Friday, January 13, 2023

"Electromagnetic Fields of Wireless Communications: Biological and Health Effects"

Panagopoulos DJ (Ed.). (2022). Electromagnetic Fields of Wireless Communications: Biological and Health Effects (1st ed.). CRC Press. doi: 10.1201/9781003201052

This 544-page book reflects contributions from experts in biological and health effects of Radio Frequency (RF)/Microwave and Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs) used in wireless communications (WC) and other technological applications. Diverse topics related to physics, biology, pathology, epidemiology, and plausible biophysical and biochemical mechanisms of WC EMFs emitted by antennas and devices are included. 

Discussions on the possible consequences of fifth generation (5G) mobile telephony (MT) EMFs based on available data and correlation between anthropogenic EMF exposures and various pathological conditions such as infertility, cancer, electro-hypersensitivity, organic and viral diseases, and effects on animals, plants, trees, and environment are included. It further illustrates individual and public health protection and the setting of biologically- and epidemiologically-based exposure limits.


  • Covers biological and health effects, including oxidative stress, DNA damage, reproductive effects of mobile phones/antennas (2G, 3G, 4G), cordless phones, Wi-Fi, etc.
  • Describes effects induced by real-life exposures by commercially available devices/antennas.
  • Illustrates biophysical and biochemical mechanisms that fill the gap between recorded experimental and epidemiological findings and their explanations.
  • Explores experimental and epidemiological facts and mechanisms of action. Provides explanations and protection tips.
  • Transcends across physical, biological, chemical, health, epidemiological, and environmental aspects of the topic.

Table of Contents and Chapter Abstracts

A. Physical properties of Wireless Communication Electromagnetic Fields

Chapter 1: Defining Wireless Communication (WC) Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs):

A. Polarization is a principal property of all man-made EMFs.
B. Modulation, Pulsation, and Variability are inherent parameters of WC EMFs.
C. Most man-made EMF-exposures are Non-Thermal.
D. Measuring incident EMFs is more relevant than SAR.
E. All man-made EMFs emit continuous waves, not photons.
F. Differences from natural EMFs. Interaction with matter

Panagopoulos DJ, Karabarbounis A, and Lioliousis C

All types of man-made electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and corresponding non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation (EMR) produced by electric/electronic circuits and antennas – in contrast to natural EMFs/EMR – are totally polarized and coherent. Polarized/coherent EMFs/waves can produce constructive interference and amplify their intensities at certain locations. Moreover, they induce parallel/coherent forced oscillations of charged/polar molecules – especially mobile ions – in living cells/tissues, which can trigger biological effects. The most bioactive man-made EMFs are those employed in wireless communications (WC). They are usually referred to simply as Radio Frequency (RF) or Microwave (MW) EMFs/EMR because they emit carrier signals in the RF/MW band. Yet, WC EMFs contain emissions in the Extremely Low Frequency (ELF), Ultra Low Frequency (ULF), and Very Low Frequency (VLF) bands as well in the form of modulation, pulsing, and variability. This complexity and variability of WC EMFs, combined with polarization, is what makes them even more bioactive. Man-made EMFs (including WC) at environmentally existing intensities do not induce significant heating in living tissues. The Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) was introduced by health agencies as the principal metric for the bioactivity of RF/microwave EMFs. Estimation of SAR from tissue conductivity is inaccurate, and estimation from tissue specific heat is possible only for thermal effects. Thus, SAR is of little relevance, and EMF exposures should better be defined by their incident radiation/field intensity at the included frequency bands, exposure duration, and other field parameters. The present chapter also explains that man-made EMFs/EMR, in contrast to light and ionizing electromagnetic emissions, do not consist of photons but of continuous “classical” waves and, thus, do not obey Planck’s formula connecting photon energy (ϵ) with frequency (ν), ϵ = h ν. Apart from polarization, man-made EMFs differ from natural EMFs in frequency bands and emission sources. Basic concepts of interaction with living tissue are discussed.

B. Biological and Health effects of Wireless Communication Electromagnetic Fields

Chapter 2: Public Health implications of exposure to Wireless Communication Electromagnetic Fields
Miller AB

Anthropogenic electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and corresponding electromagnetic radiation (EMR) exposure has long been a concern for the public, policy makers, and health researchers. Beginning with radar during World War II, human exposure to Radio Frequency (RF) radiation, and to modulated RF wireless communication (WC) EMFs/EMR has grown substantially over time. In 2011, a working group of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reviewed the published literature and categorized WC EMR, termed as RF radiation, as a “possible” (Group 2B) human carcinogen. A broad range of adverse human health effects associated with WC EMFs/EMR have been reported since the IARC review. In addition, two large-scale carcinogenicity studies in rodents exposed to levels of WC EMR that mimic lifetime human exposures have shown significantly increased rates of Schwannomas and malignant gliomas, as well as chromosomal DNA damage. Of particular concern are the effects of WC EMR exposure on the developing brain in children. Compared with an adult male, a mobile phone held against the head of a child exposes deeper brain structures to greater radiation doses per unit volume, and the young, thin skull’s bone marrow absorbs a roughly tenfold higher local dose. Experimental and observational studies also suggest that men who keep mobile phones in their trouser pockets have significantly lower sperm counts and signifcantly impaired sperm motility and morphology, including mitochondrial DNA damage as well as an increased risk of colon cancer. Pending an updated IARC working group review, current knowledge provides justification for governments, public health authorities, and physicians/allied health professionals to warn the population that having a cell phone next to the body is harmful, and to support measures to reduce all exposures to WC EMFs/EMR to as low as reasonably achievable.

