outdated and flawed criteria, creating exposure standards that are 1) based only on heat 2) Do not consider long term exposure 3) do not take into account sensitive populations 4) do not consider new research into health effects and biological harm at levels that are far below current standards.

The first paper of this independent group of scientists and physicians, Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radiofrequency radiation: implications for 5G, was published in October 2022. This reviews the history of how the FCC standards were developed with limited data on safety. The paper also lists 14 flawed assumptions which are the basis of the current ICNIRP/FCC guidelines.

In March 2023 the (ICBE-EMF)  published a second peer reviewed paper on wireless radiofrequency radiation(RFR) exposure standards, Cell Phone Radiation Exposure Limits and Engineering Solutions. 

Scientific Literature- Exposure Levels and

Health Effects

5G Exposure Levels and Standards

Newest Published Articles 5G -Health Effects

 Published Literature 5G High Frequency GHz – Health Effects