Published Scientific Research on 5G, Small Cells, Wireless Radiation and Health

Published peer reviewed science already indicates that the current wireless technologies of 2G, 3G and 4G – in use today with our cell phones, computers and wearable tech – creates (create) radiofrequency exposures which poses (pose) a serious health risk to humans, animals and the environment. Scientists are cautioning that before rolling out 5G, research on human health effects urgently needs to be done first to ensure the public and environment are protected. “Small cells” are microwave antennas (basically shorter cell towers) rapidly being installed in public areas on utility poles and street lights in front of homes, parks and schools. Just like cell towers, these wireless antennas generate and emit microwave radiofrequency (RF) radiation to transmit 2G, 3G and 4G network signals. Companies soon plan to add a new technology called 5G which will use current 4G technology plus even higher frequencies. The higher frequencies include millimetre-wave emissions that were not previously released into public areas. Companies state that these 4G and 5G antennas will increase the wireless radiation levels in the area so much that they are working to loosen several governments’ radiation limits in order to roll it out. A 2021 research study found people who are exposed to higher radiation values present more severe headaches, dizziness and nightmares. Moreover, they sleep fewer hours.“ More than 240 scientists published an appeal to the United Nations to reduce public exposure and called for a moratorium on 5G citing “established” adverse biological effects of RF radiation. Peer-reviewed research has linked a myriad of adverse effects to wireless radiofrequency radiation including brain cancer, breast cancer, DNA damage, thyroid cancer, memory damage, sperm damage, brain damage, headaches, diabetes, hyperactivity, liver damage, oxidative stress, behaviour problems, synergistic effects, altered brain activity, tumour promotion, impaired growth and more. 5G will utilize not only the frequencies currently in use, but also higher millimetre wave and sub-millimetre wave frequencies. Small cells being installed in cities are usually 4G technology with a wide variety of frequencies. Thus, when we consider the health impacts of 5G and small cells we are looking at research on current technologies and frequencies in use in addition to research on sub-millimetre and millimetre waves. The 5G standard is new there are no studies that have looked at long term human exposure to 5G. However the current body of research finding effects from current wireless technology provides enough data for scientists to call for a moratorium. Published Reviews on 5G “5G Wireless Expansion: Public Health and Environmental Implications” published in Environmental Research is a research review that documents the range of reported adverse effects of RF and millimetre waves—effects range from cancer to bacteria growth changes to DNA damage. The study concludes that “a moratorium on the deployment of 5G is warranted” and “the addition of this added high frequency 5G radiation to an already complex mix of lower frequencies, will contribute to a negative public health outcome … from both physical and mental health perspectives” (Russell, 2018). “Adverse Health Effects of 5G Mobile Networking Technology Under Real Life Conditions” published in Toxicology Letters identifies the wide-spectrum of adverse health effects of non-ionizing non-visible radiation and concludes that 5 G mobile networking technology will affect not only the skin and eyes, but will have adverse systemic effects as well. They state that 5G will increase the cell tower densities by an order of magnitude. The researchers conclude that in aggregate, for the high frequency (radiofrequency-RF) part of the spectrum, currently published reviews show that RF radiation below the FCC guidelines can result in: carcinogenicity (brain tumours/glioma, breast cancer, acoustic neuromas, leukaemia, parotid gland tumours), genotoxicity (DNA damage, DNA repair inhibition, chromatin structure), mutagenicity, teratogenicity, neurodegenerative diseases (Alzheimer’s Disease, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis), neurobehavioral problems, autism, reproductive problems, pregnancy outcomes, excessive reactive oxygen species/oxidative stress, inflammation, apoptosis, blood-brain barrier disruption, pineal gland/melatonin production, sleep disturbance, headache, irritability, fatigue, concentration difficulties, depression, dizziness, tinnitus, burning and flushed skin, digestive disturbance, tremor, cardiac irregularities, adverse impacts on the neural, circulatory, immune, endocrine, and skeletal systems” and “from this perspective, RF is a highly pervasive cause of disease” (Kostoff et al., 2020). “Towards 5G communication systems: Are there health implications?” published in the International Journal of Hygiene and Environmental Health is a research review detailing research findings that millimetre waves can alter gene expression, promote cellular proliferation and synthesis of proteins linked with oxidative stress, inflammatory and metabolic processes.” The researchers conclude, “available findings seem sufficient to demonstrate the