5G Health Risks Debunked – A Brief Look At The Science!


As you might imagine with my having this website I see a lot of false information out there regarding 5G systems and technology and their related health risks. It is hard to know what to believe since there is so much information out their, half saying the exact opposite of what the other half is saying. So how do you know what to believe?

That is hopefully where this article will help. While I am not a physicist, or a scientist, I have been researching this topic heavily for the last 5 years and have read as much of the science on this topic as I have been able to find. What I have found reading the various studies on this topic, is they are relatively simple and easy to understand. Sure they use a bit of scientific jargon, but nothing a quick Google search can’t define.

So in this article I am going to first briefly define what “5G”, or “5G frequencies” are, and then I will give you the best examples I can find of what both sides say, and I will link to their sources and give you as fair of a comparison as possible. While I will give you my opinion on this topic, I don’t want you to take my word for anything. I simply hope to give you a starting place to delve into the studies for yourselves so that you can form your own conclusions as to what the most credible (non-biased) science says.

What Is “5G”? – Or What Are “5G Frequencies?”

What Is 5G

To answer this question I first need to explain what EMF Radiation is. EMF stands for electric magnetic fields. When people use the term EMF today they are generally talking about the radiation that is emitted from cellular towers, equipment and devices, WiFi devices, radio wave emitting devices, radiation emitted from building electrical wiring, and the radiation emitted from all other small electronic devices.

So therefore there are 4 basic types of EMF Radiation.

1. Electric Fields & 2. Magnetic Fields

The first two are “electric and magnetic fields”. When people use these terms in relation to EMF, they are mainly speaking of the electric and magnetic fields emitted from small electronic devices.

3. RF Radiation

The third type is called Radio Frequency or RF Radiation. This includes both the radio waves and the microwave portions of the electromagnetic spectrum as shown in the below chart. 5G millimeter waves are the highest frequency 90% portion of the microwave section of the electromagnetic spectrum.

4. Dirty Electricity

And the forth is called electric smog or dirty electricity which is the electric and magnetic fields that radiate into the rooms of buildings from the electrical wiring in the walls. These are high frequency spikes and surges caused by anything that attempts to change or manipulate the normal alternating current running over the lines, such as a device that changes AC electricity to DC electricity.

“5G” Defined

When people use the term “5G”, it stands for the “fifth generation” of cell phone systems. 5G technology promises to create the “internet of things” where your cell phone connects to all of the “smart” devices in your home, and even to your self driving car.

Since connecting all of these devices will necessitate electromagnetic frequencies that can carry massive amounts of data, the millimeter wave portion of the electromagnetic spectrum will be key in making these systems work. So when scientists talk about “5G” or “5G frequencies”, they mean millimeter length microwaves.

Electromagnetic Spectrum

As I already mentioned, in the above image 5G frequencies take up the highest 90% of the microwave part of the electromagnetic spectrum, from about the 24 GHz to possibly as high as 300 GHz frequencies. The millimeter designation has to do with the length of the wave itself, waves in that range being measured in millimeters rather than in feet or meters. And again these are the types of waves capable of carrying the massive amounts of data 5G systems will need to function.

5G Frequency Confusion

There has been some confusion on this recently because “5G Cellular Networks” use both the 5G millimeter wave frequencies, as well as some sub 6 GHz frequencies typically considered part of the 4G range. Since some of the newer Radio Frequency (RF) meters read up to 10 GHz, they have been advertising themselves as “5G meters”, because they can pick up the lower 4G sub 6 GHz frequencies used by 5G cellular networks.

This is deceptive because most people wanting a “5G meter”, are wanting to actually read the higher 5G millimeter wave 24 GHz to 300 GHz frequencies. I discuss this confusion in the below video.

You can tell I was a little bit surprised in that video. It was the first time I had run into this confusion. But since the filming of that video I have seen the confusion has gotten more prevalent.

