The Effects of Mobile Phone Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields on β-Amyloid-Induced Oxidative Stress in Human and Rat Primary Astrocytes.
Tsoy A et al. · 2019
At a Glance
Of the 412 peer-reviewed studies in this collection on radiofrequency exposure, 298 — 72.3% — reported biological effects. Millimeter waves are represented, but as cell-culture work at 60 GHz rather than at the 24–47 GHz bands high-band 5G deploys on, and not in people — so the distinctive part of 5G is studied at one remove rather than directly. Lower-band 5G uses frequencies already covered by decades of research, where effects are documented but dose matters: one careful study found no DNA damage in human cells until average absorption reached at least 5.0 W/kg.
Based on analysis of 415 peer-reviewed studies
5G technology has generated significant public concern about health effects. The topic has also attracted misinformation, making it difficult for people to understand what scientific research actually shows about 5G safety.
5G operates across different frequency bands—some similar to existing 4G networks, others using higher frequencies (millimeter waves) that are relatively new for widespread consumer exposure. This page focuses on what peer-reviewed research says about radiofrequency radiation at 5G frequencies.
We present the scientific evidence objectively, including both studies that raise concerns and those that find no effects, so you can make informed judgments based on actual research.
Key Findings
- -298 of 412 studies (72.3%) in this collection found biological effects from radiofrequency exposure
- -Millimeter-wave research here is laboratory work at 60 GHz — exposure changed keratinocyte gene expression only when it raised temperature, leaving a small residual effect the heat control did not reproduce (Habauzit 2014); nothing covers the 24–47 GHz bands 5G deploys on, and nothing is in people
- -Dose determines the result — exposure of human lymphocytes for 3 or 24 hours produced no significant DNA damage, while 24-hour exposure at an average absorption of at least 5.0 W/kg did induce chromosomal damage (Tice 2002)
- -DNA strand breaks in rat brain cells rose with dose rate across 0.6 and 1.2 W/kg after two hours of 2450 MHz exposure (Lai and Singh 1995)
- -The mechanism appears to be free radicals — melatonin and a spin-trap compound, both free radical scavengers, blocked radiofrequency-induced DNA strand breaks (Lai and Singh 1997)
What the Research Shows
What 5G Actually Is, for Research Purposes
5G is not one thing. Low-band and mid-band 5G operate at frequencies overlapping what 4G, WiFi and cordless phones have used for years, and those frequencies carry decades of study. High-band 5G uses millimeter waves, which is genuinely new for consumer deployment. Of the 412 peer-reviewed studies indexed here on radiofrequency exposure, of which 298 (72.3%) reported biological effects, millimeter waves are represented — but the work sits at 60 GHz, above the 24–47 GHz range high-band 5G actually deploys on, and it is done in cell cultures rather than people.
Habauzit and colleagues (2014) exposed human keratinocytes to 60 GHz and found 665 genes differentially expressed. When the temperature rise was held constant, that change disappeared. A heat-shock control did not reproduce the exposure exactly, leaving 34 genes that suggest a small specific electromagnetic effect on top of the heating. Le Quément and colleagues (2014) exposed the same cell type at 20 mW/cm² and found no change in endoplasmic-reticulum stress markers at baseline; where exposure did alter the stress response, the controls tied it to heat.
That is the shape of the millimeter-wave evidence here: mostly thermal, with a small residual effect, in cells. For the part of 5G that resembles existing technology, there is direct evidence. For the part that is new, there is adjacent evidence at the wrong frequency and the wrong scale.
What the Existing Research Found, and at What Dose
Tice and colleagues (2002) exposed cultured human blood cells to four different cellular signal technologies at 837 and 1909 MHz, including analog, TDMA, CDMA and GSM formats. Exposure for 3 or 24 hours did not produce a significant increase in DNA damage in leukocytes, and 3 hours did not increase micronucleated lymphocytes. Extended exposure at an average specific absorption rate of at least 5.0 W/kg did induce chromosomal damage. The conclusion is specific: these signals can damage chromosomes under extended exposure at that dose.