existence of biomedical effects, to invoke the precautionary principle” (Di Ciaula, 2018). The paper “A New Look at Three Potential Mechanisms Proposed for the Carcinogenesis of 5G Radiation” puts forward three mechanisms. One is that “absorption of 5G radiation in skin can lead to the generation of high levels of free radicals, which in turn increases the risk of skin cancer. Yakymenko et al., have reported that among 100 peer-reviewed publications on oxidative effects of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation included in their review, 93 studies showed that radiofrequency radiation induced oxidative effects in biological systems.” “Systematic Derivation of Safety Limits for Time-Varying 5G Radiofrequency Exposure Based on Analytical Models and Thermal Dose” published in Health Physics documents how significant tissue heating can be generated by 5G technology’s rapid short bursts of energy. “The results also show that the peak-to-average ratio of 1,000 tolerated by the International Council on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection guidelines may lead to permanent tissue damage after even short exposures, highlighting the importance of revisiting existing exposure guidelines” (Neufeld and Kuster, 2018). A review of studies on 6 to 100 GHz (Simkó and Mattsson 2019) funded by Deutsche Telekom of Germany found that “the available studies do not provide adequate and sufficient information for a meaningful safety assessment, or for the question about non-thermal effects.” The review stated, “here is a need for research regarding local heat developments on small surfaces, e.g., skin or the eye, and on any environmental impact.” This study cited research that found “the presence of sweat glands [120,121] and also capillaries in the dermis can cause locally elevated SAR levels [122]. The latter study showed that SAR levels in vessels could be up to 30 times higher than in the surrounding skin, depending on the diameter of the vessels.” Simkó and Mattsson 2019 analysed the quality of the selected studies according to specific criteria. The studies were categorized by the presence of sham/ control, dosimetry, positive control, temperature control, and whether the study was blinded. Of the 45 in vivo studies, 78% (35) demonstrated biological responses after exposure to MMW. However when analysed for quality criteria, “only three publications were identified that met all five criteria [26,51,53].” (EHT note: These three publications found an effect.) Similarly, 31 of the 53 in vitro studies found an effect. However only 13 studies had 3 of the 5 criteria satisfied and the authors conclude that “the number of examinations and the quality criteria are insufficient for a statistical analysis. It should be stressed that this quality analysis covers all publications dealing with the responses/effects of exposure to 6 to 100 GHz MMW, irrespective of the endpoints tested. To perform a correlation analysis, a larger number of comparable studies (e.g., identical endpoints in a frequency group) would be required.” The study “Physiological effects of millimetre-waves on skin and skin cells: An overview of the to-date published studies” published in Reviews on Environmental Health by Dariusz Leszczynski reviewed 99 studies and concluded that the “scientific evidence concerning the possible effects of millimetre-waves on humans is insufficient to devise science-based exposure limits and to develop science-based human health policies. The sufficient research has not been done and, therefore, precautionary measures should be considered for the deployment of the 5G, before the sufficient number of quality research studies will be executed and health risk, or lack of it, scientifically established.” “In conclusion, there is an urgent need for research on the biological and health effects of mm-waves because, using the currently available evidence on skin effects, the claims that “we know skin and human health will not be affected” as well as the claims that “we know skin and human health will be affected” are premature assumptions that lack sufficient scientific basis.” (PDF of Accepted Manuscript) Chemical polarization effects of electromagnetic field radiation from the novel 5G network deployment at ultra high frequency published in the journal Health and Technology( Ugochukwu et al., 2021) concludes that “caution must be applied not to deploy 5G network under ultra-high frequency above 20 GHz due to its adverse health effects.” “On the several findings of the research, deploying 5G network technology under the ultra-high baseband above 20 GHz will produce effects such as heating up of the body tissues due to electromagnetic field inducement on the account that human body is dipolar in nature. The effects will extend to produce dielectric polarization, ionic polarization, interfacial polarization and orientational polarization.” 