Flat out wrong.
As a practicing engineer heavily involved in the sciences, I over the years have developed critical thinking skills. Both for work, as well as for performing peer reviews for publications and review of grant proposals most people would never understand.
The list you provided, the first 20 titles had author conclusions counter to the scary titles. I personally would have been ashamed to post that stuff as proof, but that is just me.
You have demonstrated a clear lack of critical thinking skills in posting such drivel. I assume it is because you have become caught up in the frenzy the website originators intended. You have blindly trusted others who have a specific agenda you are probably unaware of.
Having children and grandchildren, I do indeed worry about the environment and their health. The sites being linked to here are not actual science based entities, they are political ones geared towards using public ignorance to achieve specific goals.
As such, they divert from the actual problems, so cannot provide actual solutions.
Jn
Last edited:
People in Belgium drink the most beer per capita than anyone else in the world. That keeps them from suffering the effects of 5G.
^^^^^^ That, + 1000
As a side note, an evaluation about the site linked to in the very first post in this thread:
from: Waking Times - Media Bias/Fact Check
Just as a free sample, there´s tons more about this questionable site:
Personally, I wouldn´t ask them for the time of the day, go figure.
I could post other references about 5G health issues,there are many. None will satisfy those who don't want to see. If you are interested, here is a massive information resource: https://www.5gexposed.com
But my question stands, where is your independent study evidence that the fields we're discussing are safe for humans and wildlife? All you will be able to come up with is the outdated, badly designed, industry backed SAR tests. What about the non thermal effects? In fact the roll out of 5G constitutes a mass experiment on humanity without their informed consent or the ability to withdraw from the experiment when we choose. That contravenes the Nuremberg Code. But that's not new because government have been doing such experiments for years.
Have look at this US Senate committee meeting if you don't think it's an experiment: YouTube
But my question stands, where is your independent study evidence that the fields we're discussing are safe for humans and wildlife? All you will be able to come up with is the outdated, badly designed, industry backed SAR tests. What about the non thermal effects? In fact the roll out of 5G constitutes a mass experiment on humanity without their informed consent or the ability to withdraw from the experiment when we choose. That contravenes the Nuremberg Code. But that's not new because government have been doing such experiments for years.
Have look at this US Senate committee meeting if you don't think it's an experiment: YouTube
Yes, there are many websites out there who's purpose is to attract lemmings who do not even read the content of the linked papers. You present as the type of person who refuses to learn the topic you are rambling on about.
I would be satisfied to see you actually read the author's conclusions for the links YOU provided. Since you are predisposed to NOT employ any critical thinking, I expect you to never take the effort.
Web sites catering to pseudoscience look for those such as you to spread their garbage. You are their target market....easily swayed by convincing verbage that lacks either content or facts.
Of the websites I have visited in the past, you will find that the level of understanding here at DIY is sufficiently high that your erroneous postings and thinkings will be shredded to bits....casually, I might add, without breaking a sweat..yawn.
jn
Jneutron. I'm going to give a couple more refs, but really there's not point me trying to convince you as you are determined not to know.
Here's a study warning about potential thermal issues of 5G: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1711.03683.pdf
Specific effects and reviews each reporting the effect
in multiple primary literature studies:
Cellular DNA damage: Single strand and double strand breaks in cellular DNA and
oxidized bases in cellular DNA, leading to chromosomal and other mutational changes:
1. Glaser ZR, PhD. 1971 Naval Medical Research Institute Research Report, June 1971. Bibliography
of Reported Biological Phenomena (“Effects”) and Clinical Manifestations Attributed to
Microwave and Radio-Frequency Radiation. Report No. 2 Revised. https://scholar.google.
com/scholar?q=Glaser+naval+medical+microwave+radio-frequency+1972&btnG=&hl=en&as_
sdt=0%2C38 (Accessed Sept. 9, 2017)
2. Goldsmith JR. 1997 Epidemiologic evidence relevant to radar (microwave) effects. Environ Health
Perspect 105(Suppl 6):1579-1587.
3. Yakymenko IL, Sidorik EP, Tsybulin AS. 1999 [Metabolic changes in cells under electromagnetic
radiation of mobile communication systems]. Ukr Biokhim Zh (1999), 2011 Mar-Apr:20-28.
4. Aitken RJ, De Iuliis GN. 2007 Origins and consequences of DNA damage in male germ cells. Reprod
Biomed Online 14:727-733.
5. Hardell, L., Sage, C. 2008. Biological effects from electromagnetic field exposure and public
exposure standards. Biomed. Pharmacother. 62, 104-109.
6. Hazout A, Menezo Y, Madelenat P, Yazbeck C, Selva J, Cohen-Bacrie P. 2008 [Causes and clinical
implications of sperm DNA damages]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil ;36:1109-1117.
7. Phillips JL, Singh NP, Lai H. 2009 Electromagnetic fields and DNA damage. Pathophysiology 16:79-
88.
8. Ruediger HW. 2009 Genotoxic effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Pathophysiology.
16:89-102.
9. Makker K, Varghese A, Desai NR, Mouradi R, Agarwal A. 2009 Cell phones: modern man’s nemesis?
Reprod Biomed Online 18:148-157.
10. Yakymenko I, Sidorik E. 2010 Risks of carcinogenesis from electromagnetic radiation and mobile
telephony devices. Exp Oncol 32:729-736.
11. Yakimenko IL, Sidorik EP, Tsybulin AS. 2011 [Metabolic changes in cells under electromagnetic
radiation of mobile communication systems]. Ukr Biokhim Zh (1999). 2011 MarApr;83(2):20-28.
12. Gye MC, Park CJ. 2012 Effect of electromagnetic field exposure on the reproductive system. Clin
Exp Reprod Med 39:1-9. doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2012.39.1.1
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 13
13. Pall, ML. 2013. Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to
produce beneficial or adverse effects. J Cell Mol Med 17:958-965. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.12088.
14. Pall, M. L. 2015 Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel
6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological
impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency
electromagnetic field action. Rev. Environ. Health 3, 99-116. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2015-0001.
15. Hensinger P, Wilke E. 2016. Mobilfunk-Studienergebnisse bestätigen Risiken Studienrecherche
2016-4 veröffentlicht. Umwelt Medizin Gesellshaft 29:3/2016.
16. Houston BJ, Nixon B, King BV, De Iuliis GN, Aitken RJ. 2016 The effects of radiofrequency
electromagnetic radiation on sperm function. Reproduction 152:R263-R276.
17. Batista Napotnik T, Reberšek M, Vernier PT, Mali B, Miklavčič D. 2016 Effects of high
voltage nanosecond electric pulses on eukaryotic cells (in vitro): A systematic review.
Bioelectrochemistry. 2016 Aug;110:1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.bioelechem.2016.02.011.
18. Asghari A, Khaki AA, Rajabzadeh A, Khaki A. 2016 A review on Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and
the reproductive system. Electron Physician. 2016 Jul 25;8(7):2655-2662. doi: 10.19082/2655.
19. Pall ML. 2018 How cancer can be caused by microwave frequency electromagnetic field (EMF)
exposures: EMF activation of voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs) can cause cancer
including tumor promotion, tissue invasion and metastasis via 15 mechanisms. Chapter 7 in
Mobile Communications and Public Health, Marko Markov, Ed., CRC press, pp 163-184.
20. Pall ML. 2018 Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health. Environ Res 164:404-416.
21. Wilke I. 2018 Biological and pathological effects of 2.45 GHz on cells, fertility, brain and behavior.
Umwelt Medizin Gesselshaft 2018 Feb 31 (1).
Lowered fertility, including tissue remodeling changes in the testis, lowered sperm
count and sperm quality, lowered female fertility including ovarian remodeling, oocyte
(follicle) loss, lowered estrogen, progesterone and testosterone levels (that is sex
hormone levels), increased spontaneous abortion incidence, lowered libido:
1. Glaser ZR, PhD. 1971 Naval Medical Research Institute Research Report, June 1971. Bibliography
of Reported Biological Phenomena (“Effects”) and Clinical Manifestations Attributed to
Microwave and Radio-Frequency Radiation. Report No. 2 Revised. https://scholar.google.
com/scholar?q=Glaser+naval+medical+microwave+radio-frequency+1972&btnG=&hl=en&as_
sdt=0%2C38 (Accessed Sept. 9, 2017)
2. Tolgskaya MS, Gordon ZV. 1973. Pathological Effects of Radio Waves, Translated from Russian by B
Haigh. Consultants Bureau, New York/London, 146 pages.
3. Goldsmith JR. 1997 Epidemiological evidence relevant to radar (microwave) effects. Environ Health
Perspect 105(Suppl 6):1579-1587.
4. Aitken RJ, De Iuliis GN. 2007 Origins and consequences of DNA damage in male germ cells. Reprod
Biomed Online 14:727-733.
5. Hazout A, Menezo Y, Madelenat P, Yazbeck C, Selva J, Cohen-Bacrie P. 2008 [Causes and clinical
implications of sperm DNA damages]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil ;36:1109-1117.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 14
6. Makker K, Varghese A, Desai NR, Mouradi R, Agarwal A. 2009 Cell phones: modern man’s nemesis?
Reprod Biomed Online 18:148-157.
7. Kang N, Shang XJ, Huang YF. 2010 [Impact of cell phone radiation on male reproduction]. Zhonghua
Nan Ke Xue 16:1027-1030.
8. Gye MC, Park CJ. 2012 Effect of electromagnetic field exposure on the reproductive system. Clin Exp
Reprod Med 39:1-9. doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2012.39.1.1
9. La Vignera S, Condorelli RA, Vicari E, D’Agata R, Calogero AE. 2012 Effects of the exposure to mobile
phones on male reproduction: a review of the literature. J Androl 33:350-356.
10. Carpenter DO. 2013 Human disease resulting from exposure to electromagnetic fields. Rev Environ
Health 2013;28:159-172.
11. Nazıroğlu M, Yüksel M, Köse SA, Özkaya MO. 2013 Recent reports of Wi-Fi and mobile phoneinduced radiation on oxidative stress and reproductive signaling pathways in females and
males. J Membr Biol 246:869-875.
12. Adams JA, Galloway TS, Mondal D, Esteves SC, Mathews F. 2014 Effect of mobile telephones on
sperm quality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ Int 70:106-112.
13. Liu K, Li Y, Zhang G, Liu J, Cao J, Ao L, Zhang S. 2014 Association between mobile phone use and
semen quality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Andrology 2:491-501.
14. K Sri N. 2015 Mobile phone radiation: physiological & pathophysiological considerations. Indian J
Physiol Pharmacol 59:125-135.