Chapter 3: Oxidative Stress induced by Wireless Communication Electromagnetic Fields
Yakymenko I and Tsybulin O

This chapter describes experimental data on oxidative effects induced by man-made electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and corresponding electromagnetic radiation (EMR) in living cells. Analysis of the currently available peer-reviewed scientific literature reveals important molecular effects induced by non-thermal exposures to man-made EMFs, especially wireless communication (WC) EMFs, in living cells. They include significant activation of key cellular pathways generating oxidative stress (OS) by reactive oxygen species (ROS), activation of peroxidation, oxidative damage of DNA, and changes in activities of antioxidant enzymes. Critically important features of man-made EMFs, compared to natural EMFs, are their totally polarized and coherent character and, in the case of WC EMFs, combined frequency bands and sophisticated modulation. These features provide these types of EMFs/EMR with the unique and unexpected capacity of inducing biological effects such as pronounced oxidative effects in exposed living cells. It is indicative that among 131 analyzed peer-reviewed studies dealing with oxidative effects of non-thermal Radio Frequency (RF) EMFs, mostly pulsed/modulated by Extremely Low Frequencies (ELF), 124 (95%) confirmed statistically significant oxidative effects on various types of biological systems. And among 39 analyzed studies on oxidative effects of purely ELF EMFs, 36 of them (92%) also revealed significant oxidative effects of the exposure. The wide pathogenic potential of induced ROS and their involvement in cell signaling explains a range of biological/health effects of non-thermal man-made EMF exposures, which includes both carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic pathologies. In conclusion, our analysis demonstrates that a) man-made EMFs, and especially those employed in WC combining both RF and ELF components, is a pronounced oxidative agent for living cells with high pathogenic potential; and b) the OS induced by man-made EMF exposures should be recognized as one of the primary mechanisms of biological activity of this new environmental agent.

Chapter 4: Genotoxic Effects of Wireless Communication Electromagnetic Fields
Jagetia GC

The tremendous development of wireless communications (WC) technology during the past 30 years has transformed telecommunications and popularized mobile phones so much that, today, their number exceeds the global population. In addition to electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and corresponding electromagnetic radiation (EMR) from natural sources like sun, cosmos, atmospheric discharges, etc., humans are exposed to man-made EMFs/EMR, especially at the Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) and the Radio Frequency (RF)/microwave bands. EMFs/EMR emitted by WC devices, such as mobile phones and corresponding antennas, contain RF carrier signals which are pulsed and modulated by ELF signals. We call these complex emissions WC EMFs. WC EMFs have generated great concern in the scientific community and the public, as they have been reported to cause headache, fatigue, tinnitus (microwave hearing), concentration problems, depression, memory loss, sleep, and hormonal disorders as short-term effects and even infertility and cancer as the long-term effects. This chapter has been written after collecting information from various search engines, including Google Scholar, PubMed, SciFinder, Science Direct, and other websites on the internet. The chapter focuses on the genotoxic cellular effects of WC EMFs on cultured cells, humans, and animals. Since WC EMFs combine both RF and ELF, in this chapter, both RF/WC and purely ELF man-made EMF studies are reviewed. Most studies conducted on the genotoxic effects of ELF or RF/WC EMFs have resulted in positive findings. Many human and animal studies have demonstrated that ELF or RF/ WC man-made EMFs increased the frequency of micronuclei and induced chromosome aberrations or DNA damage, including single- and double-strand breaks. It has also been demonstrated that these EMFs trigger reactive oxygen species (ROS) formation, and changes in gene expression, particularly in genes involved in signal transduction, cytoskeleton formation, and cellular metabolism

Chapter 5: DNA and Chromosome Damage in human and animal cells, induced by Mobile Telephony EMFs and other stressors
Panagopoulos DJ

Induction of DNA fragmentation in fruit fy ovarian cells after in vivo exposure and chromatid type aberrations in human peripheral blood lymphocytes (HPBLs) after in vitro exposure to mobile telephony (MT) electromagnetic fields (EMFs) from mobile phones are presented. In both cases, the biological samples were exposed in close distance to a commercially available second or third/ fourth generation (2G or 3G/4G) mobile phone handset during an active phone call in “talk” mode. The DNA fragmentation in fruit fy ovarian cells induced by 2G MT EMFs was compared with that induced by 50 Hz magnetic fields (MFs) similar to or much stronger than those of high-voltage power lines or a pulsed electric field (PEF) of similar characteristics with EMFs of atmospheric discharges (lightning) under identical conditions and experimental procedures. Respectively, the degree of chromosomal damage induced by in vitro exposure of HPBLs to 3G/4G MT EMF was compared to that induced by a high caffeine dose (~ 290 times above the permissible single dose for an adult human) administered to blood samples of the same subjects under identical conditions and experimental procedures. In the first case, it was shown that MT EMFs are much more damaging than high-voltage power line MFs or the PEF and more damaging than previous other stressors tested on the same biological system, such as certain cytotoxic chemicals, starvation, and dehydration. In the second case, it was shown that MT EMFs are similar and even more damaging than the above extreme caffeine dose. The combination of this caffeine dose and the 3G/4G MT EMF exposure increased dramatically the number of aberrations in the blood samples of all subjects, suggesting that MT EMF exposure may be significantly more dangerous when combined with other stressors. The above findings allow useful conclusions regarding EMF bioactivity, cell sensitivity, and relevant EMF exposure limits.

