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)

Effect of 835 MHz radiofrequency radiation exposure on calcium binding proteins in the hippocampus of the mouse brain.

Maskey D et al. · 2010

Researchers measured calbindin (CB) and calretinin (CR) expression in the hippocampus of mice after exposure to 835 MHz electromagnetic fields at various durations and absorption rates. Exposure conditions included 1 hour per day for 5 days at a specific absorption rate of 1.6 W/kg, 1 hour per day for 5 days at 4.0 W/kg, 5 hours per day for 1 day at 1.6 W/kg, 5 hours per day for 1 day at 4.0 W/kg, and daily exposure for 1 month at 1.6 W/kg. Exposure for 1 month produced almost complete loss of pyramidal cells in the CA1 area. Body weights did not change significantly across the exposure groups.

Exposure to 1800 MHz radiofrequency radiation induces oxidative damage to mitochondrial DNA in primary cultured neurons.

Xu S et al. · 2010

Researchers exposed primary cultured cortical neurons to pulsed radiofrequency electromagnetic fields at 1800 MHz modulated by 217 Hz at an average specific absorption rate of 2 W/kg. At 24 hours after exposure, researchers found a significant increase in levels of 8-hydroxyguanine, a common biomarker of DNA oxidative damage, in the mitochondria of neurons. The copy number of mitochondrial DNA and the levels of mitochondrial RNA transcripts showed an obvious reduction after RF exposure. Each of these mitochondrial DNA disturbances could be reversed by pretreatment with melatonin.

The effect of radiofrequency radiation on DNA and lipid damage in non-pregnant and pregnant rabbits and their newborns.

Guler G, Tomruk A, Ozgur E, Seyhan N. · 2010

Researchers investigated oxidative DNA damage and lipid peroxidation levels in the brain tissue of pregnant and non-pregnant New Zealand White rabbits and their newborns exposed to radiofrequency radiation. The rabbits were exposed to radiofrequency radiation at 1800 MHz GSM at 14 V/m for 15 minutes per day over 7 days. MDA and 8-OHdG levels in exposed pregnant and non-pregnant rabbits were significantly increased compared to controls, but no difference was found in the newborns.

DNA & Genetic DamageNo Effects Found

Absence of genotoxic potential of 902 MHz (GSM) and 1747 MHz (DCS) wireless communication signals: In vivo two-year bioassay in B6C3F1 mice.

Ziemann C et al. · 2009

Researchers exposed male and female B6C3F1 mice to GSM 902 MHz and DCS 1747 MHz signals for two years. The exposure regimen was 2 hours per day, 5 days per week, at whole-body averaged SARs of 0.4, 1.3, and 4.0 W/kg. Micronuclei were counted in peripheral blood erythrocytes stained with May-Grunwald-Giemsa or acridine orange. No significant differences in micronuclei frequency were observed between RF-exposed, sham-exposed, and cage control mice. Positive control mice injected with mitomycin C had significantly increased micronuclei, and the authors concluded that the data did not indicate RF-induced genotoxicity after two years.

DNA & Genetic DamageNo Effects Found

Cytogenetic effects of exposure to 2.3 GHz radiofrequency radiation on human lymphocytes in vitro.

Hansteen IL et al. · 2009

The aim was to test if exposure used in mobile phones and wireless network technologies would induce DNA damage in cultured human lymphocytes with and without a known clastogen. Lymphocytes from six donors were exposed to 2.3 GHz, 10 W/m(2) continuous waves, or 2.3 GHz, 10 W/m(2) pulsed waves (200 Hz pulse frequency, 50% duty cycle). Mitomycin C was added to half of the cultures. No statistically significant differences were observed between control and exposed cultures. A weak trend for more chromosomal damage with the interaction of pulsed fields with mitomycin C compared to a constant field was observed.