Lai and Singh (1995) exposed rats for two hours to 2450 MHz and found a dose-rate-dependent increase in DNA single-strand breaks in brain cells at whole-body absorption rates of 0.6 and 1.2 W/kg. Notably, immediately after pulsed exposure no significant effect appeared — the effect emerged with continuous-wave exposure and at four hours after pulsed exposure. Their 1996 follow-up found both single- and double-strand breaks at 1.2 W/kg.
The Mechanism
Lai and Singh (1997) tested whether free radicals explain the damage by treating rats with melatonin or the spin-trap compound PBN before and after exposure. Both blocked the DNA strand breaks. Since both are efficient free radical scavengers, the result points at oxidative stress as the pathway rather than heating.
Leszczynski and colleagues (2002) showed a separate non-thermal response: one hour of mobile phone exposure changed the phosphorylation status of numerous proteins in human endothelial cells, including heat shock protein-27, at intensities that did not heat the cells.
Putting Dose in Context
The exposures producing these effects — 0.6 to 5.0 W/kg — are far above what a person absorbs from a distant 5G antenna, and in the range of a phone held against the head. Ambient exposure from network infrastructure is typically thousands of times lower than the levels in these experiments. A guide that reports the effects without the doses leaves out the part that determines whether they apply to you.
What the Evidence Does Not Show
No study here demonstrates harm from 5G. The millimeter-wave work in this collection is cell-culture research at 60 GHz, not at 5G's own bands and not in people, which means claims that high-band 5G is dangerous and claims that it is proven safe are both running ahead of the evidence. The lower-band research shows real non-thermal biological effects, at doses generally above ambient network exposure and comparable to handset use.
Reducing Exposure If You Choose To
The dominant source for almost everyone is their own handset, not the network. Speaker mode or wired headphones remove most head exposure. Texting over calling reduces transmit time. Keeping the phone out of the bedroom overnight removes hours of close proximity. Using WiFi rather than cellular in weak-signal areas matters because a phone reaching for a distant tower transmits at higher power — which is also why more, closer antennas can lower handset output rather than raise total exposure.
Related Studies (415)
Effect of 900-, 1800-, and 2100-MHz radiofrequency radiation on DNA and oxidative stress in brain
Alkis ME et al. · 2019
Researchers exposed male Sprague Dawley rats to radiofrequency radiation at 900, 1800, or 2100 MHz for 2 hours per day for 6 months to study DNA damage and oxidative stress in blood and brain tissue. DNA damage and oxidative stress indicators were found higher in the radiofrequency radiation exposure groups than in the sham-control group. The researchers concluded that 900-, 1800-, and 2100-MHz radiofrequency radiation may cause oxidative damage, induce an increase in lipid peroxidation, and increase oxidative DNA damage in the frontal lobe of rat brain tissues, and that 2100-MHz radiation may cause formation of DNA single-strand breaks.
Brain & Nervous SystemNo Effects Found
Impact of Long-Term RF-EMF on Oxidative Stress and Neuroinflammation in Aging Brains of C57BL/6 Mice.
Jeong YJ et al. · 2018
The aim of the study was to observe the impact of long-term RF-EMF on oxidative stress and neuroinflammation in aging brains of C57BL/6 mice. Compared with young mice, aged mice showed significantly increased protein and lipid oxidative damage markers in the brain. Aged mice also had significantly elevated markers of DNA damage, apoptosis, astrocytes, and microglia. Long-term RF-EMF exposure did not change the levels of oxidative stress, DNA damage, apoptosis, astrocyte, or microglia markers in aged mouse brains. Long-term RF-EMF exposure also did not alter locomotor activity in aged mice.
Measurement of the 100 MHz EMF radiation in vivo effects on zebrafish D. rerio embryonic development: A multidisciplinary study.
Piccinetti CC et al. · 2018
Researchers evaluated the biological effects of 100 MHz radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure on zebrafish embryos using a multidisciplinary protocol. The 100 MHz EMF affected zebrafish embryonic development from 24 to 72 hours post-fertilization across all analyzed pathways. At 48 hours post-fertilization, reduced growth, increased oxidative stress gene transcription, apoptotic and autophagic processes, and modified cholesterol metabolism were detected. By 72 hours post-fertilization, embryos partially recovered from stress and reached hatching time comparable to controls.