Chapter 6: The impacts of Wireless Communication Electromagnetic Fields on human reproductive biology
Miller K, Harrison K, Martin JH, Nixon B, and De Iuliis GN

The domain of reproductive biology underpins our understanding of human fertility and forms an important part of the debate on the safety of wireless communication (WC) electromagnetic fields (EMFs). While studies on the effects of anthropogenic EMFs on reproduction are of clear importance, recent evidence suggests that such studies are well placed to provide much-anticipated mechanistic insights on the health impacts of EMFs. Resolution of the biophysical mechanism(s) of action is one of the most important keys required to unlock scientific progression and enable accurate assessment of health risk. Growing recourse to assisted reproductive technologies (ART) across developed nations has justifiably given rise to concern about our decreasing collective fertility as a species. While this issue is certainly multi-factorial, the rise of anthropogenic EMF exposures and especially those of WC technology has aligned with a simultaneous global decline in male semen quality parameters. This well recognized link to reproductive health clearly underlines the unique sensitivity of our reproductive systems to environmental change and has prompted investigation of the impact of novel environmental insults such as WC EMFs. The current picture of how WC EMFs impact reproduction is not yet completely clear, but the field offers strong evidence of negative impacts on the cells, tissues, and processes that influence fertility. Accordingly, here we summarize the highest quality evidence outlining effects of WC EMFs on reproductive tissues and germ cells, and based on this, we propose a plausible mechanism for the molecular nature of the interaction of WC EMF with our biology. We also highlight some of the controversies in this field, including those pertaining to policy. Against this background, we contend that, in parallel with our advancing research, revising the safety limits of anthropogenic EMF exposures to our population is warranted.

Chapter 7: Effects of Wireless Communication Electromagnetic Fields on human and animal brain activity
Mohammed HS

The wide and increasing use of telecommunication equipment has necessitated the study of its effects on biological systems and, in particular, on brain activity. Due to the electrical nature of communication between neuronal cells in the brain, the effects of anthropogenic electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and corresponding electromagnetic radiation (EMR) on the human and animal brain have become the focus of many studies. Electroencephalography (EEG) as a direct and sensitive tool for monitoring brain functional changes can be implemented to decipher these effects. Pulsation and modulation of the wireless communication (WC) electromagnetic signals at low frequencies produce complex radiation patterns with components in the Radio Frequency (RF)/microwave and the Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) bands. This mixed type of EMFs/EMR we call wireless communication EMFs/EMR (WC EMFs/EMR). Increasing experimental and theoretical evidence emphasizes the crucial role of the ELF signal pulsation/modulation in the effects of WC EMFs/EMR on human and animal EEG, even at intensities well below the officially accepted limits for human exposure. The duration of exposure is an additional important parameter for the induced effects. The vast majority of recorded effects of WC EMFs/EMR on the human/animal brain are not accompanied by any significant heating, and thus, they are categorized as non-thermal effects. This chapter highlights the concepts related to the human and animal EEG and its alterations induced by anthropogenic EMFs and especially WC EMFs/EMR. Effects on wake and sleep human and animal EEG are described. The importance of animal studies is discussed, and the need for methodological standardization in experimental studies is emphasized. Proposed mechanisms for the action of anthropogenic EMFs on brain activity are reviewed. More studies investigating the non-thermal effects of WC EMFs/EMR on the human and animal brain are needed in order to further explore the effects, the interaction mechanisms, and the consequences of anthropogenic EMFs on health and wellbeing.

Chapter 8: Electrohypersensitivity as a worldwide man-made electromagnetic pathology: a review of the medical evidence
Belpomme D and Irigaray P

Much of the controversy over the causes of electro-hypersensitivity (EHS) and multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) lies in the absence of both recognized clinical criteria and objective biomarkers for widely accepted diagnosis. However, there are, presently, sufficient clinical, biological, and radiological data for EHS to be acknowledged as a distinctly well-defined, objectively identified, and characterized neurologic pathological disorder. Therefore, patients who self-report suffering from EHS should be diagnosed and treated on the basis of currently available biological tests and the use of suitable cerebral imaging. Because we have shown that EHS is frequently associated with MCS in EHS patients and that both those individualized clinical entities share a common pathophysiological mechanism for symptom occurrence, it appears that EHS and MCS can be identified as a unique neurologic pathological syndrome, whatever their precise causal origin is. In this review, we distinguish the etiology of EHS itself from the environmental causes that trigger symptoms and subsequent pathophysiological changes after EHS occurrence. Contrary to present scientifically unfounded claims, we indubitably refute the hypothesis of a nocebo effect to account for the genesis of EHS and its presentation in EHS self-reported patients. We also refute the erroneous concept that EHS could be reduced to a vague “functional impairment”. The hypersensitivity that characterizes EHS appears to be a persistent and most often irreversible pathological state, as is also the case for sensitivity to chemicals in MCS-bearing patients. Taking into consideration the WHO-proposed causality criteria, we argue that EHS may, in fact, be causally related to increased exposure to man-made electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and, in a limited number of cases, to marketed environmental chemicals. We, therefore, appeal to all governments and international health institutions and, more particularly, the WHO to urgently consider this growing EHS-associated pandemic plague and to acknowledge EHS as a new real disorder.