DNA & Genetic DamageNo Effects Found

Human fibroblasts and 900 MHz radiofrequency radiation: evaluation of DNA damage after exposure and co-exposure to 3-Chloro-4-(dichloromethyl)-5-Hydroxy-2(5h)-furanone (MX).

Sannino A et al. · 2009

Researchers exposed human dermal fibroblasts from a healthy donor and a Turner's syndrome donor to 900 MHz RF radiation for 24 hours using a GSM-like signal at 1 W/kg, and Turner's syndrome fibroblasts were also exposed for 1 hour. For RF exposure alone, DNA damage was assessed with the alkaline comet assay and the cytokinesis-block micronucleus assay. RF radiation alone caused no genotoxic or cytotoxic effects in either cell line. MX increased DNA migration in the comet assay, but RF exposure did not enhance this MX-induced DNA damage.

Brain & Nervous SystemNo Effects Found

Expression of the water channel protein, aquaporin-4, in mouse brains exposed to mobile telephone radiofrequency fields

Finnie JW, Blumbergs PC, Cai Z, Manavis J · 2009

Researchers exposed mice to 900 MHz radiofrequency fields at a specific absorption rate of 4 W/kg for 60 minutes or for 5 days per week over 104 weeks. Control mice were sham-exposed or freely moving to account for restraint stress, and a positive control group received a clostridial toxin that upregulates aquaporin-4. No immunohistochemically detectable up-regulation of aquaporin-4 was observed in exposed mouse brains after either short or long exposure durations.

Effects of mobile phone radiofrequency on the structure and function of the normal human hemoglobin.

Mousavy SJ et al. · 2009

Researchers investigated the effect of mobile phone RF (910 MHz and 940 MHz) on the structure and function of HbA. Oxygen affinity was measured using sodium dithionite with a UV-vis spectrophotometer, and structural changes were studied by circular dichroism and fluorescence spectroscopy. The results indicated that mobile phone EMFs altered oxygen affinity and tertiary structure of HbA. Furthermore, the decrease of oxygen affinity of HbA corresponded to the EMFs intensity and time of exposure.

Effect of electromagnetic field induced by radio frequency waves at 900 to 1800 MHz on bone mineral density of iliac bone wings.

Atay T et al. · 2009

Researchers investigated the effects of electromagnetic waves from cellular phones operating at 900 to 1800 MHz on bone mineral density of the human iliac bone wings in 150 male volunteers. Participants were divided into two groups based on the iliac side exposed to electromagnetic waves (group 1) and the unexposed side (group 2). The mean daily phone carriage duration was 14.7 hours and the mean duration of phone use was 6.2 years. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry measurements showed slightly lower values on the exposed side but the difference was not statistically significant (P > 0.05), and values were not as low as in osteopenia or osteoporosis.

Aluminum, calcium ion and radiofrequency synergism in acceleration of lymphomagenesis.

Anghileri LJ, Mayayo E, Domingo JL. · 2009

The study found a synergism between aluminum and radiofrequency that increased early mortality in lymphoma-bearing mice. This synergism was stronger with aluminum lactate than with aluminum citrate due to higher ionization at physiological pH. The dissociation of aluminum complexes appears to induce a remarkable acceleration of mortality and lymphoid-related hypertrophy of the spleen and liver at an early age. Calcium chloride overload had no effect when cellular calcium homeostasis was functional. The researchers measured organ hypertrophy using the organ-to-body-weight ratio and histopathological examination.

Radio frequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) from GSM (0.9/1.8GHz) mobile phones induces oxidative stress and reduces sperm motility in rats.

Mailankot M et al. · 2009

Researchers exposed male albino Wistar rats to RF-EMR from an active GSM mobile phone for one hour daily over 28 days. Exposed rats had significantly reduced sperm motility but no change in total sperm count. RF-EMR exposure also increased lipid peroxidation and decreased glutathione levels in the testis and epididymis. Facial temperature did not change significantly during exposure.

Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic waves (RF-EMW) from cellular phones on human ejaculated semen: an in vitro pilot study

Agarwal A et al. · 2009

After liquefaction, neat semen samples were divided into two aliquots, with one exposed to cellular phone radiation in talk mode for 1 hour and the other serving as an unexposed control under identical conditions. Exposed samples showed a significant decrease in sperm motility and viability, an increase in ROS level, and a decrease in ROS-TAC score. Levels of total antioxidant capacity and DNA damage showed no significant differences between exposed and unexposed samples.

Derangement of chick embryo retinal differentiation caused by radiofrequency electromagnetic fields.

Zareen N, Khan MY, Ali Minhas L · 2009

Embryos exposed for 10 post-incubation days showed decreased retinal growth and mild epithelial pigmentation. Extending exposure to 15 post-incubation days reversed growth retardation to enhancement and shifted pigmentation from mild to intense. The authors concluded that mobile phone EMF causes derangement of chicken embryo retinal differentiation. Retinal thickness and epithelial pigmentation grades were statistically compared between control and experimental groups.

Radio frequency magnetic fields disrupt magnetoreception in American cockroach.

Vácha M, Puzová T, Kvícalová M · 2009

Researchers tested how weak radio frequency magnetic fields affect the American cockroach's ability to sense the geomagnetic field. A 1.2 MHz field disrupted this sense at intensities between 12 nT and 18 nT, while a 2.4 MHz field required between 18 nT and 44 nT. A 7 MHz field had no effect even at the highest tested intensity of 44 nT. The disruptive effect was strongest at the Larmor frequency of 1.2 MHz. The researchers measured the rise in locomotor activity induced by periodic changes in the geomagnetic North position by 60 degrees.

Influence of 1.8-GHz (GSM) radiofrequency radiation (RFR) on DNA damage and repair induced by X-rays in human leukocytes in vitro.

Zhijian C et al. · 2009

Researchers used the in vitro comet assay to determine whether 1.8-GHz radiofrequency radiation can influence DNA repair in human leukocytes exposed to X-rays. Leukocytes from four young healthy donors were intermittently exposed to RFR at a SAR of 2 W/kg for 24 hours with fields on for 5 minutes and off for 10 minutes, then irradiated with X-rays at doses of 0.25, 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 Gy. DNA damage was measured at 0, 15, 45, 90, 150 and 240 minutes after X-rays using percent tail DNA, and repair speed was assessed via DNA repair percentage. The results showed individual differences in DNA repair speeds among the four donors. Intermittent RFR exposure did not directly induce DNA damage or show synergistic effects with X-rays.

Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields on seed germination and root meristematic cells of Allium cepa L.

Tkalec M et al. · 2009

Researchers exposed Allium cepa seeds for two hours to 400 and 900MHz fields at strengths of 10, 23, 41 and 120Vm(-1), and also tested a four-hour exposure and modulation at 23Vm(-1). Germination rate and root length did not change significantly under any exposure condition. At 900MHz, higher field strengths (41 and 120Vm(-1)) and modulated fields significantly increased the mitotic index, while all 900MHz exposures increased the percentage of mitotic abnormalities. At 400MHz, the mitotic index increased only after modulated exposure, and higher numbers of mitotic abnormalities were found after modulated exposure and after higher field strengths (41 and 120Vm(-1)). The chromosomal aberrations were mainly lagging chromosomes, vagrants, disturbed anaphases and chromosome stickiness.

Induction of adaptive response in human blood lymphocytes exposed to radiofrequency radiation.

Sannino A et al. · 2009

Lymphocytes were collected at 72 hours to measure micronuclei frequency in cytokinesis-blocked binucleated cells. Four donors exhibited a significant reduction in micronuclei after RF pre-exposure, indicating an adaptive response. One donor showed no significant difference in micronuclei between pre-exposed and unexposed cells, indicating a non-responder. The data indicated heterogeneity in the induction of an adaptive response between individuals exposed to RF radiation.