15. Hensinger P, Wilke E. 2016. Mobilfunk-Studienergebnisse bestätigen Risiken Studienrecherche
2016-4 veröffentlicht. Umwelt Medizin Gesellshaft 29:3/2016.
16. Houston BJ, Nixon B, King BV, De Iuliis GN, Aitken RJ. 2016 The effects of radiofrequency
electromagnetic radiation on sperm function. Reproduction 152:R263-R276
17. Pall ML. 2018 Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health. Environ Res 164:404-416.
18. Wilke I. 2018 Biological and pathological effects of 2.45 GHz on cells, fertility, brain and behavior.
Umwelt Medizin Gesselshaft 2018 Feb 31 (1).
Neurological/neuropsychiatric effects:
1. Marha K. 1966 Biological Effects of High-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields (Translation). ATD
Report 66-92. July 13, 1966 (ATD Work Assignment No. 78, Task 11). http://www.dtic.mil/
docs/citations/AD0642029 (accessed March 12, 2018)
2. Glaser ZR, PhD. 1971 Naval Medical Research Institute Research Report, June 1971. Bibliography
of Reported Biological Phenomena (“Effects”) and Clinical Manifestations Attributed to
Microwave and Radio-Frequency Radiation. Report No. 2 Revised. https://scholar.google.
com/scholar?q=Glaser+naval+medical+microwave+radio-frequency+1972&btnG=&hl=en&as_
sdt=0%2C38 (Accessed Sept. 9, 2017)
3. Tolgskaya MS, Gordon ZV. 1973. Pathological Effects of Radio Waves, Translated from Russian by by
Haigh. Consultants Bureau, New York/London, 146 pages.
4. Bise W. 1978 Low power radio-frequency and microwave effects on human electroencephalogram
and behavior. Physiol Chem Phys 10:387-398.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 15
5. Raines, J. K. 1981. Electromagnetic Field Interactions with the Human Body: Observed Effects and
Theories. Greenbelt, Maryland: National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1981; 116 p.
6. Frey AH. 1993 Electromagnetic field interactions with biological systems. FASEB J 7:272-281.
7. Lai H. 1994 Neurological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation. In: Advances in
Electromagnetic Fields in Living Systems, Vol. 1, J.C. Lin, Ed., Plenum Press, New York, pp. 27-
88.
8. Grigor’ev IuG. 1996 [Role of modulation in biological effects of electromagnetic radiation]. Radiats
Biol Radioecol 36:659-670.
9. Lai, H 1998 Neurological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation. https://mapcruzin.
com/radiofrequency/henry_lai2.htm.
10. Aitken RJ, De Iuliis GN. 2007 Origins and consequences of DNA damage in male germ cells.
Reprod Biomed Online 14:727-733.
11. Hardell, L., Sage, C. 2008. Biological effects from electromagnetic field exposure and public
exposure standards. Biomed. Pharmacother. 62, 104-109.
12. Makker K, Varghese A, Desai NR, Mouradi R, Agarwal A. 2009 Cell phones: modern man’s nemesis?
Reprod Biomed Online 18:148-157.
13. Khurana VG, Hardell L, Everaert J, Bortkiewicz A, Carlberg M, Ahonen M. 2010 Epidemiological
evidence for a health risk from mobile phone base stations. Int J Occup Environ Health
16:263-267.
14. Levitt, B. B., Lai, H. 2010. Biological effects from exposure to electromagnetic radiation emitted
by cell tower base stations and other antenna arrays. Environ. Rev. 18, 369-395. doi.
org/10.1139/A10-018
15. Carpenter DO. 2013 Human disease resulting from exposure to electromagnetic fields. Rev
Environ Health 2013;28:159-172.
16. Politański P, Bortkiewicz A, Zmyślony M. 2016 [Effects of radio- and microwaves emitted by
wireless communication devices on the functions of the nervous system selected elements].
Med Pr 67:411-421.
17. Hensinger P, Wilke E. 2016. Mobilfunk-Studienergebnisse bestätigen Risiken Studienrecherche
2016-4 veröffentlicht. Umwelt Medizin Gesellshaft 29:3/2016.
18. Pall ML. 2016 Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread
neuropsychiatric effects including depression. J Chem Neuroanat 75(Pt B):43-51. doi:
10.1016/j.jchemneu.2015.08.001.
19. Hecht, Karl. 2016 Health Implications of Long-Term Exposures to Electrosmog. Brochure 6 of A
Brochure Series of the Competence Initiative for the Protection of Humanity, the Environment
and Democracy. http://kompetenzinitiative.net/KIT/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/KI_
Brochure-6_K_Hecht_web.pdf (accessed Feb. 11, 2018)
20. Sangün Ö, Dündar B, Çömlekçi S, Büyükgebiz A. 2016 The Effects of Electromagnetic Field on the
Endocrine System in Children and Adolescents. Pediatr Endocrinol Rev 13:531-545.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 16
21. Belyaev I, Dean A, Eger H, Hubmann G, Jandrisovits R, Kern M, Kundi M, Moshammer H, Lercher P,
Müller K, Oberfeld G, Ohnsorge P, Pelzmann P, Scheingraber C, Thill R. 2016 EUROPAEM EMF
Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems
and illnesses. Rev Environ Health DOI 10.1515/reveh-2016-0011.
22. Zhang J, Sumich A, Wang GY. 2017 Acute effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field emitted by
mobile phone on brain function. Bioelectromagnetics 38:329-338. doi: 10.1002/bem.22052.
23. Lai H. 2018. A Summary of Recent Literature (2007–2017) on Neurological Effects of Radio
Frequency Radiation. Chapter 8 in Mobile Communications and Public Health, Marko Markov,
Ed., CRC press, pp 185-220.
24. Pall ML. 2018 Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health. Environ Res 164:404-416.
25. Wilke I. 2018 Biological and pathological effects of 2.45 GHz on cells, fertility, brain and behavior.
Umwelt Medizin Gesselshaft 2018 Feb 31 (1).
Apoptosis/cell death (an important process in production of
neurodegenerative diseases that is also important in producing
infertility responses):
1. Glaser ZR, PhD. 1971 Naval Medical Research Institute Research Report, June 1971. Bibliography
of Reported Biological Phenomena (“Effects”) and Clinical Manifestations Attributed to
Microwave and Radio-Frequency Radiation. Report No. 2 Revised. https://scholar.google.
com/scholar?q=Glaser+naval+medical+microwave+radio-frequency+1972&btnG=&hl=en&as_
sdt=0%2C38 (Accessed Sept. 9, 2017)
2. Tolgskaya MS, Gordon ZV. 1973. Pathological Effects of Radio Waves, Translated from Russian by B
Haigh. Consultants Bureau, New York/London, 146 pages.
3. Raines, J. K. 1981. Electromagnetic Field Interactions with the Human Body: Observed Effects and
Theories. Greenbelt, Maryland: National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1981; 116 p.
4. Hardell L, Sage C. 2008. Biological effects from electromagnetic field exposure and public exposure
standards. Biomed. Pharmacother. 62:104-109. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2007.12.004.
5. Makker K, Varghese A, Desai NR, Mouradi R, Agarwal A. 2009 Cell phones: modern man’s nemesis?
Reprod Biomed Online 18:148-157.
6. Levitt, B. B., Lai, H. 2010. Biological effects from exposure to electromagnetic radiation emitted by
cell tower base stations and other antenna arrays. Environ. Rev. 18, 369-395. doi.org/10.1139/
A10-018
7. Yakymenko I, Sidorik E. 2010 Risks of carcinogenesis from electromagnetic radiation and mobile
telephony devices. Exp Oncol 32:729-736.
8. Yakimenko IL, Sidorik EP, Tsybulin AS. 2011 [Metabolic changes in cells under electromagnetic
radiation of mobile communication systems]. Ukr Biokhim Zh (1999). 2011 Mar-Apr;83(2):20-28.
9. Pall, ML. 2013. Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to
produce beneficial or adverse effects. J Cell Mol Med 17:958-965. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.12088.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 17
10. Pall ML. 2016 Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread
neuropsychiatric effects including depression. J Chem Neuroanat 75(Pt B):43-51. doi:
10.1016/j.jchemneu.2015.08.001.
11. Batista Napotnik T, Reberšek M, Vernier PT, Mali B, Miklavčič D. 2016 Effects of high
voltage nanosecond electric pulses on eukaryotic cells (in vitro): A systematic review.
Bioelectrochemistry. 2016 Aug;110:1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.bioelechem.2016.02.011.
12. Asghari A, Khaki AA, Rajabzadeh A, Khaki A. 2016 A review on Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and
the reproductive system. Electron Physician. 2016 Jul 25;8(7):2655-2662. doi: 10.19082/2655.
13. Pall ML. 2018 Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health. Environ Res 164:404-416.
Oxidative stress/free radical damage (important mechanisms
involved in almost all chronic diseases; direct cause of cellular DNA
damage):
1. Raines, J. K. 1981. Electromagnetic Field Interactions with the Human Body: Observed Effects and
Theories. Greenbelt, Maryland: National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1981; 116 p.
2. Hardell, L., Sage, C. 2008. Biological effects from electromagnetic field exposure and public
exposure standards. Biomed. Pharmacother. 62, 104-109.
3. Hazout A, Menezo Y, Madelenat P, Yazbeck C, Selva J, Cohen-Bacrie P. 2008 [Causes and clinical
implications of sperm DNA damages]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil ;36:1109-1117
4. Makker K, Varghese A, Desai NR, Mouradi R, Agarwal A. 2009 Cell phones: modern man’s nemesis?
Reprod Biomed Online 18:148-157.
5. Desai NR, Kesari KK, Agarwal A. 2009 Pathophysiology of cell phone radiation: oxidative stress and
carcinogenesis with focus on the male reproductive system. Reproduct Biol Endocrinol 7:114.
6. Yakymenko I, Sidorik E. 2010 Risks of carcinogenesis from electromagnetic radiation and mobile
telephony devices. Exp Oncol 32:729-736.
7. Yakimenko IL, Sidorik EP, Tsybulin AS. 2011 [Metabolic changes in cells under electromagnetic
radiation of mobile communication systems]. Ukr Biokhim Zh (1999). 2011 MarApr;83(2):20-28.
8. Consales, C., Merla, C., Marino, C., et al. 2012. Electromagnetic fields, oxidative stress, and
neurodegeneration. Int. J. Cell Biol. 2012: 683897.
9. LaVignera et al 2012 La Vignera S, Condorelli RA, Vicari E, D’Agata R, Calogero AE. 2012 Effects
of the exposure to mobile phones on male reproduction: a review of the literature. J Androl
33:350-356.