The Real Science For 5G Health Risks – With No Conflicts Of Interest

Scientific Studies Image

The reason that I titled the heading for this section the way that I did is because this is where I go over what I call real, actual, no agenda or no dog in the fight science. But please do not take my word for it. Please read the actual studies I link to below, as well as do your own research on your own. That is what I have done for myself, and that is what I am attempting to demonstrate in this article. But I still think it is important for each person to put in the work to do their own research on both sides and come to their own conclusions.

So in this section I am going to give you a small sample of the massive amounts of independently funded, peer reviewed scientific studies showing the health risks specifically of 5G frequencies. Then in the next section I will show you a few important studies that show the health risks of EMF Radiation in general. And after that in the next section I will show you a recent study as well as a few of the most prominent recent main stream articles pushing the opposite view.

5G’s 60 GHz & 120-140 GHz Frequencies Oxygen Absorption Issues

60 GHz Oxygen Absorption

This first article isn’t a study. It is just a well known fact, as shown in the article entitled “Fixed Wireless Communications at 60GHz Unique Oxygen Absorption Properties“, that there are several of the 5G millimeter frequencies that absorb oxygen, which may interfere with people exposed to those frequencies being able to absorb oxygen themselves in their lungs. From the frequency of 10 GHz and above the waves begin to interact with Oxygen molecules more, until it gets to the point of absorption.

You can see the oxygen absorption characteristics of these frequencies in the above graph that I borrowed from that article that I linked to above.  These frequencies affects the orbit of electrons in the oxygen molecule, and this affects the oxygen molecule’s ability to bind with blood hemoglobin. The 60 GHz frequency was the one chosen for the first 5G home WiFi routers that came on the market. My understanding is that they have now been discontinued due to the frequency not penetrating walls very well.

In this below video scientist Iris Huizing discusses this oxygen interaction with the various 5G frequencies including the absorption issue. Just know when she refers to “5G frequencies” she is referring to the frequencies used by current 5G cellular networks including some of the traditionally thought of 4G frequencies.

Russian 2019 Study Of 5G Adverse Effects Under Real Life Conditions

5G Russian Study

The title of this study 2019 Russian study is entitled “Adverse health effects of 5G mobile networking technology under real-life conditions“. The conclusion of this article reads as follows:

“Wireless radiation offers the promise of improved remote sensing, improved communications and data transfer, and improved connectivity. Unfortunately, there is a large body of data from laboratory and epidemiological studies showing that previous and present generations of wireless networking technology have significant adverse health impacts. Much of this data was obtained under conditions not reflective of real-life. When real-life considerations are added, such as 1) including the information content of signals along with 2) the carrier frequencies, and 3) including other toxic stimuli in combination with the wireless radiation, the adverse effects associated with wireless radiation are increased substantially. Superimposing 5G radiation on an already imbedded toxic wireless radiation environment will exacerbate the adverse health effects shown to exist.

CIA Declassified 2012 Russian Millimeter Waves Study

CIA Declassified 2012 Russian Millimeter Waves Study

This is a Russian study done in 2012 that the CIA originally had listed as a classified document. It has since been declassified, but it is still partially redacted. It is entitled “Biological Effect Of Millimeter Radiowaves“. Remember whenever the term millimeter waves is used, it refers to the microwave portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, or 5G.

This study found that exposure to 5G millimeter waves interferes with the normal cellular function or processes of the body. They found that it even interfered with the processes of DNA and RNA. It especially effected these processes in the liver, spleen, kidneys, lungs and heart.

Microwave Expert Physicist Barry Trower Describes In Detail The Harmful Effects Of 5G Millimeter Waves

Barry Trower literally spent his whole life studying microwave radiation. First he studied them as military weapons when he served in the British military. They he continued studying them the rest of his career as a Physicist professor. Here him discuss from first hand knowledge the effects of 5G millimeter waves in this below video interview.

Barry Trower is well respected and world renowned. He has been a very active expert warning about the harmful biological effects that the 5G rollout will cause.

Over 400 Scientists Appeal Over 5G To the European Commission

5G Letters

When I first learned about the scientist effort writing letters to various governments around the world warning about the dangers of 5G millimeter wave exposure, it was only 250 scientists. As I was writing this article when I went to get the link again I found out the number is now up to over 400. That’s pretty crazy. They come from more than 35 different countries. And there are other doctor groups writing similar letters.