5G, Wireless and Wildlife FCC and ICNIRP limits were not developed to protect our flora or fauna. Wireless radiation “safety” limits for trees, plants, birds and bees simply do not exist. No US agency nor international authority with expertise in science, biology or safety has ever acted to review research and set safety limits for birds, bees, trees and wildlife. A 2021 review (Balmori 2021) found “sufficient evidence on the damage caused by electromagnetic radiation” to insects to state that “electromagnetic radiation should be considered seriously as a complementary driver for the dramatic decline in insects, acting in synergy with agricultural intensification, pesticides, invasive species and climate change.” The paper concludes that “the precautionary principle should be applied before any new deployment (such 5G) is considered.” A 2021 comprehensive research review by Levitt, Lai and Manville (2021) entitled “Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, part 1. Rising ambient EMF levels in the environment” published in Reviews of Environmental Health found “exponential increases in nearly all environments. ” The abstract states “biological effects have been seen broadly across all taxa and frequencies at vanishingly low intensities comparable to today’s ambient exposures. Broad wildlife effects have been seen on orientation and migration, food finding, reproduction, mating, nest and den building, territorial maintenance and defence, and longevity and survivorship. Cyto- and geno-toxic effects have been observed… It is time to recognize ambient EMF as a novel form of pollution and develop rules at regulatory agencies that designate air as ‘habitat’ so EMF can be regulated like other pollutants. Wildlife loss is often unseen and undocumented until tipping points are reached. Long-term chronic low-level EMF exposure standards, which do not now exist, should be set accordingly for wildlife, and environmental laws should be strictly enforced.” This paper, which is one of a three part series that addresses wireless frequencies now in use as well as the complex signals that will be deployed for 5G stating “serious concerns regarding phasing because it interacts with living cells in extremely complex ways that have nothing to do with traditional thermal thresholds. The wave form itself is the biologically active component” and “The reason that phasing may have a unique biological impact is because very fast peak radiation pulses generate bursts of energy that can give rise to what are called Sommerfeld and Brillouin precursors in living cells that can in turn penetrate and disperse much deeper than traditional models predict. Som merfeld/Brillouin precursors most notably form with ultra wideband exposures as proposed with 5G.” A 2020 report of the “biological effects of electromagnetic fields on insects” by high voltage, mobile communications and WLAN came to the conclusion that, in addition to pesticides and the loss of habitats, mobile communications radiation also has negative effects on insects and is therefore another factor in weakening the insect world. Read “Biological effects of electromagnetic fields on insects” by Alain Thill. Several literature reviews warn that non-ionizing EMFs are an “emerging threat” to wildlife (Balmori 2015, Curachi 2013, Sivani 2012) and impacts to pollinators are documented in published studies (Favre 2011, Kumar et.al., 2011, Lazaro et al., 2016). Field research has found years of exposure to cell tower radiation damages trees (Waldmann-Selsam, C., et al. 2016, Helmut 2016, Haggerty 2010) and plants (Halgamuge 2017, Pall 2016, Halgamuge and Davis 2019). Radiofrequency radiation has been found to affect the magnetic sense of invertebrates (including insects) (Tomanová and Vácha, 2016; Vácha et al., 2009) birds (Engels et al., 2014) and mammals (Malkemper et al., 2015). Furthermore research shows bees and pollinators could suffer serious impacts from the higher frequencies to be used in 5G as the higher frequencies resonate with their bodies resulting in up to 370% higher absorbed power. Currently there is no U.S. Government-funded research program into the non-thermal biological effects of RF emissions to the environment. The EPA, which formerly conducted such research, lost all of its research funding in 1996, and has done nothing since. In July 2020 the Director of the Radiation Protection Division of the EPA Lee Ann B. Veal wrote Theodora Scarato Executive Director of EHT that the EPA had no funded mandate to regarding wireless radiofrequency matters and that they are not aware of any developed safety limits or research reviews related to impacts of wireless on birds bees and the environment. Read the letter. The EPA stated their last research review was their 1984 Report. The FCC confirmed in a USTTI webinar October 15, 2020 that their limits were for humans only. A Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit from September 8, 2000. It clarifies how decades ago, when FCC limits were set, the EPA was defunded from properly reviewing the science on harm from electromagnetic fields. “The Court’s reliance on the EPA was technically correct but substantively naive. What the Court did not realize was that Congress terminated funding for radiation research by EPA in 1996, and no staff has been available at EPA to conduct such research for the past five years.” 5G Millimetre Waves and Human Skin