10. Pall, ML. 2013. Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to
produce beneficial or adverse effects. J Cell Mol Med 17:958-965. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.12088.
11. Nazıroğlu M, Yüksel M, Köse SA, Özkaya MO. 2013 Recent reports of Wi-Fi and mobile phoneinduced radiation on oxidative stress and reproductive signaling pathways in females and
males. J Membr Biol 246:869-875.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 18
12. Pall, M. L. 2015. Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety
Panel 6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce
biological impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower
frequency electromagnetic field action. Rev. Environ. Health 3, 99-116.
13. Yakymenko I, Tsybulin O, Sidorik E, Henshel D, Kyrylenko O, Kysylenko S. 2015 Oxidative
mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagnetic
Biol Med: Early Online 1-16. ISSN: 1536-8378.
14. Hensinger P, Wilke E. 2016. Mobilfunk-Studienergebnisse bestätigen Risiken Studienrecherche
2016-4 veröffentlicht. Umwelt Medizin Gesellshaft 29:3/2016.
15. Houston BJ, Nixon B, King BV, De Iuliis GN, Aitken RJ. 2016 The effects of radiofrequency
electromagnetic radiation on sperm function. Reproduction 152:R263-R276.
16. Dasdag S, Akdag MZ. 2016 The link between radiofrequencies emitted from wireless technologies
and oxidative stress. J Chem Neuroanat 75(Pt B):85-93.
17. Wang H, Zhang X. 2017 Magnetic fields and reactive oxygen species. Int J Mol Sci. 2017 Oct
18;18(10). pii: E2175. doi: 10.3390/ijms18102175.
18. Pall ML. 2018 Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health. Environ Res 164:404-416.
19. Wilke I. 2018 Biological and pathological effects of 2.45 GHz on cells, fertility, brain and behavior.
Umwelt Medizin Gesselshaft 2018 Feb 31 (1).
Endocrine, that is hormonal effects:
1. Glaser ZR, PhD. 1971 Naval Medical Research Institute Research Report, June 1971. Bibliography
of Reported Biological Phenomena (“Effects”) and Clinical Manifestations Attributed to
Microwave and Radio-Frequency Radiation. Report No. 2 Revised. https://scholar.google.
com/scholar?q=Glaser+naval+medical+microwave+radio-frequency+1972&btnG=&hl=en&as_
sdt=0%2C38 (Accessed Sept. 9, 2017)
2. Tolgskaya MS, Gordon ZV. 1973. Pathological Effects of Radio Waves, Translated from Russian by B
Haigh. Consultants Bureau, New York/London, 146 pages.
3. Raines, J. K. 1981. Electromagnetic Field Interactions with the Human Body: Observed Effects and
Theories. Greenbelt, Maryland: National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1981; 116 p.
4. Hardell, L., Sage, C. 2008. Biological effects from electromagnetic field exposure and public
exposure standards. Biomed. Pharmacother. 62, 104-109.
5. Makker K, Varghese A, Desai NR, Mouradi R, Agarwal A. 2009 Cell phones: modern man’s nemesis?
Reprod Biomed Online 18:148-157.
6. Gye MC, Park CJ. 2012 Effect of electromagnetic field exposure on the reproductive system. Clin
Exp Reprod Med 39:1-9. doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2012.39.1.1
7. Pall, M. L. 2015. Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel
6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological
impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency
electromagnetic field action. Rev. Environ. Health 3, 99-116.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 19
8. Sangün Ö, Dündar B, Çömlekçi S, Büyükgebiz A. 2016 The Effects of Electromagnetic Field on the
Endocrine System in Children and Adolescents. Pediatr Endocrinol Rev 13:531-545.
9. Hecht, Karl. 2016 Health Implications of Long-Term Exposures to Electrosmog. Brochure 6 of A
Brochure Series of the Competence Initiative for the Protection of Humanity, the Environment
and Democracy. http://kompetenzinitiative.net/KIT/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/KI_
Brochure-6_K_Hecht_web.pdf (accessed Feb. 11, 2018)
10. Asghari A, Khaki AA, Rajabzadeh A, Khaki A. 2016 A review on Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and
the reproductive system. Electron Physician. 2016 Jul 25;8(7):2655-2662. doi: 10.19082/2655.
11. Pall ML. 2018 Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health. Environ Res 164:404-416.
12. Wilke I. 2018 Biological and pathological effects of 2.45 GHz on cells, fertility, brain and behavior.
Umwelt Medizin Gesselshaft 2018 Feb 31 (1).
Increased intracellular calcium: intracellular calcium is maintained
at very low levels (typically about 2 X 10-9 M) except for brief
increases used to produce regulatory responses, such that
sustained elevation of intracellular calcium levels produces many
pathophysiological (that is disease-causing) responses).
1. Adey WR. 1988 Cell membranes: the electromagnetic environment and cancer promotion.
Neurochem Res.13:671-677.
2. Walleczek, J. 1992. Electromagnetic field effects on cells of the immune system: the role of calcium
signaling. FASEB J. 6, 3177-3185.
3. Adey, WR. 1993 Biological effects of electromagnetic fields. J Cell Biochem 51:410-416.
4. Frey AH. 1993 Electromagnetic field interactions with biological systems. FASEB J 7:272-281.
5. Funk RHW, Monsees T, Özkucur N. 2009 Electromagnetic effects—Form cell biology to medicine.
Prog Histochem Cytochem 43:177-264.
6. Yakymenko IL, Sidorik EP, Tsybulin AS. 1999 [Metabolic changes in cells under electromagnetic
radiation of mobile communication systems]. Ukr Biokhim Zh (1999), 2011 Mar-Apr:20-28.
7. Gye MC, Park CJ. 2012 Effect of electromagnetic field exposure on the reproductive system. Clin
Exp Reprod Med 39:1-9. doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2012.39.1.1
8. Pall, ML. 2013. Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to
produce beneficial or adverse effects. J Cell Mol Med 17:958-965. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.12088.
9. Pall ML. 2014 Electromagnetic field activation of voltage-gated calcium channels: role in
therapeutic effects. Electromagn Biol Med. 2014 Apr 8 doi: 10.3109/15368378.2014.906447.
10. Pall ML. 2015 How to approach the challenge of minimizing non-thermal health effects of
microwave radiation from electrical devices. International Journal of Innovative Research in
Engineering & Management (IJIREM) ISSN: 2350-0557, Volume-2, Issue -5, September 2015;
71-76.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 20
11. Pall, M. L. 2015 Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel
6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological
impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency
electromagnetic field action. Rev. Environ. Health 3, 99-116. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2015-0001.
12. Pall ML. 2016 Electromagnetic fields act similarly in plants as in animals: Probable activation of
calcium channels via their voltage sensor. Curr Chem Biol 10: 74-82.
13. Pall ML. 2016 Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread
neuropsychiatric effects including depression. J Chem Neuroanat 75(Pt B):43-51. doi:
10.1016/j.jchemneu.2015.08.001.
14. Batista Napotnik T, Reberšek M, Vernier PT, Mali B, Miklavčič D. 2016 Effects of high
voltage nanosecond electric pulses on eukaryotic cells (in vitro): A systematic review.
Bioelectrochemistry. 2016 Aug;110:1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.bioelechem.2016.02.011.
15. Asghari A, Khaki AA, Rajabzadeh A, Khaki A. 2016 A review on electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and
the reproductive system. Electron Physician. 2016 Jul 25;8(7):2655-2662. doi: 10.19082/2655.
Pulsed EMFs are, in most cases much more biologically active than are nonpulsed EMFs. This is important because all wireless communication devices
communicate via pulsations and because the “smarter” the devices are, the more they
pulse because the pulsations convey the information. What should be obvious is that
you cannot study such pulsation roles if there were no biological effects produced by
such EMFs. The pulsation studies alone tell us that there are many such EMF effects.
1. Osipov YuA, 1965 [Labor hygiene and the effect of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields on
workers]. Leningrad Meditsina Publishing House, 220 pp.
2. Pollack H, Healer J. 1967 Review of Information on Hazards to Personnel from High-Frequency
Electromagnetic Radiation. Institute for Defense Analyses; Research and Engineering
Support Division. IDA/HQ 67-6211, Series B, May 1967.
3. Frey AH. 1974 Differential biologic effects of pulsed and continuous electromagnetic fields and
mechanisms of effect. Ann N Y Acad Sci 238: 273-279.
4. Creighton MO, Larsen LE, Stewart-DeHaan PJ, Jacobi JH, Sanwal M, Baskerville JC, Bassen HE, Brown
DO, Trevithick JR. 1987 In vitro studies of microwave-induced cataract. II. Comparison of
damage observed for continuous wave and pulsed microwaves. Exp Eye Res 45:357-373.
5. Grigor’ev IuG. 1996 [Role of modulation in biological effects of electromagnetic radiation]. Radiats
Biol Radioecol 36:659-670.
6. Belyaev I. 2005 Non-thermal biological effects of microwaves. Microwave Rev 11:13-29.
7. Belyaev I. 2005 Non-thermal biological effects of microwaves: current knowledge, further
perspective and urgent needs. Electromagn Biol Med 24(3):375-403.
8. Markov MS. 2007 Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy: History, state of the art and future. The
Environmentalist 27:465-475.
9. Van Boxem K, Huntoon M, Van Zundert J, Patijn J, van Kleef M, Joosten EA. 2014 Pulsed
radiofrequency: a review of the basic science as applied to the pathophysiology of radicular
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 21
pain: a call for clinical translation. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2014 Mar-Apr;39(2):149-59.
10. Belyaev, I. 2015. Biophysical mechanisms for nonthermal microwave effects. In: Electromagnetic
Fields in Biology and Medicine, Marko S. Markov, ed, CRC Press, New York, pp 49-67.
11. Pall, M. L. 2015 Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel
6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological
impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency
electromagnetic field action. Rev. Environ. Health 3, 99-116. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2015-0001.
12. Panagopoulos DJ, Johansson O, Carlo GL. 2015 Real versus simulated mobile phone exposures
in experimental studies. BioMed. Res. Int. 2015, article ID 607053, 8 pages. doi:
10.1155/2015/607053.
13. Batista Napotnik T, Reberšek M, Vernier PT, Mali B, Miklavčič D. 2016 Effects of high
voltage nanosecond electric pulses on eukaryotic cells (in vitro): A systematic review.
Bioelectrochemistry. 2016 Aug;110:1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.bioelechem.2016.02.011.
