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)

Cellular EffectsNo Effects Found

The Heat-Shock Factor is not Activated in Mammalian Cells Exposed to Cellular Phone Frequency Microwaves.

Laszlo et al. · 2005

Researchers measured heat-shock factor DNA-binding activity in hamster, mouse, and human cells after exposure to FDMA- or CDMA-modulated microwaves at low or high SARs. The assay could detect a 10% increase in HSF activation from a 1°C temperature rise. No increase in HSF DNA-binding ability was detected from any exposure tested. The results do not support activation of the stress response by mobile communication microwaves.

DNA & Genetic DamageNo Effects Found

Effect of high-frequency electromagnetic fields with a wide range of SARs on chromosomal aberrations in murine m5S cells.

Komatsubara Y et al. · 2005

Researchers exposed murine m5S cells to 2.45 GHz high-frequency electromagnetic fields for 2 hours at SARs of 5, 10, 20, 50, and 100 W/kg continuous wave and at a mean SAR of 100 W/kg pulse wave with a maximum of 900 W/kg. The effects were compared with sham-exposed controls and with mitomycin C and X-ray treatments as positive controls. No significant differences in chromosomal aberrations were observed between HFEMF-exposed cells and sham controls, while positive controls increased chromatid-type and chromosome-type aberrations.

Cancer & TumorsNo Effects Found

Effect of radiofrequency radiation exposure on mouse skin tumorigenesis initiated by 7,12-dimethybenz[alpha]anthracene.

Huang TQ, Lee JS, Kim TH, Pack JK, Jang JJ, Seo JS. · 2005

The study used 80 male ICR mice initiated with DMBA and then exposed to 849 MHz or 1,763 MHz RF radiation at 0.4 W/kg SAR for 19 weeks. No skin tumors were observed in the sham or RF-exposed groups, while the TPA positive control group had a 95% tumor incidence. Pathological examination and PCNA staining showed no differences between sham and RF-exposed groups, and cyclin D1 and c-fos expression was only detected in TPA-induced tumors. The researchers concluded that RF radiation does not act as a tumor promoter for skin tumors in this model.

Cellular EffectsNo Effects Found

An investigation of the effects of TETRA RF fields on intracellular calcium in neurones and cardiac myocytes.

Green AC et al. · 2005

Intracellular calcium concentration ([Ca(2 +) ](i)) was measured in cultured rat cerebellar granule cells and cardiac myocytes during exposure to TETRA fields (380.8875 MHz pulse modulated at 17.6 Hz, 25% duty cycle). Granule cells exposed at specific absorption rates (SARs) of 5, 10, 20, 50 or 400 mW x kg(-1) showed no significant changes in resting [Ca(2 +) ](i). Exposure to TETRA (50 or 400 mW x kg(-1)) had no significant effect on either the rate or amplitude of spontaneous Ca(2 +) transients in cardiac myocytes. Overall, these results showed no evidence of any consistent or biologically relevant effect of TETRA fields on [Ca(2 + )](i) in granule cells and cardiac myocytes at any of the SAR tested.

DNA & Genetic DamageNo Effects Found

Evaluation of genotoxic effects in human peripheral blood leukocytes following an acute in vitro exposure to 900 MHz radiofrequency fields.

Zeni O et al. · 2005

Researchers exposed human peripheral blood leukocytes from healthy volunteers to a 900 MHz GSM signal for 2 hours at SARs of 0.3 and 1 W/kg. DNA damage was assessed with the comet assay, chromosome aberrations and sister chromatid exchanges were measured in stimulated lymphocytes, and cell proliferation was evaluated via the mitotic index. No statistically significant differences were observed between exposed and sham-exposed samples for any of these endpoints, while positive controls showed the expected increases in DNA damage.

2.45GHz radiofrequency fields alter gene expression in cultured human cells.

Lee S et al. · 2005

The study used the serial analysis of gene expression (SAGE) method to measure genome-wide gene expression changes in cultured human HL-60 cells exposed to pulsed 2.45 GHz RF fields. After a 2-hour exposure, 221 genes showed altered expression, increasing to 759 genes after 6 hours. Apoptosis-related genes were upregulated while cell cycle genes were downregulated, with no significant increase in heat shock genes.

Radiofrequency-induced carcinogenesis: cellular calcium homeostasis changes as a triggering factor.

Anghileri LJ, Mayayo E, Domingo JL, Thouvenot P. · 2005

Mice were treated with 1 hour per week of radiofrequency exposure for 4 months while a sham-exposed group served as controls. The evolution of carcinogenesis was followed up to 18 months, and the maximal life span of control mice was about 24 months. All dead animals were clinically and histologically examined to give an age-determined comparative quantification of the evolving carcinogenesis. A radiocalcium tracer method permitted the evaluation of radiofrequency effects on transmembrane transport of extracellular calcium at 1 and 24 hours after exposure, and the determination of induced lipid peroxidation completed this second study.

