6,486 Studies Reviewed. 85.2% of Original Studies Found Biological Effects. The Evidence is Clear.
Research Guide

Is 5G Safe? What the Research Actually Shows

Based on 415 peer-reviewed studies

Share:
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)

Whole Body / GeneralNo Effects Found

Effects of mobile phone electromagnetic fields at nonthermal SAR values on melatonin and body weight of Djungarian hamsters (Phodopus sungorus).

Lerchl A et al. · 2008

Researchers exposed adult male Djungarian hamsters to RF-EMF at 383, 900, and 1800 MHz for 60 days at 80 mW/kg. Pineal and serum melatonin levels and organ weights were not affected in any experiment. Body weight increased transiently up to 4% at 383 MHz, increased up to 6% non-transiently at 900 MHz, and was unchanged at 1800 MHz.

Cellular EffectsNo Effects Found

Acute radio frequency irradiation does not affect cell cycle, cellular migration, and invasion.

Lee JJ et al. · 2008

NIH3T3 mouse fibroblasts were exposed to 849 MHz RF radiation at average SAR values of 2 or 10 W/kg for either 1 hour or 1 hour per day for 3 days. Cellular invasion and migration were assessed using in vitro Matrigel invasion and Transwell migration assays. Cell cycle distribution was analyzed at 24 and 48 hours after exposure by flow cytometry. The study found no detectable effects on cell cycle distribution, cellular migration, or invasion at the tested SAR values.

Brain & Nervous SystemNo Effects Found

Characterization of biological effect of 1763 MHz radiofrequency exposure on auditory hair cells.

Huang TQ et al. · 2008

Researchers exposed HEI-OC1 immortalized mouse auditory hair cells to 1763 MHz RF at 20 W/kg SAR in a CDMA chamber for 24 and 48 hours. They assessed cell cycle, DNA damage, heat shock protein expression, MAPK phosphorylation, and gene expression, finding no changes in cell cycle, DNA damage, HSP expression, or MAPK phosphorylation. Microarray analysis showed only 29 genes (0.09% of total) changed more than 1.5-fold after exposure.

Immune SystemNo Effects Found

Molecular responses of Jurkat T-cells to 1763 MHz radiofrequency radiation.

Huang TQ, Lee MS, Oh E, Zhang BT, Seo JS, Park WY. · 2008

They assessed cell proliferation, cell cycle progression, DNA damage, and gene expression. RF exposure did not significantly change cell numbers, cell cycle distribution, or DNA damage levels. Genome-wide analysis found no genes changed more than two-fold, but ten genes changed 1.3- to 1.8-fold, including down-regulation of CXCR3 and IL1R2.

Cancer & TumorsNo Effects Found

Mobile phone base station radiation does not affect neoplastic transformation in BALB/3T3 cells.

Hirose H et al. · 2008

Researchers continuously exposed BALB/3T3 cells to 2.1425 GHz W-CDMA RF fields at SARs of 80 and 800 mW/kg for 6 weeks. They also tested MCA-treated cells and MCA plus TPA-treated cells for tumor promotion and co-promotion effects. No significant differences in transformation frequency were found between RF-exposed groups and sham-exposed controls in any treatment condition. The results suggest that exposure to low-level RF radiation of up to 800 mW/kg does not induce cell transformation.

Brain & Nervous SystemNo Effects Found

Local exposure of 849 MHz and 1763 MHz radiofrequency radiation to mouse heads does not induce cell death or cell proliferation in brain

Kim TH et al. · 2008

Researchers used a carousel-type chamber to expose the heads of C57BL mice to 849 MHz or 1763 MHz RF radiation. Mice were irradiated intermittently at 7.8 W/kg for up to 12 months. Brain tissues collected at 6 and 12 months showed no differences in histology, cell proliferation, NeuN and GFAP expression in hippocampus and cerebellum, or cell death between exposure and control groups. Body weights did not differ among sham, 849 MHz, and 1763 MHz groups during the study.