Melatonin attenuates radiofrequency radiation (900 MHz)-induced oxidative stress, DNA damage and cell cycle arrest in germ cells of male Swiss albino mice.
Pandey N, Giri S. · 2018
Researchers exposed Swiss albino mice to RFR for 3 hours twice daily for 35 days and gave some mice melatonin at 5 mg/kg body weight per day. RFR-exposed mice showed extensive DNA damage, arrest in pre-meiotic spermatogenesis, low sperm count, and sperm head abnormalities. Biochemical assays revealed excess free radical generation and histological changes in testis and germ cells. Melatonin supplementation diminished or abolished these effects.
Radiofrequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi (2.4 GHz) causes impaired insulin secretion and increased oxidative stress in rat pancreatic islets.
Masoumi A, Karbalaei N, Mortazavi SMJ, Shabani M. · 2018
The Wi-Fi exposure used a frequency of 2.45 GHz. The Wi-Fi exposed group had significantly lower weight gain than controls and developed hyperglycemia. Plasma insulin levels and glucose-stimulated insulin secretion from pancreatic islets were significantly reduced, while pancreatic lipid peroxidation increased and GSH, SOD, and GPx activities decreased.
Exposure to radiation from single or combined radio frequencies provokes macrophage dysfunction in the RAW 264.7 cell line.
López-Furelos A et al. · 2018
Researchers exposed RAW 264.7 macrophage cells to single or combined radiofrequency signals at 900 and 2450 MHz for 4, 24, 48, or 72 hours in a GTEM chamber. They measured cell viability, nitric oxide production, HSP70 and TNF-α expression, and phagocytic activity. Phagocytic activity declined with longer exposure, while combined exposure raised HSP70 at 48 hours and significantly increased nitric oxide and TNF-α at 72 hours.
Effect of low-level 1800 MHz radiofrequency radiation on the rat sciatic nerve and the protective role of paricalcitol.
Comelekoglu U et al. · 2018
Researchers divided rats into four groups: control, paricalcitol only, RF exposure only, and RF plus paricalcitol. Rats in the RF groups were exposed to 1,800 MHz RF radiation for 1 hour per day for 4 weeks. RF exposure caused significant reduction in nerve signal amplitude, prolonged latency, increased malondialdehyde levels, increased catalase activity, and degeneration of myelinated nerve fibers. Paricalcitol administration partially ameliorated these neuropathic changes.
Activation of the TRPV1 Thermoreceptor Induced by Modulated or Unmodulated 1800 MHz Radiofrequency Field Exposure.
Ruigrok HJ et al. · 2018
Researchers monitored TRPV1 activation in real time on live cells using a bioluminescence resonance energy transfer technique. Transiently-transfected HEK293T cells were exposed to 1800 MHz radiofrequency signals including CW, GSM, UMTS, LTE, Wi-Fi and WiMAX at specific absorption rates between 8 and 32 W/kg. TRPV1 channels were activated by the heat produced by radiofrequency exposure, but no activation occurred without temperature elevation. Radiofrequency exposure did not alter the maximal efficacy of capsaicin to activate TRPV1 at fixed temperature.
The Protective Effect of Autophagy on DNA Damage in Mouse Spermatocyte-Derived Cells Exposed to 1800 MHz Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields.
Li R et al. · 2018
Mouse spermatocyte-derived cells (GC-2) were exposed to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields at 4 W/kg for 24 hours. The exposure induced both autophagy and DNA damage in GC-2 cells through the generation of reactive oxygen species. When autophagy was blocked by knocking down AMPKα, DNA damage increased, while overexpressing AMPKα promoted autophagy and reduced DNA damage.
Probing the Origins of 1,800 MHz Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Radiation Induced Damage in Mouse Immortalized Germ Cells and Spermatozoa in vitro.