Cancer causation by EMF exposures:
1. Dwyer, M. J., Leeper, D. B. 1978 A Current Literature Report on the Carcinogenic Properties of
Ionizing and Nonionizing Radiation. DHEW Publication (NIOSH) 78-134, March 1978.
2. Marino AA, Morris DH. 1985 Chronic electromagnetic stressors in the environment. A risk factor in
human cancer. J environ sci health C3:189-219.
3. Adey WR. 1988 Cell membranes: the electromagnetic environment and cancer promotion.
Neurochem Res.13:671-677.
4. Adey WR. 1990 Joint actions of environmental nonionizing electromagnetic fields and chemical
pollution in cancer promotion. Environ Health Perspect 86:297-305.
5. Frey AH. 1993 Electromagnetic field interactions with biological systems. FASEB J 7:272-281.
6. Goldsmith JR. 1995 Epidemiological evidence of radiofrequency radiation (microwave) effects on
health in military, broadcasting and occupational settings. Int J Occup Environ Health 1:47-57.
7. Goldsmith JR. 1997 Epidemiologic evidence relevant to radar (microwave) effects. Env Health
Perspect 105(Suppl 6):1579-1587.
8. Kundi M, Mild K, Hardell L, Mattsson M. 2004 Mobile telephones and cancer – a review of the
epidemiological evidence. J Toxicol Env Health, Part B 7:351-384.
9. Kundi M. 2004 Mobile phone use and cancer. Occup Env Med 61:560-570.
10. Behari J, Paulraj R. 2007 Biomarkers of induced electromagnetic field and cancer. Indian J Exp Biol
45:77-85.
11. Hardell L, Carlberg M, Soderqvist F, Hansson Mild K. 2008 Meta-analysis of long-term mobile
phone use and the association with brain tumors. Int J Oncol 32:1097-1103.
12. Khurana VG, Teo C, Kundi M, Hardell L, Carlberg M. 2009 Cell phones and brain tumors: a review
including the long-term epidemiologic data. Surg Neurol 72:205-214.
13. Desai NR, Kesari KK, Agarwal A. 2009 Pathophysiology of cell phone radiation: oxidative stress and
carcinogenesis with focus on the male reproductive system. Reproduct Biol Endocrinol 7:114.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 22
14. Davanipour Z, Sobel E. 2009 Long-term exposure to magnetic fields and the risks of Alzheimer’s
disease and breast cancer: Further biological research. Pathophysiology 16:149-156.
15. Yakymenko I, Sidorik E. 2010 Risks of carcinogenesis from electromagnetic radiation and mobile
telephony devices. Exp Oncol 32:729-736.
16. Carpenter DO. 2010 Electromagnetic fields and cancer: the cost of doing nothing. Rev Environ
Health 25:75-80.
17. Giuliani L, Soffriti M (Eds). 2010 NON-THERMAL EFFECTS AND MECHANISMS OF INTERACTION
BETWEEN ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AND LIVING MATTER, RAMAZZINI INSTITUTE EUR.
J. ONCOL. LIBRARY Volume 5, National Institute for the Study and Control of Cancer and
Environmental Diseases “Bernardino Ramazzini” Bologna, Italy 2010, 400 page monograph.
18. Khurana, V. G., Hardell, L., Everaert, J., Bortkiewicz, A., Carlberg, M., Ahonen, M. 2010
Epidemiological evidence for a health risk from mobile phone base stations. Int. J. Occup.
Environ. Health 16, 263-267.
19. Yakymenko, I., Sidorik, E., Kyrylenko, S., Chekhun, V. 2011. Long-term exposure to microwave
radiation provokes cancer growth: evidences from radars and mobile communication systems.
Exp. Oncol. 33(2), 62-70.
20. Biointiative Working Group, David Carpenter and Cindy Sage (eds). 2012 Bioinitiative 2012: A
rationale for biologically-based exposure standards for electromagnetic radiation. http://
www.bioinitiative.org/participants/why-we-care/
21. Ledoigt G, Belpomme D. 2013 Cancer induction molecular pathways and HF-EMF irradiation. Adv
Biol Chem 3:177-186.
22. Hardell L, Carlberg M. 2013 Using the Hill viewpoints from 1965 for evaluating strengths of
evidence of the risk for brain tumors associated with use of mobile and cordless phones. Rev
Environ Health 28:97-106. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2013-0006.
23. Hardell L, Carlberg M, Hansson Mild K. 2013 Use of mobile phones and cordless phones
is associated with increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma. Pathophysiology
2013;20(2):85-110.
24. Carpenter DO. 2013 Human disease resulting from exposure to electromagnetic fields. Rev
Environ Health 2013;28:159-172.gj
25. Davis DL, Kesari S, Soskolne CL, Miller AB, Stein Y. 2013 Swedish review strengthens grounds for
concluding that radiation from cellular and cordless phones is a probable human carcinogen.
Pathophysiology 20:123-129.
26. Morgan LL, Miller AB, Sasco A, Davis DL. 2015 Mobile phone radiation causes brain tumors and
should be classified as a probable human carcinogen (2A). Int J Oncol 46(5): 1865-1871.
27. Mahdavi M, Yekta R, Tackallou SH. 2015 Positive correlation between ELF and RF electromagnetic
fields on cancer risk. J Paramed Sci 6(3), ISSN 2008-4978.
28. Carlberg M, Hardell L. 2017 Evaluation of Mobile Phone and Cordless Phone Use and Glioma Risk
Using the Bradford Hill Viewpoints from 1965 on Association or Causation. BioMed Res Int
2017, Article ID 9218486, https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/9218486
29. Bortkiewicz A, Gadzicka E, Szymczak W. 2017 Mobile phone use and risk for intracranial tumors
and salivary gland tumors - A meta-analysis. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 30:27-43.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 23
30. Bielsa-Fernández P, Rodríguez-Martín B. 2017 [Association between radiation from mobile
phones and tumour risk in adults]. Gac Sanit. 2017 Apr 12. pii: S0213-9111(17)30083-3. doi:
10.1016/j.gaceta.2016.10.014. [Epub ahead of print]
31. Alegría-Loyola MA, Galnares-Olalde JA, Mercado M. 2017 [Tumors of the central nervous system].
Rev Med Inst Mex Seguro Soc 55:330-334.
32. Prasad M, Kathuria P, Nair P, Kumar A, Prasad K. 2017 Mobile phone use and risk of brain tumours:
a systematic review of association between study quality, source of funding, and research
outcomes. Neurol Sci. 2017 Feb 17. doi: 10.1007/s10072-017-2850-8. [Epub ahead of print].
33. Miller A. 2017 References on cell phone radiation and cancer. https://ehtrust.org/references-cellphone-radio-frequency-radiation-cancer/ (Accessed Sept. 9, 2017)
34. Hardell L. 2017 World Health Organization, radiofrequency radiation and health – a hard nut to
crack (Review). Int J Oncol 51:405-413.
35. Pall ML. 2018 How cancer can be caused by microwave frequency electromagnetic field (EMF)
exposures: EMF activation of voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs) can cause cancer
including tumor promotion, tissue invasion and metastasis via 15 mechanisms. Chapter 7 in:
Mobile Communications and Public Health, Marko Markov, Ed., CRC Press, pp 163-184.
Each of these reviews, typically cite from 5 to over 100 primary literature citations,
each showing that non-thermal EMF exposures produce the effect under which they
are listed. It follows from this, that there are not only 11 or more reviews documenting
each of these effects, but there is also a massive primary literature documenting these
effects as well. It follows from this that the ICNIRP, FCC and International Safety
Guidelines, which are entirely based only on thermal effects are inadequate and
there have been petitions and other statements of international groups of scientists
expressing great concern about this. It follows that the ICNIRP, FCC and International
safety guidelines are completely unscientific and cannot be relied upon to protect our safety
Here's a study warning about potential thermal issues of 5G: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1711.03683.pdf
Specific effects and reviews each reporting the effect
in multiple primary literature studies:
Cellular DNA damage: Single strand and double strand breaks in cellular DNA and
oxidized bases in cellular DNA, leading to chromosomal and other mutational changes:
1. Glaser ZR, PhD. 1971 Naval Medical Research Institute Research Report, June 1971. Bibliography
of Reported Biological Phenomena (“Effects”) and Clinical Manifestations Attributed to
Microwave and Radio-Frequency Radiation. Report No. 2 Revised. https://scholar.google.
com/scholar?q=Glaser+naval+medical+microwave+radio-frequency+1972&btnG=&hl=en&as_
sdt=0%2C38 (Accessed Sept. 9, 2017)
2. Goldsmith JR. 1997 Epidemiologic evidence relevant to radar (microwave) effects. Environ Health
Perspect 105(Suppl 6):1579-1587.
3. Yakymenko IL, Sidorik EP, Tsybulin AS. 1999 [Metabolic changes in cells under electromagnetic
radiation of mobile communication systems]. Ukr Biokhim Zh (1999), 2011 Mar-Apr:20-28.
4. Aitken RJ, De Iuliis GN. 2007 Origins and consequences of DNA damage in male germ cells. Reprod
Biomed Online 14:727-733.
5. Hardell, L., Sage, C. 2008. Biological effects from electromagnetic field exposure and public
exposure standards. Biomed. Pharmacother. 62, 104-109.
6. Hazout A, Menezo Y, Madelenat P, Yazbeck C, Selva J, Cohen-Bacrie P. 2008 [Causes and clinical
implications of sperm DNA damages]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil ;36:1109-1117.
7. Phillips JL, Singh NP, Lai H. 2009 Electromagnetic fields and DNA damage. Pathophysiology 16:79-
88.
8. Ruediger HW. 2009 Genotoxic effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Pathophysiology.
16:89-102.
9. Makker K, Varghese A, Desai NR, Mouradi R, Agarwal A. 2009 Cell phones: modern man’s nemesis?
Reprod Biomed Online 18:148-157.
10. Yakymenko I, Sidorik E. 2010 Risks of carcinogenesis from electromagnetic radiation and mobile
telephony devices. Exp Oncol 32:729-736.
11. Yakimenko IL, Sidorik EP, Tsybulin AS. 2011 [Metabolic changes in cells under electromagnetic
radiation of mobile communication systems]. Ukr Biokhim Zh (1999). 2011 MarApr;83(2):20-28.
12. Gye MC, Park CJ. 2012 Effect of electromagnetic field exposure on the reproductive system. Clin
Exp Reprod Med 39:1-9. doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2012.39.1.1
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 13
13. Pall, ML. 2013. Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to
produce beneficial or adverse effects. J Cell Mol Med 17:958-965. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.12088.
14. Pall, M. L. 2015 Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel
6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological
impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency
electromagnetic field action. Rev. Environ. Health 3, 99-116. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2015-0001.