The website you can find all this on is ehtrust.org. The article is entitled “SMALL CELLS, MINI CELL TOWERS, WIRELESS FACILITIES AND HEALTH: LETTERS FROM SCIENTISTS ON THE HEALTH RISK OF 5G“. These letters are really worth taking the time to go pull up and reading. I highly recommend it. It makes a great resource to share with others as well.

How To Protect Yourself From 5G Exposure

In this below video I go through the only scientifically proven methods I have found to protect the human body from the random EMF Radiation we are all exposed to in today’s world. Hopefully you will find it beneficial.

A Few Important General EMF Radiation Studies

In this section I want to highlight a few important studies showing the health risks of EMF Radiation in general, not necessarily just the 5G millimeter waves.

Study Showing Cell Phones In Bras Causing Malignant Breast Tumors

EMF Radiation Breast Cancer

The study I want to highlight here is one done (I believe in the United States) in 2013 entitled “Multifocal Breast Cancer in Young Women with Prolonged Contact between Their Breasts and Their Cellular Phones“. This study mainly looked at what could be causing breast cancer in women younger than 40, where normally breast cancer does not occur.

In this study they show multiple images similar to the one above showing the tumors only occurring in the exact spot on the breast where each specific woman was carrying her cell phone in her braw. They did not show signs of tumors anywhere else in their breasts. If they only carried their cell phone next to one breast, then those women would only develop the cancer on that one breast in the exact spot where her cell phone was always carried.

The image above is actually not from that study however. Instead I took it from the below video of a news clip showing one of Dr. Oz’s programs where he interviews a young woman who contracted breast cancer after carrying her cell phone in her braw for 4 years. You can see they drew lines to show exactly where next to her breast her cell phone would always sit. She likewise only developed tumors in the spot next to where she carried her cell phone.

Breast Cancer Cell Phone Video

3 Studies Showing An Increase In Malignant Brain Tumors Near The Ear

Temporal Lobe

I found this study in the International Journal of Epidemiology. It was conducted in 2010 and is entitled the “Brain tumour risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the INTERPHONE international case–control study“.

This, like other similar studies, found that during the time since cell phones became commonly used, while there was not really a significant increase in the overall amount of brain tumors, they did find a very significant increase in brain tumors occurring in the part of the brain (the temporal lobe) that is closest to our ears.

The following two studies, “Location, Location, Location Aggressive Brain Tumors Tell a Story” and “Brain Tumours: Rise in Glioblastoma Multiforme Incidence in England 1995–2015 Suggests an Adverse Environmental or Lifestyle Factor“, are two that also show an increase in brain tumors in the temporal lobe during similar time periods studied.

5 Studies Showing Increase In Cancer, DNA Damage & Other Symptoms In People Living Near Cell Towers

Cell Tower By Elementary School

There are a lot of studies that have been done showing that people living close to cell towers develop cancer and other health problems more often and at younger ages than those who live farther away. This article is getting long so I am not going to go into a lot of detail with these 5 studies. I will link to each so that you can go to them and read them for yourself. I will give a short blurb about each.

German Study Published in 2004

This study entitled “The Influence of Being Physically Near to a Cell Phone Transmission Mast on the Incidence of Cancer“ finds significant increase in cancer in those living within 400 meters of cell towers, compared to those that lived farther away.

French Study Published in 2002

In this questionnaire study entitled “Investigation on the health of people living near mobile telephone relay stations: I/Incidence according to distance and sex“, they found that significantly more people living closer than 300 meters to a cell towers complained of tiredness, headache, sleep disturbance, discomfort, irritability, depression, loss of memory, dizziness, libido decrease, etc., than did those that lived farther away; and women significantly more often than men.

Israeli Study Published in 2004

In this study entitled “Increased incidence of cancer near a cell-phone transmitter station“ they found 129 cancer cases per 10,000 people living within 350 meters from cell towers as compared to 16-31 cases per 10,000 people that lived more than 350 meters from cell towers.