Houston BJ, Nixon B, King BV, Aitken RJ, De Iuliis GN. · 2018
Researchers exposed cultured mouse spermatogonial GC1 and spermatocyte GC2 cell lines, as well as cauda epididymal spermatozoa, to continuous wave RF-EMR at 1.8 GHz at 0.15 and 1.5 W/kg. A 4-hour exposure increased mitochondrial reactive oxygen species in GC1 cells (7 vs. 18%; p < 0.001) and GC2 cells (11.5 vs. 16%; p < 0.01), with Complex III of the electron transport chain identified as the potential source. Exposure at 0.15 W/kg for 3 hours induced significant DNA fragmentation in spermatozoa (p < 0.05), though this was no longer significant after 4 hours. After 4 hours of exposure, spermatozoa showed significant oxidative DNA damage in the form of 8-hydroxy-2′-deoxyguanosine (p < 0.05) and a decline in sperm motility (p < 0.05).
DNA & Genetic DamageNo Effects Found
RF-EMF exposure at 1800 MHz did not elicit DNA damage or abnormal cellular behaviors in different neurogenic cells.
Su L, Wei X, Xu Z, Chen G · 2017
Researchers exposed neurogenic A172, U251, and SH-SY5Y cells to 1800 MHz RF-EMF at 4.0 W/kg intermittently for 1, 6, or 24 hours. DNA damage was measured by quantifying γH2AX foci, an early marker of DNA double-strand breaks. Cell cycle progression, proliferation, and viability were assessed using flow cytometry, hemocytometer, and cell counting kit-8 assay. Exposure did not significantly induce γH2AX foci formation or cause abnormal cell cycle progression, proliferation, or viability. Prolonged incubation up to 48 hours after exposure also did not significantly affect cellular behavior.
Brain & Nervous SystemNo Effects Found
Effects of 1950 MHz radiofrequency electromagnetic fields on Aβ processing in human neuroblastoma and mouse hippocampal neuronal cells.
Park J, Kwon JH, Kim N, Song K · 2017
Researchers exposed HT22 mouse hippocampal neuronal cells and SH-SY5Y human neuroblastoma cells to 1950 MHz RF-EMF at a SAR of 6 W/kg for 2 hours per day over 3 days. They analyzed mRNA and protein expression of key genes involved in Aβ processing. In HT22 cells, mRNA levels of APP, BACE1, ADAM10 and PSEN1 decreased, while APP mRNA was unchanged in SH-SY5Y cells. Protein expression of APP and BACE1 and secreted Aβ peptide did not differ significantly between exposed and control cells.
Brain & Nervous SystemNo Effects Found
Effect of acute millimeter wave exposure on dopamine metabolism of NGF-treated PC12 cells.
Haas AJ et al. · 2017
Researchers investigated the effects of a 24-hour millimeter wave exposure at 60.4 GHz with an incident power density of 5 mW/cm² on dopaminergic turnover in NGF-treated PC12 cells. They measured intracellular and extracellular dopamine and DOPAC using high performance liquid chromatography and assessed dopamine transporter expression by immunocytochemistry. Dopamine turnover and DAT protein expression were not impacted by exposure, while extracellular DOPAC accumulation showed a slight non-significant increase attributed to thermal effects.
DNA & Genetic DamageNo Effects Found
Mobile phone radiofrequency exposure has no effect on DNA double strand breaks (DSB) in human lymphocytes.
Danese E et al. · 2017
Researchers exposed blood samples from 14 healthy volunteers to 900 MHz radiofrequency from a commercial mobile phone for 30 minutes. A control sample was kept away from radiofrequency sources. DNA integrity was measured by analyzing γ-H2AX foci in lymphocytes using immunofluorescence staining. No measure of γ-H2AX foci was significantly influenced by the exposure, and the odds ratio for genetic damage ranged from 0.27 to 1.00.
Evaluation of the Effect of Radiofrequency Radiation Emitted From Wi-Fi Router and Mobile Phone Simulator on the Antibacterial Susceptibility of Pathogenic Bacteria Listeria monocytogenes and Escherichia coli.
Taheri M et al. · 2017
Researchers assessed whether 900 MHz GSM mobile phone radiation and 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi router radiation alter the susceptibility of microorganisms to different antibiotics. The study found that exposure to Wi-Fi and RF simulator radiation can significantly alter inhibition zone diameters and growth rates for Listeria monocytogenes and Escherichia coli. Pure cultures of Listeria monocytogenes and Escherichia coli were exposed to RF-EMFs from a GSM 900 MHz mobile phone simulator and a 2.4 GHz Wi-Fi router.