Some carriers will incorporate millimetre and submillimetre waves into 5G wireless networks. The study “Human Electromagnetic Field Exposure in 5G at 28 GHz” published in IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine evaluated human exposure to radiofrequency for three wireless systems -5G, 4G, and 3.9G and found that 5G’s higher frequencies penetrate into the skin very intensely despite the fact that the depth of penetration is more shallow.“ The SAR is inversely proportional to the penetration depth, and hence, a shallower penetration occurring in 5G yields a higher absorption.” The authors conclude that “the fact that a high-frequency EMF cannot penetrate deep into human skin does not mean that it is not dangerous.” “The Human Skin as a Sub-THz Receiver – Does 5G Pose a Danger to It or Not?”, published in Environmental Research, and “The Modeling of the Absorbance of Sub-THz Radiation by Human Skin”, published in IEEE Transactions on Terahertz Science and Technology, are two papers by physicists presenting research that found higher 5G frequencies are intensely absorbed into human sweat ducts (in skin), at a much higher absorption levels than other parts of our skin’s tissues (Betzalel et al., 2017, Betzalel et al., 2018). In an article published in Environmental Research, researchers conclude, “We are raising a warning flag against the unrestricted use of sub-THz technologies for communication, before the possible consequences for public health are explored” (Betzalel, et al., 2018). A 2020 study published in the journal Environmental Research and Public Health investigated the combined exposure of 3 G mobile systems at 1950 MHz RF and UV found a 24-h RF exposure significantly reduced the MMP-1 enzyme concentration, caused by prior UV exposure. Although they did not find changes in cytokines due to exposure to RF alone or enhancement of the effects of UV radiation, their findings indicate changes after exposure and point to the importance of investigating this and other effects on skin. The authors conclude that, “the investigation of the possible adverse effects on the skin due to the high frequency electromagnetic fields become more and more important before the deployment of 5G mobile systems. Using this new technology, the absorption of exposure to RF in the skin will be enhanced. The skin will be the most important target organ of the RF exposure to 5G. Therefore, our approach of combined (i.e., consecutive) exposure to UV and RF might be important in future research related to 5G and skin.” A 2021 paper “Millimeter (MM) wave and microwave frequency radiation produce deeply penetrating effects: the biology and the physics” by Martin L Pall PHD reviews the science on how MMwaves can have highly penetrating effects stating that “in humans, MM-waves have penetrating effects including impacts on the brain, producing EEG changes and other neurological/neuropsychiatric changes, increases in apparent electromagnetic hypersensitivity and produce changes on ulcers and cardiac activity…Specifically, MM-wave electrical fields are almost completely absorbed in the outer 1 mm of the body due to the high dielectric constant of biological aqueous phases. However, the magnetic fields are very highly penetrating. 3. Time-varying magnetic fields have central roles in producing highly penetrating effects. The primary mechanism of EMF action is voltage-gated calcium channel (VGCC) activation with the EMFs acting via their forces on the voltage sensor, rather than by depolarization of the plasma membrane…There are three very important findings here which are rarely recognized in the EMF scientific literature: coherence of electronically generated EMFs; the key role of time-varying magnetic fields in generating highly penetrating effects; the key role of both modulating and pure EMF pulses in greatly increasing very short term high level time-variation of magnetic and electric fields. It is probable that genuine safety guidelines must keep nanosecond timescale-variation of coherent electric and magnetic fields below some maximum level in order to produce genuine safety. These findings have important implications with regard to 5G radiation.” 5G’s Higher Frequencies Will Impact Insects “Exposure of Insects to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields from 2 to 120 GHz” published in Scientific Reports is the first study to investigate how insects (including the Western honeybee) absorb the higher frequencies (2 GHz to 120 GHz) to be used in the 4G/5G rollout. The scientific simulations showed increases in absorbed power between 3% to 370% when the insects were exposed to the frequencies. Researchers concluded, “This could lead to changes in insect behaviour, physiology, and morphology over time….” (Thielens et al., 2018) According to Belyaev 2019, “the health effects of chronic MMW exposures may be more significant than for any other frequency range.” The abstract states that, “ Various responses to non-thermal microwaves (MW) from mobile communication including adverse health effects related to electro hypersensitivity, cancer risks, neurological effects, and reproductive impacts have been reported while some studies reported no such effects. This presentation provides an overview of the complex dependence of the MW effects on various physical and biological variables, which account for, at least partially, an apparent inconsistence in the published data. Among other variables, dependencies on carrier frequency, polarization, modulation, intermittence, electromagnetic stray fields, genotype, physiological traits, and