15. Hensinger P, Wilke E. 2016. Mobilfunk-Studienergebnisse bestätigen Risiken Studienrecherche
2016-4 veröffentlicht. Umwelt Medizin Gesellshaft 29:3/2016.
16. Houston BJ, Nixon B, King BV, De Iuliis GN, Aitken RJ. 2016 The effects of radiofrequency
electromagnetic radiation on sperm function. Reproduction 152:R263-R276.
17. Batista Napotnik T, Reberšek M, Vernier PT, Mali B, Miklavčič D. 2016 Effects of high
voltage nanosecond electric pulses on eukaryotic cells (in vitro): A systematic review.
Bioelectrochemistry. 2016 Aug;110:1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.bioelechem.2016.02.011.
18. Asghari A, Khaki AA, Rajabzadeh A, Khaki A. 2016 A review on Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and
the reproductive system. Electron Physician. 2016 Jul 25;8(7):2655-2662. doi: 10.19082/2655.
19. Pall ML. 2018 How cancer can be caused by microwave frequency electromagnetic field (EMF)
exposures: EMF activation of voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs) can cause cancer
including tumor promotion, tissue invasion and metastasis via 15 mechanisms. Chapter 7 in
Mobile Communications and Public Health, Marko Markov, Ed., CRC press, pp 163-184.
20. Pall ML. 2018 Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health. Environ Res 164:404-416.
21. Wilke I. 2018 Biological and pathological effects of 2.45 GHz on cells, fertility, brain and behavior.
Umwelt Medizin Gesselshaft 2018 Feb 31 (1).
Lowered fertility, including tissue remodeling changes in the testis, lowered sperm
count and sperm quality, lowered female fertility including ovarian remodeling, oocyte
(follicle) loss, lowered estrogen, progesterone and testosterone levels (that is sex
hormone levels), increased spontaneous abortion incidence, lowered libido:
1. Glaser ZR, PhD. 1971 Naval Medical Research Institute Research Report, June 1971. Bibliography
of Reported Biological Phenomena (“Effects”) and Clinical Manifestations Attributed to
Microwave and Radio-Frequency Radiation. Report No. 2 Revised. https://scholar.google.
com/scholar?q=Glaser+naval+medical+microwave+radio-frequency+1972&btnG=&hl=en&as_
sdt=0%2C38 (Accessed Sept. 9, 2017)
2. Tolgskaya MS, Gordon ZV. 1973. Pathological Effects of Radio Waves, Translated from Russian by B
Haigh. Consultants Bureau, New York/London, 146 pages.
3. Goldsmith JR. 1997 Epidemiological evidence relevant to radar (microwave) effects. Environ Health
Perspect 105(Suppl 6):1579-1587.
4. Aitken RJ, De Iuliis GN. 2007 Origins and consequences of DNA damage in male germ cells. Reprod
Biomed Online 14:727-733.
5. Hazout A, Menezo Y, Madelenat P, Yazbeck C, Selva J, Cohen-Bacrie P. 2008 [Causes and clinical
implications of sperm DNA damages]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil ;36:1109-1117.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 14
6. Makker K, Varghese A, Desai NR, Mouradi R, Agarwal A. 2009 Cell phones: modern man’s nemesis?
Reprod Biomed Online 18:148-157.
7. Kang N, Shang XJ, Huang YF. 2010 [Impact of cell phone radiation on male reproduction]. Zhonghua
Nan Ke Xue 16:1027-1030.
8. Gye MC, Park CJ. 2012 Effect of electromagnetic field exposure on the reproductive system. Clin Exp
Reprod Med 39:1-9. doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2012.39.1.1
9. La Vignera S, Condorelli RA, Vicari E, D’Agata R, Calogero AE. 2012 Effects of the exposure to mobile
phones on male reproduction: a review of the literature. J Androl 33:350-356.
10. Carpenter DO. 2013 Human disease resulting from exposure to electromagnetic fields. Rev Environ
Health 2013;28:159-172.
11. Nazıroğlu M, Yüksel M, Köse SA, Özkaya MO. 2013 Recent reports of Wi-Fi and mobile phoneinduced radiation on oxidative stress and reproductive signaling pathways in females and
males. J Membr Biol 246:869-875.
12. Adams JA, Galloway TS, Mondal D, Esteves SC, Mathews F. 2014 Effect of mobile telephones on
sperm quality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ Int 70:106-112.
13. Liu K, Li Y, Zhang G, Liu J, Cao J, Ao L, Zhang S. 2014 Association between mobile phone use and
semen quality: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Andrology 2:491-501.
14. K Sri N. 2015 Mobile phone radiation: physiological & pathophysiological considerations. Indian J
Physiol Pharmacol 59:125-135.
15. Hensinger P, Wilke E. 2016. Mobilfunk-Studienergebnisse bestätigen Risiken Studienrecherche
2016-4 veröffentlicht. Umwelt Medizin Gesellshaft 29:3/2016.
16. Houston BJ, Nixon B, King BV, De Iuliis GN, Aitken RJ. 2016 The effects of radiofrequency
electromagnetic radiation on sperm function. Reproduction 152:R263-R276
17. Pall ML. 2018 Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health. Environ Res 164:404-416.
18. Wilke I. 2018 Biological and pathological effects of 2.45 GHz on cells, fertility, brain and behavior.
Umwelt Medizin Gesselshaft 2018 Feb 31 (1).
Neurological/neuropsychiatric effects:
1. Marha K. 1966 Biological Effects of High-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields (Translation). ATD
Report 66-92. July 13, 1966 (ATD Work Assignment No. 78, Task 11). http://www.dtic.mil/
docs/citations/AD0642029 (accessed March 12, 2018)
2. Glaser ZR, PhD. 1971 Naval Medical Research Institute Research Report, June 1971. Bibliography
of Reported Biological Phenomena (“Effects”) and Clinical Manifestations Attributed to
Microwave and Radio-Frequency Radiation. Report No. 2 Revised. https://scholar.google.
com/scholar?q=Glaser+naval+medical+microwave+radio-frequency+1972&btnG=&hl=en&as_
sdt=0%2C38 (Accessed Sept. 9, 2017)
3. Tolgskaya MS, Gordon ZV. 1973. Pathological Effects of Radio Waves, Translated from Russian by by
Haigh. Consultants Bureau, New York/London, 146 pages.
4. Bise W. 1978 Low power radio-frequency and microwave effects on human electroencephalogram
and behavior. Physiol Chem Phys 10:387-398.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 15
5. Raines, J. K. 1981. Electromagnetic Field Interactions with the Human Body: Observed Effects and
Theories. Greenbelt, Maryland: National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1981; 116 p.
6. Frey AH. 1993 Electromagnetic field interactions with biological systems. FASEB J 7:272-281.
7. Lai H. 1994 Neurological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation. In: Advances in
Electromagnetic Fields in Living Systems, Vol. 1, J.C. Lin, Ed., Plenum Press, New York, pp. 27-
88.
8. Grigor’ev IuG. 1996 [Role of modulation in biological effects of electromagnetic radiation]. Radiats
Biol Radioecol 36:659-670.
9. Lai, H 1998 Neurological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation. https://mapcruzin.
com/radiofrequency/henry_lai2.htm.
10. Aitken RJ, De Iuliis GN. 2007 Origins and consequences of DNA damage in male germ cells.
Reprod Biomed Online 14:727-733.
11. Hardell, L., Sage, C. 2008. Biological effects from electromagnetic field exposure and public
exposure standards. Biomed. Pharmacother. 62, 104-109.
12. Makker K, Varghese A, Desai NR, Mouradi R, Agarwal A. 2009 Cell phones: modern man’s nemesis?
Reprod Biomed Online 18:148-157.
13. Khurana VG, Hardell L, Everaert J, Bortkiewicz A, Carlberg M, Ahonen M. 2010 Epidemiological
evidence for a health risk from mobile phone base stations. Int J Occup Environ Health
16:263-267.
14. Levitt, B. B., Lai, H. 2010. Biological effects from exposure to electromagnetic radiation emitted
by cell tower base stations and other antenna arrays. Environ. Rev. 18, 369-395. doi.
org/10.1139/A10-018
15. Carpenter DO. 2013 Human disease resulting from exposure to electromagnetic fields. Rev
Environ Health 2013;28:159-172.
16. Politański P, Bortkiewicz A, Zmyślony M. 2016 [Effects of radio- and microwaves emitted by
wireless communication devices on the functions of the nervous system selected elements].
Med Pr 67:411-421.
17. Hensinger P, Wilke E. 2016. Mobilfunk-Studienergebnisse bestätigen Risiken Studienrecherche
2016-4 veröffentlicht. Umwelt Medizin Gesellshaft 29:3/2016.
18. Pall ML. 2016 Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread
neuropsychiatric effects including depression. J Chem Neuroanat 75(Pt B):43-51. doi:
10.1016/j.jchemneu.2015.08.001.
19. Hecht, Karl. 2016 Health Implications of Long-Term Exposures to Electrosmog. Brochure 6 of A
Brochure Series of the Competence Initiative for the Protection of Humanity, the Environment
and Democracy. http://kompetenzinitiative.net/KIT/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/KI_
Brochure-6_K_Hecht_web.pdf (accessed Feb. 11, 2018)
20. Sangün Ö, Dündar B, Çömlekçi S, Büyükgebiz A. 2016 The Effects of Electromagnetic Field on the
Endocrine System in Children and Adolescents. Pediatr Endocrinol Rev 13:531-545.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 16
21. Belyaev I, Dean A, Eger H, Hubmann G, Jandrisovits R, Kern M, Kundi M, Moshammer H, Lercher P,
Müller K, Oberfeld G, Ohnsorge P, Pelzmann P, Scheingraber C, Thill R. 2016 EUROPAEM EMF
Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems
and illnesses. Rev Environ Health DOI 10.1515/reveh-2016-0011.
22. Zhang J, Sumich A, Wang GY. 2017 Acute effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field emitted by
mobile phone on brain function. Bioelectromagnetics 38:329-338. doi: 10.1002/bem.22052.
23. Lai H. 2018. A Summary of Recent Literature (2007–2017) on Neurological Effects of Radio
Frequency Radiation. Chapter 8 in Mobile Communications and Public Health, Marko Markov,
Ed., CRC press, pp 185-220.
24. Pall ML. 2018 Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health. Environ Res 164:404-416.
25. Wilke I. 2018 Biological and pathological effects of 2.45 GHz on cells, fertility, brain and behavior.
Umwelt Medizin Gesselshaft 2018 Feb 31 (1).