A possible role for extra-cellular ATP in plant responses to high frequency, low amplitude electromagnetic field

Roux D et al. · 2008

Researchers investigated the role of extracellular ATP in plant responses to high-frequency, low-amplitude electromagnetic fields. Exposure to low-level 900 MHz EMF evoked accumulation of stress-related transcripts and affected ATP levels. ATP concentration dropped 27% after 30 minutes of exposure, and adenylate energy charge decreased by 18%. The authors discuss whether this reflects increased energy usage or a signaling function for ATP in stress physiology.

Is gene activity in plant cells affected by UMTS-irradiation? A whole genome approach.

Engelmann JC et al. · 2008

Researchers exposed Arabidopsis thaliana cell suspension cultures to a radiofrequency field protocol representing typical urban microwave exposure for 24 hours. They used Affymetrix-ATH1 whole genome microarrays to measure gene expression. Differential expression analysis revealed significant changes in transcription of 10 genes, but fold changes did not exceed 2.5. Three of the affected genes are dark-inducible, and their functions do not point to known plant responses to environmental stimuli.

Combinative exposure effect of radio frequency signals from CDMA mobile phones and aphidicolin on DNA integrity.

Tiwari R et al. · 2008

Researchers exposed whole blood samples from six healthy men to RF signals from a CDMA mobile phone for one hour. They assessed DNA damage using the alkaline comet assay and tested combinative effects with aphidicolin at two concentrations. RF signals alone or with low-dose aphidicolin did not significantly increase DNA damage compared to sham exposure. However, univariate analysis showed significant DNA damage with combined exposure at both aphidicolin concentrations. APC alone at the higher concentration also caused significant damage, and DNA repair efficiency varied significantly in combined exposure groups.

In vitro assessment of clastogenicity of mobile-phone radiation (835 MHz) using the alkaline comet assay and chromosomal aberration test.

Kim JY et al. · 2008

The study investigated clastogenicity of 835-MHz RF-EMF using alkaline comet assay and chromosomal aberration test on mammalian cells. No direct cytogenetic effect was found in the chromosomal aberration test with RF-EMF alone. The comet assay showed nearly negative results for RF-EMF alone, with a small increase in tail moment. RF-EMF showed a potentiation effect in the comet assay when combined with model clastogens.

High frequency (900 MHz) low amplitude (5 V m-1) electromagnetic field: a genuine environmental stimulus that affects transcription, translation, calcium and energy charge in tomato.

Roux D et al. · 2008

Researchers exposed tomato plants to 900 MHz, 5 V m(-1) electromagnetic fields for 10 minutes using a Mode Stirred Reverberation Chamber. Within minutes, stress-related mRNAs for calmodulin, calcium-dependent protein kinase, and proteinase inhibitor accumulated in a rapid, large, three-phase pattern typical of an environmental stress response. Transcript accumulation was maximal at normal calcium levels, depressed at higher calcium, and completely suppressed when calcium was removed with chelators or channel blockers. Thirty minutes after exposure, ATP concentration and adenylate energy charge transiently decreased, and the uncoupler CCCP prevented transcript accumulation entirely.

Nonthermal effects of radiofrequency-field exposure on calcium dynamics in stem cell-derived neuronal cells: elucidation of calcium pathways.

Rao VS et al. · 2008

The study used neuronal cells differentiated from a mouse embryonic stem cell line and a frequency-tunable applicator to examine calcium dynamics in real time. Control cells showed about five spontaneous calcium spikes per cell in 60 minutes, while exposure to 800 MHz RF radiation at 0.5 W/kg increased spikes to 15.7 per cell. The increase depended on frequency but not on SAR between 0.5 and 5 W/kg, and involved N-type calcium channels and phospholipase C enzymes. Microfilament disruption prevented the calcium spikes.

Impact of 864 MHz or 935 MHz radiofrequency microwave radiation on the basic growth parameters of V79 cell line

Pavicic I, Trosic I · 2008

Researchers exposed V79 cells to continuous wave frequencies of 864 MHz and 935 MHz for 1, 2, or 3 hours. Growth was significantly increased after two- and three-hour exposures to 864 MHz and after three-hour exposure to 935 MHz, measured 72 hours after irradiation. Colony-forming ability and cell viability did not significantly differ from control cells. The two fields showed similar effects on growth, colony-forming ability, and viability, with impact being time-dependent.