cell density during exposure were reported. Nowadays, biological and health effects of 5G communication, which will use microwaves of extremely high frequencies (millimetre waves MMW, wavelength 1- 10 mm), are of significant public concern. It follows from available studies that MMW, under specific conditions of exposure at very low intensities below the ICNIRP guidelines, can affect biological systems and human health. Both positive and negative effects were observed in dependence on exposure parameters. In particular, MMW inhibited repair of DNA damage induced by ionizing radiation at specific frequencies and polarizations. To what extend the 5G technology and the Internet of Things will affect the biota and human health is definitely not known. However, based on possible fundamental role of MMW in regulation of homeostasis and almost complete absence of MMW in atmosphere due to effective absorption, which suggests the lack of adaptation to this type of radiation, the health effects of chronic MMW exposures may be more significant than for any other frequency range.” The Bioeffects of Millimetre Waves Documented Years Ago “Biological Effect of Millimeter Waves”, a Russian review on millimetre waves declassified by the CIA in 2012, reported multiple research findings and concluded that, “Morphological, functional and biochemical studies conducted in humans and animals revealed that millimetre wave caused changes in the body manifested in structural alterations in the skin and internal organs, qualitative and quantitative changes of the blood and bone marrow composition and changes of the conditioned reflex activity, tissue respiration, activity of enzymes participating in the process of tissue respiration and nucleic metabolism” (Zalyubovskaya, 1977). “Current State And Implications Of Research On Biological Effects Of Millimeter Waves: A Review Of The Literature” published in BioElectroMagnetics reviewed dozens of research findings on low-intensity millimetre waves and determined that the reported, “MMW effects could not be readily explained by temperature changes during irradiation.” The review concludes by questioning the adequacy of regulatory limits stating that, “Safety limits for these types of exposure are based solely on predictions of energy deposition and MMW heating, but in view of recent studies this approach is not necessarily adequate” (Pakhomov et al., 1998). “Skin Heating and Injury by Prolonged Millimetre-Wave Exposure: Theory Based on a Skin Model Coupled to a Whole Body Model and Local Biochemical Release From Cells at Supraphysiologic Temperatures”, published in IEEE Transactions On Plasma Science concludes that a consequence of MMW heating is the alteration of cell-membrane permeability. Nearby skin layers are affected by the biophysical mechanism of biochemical release through cell membranes. “The released molecules are delivered to other skin regions by diffusion and into the bloodstream by perfusion, where according to our hypothesis, the molecules interact with susceptible cells. This raises the possibility of additional indirect injury at nearby deeper skin regions that experience insignificant heating. Biochemical release may also lead to injury at distant sites within the body by perfusion clearance that transfers molecules into the systemic circulation to reach other susceptible cells” (Stewart et al., 2006). Siegel et al, 2010 published in Electronics Records reviewed a series of experiments “which show changes in cell membrane potential and the action potential firing rate of cortical neurons under short (1 min) exposures to continuous-wave 60 GHz radiation at mW/cm2 power levels, more than 1000 times below the US govern- ment maximum permissible exposure.” “At power levels of approximately 300 nW/cm2 and above, we observed strong inhibition of the action potential firing rate in some of the neurons, and increased firing in others, perhaps indicating the functional heterogeneity in the studied neuronal population. …These results are believed to be the first positive correlative measurements of real-time changes in neuronal activity with ultra-low-power millimetre-wave exposures. The experiments point to changes in membrane channel opening….” Yes, Adding More Cell Antennas Will Increase Exposures in Communities A 2018 study published in Annals of Telecommunications found increased RF-EMF exposure from small cell LTE networks in two urban cities in France and the Netherlands. Researchers measured the RF-EMF from LTE (Long-Term Evolution) MC (macro cells meaning large cell towers) and SC networks (low-powered small cell base stations) and found that the small cell networks increased the radio emissions from base stations (called downlink) by a factor of 7–46 while decreasing the radio emissions from user equipment exposure (called ) by a factor of 5–17. So while the devices themselves could emit less radiation, the cell antennas will increase the levels from cell antennas (Mazloum et al., 2019). This study shows the increased exposures would be involuntary. We can turn our phones off, but we cannot turn off the antennas in the neighbourhood. A 2020 paper “Radiation Analysis in a Gradual 5G Network Deployment Strategy,” presented at the IEEE 3rd 5G World Forum documents how engineers found significant