Reactive oxygen species formation is not enhanced by exposure to UMTS 1950 MHz radiation and co-exposure to ferrous ions in Jurkat cells.

Brescia F et al. · 2009

Researchers measured reactive oxygen species (ROS) production in human lymphoblastoid cells exposed to a 1950 MHz UMTS signal at Specific Absorption Rates of 0.5 and 2.0 W/kg. Exposures ranged from short durations of 5 to 60 minutes up to 24 hours, and the study also tested RF radiation given before or at the same time as ferrous ions. RF exposure did not increase ROS formation or affect cell viability, and combining RF with ferrous ions did not produce more ROS than ferrous ions alone.

Blood-brain barrier disruption by continuous-wave radio frequency radiation

Sirav B, Seyhan N · 2009

Researchers investigated the effects of 900 and 1,800 MHz continuous-wave radio frequency radiation on blood-brain barrier permeability in rats. Twenty minutes of exposure at both frequencies increased blood-brain barrier permeability in male rats, while female rats showed no change. The researchers noted that the scientific evidence on radio frequency radiation safety or harm remains inconclusive.

Enhancement of chemically induced reactive oxygen species production and DNA damage in human SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells by 872MHz radiofrequency radiation.

Luukkonen J et al. · 2009

Researchers exposed human SH-SY5Y neuroblastoma cells to 872 MHz radiofrequency radiation at 5 W/kg for 1 hour, combined with menadione, a chemical that induces intracellular ROS production and DNA damage. Continuous-wave RF radiation increased DNA breakage compared to cells exposed only to menadione, and ROS levels were higher at 30 and 60 minutes after exposure ended. No effects of the GSM signal were seen on either ROS production or DNA damage.

Continuous exposure to 900MHz GSM-modulated EMF alters morphological maturation of neural cells.

Del Vecchio G et al. · 2009

Researchers studied the effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure on neuronal maturation using two in vitro models: murine SN56 cholinergic cells and rat primary cortical neurons. Cells were exposed at 1 W/kg at 900 MHz GSM modulated, and neurite emission, outgrowth, and branching were examined at multiple time points. RF-EMF exposure reduced the number of neurites in both cell systems, and this reduction correlated with increased expression of beta-thymosin mRNA.

Reproductive Health464 citations

Mobile phone radiation induces reactive oxygen species production and DNA damage in human spermatozoa in vitro.

De Iuliis GN, Newey RJ, King BV, Aitken RJ. · 2009

Researchers exposed purified human spermatozoa in vitro to radio-frequency electromagnetic radiation tuned to 1.8 GHz across a range of specific absorption rates from 0.4 W/kg to 27.5 W/kg. As the SAR increased, sperm motility and vitality were significantly reduced, while mitochondrial reactive oxygen species generation and DNA fragmentation were significantly elevated (P<0.001). The researchers also observed highly significant relationships between SAR, the oxidative DNA damage biomarker 8-OH-dG, and DNA fragmentation after exposure.

DNA & Genetic DamageNo Effects Found

Evaluation of HSP70 Expression and DNA Damage in Cells of a Human Trophoblast Cell Line Exposed to 1.8 GHz Amplitude-Modulated Radiofrequency Fields.

Valbonesi P et al. · 2008

Researchers used the human trophoblast cell line HTR-8/SVneo to evaluate HSP70 and HSC70 protein and gene expression and primary DNA damage after nonthermal exposure to pulse-modulated 1817 MHz GSM-217 Hz waves for one hour at a SAR of 2 W/kg. Heat shock significantly enhanced HSP70 expression but not HSC70 expression. Exposure to high-frequency EMFs did not change HSP70 or HSC70 protein or gene expression. Hydrogen peroxide caused a significant increase in DNA strand breaks, but EMF exposure did not. Overall, no evidence was found that the exposure induced a HSP70-mediated stress response or primary DNA damage.

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.