Chapter 9: Carcinogenic effects of non-thermal exposure to Wireless Communication Electromagnetic Fields
Yakymenko I and Tsybulin O

In this chapter, we discuss alarming epidemiological and experimental data on carcinogenic effects of long-term non-thermal exposure to man-made electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and corresponding electromagnetic radiation (EMR), mainly from wireless communication (WC) systems, termed as WC EMFs and WC EMR, respectively. Moreover, since all WC EMFs/EMR include Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) components in the form of pulsations and modulation, the chapter also examines corresponding data from purely ELF man-made EMFs. During the past two decades, a number of scientific reports have revealed that, under certain conditions, non-thermal exposure to WC EMFs/ EMR or modulated microwaves (MMWs) can substantially induce cancer progression in humans and animals. The carcinogenic effect of WC EMFs is typically manifested after long-term (usually ≥ 10 years) exposure, e.g., in mobile phone users. Nevertheless, even a year of operation of a powerful base station for mobile telephony (MT) reportedly resulted in a dramatic increase of cancer incidence among the population living nearby. In addition, studies in rodents unveiled a significant increase in carcinogenesis after 17–24 months of MMW exposure both in tumor-prone and intact animals. Data on widely accepted molecular markers of carcinogenesis confirm that exposure to non-thermal levels of MMWs or ELF man-made EMFs can induce tumorigenesis. It is becoming increasingly evident that assessment of biological effects of man-made EMFs/EMR based solely on thermal approach used in recommendations by certain international regulatory agencies, including the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), requires urgent and significant re-evaluation. We conclude that available scientific data strongly point to the need for re-elaboration of the current safety limits for man-made EMF exposures. We also emphasize that the everyday exposure of the population to WC EMFs/EMR should be regulated based on the Precautionary Principle, which implies maximum restriction of the risk factor till new, more unambiguous conclusions can be drawn regarding its safety.

C. Effects on Wildlife and Environment

Chapter 10: Effects of man-made and especially Wireless Communication Electromagnetic Fields on Wild Life
Balmori A

During the past few decades, millions of mobile telephony (MT) base antennas and antennas of other types of wireless communications (WC) have been installed around the world, in cities and in nature, including protected natural areas, in addition to pre-existing antennas (e.g., for television, radio broadcasting, radars, etc.) and high-voltage power lines. Only the aesthetic aspects or urban regulations have been generally considered in this deployment by the responsible authorities, while the biological and environmental impacts of the associated electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and corresponding non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation (EMR) emissions have not been assessed so far. Therefore, the effects on animals (including humans) and plants living around the anthropogenic EMF sources have not been considered. This deficit is particularly concerning because these EMFs/EMR are very different from natural EMFs/EMR, such as light, geomagnetic and geoelectric fields, atmospheric (Schumann) oscillations, or cosmic microwaves, which not only are not dangerous at normal intensities, but, on the contrary, they are vital to the environment and to all forms of life. This chapter reviews the available research on the effects of anthropogenic and especially WC EMFs on wildlife and the natural environment, published mainly during the past 30 years. It includes studies conducted both in the nature and in the laboratory, with vertebrates (mammals, birds, fish, amphibians, and reptiles), invertebrates (mostly insects), plants, and trees. Most of these studies have shown significant detrimental effects of the anthropogenic EMFs on wildlife, at intensities comparable to the current ambient exposure levels, suggesting that we are facing a new environmental pollutant which threatens the health and existence of these species. It is worrying that, despite the accumulating evidence, the people, governments, and even nature conservation organizations are uninformed and unaware of the risks that anthropogenic, and especially WC EMFs pose to the welfare of biodiversity and ultimately to humans.