Apoptosis/cell death (an important process in production of
neurodegenerative diseases that is also important in producing
infertility responses):
1. Glaser ZR, PhD. 1971 Naval Medical Research Institute Research Report, June 1971. Bibliography
of Reported Biological Phenomena (“Effects”) and Clinical Manifestations Attributed to
Microwave and Radio-Frequency Radiation. Report No. 2 Revised. https://scholar.google.
com/scholar?q=Glaser+naval+medical+microwave+radio-frequency+1972&btnG=&hl=en&as_
sdt=0%2C38 (Accessed Sept. 9, 2017)
2. Tolgskaya MS, Gordon ZV. 1973. Pathological Effects of Radio Waves, Translated from Russian by B
Haigh. Consultants Bureau, New York/London, 146 pages.
3. Raines, J. K. 1981. Electromagnetic Field Interactions with the Human Body: Observed Effects and
Theories. Greenbelt, Maryland: National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1981; 116 p.
4. Hardell L, Sage C. 2008. Biological effects from electromagnetic field exposure and public exposure
standards. Biomed. Pharmacother. 62:104-109. doi: 10.1016/j.biopha.2007.12.004.
5. Makker K, Varghese A, Desai NR, Mouradi R, Agarwal A. 2009 Cell phones: modern man’s nemesis?
Reprod Biomed Online 18:148-157.
6. Levitt, B. B., Lai, H. 2010. Biological effects from exposure to electromagnetic radiation emitted by
cell tower base stations and other antenna arrays. Environ. Rev. 18, 369-395. doi.org/10.1139/
A10-018
7. Yakymenko I, Sidorik E. 2010 Risks of carcinogenesis from electromagnetic radiation and mobile
telephony devices. Exp Oncol 32:729-736.
8. Yakimenko IL, Sidorik EP, Tsybulin AS. 2011 [Metabolic changes in cells under electromagnetic
radiation of mobile communication systems]. Ukr Biokhim Zh (1999). 2011 Mar-Apr;83(2):20-28.
9. Pall, ML. 2013. Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to
produce beneficial or adverse effects. J Cell Mol Med 17:958-965. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.12088.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 17
10. Pall ML. 2016 Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread
neuropsychiatric effects including depression. J Chem Neuroanat 75(Pt B):43-51. doi:
10.1016/j.jchemneu.2015.08.001.
11. Batista Napotnik T, Reberšek M, Vernier PT, Mali B, Miklavčič D. 2016 Effects of high
voltage nanosecond electric pulses on eukaryotic cells (in vitro): A systematic review.
Bioelectrochemistry. 2016 Aug;110:1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.bioelechem.2016.02.011.
12. Asghari A, Khaki AA, Rajabzadeh A, Khaki A. 2016 A review on Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and
the reproductive system. Electron Physician. 2016 Jul 25;8(7):2655-2662. doi: 10.19082/2655.
13. Pall ML. 2018 Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health. Environ Res 164:404-416.
Oxidative stress/free radical damage (important mechanisms
involved in almost all chronic diseases; direct cause of cellular DNA
damage):
1. Raines, J. K. 1981. Electromagnetic Field Interactions with the Human Body: Observed Effects and
Theories. Greenbelt, Maryland: National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1981; 116 p.
2. Hardell, L., Sage, C. 2008. Biological effects from electromagnetic field exposure and public
exposure standards. Biomed. Pharmacother. 62, 104-109.
3. Hazout A, Menezo Y, Madelenat P, Yazbeck C, Selva J, Cohen-Bacrie P. 2008 [Causes and clinical
implications of sperm DNA damages]. Gynecol Obstet Fertil ;36:1109-1117
4. Makker K, Varghese A, Desai NR, Mouradi R, Agarwal A. 2009 Cell phones: modern man’s nemesis?
Reprod Biomed Online 18:148-157.
5. Desai NR, Kesari KK, Agarwal A. 2009 Pathophysiology of cell phone radiation: oxidative stress and
carcinogenesis with focus on the male reproductive system. Reproduct Biol Endocrinol 7:114.
6. Yakymenko I, Sidorik E. 2010 Risks of carcinogenesis from electromagnetic radiation and mobile
telephony devices. Exp Oncol 32:729-736.
7. Yakimenko IL, Sidorik EP, Tsybulin AS. 2011 [Metabolic changes in cells under electromagnetic
radiation of mobile communication systems]. Ukr Biokhim Zh (1999). 2011 MarApr;83(2):20-28.
8. Consales, C., Merla, C., Marino, C., et al. 2012. Electromagnetic fields, oxidative stress, and
neurodegeneration. Int. J. Cell Biol. 2012: 683897.
9. LaVignera et al 2012 La Vignera S, Condorelli RA, Vicari E, D’Agata R, Calogero AE. 2012 Effects
of the exposure to mobile phones on male reproduction: a review of the literature. J Androl
33:350-356.
10. Pall, ML. 2013. Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to
produce beneficial or adverse effects. J Cell Mol Med 17:958-965. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.12088.
11. Nazıroğlu M, Yüksel M, Köse SA, Özkaya MO. 2013 Recent reports of Wi-Fi and mobile phoneinduced radiation on oxidative stress and reproductive signaling pathways in females and
males. J Membr Biol 246:869-875.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 18
12. Pall, M. L. 2015. Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety
Panel 6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce
biological impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower
frequency electromagnetic field action. Rev. Environ. Health 3, 99-116.
13. Yakymenko I, Tsybulin O, Sidorik E, Henshel D, Kyrylenko O, Kysylenko S. 2015 Oxidative
mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagnetic
Biol Med: Early Online 1-16. ISSN: 1536-8378.
14. Hensinger P, Wilke E. 2016. Mobilfunk-Studienergebnisse bestätigen Risiken Studienrecherche
2016-4 veröffentlicht. Umwelt Medizin Gesellshaft 29:3/2016.
15. Houston BJ, Nixon B, King BV, De Iuliis GN, Aitken RJ. 2016 The effects of radiofrequency
electromagnetic radiation on sperm function. Reproduction 152:R263-R276.
16. Dasdag S, Akdag MZ. 2016 The link between radiofrequencies emitted from wireless technologies
and oxidative stress. J Chem Neuroanat 75(Pt B):85-93.
17. Wang H, Zhang X. 2017 Magnetic fields and reactive oxygen species. Int J Mol Sci. 2017 Oct
18;18(10). pii: E2175. doi: 10.3390/ijms18102175.
18. Pall ML. 2018 Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health. Environ Res 164:404-416.
19. Wilke I. 2018 Biological and pathological effects of 2.45 GHz on cells, fertility, brain and behavior.
Umwelt Medizin Gesselshaft 2018 Feb 31 (1).
Endocrine, that is hormonal effects:
1. Glaser ZR, PhD. 1971 Naval Medical Research Institute Research Report, June 1971. Bibliography
of Reported Biological Phenomena (“Effects”) and Clinical Manifestations Attributed to
Microwave and Radio-Frequency Radiation. Report No. 2 Revised. https://scholar.google.
com/scholar?q=Glaser+naval+medical+microwave+radio-frequency+1972&btnG=&hl=en&as_
sdt=0%2C38 (Accessed Sept. 9, 2017)
2. Tolgskaya MS, Gordon ZV. 1973. Pathological Effects of Radio Waves, Translated from Russian by B
Haigh. Consultants Bureau, New York/London, 146 pages.
3. Raines, J. K. 1981. Electromagnetic Field Interactions with the Human Body: Observed Effects and
Theories. Greenbelt, Maryland: National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1981; 116 p.
4. Hardell, L., Sage, C. 2008. Biological effects from electromagnetic field exposure and public
exposure standards. Biomed. Pharmacother. 62, 104-109.
5. Makker K, Varghese A, Desai NR, Mouradi R, Agarwal A. 2009 Cell phones: modern man’s nemesis?
Reprod Biomed Online 18:148-157.
6. Gye MC, Park CJ. 2012 Effect of electromagnetic field exposure on the reproductive system. Clin
Exp Reprod Med 39:1-9. doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2012.39.1.1
7. Pall, M. L. 2015. Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel
6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological
impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency
electromagnetic field action. Rev. Environ. Health 3, 99-116.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 19
8. Sangün Ö, Dündar B, Çömlekçi S, Büyükgebiz A. 2016 The Effects of Electromagnetic Field on the
Endocrine System in Children and Adolescents. Pediatr Endocrinol Rev 13:531-545.
9. Hecht, Karl. 2016 Health Implications of Long-Term Exposures to Electrosmog. Brochure 6 of A
Brochure Series of the Competence Initiative for the Protection of Humanity, the Environment
and Democracy. http://kompetenzinitiative.net/KIT/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/KI_
Brochure-6_K_Hecht_web.pdf (accessed Feb. 11, 2018)
10. Asghari A, Khaki AA, Rajabzadeh A, Khaki A. 2016 A review on Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and
the reproductive system. Electron Physician. 2016 Jul 25;8(7):2655-2662. doi: 10.19082/2655.
11. Pall ML. 2018 Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health. Environ Res 164:404-416.
12. Wilke I. 2018 Biological and pathological effects of 2.45 GHz on cells, fertility, brain and behavior.
Umwelt Medizin Gesselshaft 2018 Feb 31 (1).
Increased intracellular calcium: intracellular calcium is maintained
at very low levels (typically about 2 X 10-9 M) except for brief
increases used to produce regulatory responses, such that
sustained elevation of intracellular calcium levels produces many
pathophysiological (that is disease-causing) responses).
1. Adey WR. 1988 Cell membranes: the electromagnetic environment and cancer promotion.
Neurochem Res.13:671-677.
2. Walleczek, J. 1992. Electromagnetic field effects on cells of the immune system: the role of calcium
signaling. FASEB J. 6, 3177-3185.
3. Adey, WR. 1993 Biological effects of electromagnetic fields. J Cell Biochem 51:410-416.
4. Frey AH. 1993 Electromagnetic field interactions with biological systems. FASEB J 7:272-281.
5. Funk RHW, Monsees T, Özkucur N. 2009 Electromagnetic effects—Form cell biology to medicine.
Prog Histochem Cytochem 43:177-264.
6. Yakymenko IL, Sidorik EP, Tsybulin AS. 1999 [Metabolic changes in cells under electromagnetic
radiation of mobile communication systems]. Ukr Biokhim Zh (1999), 2011 Mar-Apr:20-28.
7. Gye MC, Park CJ. 2012 Effect of electromagnetic field exposure on the reproductive system. Clin
Exp Reprod Med 39:1-9. doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2012.39.1.1
8. Pall, ML. 2013. Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to
produce beneficial or adverse effects. J Cell Mol Med 17:958-965. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.12088.
