The rollout of 5G networks has sparked intense debate about potential health effects. With over 1.2 billion 5G connections expected by 2025, understanding what the science actually says is more important than ever. Let’s examine the research objectively.
Understanding 5G Technology and EMF Exposure
Fifth-generation (5G) wireless technology was first widely deployed in 2019 and extends into higher frequencies around 3.5 GHz and up to a few tens of GHz. These higher frequencies are new to mobile phone networks but have been used in other applications like security body scanners and point-to-point radio links.
The key difference with 5G is the use of millimeter waves (MMW) in some deployments, which penetrate tissue less deeply than lower frequencies. This has led researchers to focus particularly on potential effects on skin and surface tissues.
What Major Health Organizations Say
World Health Organization Position
The WHO states that to date, after much research performed, no adverse health effect has been causally linked with exposure to wireless technologies. However, the organization acknowledges knowledge gaps and is conducting a health risk assessment of radiofrequency fields, including 5G, with results expected in 2025.
The WHO emphasizes that radiofrequency exposure levels from current technologies result in negligible temperature rise in the human body, and that tissue heating is the main established mechanism of interaction.
International Cancer Research Agency Classification
An important point of context: In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2B) based on limited evidence from studies on long-term, heavy mobile phone use of 1G, 2G, and 3G technologies. It’s crucial to understand that Group 2B also includes everyday substances like talc powder and pickled vegetables, indicating possible but not proven cancer risk.
Safety Standards and Exposure Limits
Public exposure to RF fields from 5G is below the human exposure limits specified by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). These guidelines cover radiofrequencies up to 300 GHz and are designed to prevent tissue heating and other known effects.
What the Research Studies Show
Comprehensive Reviews of 5G Research
A 2021 state-of-science review examined the research landscape for RF fields above 6 GHz. The findings were mixed:
The review included 107 experimental studies investigating various bioeffects including genotoxicity, cell proliferation, gene expression, and other effects. Reported bioeffects were generally not independently replicated and the majority of studies employed low-quality methods of exposure assessment and control.
A 2019 pragmatic review of studies on 6-100 GHz frequencies found that 80% of in vivo studies showed responses to exposure, while 58% of in vitro studies demonstrated effects, affecting all biological endpoints studied. However, there was no consistent relationship between power density, exposure duration, or frequency and exposure effects.
Critically, this review concluded that the available studies do not provide adequate and sufficient information for a meaningful safety assessment.
Recent Laboratory Studies
A 2025 study published in Scientific Reports examined whether 5G RF-EMF exposure affects oxidative stress and DNA repair in human skin cells. The results showed no significant effect of 5G RF-EMF exposure at 3.5 GHz up to 4 W/kg on oxidative stress markers, and RF-EMF exposure did not alter the efficiency of DNA repair.
Real-World Exposure Studies
More concerning findings emerged from Swedish case studies. Research published in 2024 examined 16 people after 5G base stations were established near their homes. Measurements showed that 5G resulted in extremely high exposure to pulsed radiofrequency radiation, with peak levels in the studied homes reaching several million microwatts per square meter.
The study reported that these high levels caused symptoms of ill health in several people within 24 hours after 5G was switched on, with the most common symptoms being sleep disturbance, fatigue, headache, irritability, concentration problems, and impaired short-term memory.
Important Context on Exposure Levels
It’s essential to understand the context: A typical office environment with 5.50 GHz wireless communication transmitters resulted in a maximum power density of 0.89 μW/cm², which is well below exposure guideline limits. The levels that caused symptoms in the Swedish studies were significantly higher than typical exposures.
Knowledge Gaps and Research Needs
Multiple scientific bodies have identified significant gaps in our understanding of 5G health effects:
Limited Long-Term Data
There are large gaps in knowledge regarding the health impact of millimeter waves in the 6-100 GHz frequency range at relevant power densities for 5G. The technology is simply too new for long-term epidemiological studies to exist yet.
A 2024 review noted that there are no epidemiological studies dealing with wireless communication for this frequency range, meaning all current research is based on laboratory studies rather than real-world population data.
Dosimetry and Exposure Assessment Challenges
Researchers have called for urgent work in several areas:
- Exact dosimetry with consideration of the skin for relevant frequency ranges, including consideration of short intense pulses
- Studies on inflammatory reactions starting from the skin
- Investigation of non-thermal effects below the heating threshold
The Precautionary Approach Debate
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. However, these views are not universally shared in the scientific community.
A 2020 European Parliament study suggested that the literature contains no adequate studies that would rule out the risk that tumors and adverse effects on reproduction and development may occur upon exposure to 5G millimeter waves, justifying calls for a moratorium pending completion of adequate research.
What Does This Mean for You?
Current Scientific Consensus
The scientific community remains divided, but key points of agreement include:
- Exposures Are Within Current Safety Limits: In most scenarios, 5G exposures remain below international safety guidelines
- More Research Is Needed: There is widespread agreement that the long-term effects of 5G require further study
- Individual Sensitivity Varies: Some individuals report electromagnetic hypersensitivity, though committees conclude that low-level RF exposure does not cause symptoms directly, but a “nocebo” effect may be present
Practical Considerations
While waiting for more definitive research, here are evidence-based considerations:
Distance Matters: All forms of electromagnetic radiation decrease rapidly with distance. Increasing distance from sources reduces exposure significantly.
Exposure Patterns: With 5G requiring increased network density and more infrastructure due to shorter ranges of higher frequencies, the number of exposure sources in the environment is increasing.
Personal Control: Unlike ambient environmental exposures, you have control over your personal device usage and proximity to wireless devices.
The Bottom Line
The research on 5G health effects presents a complex picture. While current exposure levels remain within established safety guidelines and no causal link to adverse health effects has been confirmed, the technology is too new for long-term studies to exist.
Key findings include:
- Most laboratory studies show no effects at typical exposure levels
- Study quality varies significantly, with many lacking proper controls
- Real-world exposure patterns differ from laboratory conditions
- Individual reports of sensitivity exist but remain scientifically controversial
- Major health organizations maintain that current exposures are safe while calling for continued research
Researchers emphasize that based on current knowledge about RF-EMF exposures, there is likely little reason for concern, but they want to ensure this is correct, particularly for workers who may experience higher or different exposure patterns.
For those concerned about EMF exposure, the most prudent approach combines awareness with evidence-based protective measures, while we await more comprehensive long-term research.
References:
This article cites peer-reviewed research from:
- Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology (2021)
- Toxicology Letters (2019)
- Reviews on Environmental Health (2024)
- Scientific Reports (2025)
- World Health Organization official statements
- International Agency for Research on Cancer classifications
- European Parliament health impact studies
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and should not be considered medical advice. Consult healthcare professionals for personal health concerns.
Leave a Reply