Brazil Study Published in 2011

This study entitled “Mortality by neoplasia and cellular telephone base stations in the Belo Horizonte municipality, Minas Gerais state, Brazil” was a 10 year study (1996-2006) found a significant increase in cancer in the people living closer than 500 meters to a cell tower as opposed to those living farther away.

Indian Study Published in 2015

This study entitled “A cross-sectional case control study on genetic damage in individuals residing in the vicinity of a mobile phone base station” that used a simple DNA test called “comet assays” to test for DNA damage, found a significant increase in DNA damage in the people living closer than 300 meters to the cell tower, as opposed to those living farther away.

You might want to read a related article that I wrote on cell tower radiation entitled “Why 5G Cell Towers Are More Dangerous – Get The Facts!

The Main Stream, Government & Big Tech Funded 5G Safety View

Federal Communications Commission.

The reason I named the above title the way I did, is because each of these types of sources tend to all maintain the same view, that 5G and EMF Radiation in general is perfectly harmless. Their most common argument is that because microwaves are “non-ionizing”, meaning they cannot completely remove an electron from an atom or molecule, unless they are powerful enough to cause heat in our bodily tissue (as with a microwave oven), they cannot possibly be harmful.

Also because millimeter waves get obstructed easier, they claim they do not penetrate the body as far.

As we quote some of these sources you may notice that they often mock the other side, or say things such as “there is no study that shows that 5G is harmful…”, which as you have already seen, that claim is patently false. But we will get to that.

European Commission 5G Article

European Commission

Okay the first article that I want to go over with you is this one from the European Commission’s website entitled “Is 5G bad for your health? It’s complicated, say researchers“.

The “expert” that they quote in this article is a Professor Niels Kuster, founder and director of the Swiss IT’IS Foundation. The IT’IS Foundation says that its purpose is to do “Research on Information Technologies in Society” and gets its funding from “national and international sources, including from government and non-government (NGO) agencies“.

In this article Professor Kuster talks about two possible harms caused by 5G Radiation. First he brings up the standard non-ionizing heat problem when he says:

“Just like a microwave oven heats food using non-ionizing radiation, telecom gear can do the same to the human body if it emits too much”

Then regarding cancer Professor Kuster says:

The evidence around cancer is, however, more difficult to interpret. Several large-scale epidemiological studies showed mixed results. The most well-known is probably the 13-country Interphone study from 2000 to 2006 with around 5,000 patients. This tried to find a correlation between mobile phone use and cancer. It concluded that ‘no increase in risk of glioma or meningioma was observed with use of mobile phones’.”

Remember to please go to each of these articles I list, from both sides of this argument, read them in full and come to your own conclusion based on your own logic and discernment.

My Response

Professor Niels Kuster starts off his points by referencing the “hundreds of studies about electromagnetic radiation” he claims his organization has “been involved in”. Initially to me this gave him credibility. I was like “cool, maybe he is an honest, knowledgeable guy, lets hear what he has to say”.

And in his first point, he is correct in his description of 5G and it’s heating capabilities. I was still hanging with him giving him the benefit of the doubt. In fact besides his example of a microwave oven which actually uses 4G’s 2.45 GHz frequency, the US Military has a crowd control weapon called the Active Denial System which disperses crowds by heating up the surface of their skin using the 90 GHz millimeter frequency.

However as soon as he started talking about 5G and cancer, his credibility went completely south for me, and here’s why. First “the evidence around cancer” is not difficult to interpret. Go to the scientific studies page of this website. I list many studies which link this radiation to various forms of cancer including malignant brain tumors.

Or you can go to my article about cell tower radiation. I list 4 or 5 different studies in that article where they found people living closer to cell towers experienced significantly more cancer starting at younger ages than those living farther away from these cell towers.

None of these studies that I have read are at all difficult to interpret; especially if you are reading them without a dog in the fight, or without an agenda.

And second, he does not name, cite or link to the studies he mentions. I like to look up the studies that exist that conclude that 5G is perfectly safe. Generally they are funded by major international corporations, either directly or indirectly.