increases in levels of radio frequency radiation would result if a mmWave-based 5G network was fully deployed in Austin Texas. The researchers first mapped the pre-existing LTE antennas and then laid out the real world design for the densification of cell towers and signal repeaters which would be needed in the City in order to fully build out a mmWave-based 5G network. The engineers then simulated the RF power densities that would be experienced in the outdoor environments should the 5G mmWave antennas be installed. They found the fully deployed 5G mmWave network would result in significant increases in outdoor RF levels for the City. The researchers conclude that, “This suggests that 5G mobile networks can not yet be classified as safe for the public, and demands serious considerations before using mmWave communications for 5G networks, given the potential harms it could afflict on the public.” The engineers created a heat map to show the increased radiation levels should 5G be fully deployed in Austin Texas. An Australian study published in the Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology also found that children in kindergartens with nearby antenna installations had nearly three-and-a-half times higher RF exposures than children with installations further away by more than 300 meters (Bhatt et al., 2016). A 2018 multi-country study published in Environment International measured RF in several countries. It found that cell phone tower radiation is the dominant contributor to RF exposure in most outdoor areas; exposure in urban areas was higher and that exposure has drastically increased. As an example, the measurements the researchers took in Los Angeles, USA were 70 times higher than the US EPA estimate 40 years ago (Sagar et al., 2018). As an example of how rapidly RF is increasing from wireless antennas, a 2014 published study from Environmental Research looked at RF in three European cities and found in just one year (between April 2011 and March 2012) that the total RF-EMF exposure levels in all outdoor areas in combination increased by 57.1% in Basel, by 20.1% in Ghent and by 38.2% in Brussels. “Exposure increase was most consistently observed in outdoor areas due to emissions from mobile phone base stations” (Urbinello et al., 2014). Another study, published in Environment International, looked at 529 children in Denmark, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Switzerland and Spain who wore meters around the waist or carried in a backpack during the day and placed close to the bed at night. Researchers found “the largest contributors to total personal environmental RF-EMF exposure were downlink (meaning from cell tower base stations) and broadcast” (Birks et al., 2018). Cell tower radiation is a significant contribution to our daily exposure to RF. A study recently published in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health equipped Australian adults with an RF measuring device in a small hip bag for approximately 24 consecutive hours. The study found “downlink and broadcast are the main contributors to total RF-EMF personal exposure.” Downlink (RF from mobile phone base station) contributed 40.4% of the total RF-EMF exposure (Zeleke et al., 2018). Another published study in the Science of The Total Environment journal, gave 50 Korean parents and their child a measuring device for 48 hours found that “the contribution of base-station exposure to total RF-EMF exposure was the highest both in parents and children” (Choi et al., 2018). The study Exposure of South Korean Population to 5G Mobile Phone Networks (3.4–3.8 GHz) measured exposure to electromagnetic fields in South Korea to evaluate the relative contribution of 5G as compared with other frequencies such as 2G, 3G, and 4G. Results show that the emission of 5G contributes about 15% to total telecommunications emissions. Although levels were below ICNIRP, highest levels were observed in the vicinity of 5G antennas (Selmaoui 2021). Several countries measure the levels of radiofrequency and post these measurements online- France, Greece, Turkey, India, Israel, French Polynesia, Croatia, Bulgaria, Tunisia, Switzerland, Bahrain, Iceland and Australia. If you look at the measurements by these governments as well as by industry itself the increase from 5G is evident. For example, in Australia the telecom companies report on the levels a this link https://www.rfnsa.com.au/?first=1 The values are maximum theoretically calculated numbers and they show large changes with the introduction of 5G. Take the 2021 example found here of the level increasing from 6.44% of the limit to 14.22% of the limit when the 5G network antenna is added. As another example on Queen Street in Melbourne Australia the addition of 5G antennas increased the levels from 1.67% to 3.39% of the limit. 5G antennas near a Melbourne powerpole at Elizabeth and Collins Street increased the 2021 levels from .11% to .42% of the limit and the power density increased from 7.70 mW/m2 to 42.26 mW/m2 from 0 to 50 meters from the site. A Russel Street Melbourne 5G network (2021) increased the level from .09% to .75% of the limit and the power density increased from 6.77 mW/m2 to 75.20 mW/m2 from 0 to 50 meters from the site.