Exposure to 900 MHz radiofrequency radiation induces caspase 3 activation in proliferating human lymphocytes

Palumbo R et al. · 2008

The study investigated apoptosis induction after 900 MHz GSM radiation by measuring caspase 3 activation in Jurkat cells and quiescent and proliferating human peripheral blood lymphocytes. Exposure was at 1.35 W/kg for one hour in a temperature-controlled dual wire patch cell system. Caspase 3 activity increased by 32.4% in Jurkat cells and 22% in proliferating lymphocytes 6 hours after exposure, but did not change in quiescent lymphocytes. Apoptosis and viability assessed 24 hours later were unaffected in both cell types. Cell cycle analysis of proliferating T cells also showed no differences between exposed and sham-exposed cultures.

Gene expression changes in the skin of rats induced by prolonged 35 GHz millimeter-wave exposure.

Millenbaugh NJ et al. · 2008

Rats were exposed to 35 GHz millimeter waves at 75 mW/cm(2), 42 degrees C heat, or sham, with skin collected at 6 and 24 h for gene expression and at 3-6 h or 24-48 h for histopathology. Microscopic examination showed neutrophil aggregation in vessels, stromal cell degeneration, and collagen breakdown in the dermis of exposed rats. Changes were detected in 56 genes at 6 h and 58 genes at 24 h in millimeter-wave-exposed rats. Affected genes included those for transcription regulation, protein folding, oxidative stress, immune response, and tissue matrix turnover at both times, with more extracellular matrix and chemokine genes altered at 24 h. Real-time RT-PCR confirmed up-regulation of Hspa1a, Timp1, S100a9, Ccl2, and Angptl4 at 24 h.

Mobile phone radiation might alter protein expression in human skin.

Karinen A, Heinavaara S, Nylund R, Leszczynski D. · 2008

Researchers exposed a small area of forearm skin in 10 female volunteers to RF-EMF at a specific absorption rate of 1.3 W/kg and collected punch biopsies from exposed and non-exposed areas. Analysis identified 8 proteins that were statistically significantly affected, and two of those proteins were present in all 10 volunteers. The researchers described this as the first study showing that molecular level changes might take place in human volunteers in response to exposure to RF-EMF.

Proliferation, oxidative stress and cell death in cells exposed to 872 MHz radiofrequency radiation and oxidants. Radiat.

Höytö A, Luukkonen J, Juutilainen J, Naarala J. · 2008

Researchers exposed human SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma and mouse L929 fibroblast cells to 872 MHz radiofrequency radiation at a specific absorption rate of 5 W/kg, using either continuous waves or a GSM-modulated signal. Two statistically significant differences related to RF radiation were found: t-BOOH-induced lipid peroxidation was increased in SH-SY5Y cells, and menadione-induced caspase 3 activity was increased in L929 cells, but both only for the GSM-modulated signal. No other endpoints were significantly affected, and no effects were observed from RF radiation exposure alone.

Continuous wave and simulated GSM exposure at 1.8 W/kg and 1.8 GHz do not induce hsp16-1 heat-shock gene expression in Caenorhabditis elegans.

Dawe AS et al. · 2008

Researchers exposed a transgenic strain of the nematode C. elegans to radiofrequency fields at 1.8 GHz and a specific absorption rate of approximately 1.8 W/kg. For both continuous wave and Talk-pulsed exposures lasting 2.5 hours, there was no indication that RF exposure could induce reporter expression above sham control levels. When background reporter expression was moderately elevated in sham controls, the researchers found some evidence that reporter expression may be reduced by approximately 15% following exposure to either Talk-pulsed or CW RF fields.

Effects of 900-MHz Radio Frequencies on the Chemotaxis of Human Neutrophils in Vitro.

Aly AA et al. · 2008

Researchers studied how 900-MHz radio-frequency fields affect the ability of human neutrophils to follow concentration gradients of Cyclic Adenosine 3', 5'-Monophosphate (C-AMP). Blood from healthy adult donors was exposed in vitro to different temperatures and a 900-MHz RF field at approximately 0.4 V/m. When the 900-MHz RF field was applied, neutrophil speed increased above the value observed at the same temperature, and the maximum speed exceeded that measured at any temperature by approximately 50%. The direction of motion changed from along the concentration gradient and the electrical field lines to motion at right angles to the concentration gradient and the electric field.