King Abdullah University of Science in Saudi Arabia 5G Study

King Abdullah University of Science

This is a scientific study done on 5G Radiation Health affects by a major university out of Saudi Arabia. It is done in formal scientific format and language. And as I started reading it I was amazed at how long it is. It is entitled “Health Risks Associated With 5G Exposure: A View From the Communications Engineering Perspective“. In either studies, or in news pieces quoting studies, I always strive to find who owns the entity, or who funds them to identify how neutral they are or if there is a possible conflict of interest.

I could not find who funds this University. However since the title of this study states that they are looking at things through the lens of a “communications engineering perspective”, this suggests that they might be funded by the communications (i.e. cellular) industry.

The first paragraph in their “Summary and Conclusion” it states:

“We have performed an in-depth analysis of the health risks associated with 5G exposure by adopting the perspective of 5G communications engineering. Initially, we have concentrated on the health effects, by analyzing the central allegations of diseases linked to 5G exposure and by investigating the false claims and hoaxes. Besides, we have applied key concepts of communications engineering to review recent animal-based studies, demonstrating that the claimed health effects about the carcinogenicity of RF radiation can not be applied to 5G gNBs and 5G UE. Moreover, we have examined the population-based studies relevant to 5G, showing that their methodologies have to be deeply revised when considering 5G communications.”

Then in their introduction they say:

“The fear of 5G technology is mainly due to a biased feeling among the population”

My Response

Give me a flipping break! Talk about bias! They had their conclusion determined before they started the “study”. Their own words make this crystal clear. The title of their “study” (and I use the term “study” very loosley) states that they are coming from the viewpoint of the communications industry.

Also what could be more biased than calling a theory you are studying “false claims and hoaxes”? That is the epitome of bias. True scientists don’t talk like that, and true studies don’t start from the perspective of having their minds already made up, as these guy’s minds obviously already were. Shameful.

True scientists can’t stand conflicts of interest as stated by these scientists in this article: Health risks from radiofrequency radiation, including 5G, should be assessed by experts with no conflicts of interest.

Forbes 5G Article

Forbes Logo

The article we are looking at from Forbes was published in May 31st, 2022 and is entitled “Is 5G Making You Sick? Here’s What Experts Say“. As per usual with these types of sources, Forbes first talks about the fact that 5G microwave radiation is non-ionizing. Again the idea here is that since it is not breaking off electrons and shooting them out like ionizing radiation, it cannot cause any harm.

They then get into the whole “tissue heating” potential harm we have already talked about in an earlier article. At the beginning of their “5G Fact vs. Fiction” section of the article they state:

“The World Health Organization (WHO) and FDA declare 5G safe. And, according to Collins, “all wireless communications use nonionizing electromagnetic radiation to transmit energy and information through space without the need for wires.” For 5G, he says, “the electromagnetic waves have a higher frequency, which allows it to carry more information. It also has a smaller wavelength and does not penetrate the body as far as lower-frequency energy.”

Not all experts agree with those conclusions. Whether or not 5G could negatively impact your brain is something researchers are still studying, and will likely monitor for some time.”

My Response

This article was a hard one to figure out what statements to quote for you above. As you can see in what I quoted, they were constantly back and forth sort of stating both sides. However overall the impression I got was that they felt 5G is safe. They kind of half alluded it to it being a myth that just hadn’t been debunked yet.

I didn’t quote it because it would have been to long, but they tried to compare 5G radiation to sunlight. I thought it is funny that they used the term “electromagnetic radiation” in relation to this heating issue, so that they can compare it to sunlight, to portray 5G as not harmful. I thought them using the term “electromagnetic radiation” to make that comparison was humorous, because x-rays and gamma rays are also electromagnetic radiation. This will make more sense if you read their article.

Over all the article did a better job than most in expressing at least some of the opposing argument. They did use the standard arguments against 5G.

Final Thoughts

If you made it all the way to this point in this article, especially if you clicked on and read at least some of the studies and news articles I linked to, then thank you very much. If you did I imagine you have come to the realization as did I, that this is very important information to expose people to.

So if possible please share this article on your social media sites and email it to all of your friends. That is really the only grass roots way we have of making others aware. Again thank you.

Recent Posts