D. Biophysical and Biochemical Mechanisms of action

Chapter 11: Mechanism of Ion Forced-Oscillation and Voltage-Gated Ion Channel Dysfunction by Polarized and Coherent Electromagnetic Fields
Panagopoulos DJ

Exposure of living organisms to man-made electromagnetic fields (EMFs) causes a variety of adverse biological and health effects including oxidative stress (OS), genetic damage, cell death, and cancer, as is today documented by a great number of indisputable scientific studies. How does this happen? Key signaling molecules in all cells are the mobile ions, the concentrations of which control all cellular functions. The mobile ions move in and out of the cells through ion channels. A most important class of ion channels are the voltage-gated ion channels (VGICs) which open or close by polarized forces on the electric charges of their voltage-sensors generated by changes ≥ 30 mV in the membrane voltage. Polarization, coherence, and existence of Extremely Low Frequencies (ELFs) are common features of all man-made EMFs. Polarized and coherent oscillating EMFs force mobile ions to oscillate in parallel and in phase with them. This coordinated oscillation generates electrical forces on neighboring charges. The forces increase with increasing EMF intensity and decreasing EMF frequency. The oscillating ions close to the voltage-sensors of VGICs generate similar forces on them as those generated by 30 mV changes in the membrane voltage, causing irregular opening and closing of the VGICs. Continuance of such a dysfunction disrupts intracellular ionic concentrations, which determine the cell’s electrochemical balance and homeostasis. Impairment of this balance triggers overproduction of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in cells which create OS and can damage DNA and other critical biomolecules. Since no convincing corresponding non-thermal mechanism exists for Radio Frequency (RF) EMFs, and because all RF EMFs employed in wireless communications (WC) and other applications are necessarily combined with ELF pulsation, modulation, and random variability, it seems that all non-thermal biological effects of man-made EMFs attributed, until now, to RF EMFs are actually due to their ELF components and can be explained by this mechanism.

Chapter 12: Electromagnetic Field-induced dysfunction of Voltage-Gated Ion Channels, Oxidative Stress, DNA damage and related pathologies
Panagopoulos DJ, Yakymenko I, and Chrousos GP

A plethora of studies show that exposure of living organisms to man-made polarized and coherent electromagnetic felds (EMFs), especially in the Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) and the microwave/Radio Frequency (RF) bands, may lead to oxidative stress (OS) and DNA damage. DNA damage is associated with mutations, cell senescence, cell death, infertility, and other pathologies, including cancer. ELF EMF exposures from high-voltage power lines and complex “RF” EMF exposures from wireless communication (WC) antennas/devices have been associated with increased cancer risk. Almost all man-made microwave/RF EMFs, and especially those employed in WC, are combined with ELF components in the form of modulation, pulsation, and random variability. Thus, in addition to polarization/coherence, the existence of ELFs is a common feature of almost all man-made EMFs. Polarized/coherent ELF EMFs are predicted to induce dysfunction of voltage-gated ion channels (VGICs) in cell membranes through the ion forced oscillation mechanism, and this has been verified by many experimental studies. Dysfunction of VGICs disrupts intracellular concentrations of critical ions, such as calcium, sodium, potassium, etc. This condition initiates biochemical processes leading to OS by reactive oxygen species (ROS) overproduction. Such processes include a) increased calcium signaling, leading to nitric oxide (NO•) overproduction by the nitric oxide synthases (NOS) in various locations in the cell, and superoxide anion (O2•−) overproduction in the mitochondria; b) activation of NADPH/NADH oxidase in the plasma membrane, leading to increased production of O2•−; and c) dysfunction of the Na+/K+ pump (ATPase) in the plasma and internal cell membranes, triggering mitochondrial ROS production. At least these processes may result in excessive OS, leading to DNA damage and related diseases, including infertility and cancer. Thus, it seems that there is a plausible explanation for the genetic damage and related effects found to be induced by man-made EMF exposures as reported by many experimental and epidemiological studies.

Excerpts from the book re: 5G

"Today the massive deployment of the New Radio (NR) 5G (fifth generation) MT/WC system around the world by the telecommunications industry, which is expected to further increase considerably the existing ambient EMF levels, has already started and is rolling out, despite serious concerns expressed by scientists (Miller et al. 2018; 2019; Hardell and Nyberg 2020; Kostoff et al. 2020; Levitt et al. 2021)." 

"Recently, because of the highest microwave carrier frequencies (“mm-waves”) of the 5G, certain Russian studies reporting “non-thermal effects of microwave/mm-wave EMFs” came to light. These studies were written in Russian and became known mostly from reviews in English by other Russian scientists. Three such reviews are by Pakhomov et al. (1998), Betskii and Lebedeva (2004), and Belyaev (2005)." 

"At the same time, the massive deployment of the 5G MT/WC system in order to achieve ever increasing data transmission rates and the so-called Internet of Things (IoT) is well underway despite serious concerns expressed by many expert scientists who have asked for a moratorium in 5G deployment (Hardell and Nyberg 2020), as implied by the Precautionary Principle (Harremoes 2013; Read and O'Riordan 2017; Frank 2021). Indeed, the deployment of 5G will require a huge increase in the number of base antennas, combined with potential increases in transmission power/ intensity, and thousands of satellites in the atmosphere to complement the base antennas. Moreover, the increased amount of variable data transmitted by this new WC EMR type make it even more variable in intensity, waveform, frequency, etc., with inclusion of ever more variable ELF pulsations than previous types of MT/WC EMFs (Rappaport et al. 2013; Dahlman et al. 2018). Thus, 5G is expected to significantly increase public exposure and consequent health problems (Panagopoulos 2019; Hardell and Nyberg 2020; Kostoff et al. 2020; Levitt et al. 2021). 