Experts Warn that Measurement Techniques Do Not Adequately Measure 5G Exposures A 2019 Report for the European Parliament Committee on Industry, Research and Energy published for the Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, entitled “5G Deployment: State of Play in Europe, USA, and Asia” explained that “5G radio emission fields are quite different to those of previous generations because of their complex beamformed transmissions in both directions – from base station to handset and for the return. Although fields are highly focused by beams, they vary rapidly with time and movement and so are unpredictable, as the signal levels and patterns interact as a closed loop system. This has yet to be mapped reliably for real situations, outside the laboratory.” “While the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) issues guidelines for limiting exposure to electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields (EMF), and EU member states are subject to Council Recommendation 1999/519/EC which follows ICNIRP guidelines, the problem is that currently it is not possible to accurately simulate or measure 5G emissions in the real world” (Blackman & Forge, 2019). A 2020 European Parliament Briefing on the “Effects of 5G wireless communication on human health” reiterates the issues with measurements and also comments on how radiation limits are outdated stating in this summary, “The EU’s current provisions on exposure to wireless signals, the Council Recommendation on the limitation of exposure of the general public to electromagnetic fields (0 Hz to 300 GHz), is now 20 years old, and thus does not take the specific technical characteristics of 5G into account” (Karaboytcheva, 2020). “Human Exposure to RF Fields in 5G Downlink” in IEEE International Communications Conference found “that 5G downlink RF fields generate significantly higher power density (PD) and specific absorption rate (SAR) than a current cellular system. This paper also shows that SAR should also be taken into account for determining human RF exposure in the mmW downlink” (Nasim & Kim, 2017). The study “Human EMF Exposure in Wearable Networks for Internet of Battlefield Things” published in MILCOM 2019 – 2019 IEEE Military Communications Conference (MILCOM) is the first work that explicitly compares the human EMF exposure at different operating frequencies for on-body wearable communications. The study investigates the exposure effects of the human electromagnetic field (EMF) from on-body wearable devices and compares the results to illustrate how the technology evolution to higher frequencies can impact one’s health. It concludes that the results suggest the average specific absorption rate (SAR) at 60 GHz can exceed the regulatory guidelines within a certain separation distance between a wearable device and the human skin surface (Nasim & Kim, 2019). Review Publications on Electromagnetic Radiation and RF A 2019 literature review “Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation” published in Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine found that 93 of the 100 peer-reviewed studies dealing with oxidative effects of low-intensity RFR, confirmed that RFR induces oxidative effects in biological systems (Yakymenko et al., 2016). “Planetary Electromagnetic Pollution: It Is Time to Assess Its Impact” published in The Lancet Planetary Health documents the significant increase in environmental levels of radio-frequency (RF) electromagnetic wireless radiation over the past two decades. The study cites an evaluation that found 68.2% of 2,266 studies in humans, animals, and plants demonstrated significant biological or health effects associated with exposure to electromagnetic fields. 89% of experimental studies that investigated oxidative stress endpoints showed significant effects and “radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation causes DNA damage apparently through oxidative stress.” The paper also highlights research that has associated RF exposure with altered neurodevelopment and behavioural disorders, structural and functional changes in the brain and the sensitivity of pollinators. “These findings deserve urgent attention. This weight of scientific evidence refutes the prominent claim that the deployment of wireless technologies poses no health risks at the currently permitted non-thermal radiofrequency exposure levels” (Bandara & Carpenter, 2018). The review “Thermal and non-thermal health effects of low intensity non-ionizing radiation: An international perspective” published in Environmental Pollution by researchers of the European Cancer Environment Research Institute in Brussels, Belgium and the Institute for Health and the Environment, University at Albany, NY, USA reviews current research findings and states that, “the mechanism(s) responsible include induction of reactive oxygen species, gene expression alteration and DNA damage through both epigenetic and genetic processes.” The paper affirms that “exposure to low frequency and radiofrequency electromagnetic fields at low intensities poses a significant health hazard that has not been adequately addressed by national and international organizations such as the World Health Organization” (Belpomme et al., 2018). The literature review “Effect of radiofrequency radiation on reproductive health” published by the Division of