9. Pall ML. 2014 Electromagnetic field activation of voltage-gated calcium channels: role in
therapeutic effects. Electromagn Biol Med. 2014 Apr 8 doi: 10.3109/15368378.2014.906447.
10. Pall ML. 2015 How to approach the challenge of minimizing non-thermal health effects of
microwave radiation from electrical devices. International Journal of Innovative Research in
Engineering & Management (IJIREM) ISSN: 2350-0557, Volume-2, Issue -5, September 2015;
71-76.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 20
11. Pall, M. L. 2015 Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel
6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological
impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency
electromagnetic field action. Rev. Environ. Health 3, 99-116. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2015-0001.
12. Pall ML. 2016 Electromagnetic fields act similarly in plants as in animals: Probable activation of
calcium channels via their voltage sensor. Curr Chem Biol 10: 74-82.
13. Pall ML. 2016 Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread
neuropsychiatric effects including depression. J Chem Neuroanat 75(Pt B):43-51. doi:
10.1016/j.jchemneu.2015.08.001.
14. Batista Napotnik T, Reberšek M, Vernier PT, Mali B, Miklavčič D. 2016 Effects of high
voltage nanosecond electric pulses on eukaryotic cells (in vitro): A systematic review.
Bioelectrochemistry. 2016 Aug;110:1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.bioelechem.2016.02.011.
15. Asghari A, Khaki AA, Rajabzadeh A, Khaki A. 2016 A review on electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and
the reproductive system. Electron Physician. 2016 Jul 25;8(7):2655-2662. doi: 10.19082/2655.
Pulsed EMFs are, in most cases much more biologically active than are nonpulsed EMFs. This is important because all wireless communication devices
communicate via pulsations and because the “smarter” the devices are, the more they
pulse because the pulsations convey the information. What should be obvious is that
you cannot study such pulsation roles if there were no biological effects produced by
such EMFs. The pulsation studies alone tell us that there are many such EMF effects.
1. Osipov YuA, 1965 [Labor hygiene and the effect of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields on
workers]. Leningrad Meditsina Publishing House, 220 pp.
2. Pollack H, Healer J. 1967 Review of Information on Hazards to Personnel from High-Frequency
Electromagnetic Radiation. Institute for Defense Analyses; Research and Engineering
Support Division. IDA/HQ 67-6211, Series B, May 1967.
3. Frey AH. 1974 Differential biologic effects of pulsed and continuous electromagnetic fields and
mechanisms of effect. Ann N Y Acad Sci 238: 273-279.
4. Creighton MO, Larsen LE, Stewart-DeHaan PJ, Jacobi JH, Sanwal M, Baskerville JC, Bassen HE, Brown
DO, Trevithick JR. 1987 In vitro studies of microwave-induced cataract. II. Comparison of
damage observed for continuous wave and pulsed microwaves. Exp Eye Res 45:357-373.
5. Grigor’ev IuG. 1996 [Role of modulation in biological effects of electromagnetic radiation]. Radiats
Biol Radioecol 36:659-670.
6. Belyaev I. 2005 Non-thermal biological effects of microwaves. Microwave Rev 11:13-29.
7. Belyaev I. 2005 Non-thermal biological effects of microwaves: current knowledge, further
perspective and urgent needs. Electromagn Biol Med 24(3):375-403.
8. Markov MS. 2007 Pulsed electromagnetic field therapy: History, state of the art and future. The
Environmentalist 27:465-475.
9. Van Boxem K, Huntoon M, Van Zundert J, Patijn J, van Kleef M, Joosten EA. 2014 Pulsed
radiofrequency: a review of the basic science as applied to the pathophysiology of radicular
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 21
pain: a call for clinical translation. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2014 Mar-Apr;39(2):149-59.
10. Belyaev, I. 2015. Biophysical mechanisms for nonthermal microwave effects. In: Electromagnetic
Fields in Biology and Medicine, Marko S. Markov, ed, CRC Press, New York, pp 49-67.
11. Pall, M. L. 2015 Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel
6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological
impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency
electromagnetic field action. Rev. Environ. Health 3, 99-116. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2015-0001.
12. Panagopoulos DJ, Johansson O, Carlo GL. 2015 Real versus simulated mobile phone exposures
in experimental studies. BioMed. Res. Int. 2015, article ID 607053, 8 pages. doi:
10.1155/2015/607053.
13. Batista Napotnik T, Reberšek M, Vernier PT, Mali B, Miklavčič D. 2016 Effects of high
voltage nanosecond electric pulses on eukaryotic cells (in vitro): A systematic review.
Bioelectrochemistry. 2016 Aug;110:1-12. doi: 10.1016/j.bioelechem.2016.02.011.
Cancer causation by EMF exposures:
1. Dwyer, M. J., Leeper, D. B. 1978 A Current Literature Report on the Carcinogenic Properties of
Ionizing and Nonionizing Radiation. DHEW Publication (NIOSH) 78-134, March 1978.
2. Marino AA, Morris DH. 1985 Chronic electromagnetic stressors in the environment. A risk factor in
human cancer. J environ sci health C3:189-219.
3. Adey WR. 1988 Cell membranes: the electromagnetic environment and cancer promotion.
Neurochem Res.13:671-677.
4. Adey WR. 1990 Joint actions of environmental nonionizing electromagnetic fields and chemical
pollution in cancer promotion. Environ Health Perspect 86:297-305.
5. Frey AH. 1993 Electromagnetic field interactions with biological systems. FASEB J 7:272-281.
6. Goldsmith JR. 1995 Epidemiological evidence of radiofrequency radiation (microwave) effects on
health in military, broadcasting and occupational settings. Int J Occup Environ Health 1:47-57.
7. Goldsmith JR. 1997 Epidemiologic evidence relevant to radar (microwave) effects. Env Health
Perspect 105(Suppl 6):1579-1587.
8. Kundi M, Mild K, Hardell L, Mattsson M. 2004 Mobile telephones and cancer – a review of the
epidemiological evidence. J Toxicol Env Health, Part B 7:351-384.
9. Kundi M. 2004 Mobile phone use and cancer. Occup Env Med 61:560-570.
10. Behari J, Paulraj R. 2007 Biomarkers of induced electromagnetic field and cancer. Indian J Exp Biol
45:77-85.
11. Hardell L, Carlberg M, Soderqvist F, Hansson Mild K. 2008 Meta-analysis of long-term mobile
phone use and the association with brain tumors. Int J Oncol 32:1097-1103.
12. Khurana VG, Teo C, Kundi M, Hardell L, Carlberg M. 2009 Cell phones and brain tumors: a review
including the long-term epidemiologic data. Surg Neurol 72:205-214.
13. Desai NR, Kesari KK, Agarwal A. 2009 Pathophysiology of cell phone radiation: oxidative stress and
carcinogenesis with focus on the male reproductive system. Reproduct Biol Endocrinol 7:114.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 22
14. Davanipour Z, Sobel E. 2009 Long-term exposure to magnetic fields and the risks of Alzheimer’s
disease and breast cancer: Further biological research. Pathophysiology 16:149-156.
15. Yakymenko I, Sidorik E. 2010 Risks of carcinogenesis from electromagnetic radiation and mobile
telephony devices. Exp Oncol 32:729-736.
16. Carpenter DO. 2010 Electromagnetic fields and cancer: the cost of doing nothing. Rev Environ
Health 25:75-80.
17. Giuliani L, Soffriti M (Eds). 2010 NON-THERMAL EFFECTS AND MECHANISMS OF INTERACTION
BETWEEN ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AND LIVING MATTER, RAMAZZINI INSTITUTE EUR.
J. ONCOL. LIBRARY Volume 5, National Institute for the Study and Control of Cancer and
Environmental Diseases “Bernardino Ramazzini” Bologna, Italy 2010, 400 page monograph.
18. Khurana, V. G., Hardell, L., Everaert, J., Bortkiewicz, A., Carlberg, M., Ahonen, M. 2010
Epidemiological evidence for a health risk from mobile phone base stations. Int. J. Occup.
Environ. Health 16, 263-267.
19. Yakymenko, I., Sidorik, E., Kyrylenko, S., Chekhun, V. 2011. Long-term exposure to microwave
radiation provokes cancer growth: evidences from radars and mobile communication systems.
Exp. Oncol. 33(2), 62-70.
20. Biointiative Working Group, David Carpenter and Cindy Sage (eds). 2012 Bioinitiative 2012: A
rationale for biologically-based exposure standards for electromagnetic radiation. http://
www.bioinitiative.org/participants/why-we-care/
21. Ledoigt G, Belpomme D. 2013 Cancer induction molecular pathways and HF-EMF irradiation. Adv
Biol Chem 3:177-186.
22. Hardell L, Carlberg M. 2013 Using the Hill viewpoints from 1965 for evaluating strengths of
evidence of the risk for brain tumors associated with use of mobile and cordless phones. Rev
Environ Health 28:97-106. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2013-0006.
23. Hardell L, Carlberg M, Hansson Mild K. 2013 Use of mobile phones and cordless phones
is associated with increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma. Pathophysiology
2013;20(2):85-110.
24. Carpenter DO. 2013 Human disease resulting from exposure to electromagnetic fields. Rev
Environ Health 2013;28:159-172.gj
25. Davis DL, Kesari S, Soskolne CL, Miller AB, Stein Y. 2013 Swedish review strengthens grounds for
concluding that radiation from cellular and cordless phones is a probable human carcinogen.
Pathophysiology 20:123-129.
26. Morgan LL, Miller AB, Sasco A, Davis DL. 2015 Mobile phone radiation causes brain tumors and
should be classified as a probable human carcinogen (2A). Int J Oncol 46(5): 1865-1871.
27. Mahdavi M, Yekta R, Tackallou SH. 2015 Positive correlation between ELF and RF electromagnetic
fields on cancer risk. J Paramed Sci 6(3), ISSN 2008-4978.
28. Carlberg M, Hardell L. 2017 Evaluation of Mobile Phone and Cordless Phone Use and Glioma Risk
Using the Bradford Hill Viewpoints from 1965 on Association or Causation. BioMed Res Int
2017, Article ID 9218486, https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/9218486
29. Bortkiewicz A, Gadzicka E, Szymczak W. 2017 Mobile phone use and risk for intracranial tumors
and salivary gland tumors - A meta-analysis. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 30:27-43.