Apoptosis is Induced by Radiofrequency Fields through the Caspase-Independent Mitochondrial Pathway in Cortical Neurons

Joubert, V., Bourthoumieu, S., Leveque, P. and Yardin, C. · 2008

Researchers exposed rat primary neuronal cultures to a continuous-wave 900 MHz radiofrequency field at a specific absorption rate of 2 W/kg for 24 hours. A statistically significant difference in the rate of apoptosis was found in the RF-field-exposed neurons compared to the sham-, 37°C- and 39°C-exposed neurons either 0 or 24 h after exposure using both methods. The percentage of AIF-positive nuclei in RF-field-exposed neurons was increased by three- to sevenfold compared to other conditions, while no increase in caspase 3 activity was found.

Effect of 1.8 GHz radiofrequency electromagnetic fields on gene expression of rat neurons

Zhang SZ, Yao GD, Lu DQ, Chiang H, Xu ZP. · 2008

Researchers exposed primary cultured rat neurons to 1.8 GHz RF EMF at a SAR of 2 W/kg and used a gene array to look for changes in gene expression. Among 1200 candidate genes screened, 24 were up-regulated and 10 were down-regulated, associated with functions including cytoskeleton, signal transduction, and metabolism. The effect of 24-hour exposure on gene expression was more obvious than that of 6-hour exposure, and intermittent exposure had a more obvious effect than continuous exposure.

Electromagnetic noise inhibits radiofrequency radiation-induced DNA damage and reactive oxygen species increase in human lens epithelial cells.

Yao K, Wu W, Wang K, Ni S, Ye P, Yu Y, Ye J, Sun L. · 2008

Researchers exposed cultured human lens epithelial cells (HLECs) to a 1.8 GHz GSM radiofrequency field for 2 hours at specific absorption rates of 1, 2, 3, and 4 W/kg, then measured intracellular reactive oxygen species (ROS) and DNA damage. After exposure to 1.8 GHz RF for 2 h, HLECs exhibited significant intracellular ROS increase in the 2, 3, and 4 W/kg groups, and RF at 3 W/kg and 4 W/kg induced significant DNA damage consisting mainly of single strand breaks. When the radiofrequency field was superposed with 2 μT electromagnetic noise, the noise blocked the RF-induced ROS increase and DNA damage.

Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (UMTS, 1,950 MHz) induce genotoxic effects in vitro in human fibroblasts but not in lymphocytes.

Schwarz C et al. · 2008

Researchers exposed human cultured fibroblasts and human lymphocyte cultures to 1,950 MHz UMTS electromagnetic fields at specific absorption rates below the safety limit of 2 W/kg. UMTS exposure increased the comet tail factor and induced centromere-negative micronuclei in human cultured fibroblasts in a dose- and time-dependent way. Incubation for 24 hours at a SAR of 0.05 W/kg produced a statistically significant rise in both the comet tail factor and micronuclei (P = 0.02). No UMTS effect was found in lymphocytes, whether unstimulated or stimulated with Phytohemagglutinin. The researchers concluded that UMTS exposure may cause genetic alterations in some but not in all human cells in vitro.

Increased levels of numerical chromosome aberrations after in vitro exposure of human peripheral blood lymphocytes to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields for 72 hours.

Mazor R et al. · 2008

Researchers exposed human peripheral blood lymphocytes from 10 samples to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields at 800 MHz for 72 hours in a waveguide resonator at specific absorption rates of 2.9 and 4.1 W/kg. The study found increased levels of aneuploidy depending on the chromosome studied and the level of exposure, with chromosomal gains appearing to be the primary contributor. Temperature was tested over a range of 33.5–40°C for 72 hours and showed no statistically significant difference in aneuploidy levels compared to 37°C, suggesting the effect may not be due to heating.

What This Means for You

  1. Minimize the time your phone is directly against your body.
  2. Use speakerphone or air tube headphones for calls to keep the phone away from your head.
  3. When not in use, keep your phone at a distance rather than in your pocket.
  4. Consider a phone shield to deflect radiation away from your body. SYB Phone Shield

Further Reading:

Frequently 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.