Reproductive Biology & Maternal Health, Child Health, Indian Council of Medical Research documents research that has found a link between radiofrequency radiation and oxidative stress and changes to the reproductive system including sperm count, motility, normal morphology and viability. The review concludes that the “available data indicate that exposure to EMF can cause adverse health effects. It is also reported that biological effects may occur at very low levels of exposure” (Singh et al., 2018). Environmental Review published a 2010 landmark review study on 56 studies that reported biological effects found at very low intensities, including impacts on reproduction, permeability of the blood-brain barrier, behaviour, cellular and metabolic changes, and increases in cancer risk (Lai & Levitt, 2010). Cancer “Cancer epidemiology update, following the 2011 IARC evaluation of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields” published in Environmental Research is a comprehensive research review of RF effects in human and animal research. The review concludes that scientific evidence is now adequate to conclude radiofrequency radiation is carcinogenic to humans (Miller, 2018). Several previously published studies also concluded that RF causes various types of cancer, for example, Carlberg & Hardell, 2017 published in BioMed Research International; Atzman et al., 2016 published in the International Journal Cancer Clinical Research; and Peleg et al., 2018 published in Environmental Research. The US National Toxicology Program (NTP) is a federal, interagency program that conducted a $30-million study designed to test the basis for federal safety limits. The study on, “Cell Phone Radio Frequency Radiation” found “clear evidence” of cancer, heart damage and DNA damage (NIEHS, 2018). The heart and brain cancers found in the NTP rats are the same cell type as tumours that researchers have found to be increasing in humans who have used cell phones for over 10 years as published in BioMed Research (Carlberg & Hardell, 2017). Thus, researchers assert in the International Journal of Oncology that the animal evidence from the NTP study confirms the human evidence associating radio frequency radiation exposure to cancer occurrences/developments (Carlberg & Hardell, 2019). The 2018 report of final brain and heart tumor results from the The Ramazzini Institute (RI) Study on Base Station RF, published in Environmental Research was another large scale rat study that also found increases in the same heart cancers that the US National Toxicology Program (NTP) study found—yet the Ramazzini rats were exposed to much lower levels of RF than the NTP rats. In fact, all the RI radiation exposures were below FCC limits, as the study was specifically designed to test the safety of RF limits for cell tower/base stations (Falconi et al., 2018.) Thus, the Ramazzini study corroborates the NTP findings as published on the National Institutes of Health website. “Tumor promotion by exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields below exposure limits for humans” published in Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications is a replication study that used very, very low RF exposures (lower than the Ramazzini and NTP study) and combined the RF with a known carcinogen. Researchers found elevated lymphoma and significantly higher numbers of tumours in the lungs and livers in animals exposed to both RF and the carcinogen, leading researchers to state that previous research published in the International Journal of Radiation Biology (Tillman et al., 2010) was confirmed and that “our results show that electromagnetic fields obviously enhance the growth of tumours” (Lerchl et al., 2015). Environment “A review of the ecological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF)” published in Environment International reviewed 113 studies finding RF-EMF had a significant effect on birds, insects, other vertebrates, other organisms and plants in 70% of the studies (Cucurachi et al., 2013). Development and reproduction in birds and insects were the most strongly affected. As an example of the several studies on wildlife impacts, a study published in the Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology focused on RF emissions from antennas found increased sperm abnormalities in mice exposed to RF from GSM antennas (Otitoloju et al., 2009). Published studies, in Toxicology International and Apidologie, on bees have found behavioural effects (Kumar et al., 2011; Favre 2011), while other studies from the International Journal of Environmental Sciences and the IIAS-InterSymp Conference attest to disrupted navigation (Goldsworthy, 2009; Sainudeen, 2011; Kimmel et al., 2007). Decreasing egg laying rate and reduced colony strength are documented in Science Direct and the Acta Systemica-IIAS International Journal (Sharma & Kumar, 2010; Harst et al., 2006). Research has also found high levels of damage to trees from cell antenna radiation. For example, a field monitoring study, “Radiofrequency radiation injures trees around mobile phone base stations” published in the Science of The Total Environment –spanning 9 years, involving over 100 trees–found trees sustained more damage on the side of the tree facing the antenna (Waldmann-Selsam et al., 2016).