"Strangely, in 2020, the ICNIRP increased the general public exposure limit for WC EMFs (2–6 GHz) averaged over 6 minutes (min) from 1000 to 4000 μW/cm2 (from 1 to 4 mW/cm2) instead of decreasing it (ICNIRP 1998; 2020). Also strange were the technical reports and papers referring to the characteristics of 5G that do not provide any information on the ULF/ELF/VLF components of this new WC EMF type, as if their authors are not aware of their existence (EPRS 2020; 2021; Karipidis et al. 2021). As already mentioned, carrying out studies involving WC EMF exposures without searching the low-frequency components and attributing any observed effects to the RF/ MW carrier can be very misleading. Similarly, reviewing and evaluating other studies by looking only at the RF/MW part of their EMF exposures and ignoring the low-frequency part or not examining whether the exposures are from real-life WC devices/antennas or simulated signals with fxed parameters and, thus, significantly less bioactive, as in EPRS (2020; 2021) (EPRS: European Parliamentary Research Service) and Karipidis et al. (2021), is a flawed methodology. Thus, not only are WC EMFs dangerous to life, but the evaluation of their risks by certain reviews and organizations is flawed as well. In view of the fact that the ULF/ELF/VLF EMFs are actually the most bioactive, the low frequency (ULF/ELF/VLF) pulsations of the most recent generations of WC signals such as the 4G and 5G should be in the forefront of bioelectromagnetic research in order to allow the correct evaluation of their risks." 

"The International Commission for Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) is a private, non-governmental organization (NGO) that sets EMF exposure standards and claims that the only biological effects induced by EMFs are those due to tissue heating (thermal effects) in the case of RF EMFs, and denies any non-thermal effects (ICNIRP 1998; 2020; Hardell and Carlberg 2021). Facts show that only RF exposures with frequencies at the GHz range or higher and intensities greater than 0.1 mW/cm2 may induce tissue heating, usually of the order of 0.1–0.3°C, and, thus, the vast majority of EMF exposures at environmentally existing intensities, mainly due to ELF EMFs alone or combined with RF, are non-thermal (Panagopoulos et al. 2013b). Yet, the thermal effects are expected to become more significant with the higher frequencies of 5G (up to 100 GHz) (Neufeld and Kuster 2018). Even though ICNIRP accepts (only) the thermal effects of RF EMFs, it has recently increased the average 6-minute (min) exposure limit for 2–6 GHz from 1 mW/cm2 to 4 mW/cm2 (ICNIRP 2020). Thus, not even thermal effects are prevented by the ICNIRP limits anymore."

"In the 5G or New Radio (NR) system which is being deployed, the carrier frequencies are extending up to 80–100 GHz with two basic frequency ranges: 1) existing MT bands ≤6 GHz, and 2) 24.25–52.6 GHz with a tendency to increase. Moreover, 5G uses new technologies such as Multiple-Input Multiple-Output (MIMO) for multi-stream transmission and high data rates, and adaptive beam-forming by use of antenna arrays (which can be used to amplify beam intensity – see Section 1.2.4 equations 1.23, 1.24). The 100 Hz and 1000 Hz pulsations (frame, subframe) are retained, and there are synchronization and reference pulsations at ~ 6–200 Hz called Synchronization Signal Blocks (SSB) (Rappaport et al. 2013; Dahlman et al. 2018)."

"5G MT employs higher MW carrier frequencies (called mm-waves) in order to accomplish higher quality of simulations (data transfer). But with higher frequencies, the heating of exposed living tissues increases (Eq. 1.31), while penetration through different materials (e.g., air, buildings, etc.) decreases (Eq. 1.2). In order to overcome the low penetration, the number of antennas must be significantly increased, and the intensity of the emissions as well. Under such conditions, thermal effects in exposed humans cannot be excluded in addition to the already existing non-thermal effects. Studies have theoretically predicted the induction of significant thermal effects (Neufeld and Kuster 2018; Thielens et al. 2018; 2020). These facts further justify the concerns expressed by the scientific community against the installation of 5G (Hardell and Nyberg 2020; Kostoff et al. 2020; Panagopoulos 2020)."

"In a recent review of studies of the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS 2021)(authored by Thielens and reviewed by Vacha and Vian) regarding environmental impacts of 5G, there is no mention of pulsations or any other ELF components, and the only examined frequency band of the radiation is the carrier (MW) frequency. Moreover, the importance of the inherent variability of the real WC exposures in inducing biological/health effects is not even mentioned, and studies are criticized for having used real-life emissions from mobile phones for the exposures, which, as explained, is the only realistic exposure method (Panagopoulos et al. 2015b; 2016; Panagopoulos 2017; 2019a; Leach et al. 2018; Kostoff et al. 2020). Thus, the most important parameters of WC EMFs (low frequency components, variability) were completely ignored...."

