Why We Believe 5G Is not Safe: Part 2

Despite this, the FDA recently upheld the FCC’s 1996 exposure limits for RFR in a letter to the FCC. The FDA asserted that “no changes to the current standards are warranted at this time” and that “NTP’s experimental findings should not be applied to human cell phone usage.” According to the FDA, “the available scientific evidence to date does not support adverse health effects in humans due to exposures at or under the current limits.”

The latest cellular technology, 5G, introduces millimeter waves alongside the microwaves used in earlier cellular technologies (2G through 4G). Due to its limited range, 5G will require cell antennas to be positioned every 100 to 200 meters, potentially exposing many individuals to millimeter wave radiation. 5G also incorporates novel technologies like active antennas with beam-forming capabilities, phased arrays, and massive multiple inputs and outputs (massive MIMO), which present distinct challenges in terms of exposure measurement.

Millimeter waves are predominantly absorbed within a few millimeters of human skin and in the surface layers of the cornea. Short-term exposure may lead to adverse physiological effects in the peripheral nervous system, the immune system, and the cardiovascular system. Research suggests that long-term exposure could pose health risks to the skin (e.g., melanoma), the eyes (e.g., ocular melanoma), and the testes (e.g., sterility).

Given that 5G is a novel technology, there is limited research on its health effects, and we essentially lack data in this regard. Yet, we have substantial evidence of the harmful effects of 2G and 3G technologies. Our understanding of the effects of 4G, a decade-old technology, is also relatively limited due to a lack of government-funded research. Meanwhile, we observe increases in certain types of head and neck tumors in tumor registries, which could be attributed, at least in part, to the proliferation of cell phone radiation. These findings align with the results of case-control studies on tumor risk in frequent cell phone users.

5G is not expected to replace 4G but rather coexist with it for the foreseeable future, potentially leading to simultaneous exposure to multiple types of RFR. This raises concerns about potential synergistic effects, which may significantly increase our overall risk of harm from RFR. It’s worth noting that cancer is not the sole risk, as there is substantial evidence indicating that RFR may also contribute to neurological disorders and reproductive harm, likely through oxidative stress.

As a society, we should consider whether it is prudent to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in deploying 5G, a cellular technology that necessitates the installation of 800,000 or more new cell antenna sites in close proximity to where we live, work, and engage in recreational activities.

Alternatively, we could heed the recommendations of the 250 scientists and medical doctors who have endorsed the 5G Appeal. This appeal calls for an immediate halt to the deployment of 5G and urges the government to allocate funding for research aimed at establishing biologically grounded exposure limits to protect our health and safety.