Genetic damage in mobile phone users: some preliminary findings.

Gandhi G, Anita · 2005

Researchers investigated DNA and chromosomal damage in peripheral blood lymphocytes of 24 mobile phone users exposed to microwave frequencies of 800-2000 MHz. DNA damage measured by comet assay showed a mean comet tail length of 26.76 ± 0.054 mm with 39.75% of cells damaged, which was highly significant compared to controls. The in vivo capillary blood micronucleus test also revealed a highly significant frequency of micronucleated cells at 0.25.

Electromagnetic fields affect transcript levels of apoptosis-related genes in embryonic stem cell-derived neural progenitor cells.

Nikolova T et al. · 2005

ELF-EMF significantly affected transcript levels of bcl-2, bax, and GADD45 genes but did not affect neural-specific gene mRNA levels. RF-EMF down-regulated neural-specific Nurr1 and up-regulated bax and GADD45 mRNA levels. Short-term RF-EMF exposure for 6 hours caused a transient increase in DNA double-strand breaks, while 48-hour exposure did not. No effects were observed on mitochondrial function, nuclear apoptosis, cell proliferation, or chromosomal alterations.

Impact of radio frequency electromagnetic radiation on DNA integrity in the male germline.

Aitken RJ, Bennetts LE, Sawyer D, Wiklendt AM, King BV. · 2005

Researchers exposed mice to 900 MHz RFEMR at a specific absorption rate of approximately 90 mW/kg inside a waveguide for 7 days at 12 h per day. Sperm number, morphology, and vitality were not significantly affected by the exposure. However, detailed DNA analysis using QPCR revealed statistically significant damage to both the mitochondrial genome and the nuclear beta-globin locus.

Studying the synergistic damage effects induced by 1.8 GHz radiofrequency field radiation (RFR) with four chemical mutagens on human lymphocyte DNA using comet assay in vitro.

Baohong Wang et al. · 2005

Researchers studied whether 1.8 GHz radiofrequency field radiation (RFR) at a SAR of 3 W/kg could interact with four chemical mutagens to damage DNA in human lymphocytes in vitro. DNA damage was detected using comet assay at two incubation times after treatment. RFR alone showed no difference in DNA damage compared to the control group, but co-exposure with MMC or 4NQO produced significantly greater DNA damage than those chemicals alone. Co-exposure with bleomycin or methyl methanesulfonate did not significantly increase DNA damage compared with those chemicals alone.

Non-thermal DNA breakage by mobile-phone radiation (1800MHz) in human fibroblasts and in transformed GFSH-R17 rat granulosa cells in vitro.

Diem E, Schwarz C, Adlkofer F, Jahn O, Rudiger H. · 2005

Researchers exposed cultured human diploid fibroblasts and transformed GFSH-R17 rat granulosa cells to 1800 MHz RF-EMF at SAR levels of 1.2 or 2 W/kg, using both intermittent and continuous exposures. DNA strand breaks were determined by means of the alkaline and neutral comet assay. Effects occurred after 16 h exposure in both cell types, and intermittent exposure showed a stronger effect in the comet assay than continuous exposure. The researchers concluded that the induced DNA damage cannot be based on thermal effects.

Immune SystemNo Effects Found

1800 MHz radiofrequency (mobile phones, different global system for mobile communication modulations) does not affect apoptosis and heat shock protein 70 level in peripheral blood mononuclear cells from young and old donors.

Capri M et al. · 2004

Researchers studied whether prolonged in vitro exposure to 1800 MHz radiofrequency could affect human peripheral blood mononuclear cells from young and elderly donors by altering apoptosis, mitochondrial membrane potential, and heat shock protein 70 levels. Three GSM signal modulations (Basic, DTX, and Talk) were applied at specific absorption rates of 1.4 and 2.0 W kg−1. Endpoints were analyzed both with and without the apoptosis-inducing agent 2-deoxy-D-ribose. No significant difference was found between RF-exposed and sham-exposed cells for any endpoint. The 1800 MHz RF did not induce apoptosis on its own, did not alter apoptosis triggered by an agent, and did not change mitochondrial function or HSP 70 expression.

DNA & Genetic DamageNo Effects Found

Measurement of DNA damage and apoptosis in molt-4 cells after in vitro exposure to radiofrequency radiation.

Hook GJ et al. · 2004

Researchers exposed Molt-4 T lymphoblastoid cells to CDMA, FDMA, iDEN, and TDMA modulated RF radiation for up to 24 hours. DNA damage was measured with the single-cell gel electrophoresis assay and apoptosis with the annexin V affinity assay. No statistically significant difference in DNA damage or apoptosis was observed between sham and exposed cells for any frequency, modulation, or exposure time.

Oxidative StressNo Effects Found

Evaluation of Parameters of Oxidative Stress after In Vitro Exposure to FMCW- and CDMA-Modulated Radiofrequency Radiation Fields.