"Another recent review of 107 experimental and 31 epidemiological studies with “RF” EMFs above 6 GHz (in order to assess bioactivity of 5G) by members of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency again makes no mention of pulsations or any other ELF components in the 5G or in the examined studies, and no mention whether there is any similarity of the signals produced by generators in the studies with those of the 5G apart from the carrier frequency. Although most of the reviewed studies had reported genotoxic and various other effects, the authors of the review found “no confirmed evidence” of adverse effects on human health and criticized the studies for not being “independently replicated” and for employing “low quality methods of exposure assessment and control” (Karipidis et al. 2021). The same authors also made a “meta-analysis” of the same 107 experimental studies and found that the studies “do not confirm an association between low-level mm-waves and biological effects” (Wood et al. 2021). They also estimated the “effect size” (an arbitrary measure of bioactivity) among studies that reported “continuous wave” and “modulated” “RF” EMFs and found “non-significant difference”. But the “effect size” of the studies reporting modulation was found to be almost double (4.3 ± 1.6) than that of the studies reporting “continuous wave” (2.2 ± 0.6), and it is strange how this difference was reported as “nonsignificant”. Moreover, as explained in the present chapter and in Panagopoulos (2021), it is unlikely that any MW generator does not contain on/off pulsations, even only for energy-saving reasons, as in radars. Even the onset and removal of an EMF exposure alone may produce the greatest effects (Goodman et al. 1995)."

"Novel 5G technology is being rolled out in several densely populated cities, although potential chronic health or environmental impacts have not been evaluated and are not being followed. Higher carrier frequencies (shorter wavelength) associated with 5G do not penetrate the body as deeply as frequencies from older technologies, but the low frequency pulsations do. Moreover, the effects may be systemic (at whole organism level) (Beltzalel et al. 2018; Russell 2018). The range and magnitude of potential impacts of 5G technologies are under-researched, although important biological outcomes have been reported with millimeter wavelength exposure. These include oxidative stress and altered gene expression, effects on skin, and systemic effects such as on immune function (Szmigielski 2013; Yakymenko et al. 2016; Russell, 2018). In vivo studies reporting resonance with human sweat ducts (Beltzalel et al. 2018), acceleration of bacterial and viral replication, and other endpoints indicate the potential for novel as well as more commonly recognized biological impacts of this range of frequencies and highlight the need for research before population-wide continuous exposures. While information on the carrier frequencies of 5G technology are available in the related technical literature, there is no information regarding the lower frequency components (pulsations, modulations) of this new type of WC EMFs/EMR."

"Even if the risk of WC EMR per individual is low, WC EMR is now widely distributed and could become a major public health problem, especially if the planned introduction of 5G proceeds. If 5G is rolled out, we can expect to see an increase in all of the conditions associated with exposure to WC EMR. A moratorium on the roll-out of 5G is essential."

"The 5G system involves even higher carrier frequencies (up to 100 GHz) in order to be able to transmit higher amounts of data per second, and a much denser network of base antennas of potentially increased power and directional beams in order to compensate for the energy scattering loss due to the higher carrier frequency (Sauter 2011; Sesia et al. 2011; Neufeld and Kuster 2018; Agiwal and Jin 2018; Dahlman et al. 2018). A part of the scientific community, including most of those who are experts in the biological and health effects of WC EMFs, has expressed strong objections to 5G installation with concerns of highly increased health risk (McClelland and Jaboin 2018; Miller et al. 2018; 2019; Panagopoulos 2019a; 2019b; Hardell and Nyberg 2020; Hardell and Carlberg 2020; Kostoff et al. 2020)."

"Given the unique exteriorization from the human body, the temperature of the testis is 2°C–3°C lower than rectal temperature, with 35°C considered optimal for spermatogenesis (Saikhun et al. 1998). A review of 5G WC-related EMF studies and expected health effects has highlighted that there is an essential need for more research into local heat impacts on body surfaces, such as the skin and eyes, with improvement to study design necessary for safety assessment (Simkó and Mattsson 2019). The attention to exposed surface area (and not volume) requires further consideration because of the very shallow penetration depth of 5G and millimeter wave* (mmW) carrier frequencies. Although such frequencies have a very shallow penetration depth, contrastingly, associated ELFs (due to pulsation and modulation of the WC EMFs) have considerable tissue penetration depth, calling attention to the accountability of both surface area and volume. Investigation into whether there are any plausible health-related effects associated with the skin is under way (Karipidis et al. 2021) and, while requiring careful corroboration in the scientific community, pronounces the further significance for the potentially vulnerable exteriorized human testes (Miller and Torday 2019). Discussion concerning non-thermal modes of action in human reproductive systems, which constitute the vast majority of recorded effects, is the feature in this chapter and is addressed below; however, possible micro-thermal impacts are clearly not to be neglected, as they form a key part of the debate and must be explicitly considered in any research design in this field."

Sunday, January 1, 2023

5G Wireless Technology: Cutting Through the Hype

See the bottom of this page for links to recent news stories about 5G hype.

The CTIA, the wireless industry trade association, has launched an advertising campaign entitled, "The Global Race to 5G." The ads claim that unless the U.S. wins this "global race" to become the first nation to deploy the fifth generation of wireless technology or 5G, we will not reap the economic benefits of this technology. 

The CTIA claims that "compared to today's 4G networks, 5G will be up to 100x faster, support 100x more devices, and provide a 5x faster response time." Moreover, the association asserts that the nation's wireless industry is prepared to invest $275 billion in 5G which will yield three million new jobs and $500 billion in economic growth. If we win the global race, the "next-generation of wireless will drive $2.7 trillion of new economic benefits to American families and businesses."