Proteomic analysis of continuous 900-MHz radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure in testicular tissue: a rat model of human cell phone exposure.
Sepehrimanesh M, Kazemipour N, Saeb M, Nazifi S, Davis DL · 2017
Researchers exposed 20 Sprague-Dawley rats to 900 MHz RF-EMF for 0, 1, 2, or 4 hours per day for 30 consecutive days. After 4 hours of daily exposure, ATP synthase beta subunit and hypoxia up-regulated protein 1 precursor were significantly up-regulated. The authors state that these protein increases are related to carcinogenic risk and reproductive damage.
Radiofrequency radiations induced genotoxic and carcinogenic effects on chickpea (Cicer arietinum L.) root tip cells.
Qureshi ST, Memon SA, Abassi AR, Sial MA, Bughio FA. · 2017
Researchers exposed dry chickpea seeds to GSM cell phone radiation at 900 MHz and laptop radiation at 3.31 GHz for 24 and 48 hours. Untreated seeds served as a negative control and gamma rays at 250 Gray served as a positive control. All radiofrequency treatments inhibited seed germination, with the 48-hour laptop exposure showing the strongest negative effect. Mitotic index decreased and abnormality index increased as exposure duration and frequency increased. Cell membrane damage, nuclear membrane damage, and ghost cells were observed only after 48 hours of exposure.
Generation and propagation of yeast prion [URE3] are elevated under electromagnetic field.
Lian HY, Lin KW, Yang C, Cai P. · 2017
Researchers exposed two budding yeast strains, NT64C and SB34, to 2.0 GHz RF-EMF and 50 Hz ELF-EMF. Both RF-EMF and ELF-EMF exposure elevated the de novo generation and propagation of the yeast prion [URE3] in the two strains. The increase grew over time, and ELF-EMF showed a dose-dependent effect. Chaperone transcription and expression (Hsp104, Hsp70-Ssa1/2, Hsp40-Ydj1) did not change significantly after exposure. ROS levels and SOD and CAT activities rose after short-term exposure but not after long-term exposure.
Cellular Effects
Review
Review: Weak radiofrequency radiation exposure from mobile phone radiation on plants.
Halgamuge MN. · 2017
The analysis found that 89.9% of studies reported physiological or morphological effects from mobile phone RF-EMF (p < 0.001). Maize, roselle, pea, fenugreek, duckweeds, tomato, onions, and mungbean appeared especially sensitive to RF-EMF.
Effects of radiofrequency exposure emitted from a GSM mobile phone on proliferation, differentiation, and apoptosis of neural stem cells.
Eghlidospour M, Ghanbari A, Mortazavi SMJ, Azari H. · 2017
Researchers exposed adult murine neural stem cells to GSM 900-MHz radiofrequency radiation from a mobile phone for varying durations. They used neurosphere assays to evaluate proliferation, immunofluorescence to examine differentiation, and alamarBlue and caspase 3 apoptosis assays to assess harmful effects. Neurosphere number and size and the proportion of cells becoming neurons decreased significantly with longer exposure. Cell viability, apoptosis, and astrocytic differentiation were unchanged.
Effect of Radiofrequency Radiation Emitted from 2G and 3G Cell Phone on Developing Liver of Chick Embryo - A Comparative Study.
D'Silva MH, Swer RT, Anbalagan J, Rajesh B. · 2017
Fertilized chick embryos were incubated in four groups: 2G exposed (60 eggs), 3G exposed (60 eggs), sham exposed control (60 eggs), and control (48 eggs). After the scheduled exposure duration, embryos were collected for histological analysis of liver structure and alkaline comet assay for DNA damage. Exposure of developing chick embryos to 2G and 3G cell phone radiations caused structural changes in liver including dilated sinusoidal spaces with haemorrhage, increased vacuolations in cytoplasm, increased nuclear diameter and karyorrhexis. DNA damage was significantly increased in embryos exposed to 2G and 3G radiation. The changes were more pronounced in the 3G experimental group.