Hook et al. · 2004

Researchers exposed J774.16 mouse macrophage cells to FMCW radiation at 835.62 MHz and CDMA radiation at 847.74 MHz for 20–22 hours at a specific absorption rate of 0.8 W/kg. Cells were stimulated with γ-interferon and bacterial lipopolysaccharide before exposure. The results indicated that FMCW- and CDMA-modulated RF radiation did not alter parameters indicative of oxidative stress in J774.16 cells.

Transmembrane voltage induced on altered erythrocyte shapes exposed to RF fields

Munoz S, Sebastian JL, Sancho M, Miranda JM · 2004

Researchers calculated the transmembrane voltage induced on erythrocyte, codocyte, ovalocyte, and spherocyte cell models exposed to a linearly polarized electromagnetic plane wave at 1800 MHz. The induced voltage on the original erythrocyte shape was higher than on the altered cell geometries. Erythrocyte shape and membrane electric permittivity were found to play a fundamental role in the induced transmembrane voltage values. A finite element numerical technique with adaptive meshing was used for the calculations.

High frequency electromagnetic fields (GSM signals) affect gene expression levels in tumor suppressor p53-deficient embryonic stem cells.

Czyz J et al. · 2004

Researchers exposed wild-type and p53-deficient embryonic stem cells to GSM-217 and GSM-Talk modulated electromagnetic fields at 1.71 GHz. GSM-217 exposure significantly increased hsp70 mRNA levels in p53-deficient cells, with a transient rise in c-jun, c-myc, and p21 levels only in those cells. GSM-Talk exposure produced no gene expression changes in either cell type, and cardiac differentiation and cell cycle were unaffected by GSM-217.

Apoptosis induced by ultraviolet radiation is enhanced by amplitude modulated radiofrequency radiation in mutant yeast cells.

Markkanen A et al. · 2004

Researchers exposed wild-type and cdc48-mutant yeast cells to 900 or 872 MHz RF fields with or without UV radiation at elevated temperature. Amplitude modulated RF exposure significantly enhanced UV-induced apoptosis in cdc48-mutated cells, but unmodulated fields at the same SAR had no effect. Apoptosis was measured using the annexin V-FITC method with flow cytometry.

Immune System108 citations

In vitro exposure of human lymphocytes to 900 MHz CW and GSM modulated radiofrequency: studies of proliferation, apoptosis and mitochondrial membrane potential.

Capri M et al. · 2004

Researchers exposed human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from healthy donors in vitro to a 900 MHz GSM or continuous-wave (CW) radiofrequency field for 1 hour per day for 3 days. The researchers studied mitogen-induced proliferation, cell cycle progression, spontaneous and induced apoptosis, and mitochondrial membrane potential. GSM-exposed cells showed a slight decrease in proliferation at the lowest mitogen concentration and a slight increase in cells with altered phosphatidylserine distribution, but cell cycle phases, mitochondrial membrane potential, and susceptibility to apoptosis were unaffected. When cells were exposed to the CW radiofrequency field, no significant modifications were observed for any of the endpoints studied.

The effects of whole body cell phone exposure on the t1 relaxation times and trace elements in the serum of rats.

Aksen F, Dasdag S, Akdag MZ, Askin M, Dasdag MM. · 2004

Researchers exposed rats to radiofrequency radiation from cellular phones to study effects on trace elements, T1 relaxation times, and rectal temperature. Manganese and zinc levels in the serum of exposed rats were significantly different from the control group. Iron, copper, and T1 relaxation times in serum did not change significantly, and rectal temperature also showed no statistically significant difference between groups.

Erythropoietic changes in rats after 2.45 GJz nonthermal irradiation

Busljeta I, Trosic I, Milkovic-Kraus S. · 2004

The study observed erythropoietic changes in rats subchronically exposed to radiofrequency microwave radiation at a nonthermal level. Adult male Wistar rats were exposed to 2.45 GHz continuous RF/MW fields for 2 hours daily, 7 days a week, at 5 – 10 mW/cm2. In exposed animals, erythrocyte count, haemoglobin and haematocrit were increased in peripheral blood on irradiation days 8 and 15. Anuclear cells and erythropoietic precursor cells were significantly decreased in the bone marrow on day 15, while micronucleated cells' frequency was increased.

DNA & Genetic DamageNo Effects Found

Influence of high-frequency electromagnetic fields on different modes of cell death and gene expression.

Port M, Abend M, Romer B, Van Beuningen D. · 2003

Researchers exposed human leukemia HL-60 cells in vitro to high-frequency electromagnetic fields 25 times higher than ICNIRP occupational reference levels. Cells were harvested at 0, 24, 48, and 72 hours after exposure, and apoptosis, micronuclei, abnormal cells, and expression of 1176 genes were measured. No significant changes were found in apoptosis, micronucleation, abnormal cells, or differential gene expression.

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.