5GCRISIS the5Gsummit.com 23
30. Bielsa-Fernández P, Rodríguez-Martín B. 2017 [Association between radiation from mobile
phones and tumour risk in adults]. Gac Sanit. 2017 Apr 12. pii: S0213-9111(17)30083-3. doi:
10.1016/j.gaceta.2016.10.014. [Epub ahead of print]
31. Alegría-Loyola MA, Galnares-Olalde JA, Mercado M. 2017 [Tumors of the central nervous system].
Rev Med Inst Mex Seguro Soc 55:330-334.
32. Prasad M, Kathuria P, Nair P, Kumar A, Prasad K. 2017 Mobile phone use and risk of brain tumours:
a systematic review of association between study quality, source of funding, and research
outcomes. Neurol Sci. 2017 Feb 17. doi: 10.1007/s10072-017-2850-8. [Epub ahead of print].
33. Miller A. 2017 References on cell phone radiation and cancer. https://ehtrust.org/references-cellphone-radio-frequency-radiation-cancer/ (Accessed Sept. 9, 2017)
34. Hardell L. 2017 World Health Organization, radiofrequency radiation and health – a hard nut to
crack (Review). Int J Oncol 51:405-413.
35. Pall ML. 2018 How cancer can be caused by microwave frequency electromagnetic field (EMF)
exposures: EMF activation of voltage-gated calcium channels (VGCCs) can cause cancer
including tumor promotion, tissue invasion and metastasis via 15 mechanisms. Chapter 7 in:
Mobile Communications and Public Health, Marko Markov, Ed., CRC Press, pp 163-184.
Each of these reviews, typically cite from 5 to over 100 primary literature citations,
each showing that non-thermal EMF exposures produce the effect under which they
are listed. It follows from this, that there are not only 11 or more reviews documenting
each of these effects, but there is also a massive primary literature documenting these
effects as well. It follows from this that the ICNIRP, FCC and International Safety
Guidelines, which are entirely based only on thermal effects are inadequate and
there have been petitions and other statements of international groups of scientists
expressing great concern about this. It follows that the ICNIRP, FCC and International
safety guidelines are completely unscientific and cannot be relied upon to protect our safety
Did you really think that pasting the same lists multiple times to make it look really big would bamboozle us?
You should probably look for "marks" who do not have scientific training, critical thinking skills, or 25 years of training and experience in non ionizing and ionizing radiation topics and environments.
But first and foremost, I recommend you learn the topic you are trying to bamboozle us with. Try reading some of the papers you are callously citing.
You are quite successfully separating yourself from the group of people who actually understand the topic you are ranting about.
I thank you for making it clear that you bring no facts to the table. Sometimes it is not so easy to see the lemmings.
jn
500 to 1000 watts of power at 2.45 GHz are focused into the chicken.....yes it's toast.
I spent 41 years of my career working at Motorola, several of those years were in cell phone design. Most were in two way radio design where the power levels are much higher. There were several researchers on staff where I worked including at least one with a PHD in microbiology doing testing on animals and human cadavers to explore the effects of RF exposure.... police walkie talkies pumping out 5 watts of power continuously strapped to the head of several pigs for their entire natural lives failed to make bacon, or produce any identifiable tissue damage.
I however still remain cautious and don't spend too much time with a phone to my head. My average phone bill shows 30 to 45 minutes of talk time per month....unfortunately my daughter's bill shows thousands.
Assuming 20 watts of 5G is focused on your head (not actually possible yet)
the RF energy present at your head from a mile or so away is FAR LESS than the 200 milliwatts that currently slapped to the head of a 4G phone user.
Each flat plate antenna actually has many small patch antennas embedded inside. By using the principles of beam interference the phase of the electrical signal into each patch can be adjusted such that the signals from a few of the patches can be steered toward a target. This principle has been used in radar for some time.
A new technology called MIMO (multi in, multi out) allows for several individual bidirectional steered beams from each plate antenna. The actual beamwidth of each beam varies with the number of individual antenna element employed at the time, as with any directional antenna. Those flat white plates you currently see on top of a 3G or 4G cell tower already use a fixed version of beam focusing.
The food, chemical, and plastics / polymers industries are far worse...many of their effects are well known, but kept quiet.
Do you know that food industry calories do NOT equal chemistry or physics textbook calories. One food label calorie = 1000 textbook calorie.....so yes that meal from McD's actually contains 1 MILLION calories...eat up! Don't forget a side order of GMO produced glyphosate (Roundup) residue.
5G is so far down the list it isn't worth worrying about.
That is a quite reasonable thought. I too recommend that.
I also try to limit exposure to ionizing radiation as well. I don't sleep on my granite countertop, I don't work in an enclosed basement without ventilation (radon). I don't do lots of x-rays, limit my amount of flights, try to stay away from Denver and Salt Lake City, limit my exposure to UV light, refuse to spend hours lying down on beach sand (since I learned about thorium).
That said, I just live my life. If there were real problems with cell phones, people would be dropping like flies. Research would show a clear link to untoward effects.
Since it is only fringe pseudoscience groups touting the dangers, what does that say for reality?
jn
That is so cool.
How did they convince the enemy to remove the gunpowder from their ammo and pour it onto tin can lids so we could explode it?
jn
I lament the day I figured out that I can burn 10 calories per minute on my exercise bicycle, and a snickers bar is 245.
25 minutes of exercise for one candy bar??? no way is it worth it.
jn
The big difference with 5G from many other "pollutants" is that unless you live in a Faraday cage, there will be nowhere on earth that is not saturated in microwaves, plus all the other frequency fields we already have. There is no possibility to opt out and for those who are electro-sensitive (a recognised condition) life becomes hell on earth. Those people are like the canaries in the coal mine. If you value your individual liberty, the prospect of total surveillance, 24/7 with all the corporate state controls that will be enabled, surely must give pause. China already have a citizen credit score system mediated over the mobile phone, any non compliance to state rules loose you points and the lower you go, the less people will communicate with you as they will loose credits too. Then you become a non citizen. Coming to the west soon.
If you think that is cool then you will find this site hot! Death Rays - Tales of Future Past v2
If you do some sums on how much it will cost to 'saturate the earth' with 5G you will soon realise that is not a major worry. I can't even get 4G where I live.
5G is in hype phase and the specs still haven't been sorted out. The reality will be very dull when it finally happens. Just more cat videos for all.
5G is in hype phase and the specs still haven't been sorted out. The reality will be very dull when it finally happens. Just more cat videos for all.
Wow, just....wow.. you are a veritable dictionary of pseudoscience.
Saturated in microwaves, boy does that sound scary.
Electro-sensitive... scary as well.
state controls, people compliance scoring...
Man, you are out of control.
jn
Hi zjjwwa,
The sad thing is, you can find a study or paper to support any stance you care to take.
Also, some studies don't control all the variables, or fail to take them into account. For one example, consider the studies on low level electromagnetic field strengths. However, people who live in these conditions tend to be in the middle class to lower middle class and even people that barely make ends meet. People who are well off, or even wealthy do not tend to live in areas where there are power wires running overhead, power switching stations or cellular transmitting sites. I also know of one water treatment plant where the employees are constantly enveloped by a pair of 50 KW AM transmitting stations both very near 1 MHz. The field strength is somewhere between 3 and 6 volts / meter. Not a job for a well off individual. So those studies are also including a strong social-economic component. The test sample is skewed in other words. Given you have a formal education, you understand testing very well, especially the need to control, correct or elimination factors that may invalidate the experiment and its conclusions.
However, my own observations stretching over a decade and comparing with another waste treatment plant in the same network shows me that that site without radio transmitters is worse for your health than the one bathed in higher level RF energy. The frequencies in question are 1,010 MHz and 1050 MHz. Same network reporting to hte same people with the same procedures. Some employees switch sites depending on staffing requirements and promotions but enough people are static to make a valid comparison.
In addition, all those papers you have referenced would take a great deal of time to read, even if you only read the abstracts. Of course, if you have only read the abstracts, you could be left with erroneous conclusions. You certainly wouldn't be exposed to any notes or limitations of those studies. You have to read the entire things. You are probably better off relying on the facts that you know and applying those to the problem along with some common sense.
Before you ask, both my wife and I gave up cell phones in 2006 or thereabouts. This was due to the cost of having them coupled with the fact that they weren't really needed. I still had a work cell phone that spent most of it's time in my shirt pocket, or clipped to my waist. No funny lumps or appendages growing out of odd places for me. My profession at that time was installation and servicing of commercial communications systems. I took the ball from provisioning to decommissioning systems at the end of their lifetime. The entire life cycle.
Another observation I was able to make was that electromagnetic fields normally occur with heavy industry or smaller businesses with many other negative situations to human life.
Keep all of this in mind when considering those reports.
-Chris
The sad thing is, you can find a study or paper to support any stance you care to take.
Also, some studies don't control all the variables, or fail to take them into account. For one example, consider the studies on low level electromagnetic field strengths. However, people who live in these conditions tend to be in the middle class to lower middle class and even people that barely make ends meet. People who are well off, or even wealthy do not tend to live in areas where there are power wires running overhead, power switching stations or cellular transmitting sites. I also know of one water treatment plant where the employees are constantly enveloped by a pair of 50 KW AM transmitting stations both very near 1 MHz. The field strength is somewhere between 3 and 6 volts / meter. Not a job for a well off individual. So those studies are also including a strong social-economic component. The test sample is skewed in other words. Given you have a formal education, you understand testing very well, especially the need to control, correct or elimination factors that may invalidate the experiment and its conclusions.
However, my own observations stretching over a decade and comparing with another waste treatment plant in the same network shows me that that site without radio transmitters is worse for your health than the one bathed in higher level RF energy. The frequencies in question are 1,010 MHz and 1050 MHz. Same network reporting to hte same people with the same procedures. Some employees switch sites depending on staffing requirements and promotions but enough people are static to make a valid comparison.
In addition, all those papers you have referenced would take a great deal of time to read, even if you only read the abstracts. Of course, if you have only read the abstracts, you could be left with erroneous conclusions. You certainly wouldn't be exposed to any notes or limitations of those studies. You have to read the entire things. You are probably better off relying on the facts that you know and applying those to the problem along with some common sense.
Before you ask, both my wife and I gave up cell phones in 2006 or thereabouts. This was due to the cost of having them coupled with the fact that they weren't really needed. I still had a work cell phone that spent most of it's time in my shirt pocket, or clipped to my waist. No funny lumps or appendages growing out of odd places for me. My profession at that time was installation and servicing of commercial communications systems. I took the ball from provisioning to decommissioning systems at the end of their lifetime. The entire life cycle.
Another observation I was able to make was that electromagnetic fields normally occur with heavy industry or smaller businesses with many other negative situations to human life.
Keep all of this in mind when considering those reports.
-Chris
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.