Is mobile phone radiation genotoxic? An analysis of micronucleus frequency in exfoliated buccal cells.
de Oliveira FM, Carmona AM2 Ladeira C. · 2017
To test whether mobile phone-associated EMF exposure affects micronucleus frequency in exfoliated buccal cells, the researchers obtained cell smears from the left and right inner cheeks of 86 healthy mobile phone users aged 18-30 who completed a characterization survey. No relationship was observed between micronucleus frequency and duration of mobile phone use in daily calls. Cells on the same side as phone use did not show a statistically significantly higher micronucleus frequency compared to cells on the opposite side. A highly statistically significant increase in micronucleus frequency was found in subjects reporting regular exposure to genotoxic agents.
The response of human bacteria to static magnetic field and radiofrequency electromagnetic field.
Crabtree DPE, Herrera BJ, Kang S. · 2017
The study aimed to investigate the response of human bacteria to static magnetic field and radiofrequency electromagnetic field. Researchers investigated the response of both laboratory culture strains and isolates of skin bacteria under static magnetic field (SMF) and RF-EMF. Growth patterns of laboratory cultures of Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Staphylococcus epidermidis under SMF were variable per different species. Bacterial isolates of skin microbiota from 4 subjects with different cell phone usage history also showed inconsistent growth responses.
Evaluation of Mobile Phone and Cordless Phone Use and Glioma Risk Using the Bradford Hill Viewpoints from 1965 on Association or Causation.
Carlberg M, Hardell L. · 2017
The authors evaluated glioma risk from mobile and cordless phone use using Bradford Hill's viewpoints. All nine viewpoints were evaluated based on epidemiology and laboratory studies. A meta-analysis of case-control studies found an odds ratio of 1.90 (95% CI 1.31-2.76) with highest cumulative exposure. Risk increased with latency, with an OR of 1.62 (95% CI 1.20-2.19) for 10+ years latency. Highest risk was in the 20+ years latency group, OR 2.01 (95% CI 1.41-2.88) for wireless phones.
What This Means for You
- Minimize the time your phone is directly against your body.
- Use speakerphone or air tube headphones for calls to keep the phone away from your head.
- When not in use, keep your phone at a distance rather than in your pocket.
- Consider a phone shield to deflect radiation away from your body. SYB Phone Shield
Further Reading:
Reduce Your Exposure:
Reduce your 5G exposure with shielding that deflects up to 99% of EMFFrequently Asked Questions
No study in this collection demonstrates harm from 5G. The frequencies 5G shares with 4G are well studied and show real non-thermal effects — DNA strand breaks in rat brain cells at 0.6 to 1.2 W/kg (Lai and Singh 1995), chromosomal damage in human cells under extended exposure at 5.0 W/kg or above (Tice 2002) — at doses generally well above ambient exposure from network infrastructure. The millimeter-wave research here is cell-culture work at 60 GHz, above the 24–47 GHz bands high-band 5G deploys on, and none of it is in people.
Partly. Low-band and mid-band 5G use frequency ranges already shared with 4G and WiFi, which carry decades of research. High-band 5G uses millimeter waves, which penetrate tissue less deeply. Millimeter-wave health research does exist here, but at 60 GHz in cell cultures rather than at the bands 5G deploys on or in people (Habauzit 2014, Le Quément 2014). Treating 5G as one uniform thing is what makes both the alarm and the reassurance imprecise.
For nearly everyone, the handset dominates. A phone held to the head delivers absorption in the range where experimental effects have been observed; a distant antenna delivers a small fraction of that. This is also why denser networks can reduce personal exposure — a phone with a strong signal transmits at lower power than one straining to reach a far-off tower.
Target the handset, since that is the dominant source. Use speaker mode or wired headphones for calls, text rather than call where it makes no difference, keep the phone out of the bedroom overnight, and prefer WiFi over cellular where the cellular signal is weak. These steps address absorbed dose directly and cost nothing.
Further Reading
For a comprehensive exploration of EMF health effects and practical protection strategies, explore these books by R Blank and Dr. Martin Blank.