The CTIA has denied for decades that there are adverse health effects from exposure to wireless radiation. By establishing a revolving door between its leadership and the FCC's, the CTIA ensures that the federal regulatory agency maintains the inadequate, obsolete radio frequency exposure limits which the FCC adopted in 1996.

The FCC and federal health agencies have been oblivious to the health concerns raised by more than 240 scientists from 44 nations who have published peer-reviewed research on the biologic or health effects of exposure to electromagnetic fields.

More than 400 scientists and medical doctors from over 40 countries signed a declaration demanding a moratorium on the planned increase of cell antennas for 5G deployment in the European Union. Concerns over health effects from higher radiation exposure include potential neurological impacts, infertility, and cancer.

The following excerpts were extracted from a 23-page special report from RCR Wireless that cuts through much of the hype surrounding the deployment of 5G. The excerpts are direct quotes from the report. RCR Wireless is a trade publication that has reported on the wireless industry and wireless technology since 1982.

Transitioning to a 5G World

Kelly Hill, RCR Wireless, Nov 2017

Excerpts from the Report
Hype is certainly high for 5G, given that the industry is still technically in a pre-standard phase and that standalone 5G systems are still some time off.
5G is coming even faster than originally expected. In December, the first official specification from the Third Generation Partnership Project is expected to be released; 5G New Radio will finally make its standardized debut – although like Long Term Evolution, 5G will continue to evolve and be refined in the coming years.
“5G will not replace LTE,” Rysavy Research concluded in an August report for the GSMA. “In most deployments, the two technologies will be tightly integrated and co-exist through at least the late-2020s.”
Although the industry is preparing for 5G, LTE [4G] capabilities will continue to improve in LTE Advanced Pro through the rest of the decade,”  Rysavy wrote .... 5G will eventually play an important role, but it must be timed appropriately so that the jump in capability justifies the new investment.
KT, for example, plans to support two different frequencies from the get-go in its 5G network: 3.5 GHz as an anchor with better propagation, complemented by 28 GHz in dense areas. Given that networks are expected to initially be 4G/5G networks, testing will have to continue to support LTE alongside 5G.
Hurtarte of LitePoint noted that although “millimeter wave” tends to be treated as one category, there are significant differences between the components and frequency planning needed at 28 GHz versus 39 GHz. In addition, although some frequencies are widely agreed upon, there are other frequencies that may get the nod for 5G use: 24 GHz in China, possibly 40-43 Ghz and possibly even above 70 GHz.
There are some major challenges to the success of 5G, which are all interrelated: the move to mmwave, the need for ultra-density, and the question of when the economics of 5G will actually work well enough to take off.
Mmwave [millimeter wave] provides the huge bandwidths that are needed for fast speeds and high capacity, but the higher the frequency, the shorter its range and more susceptible it is to being easily blocked and reflected (thus the need for beamforming in order to focus the energy more tightly). Seasonal foliage, energy efficient glass windows with special coatings, and standard housing materials all present effective barriers to mmwave reaching indoors to customer premise equipment, operators and vendors have found in their field testing.
Denisowski pointed out that fixed wireless is one thing, but moving objects are another. Obstruction, not radiating sources of energy, is likely to be the main cause of interference in 5G systems: vehicles driving back and forth, or even wind farms can scatter microwave radiation.
Density of foliage “plays a big role,” said Thadasina of Samsung, which has been working with a number of carriers on 5G trials. “What we found is that for the mmwave signal, as it penetrated through trees, the thickness of the trees matters. Initially the impedence offered by foliage is linear, but beyond a certain density it is no longer linear … it kills the signal.” Building materials are well-known to play a role in transmission from outdoors to indoors, he added, but the angle of incidence does as well. The difference between 30 degrees to 60 degrees to 90 degrees can create additional impedance, Thadasina said, “some of those things make it challenging in terms of closing the link.” Moisture levels play a role as well, he said ....
Fiber is fuel for 5G, and its prevalence is increasing. SNL Kagan found earlier this year that global fiber residential investment increased sharply in 2016, and that fiber is on track to reach 1 billion subscribers by 2021. Meanwhile, in the U.S., Vertical Systems Group reported that 49.6% of multi-tenant and enterprise buildings had access to fiber last year, compared to only 10% in 2004.

Deloitte said earlier this year that it expects to see $130 billion-$150 billion in “deep fiber” investment in the U.S. over 5-7 years, due to a combination of broadband competition, ensuring 5G readiness, and expanding fiber into new areas.

Murphy of Nokia said that operators should expect that, depending on which frequency they deploy in, they will need 2.5 to 10 times as many sites as they have now. That’s a tall order, especially given that small cell sites in cellular frequencies can take 18 to 24 months to get site approvals – scaling small cells has been hard enough in LTE, with the market moving much more slowly than analysts had predicted or carriers would like.
“It’s going to take a long time,” Einbinder said. “Constructing a cell tower is hard. A micro-cell has a lot of the same issues”: power and fiber and access to a site, which a community may be reluctant to grant – California, for instance, recently rejected a measure passed at the state level that would have streamlined processes for small cells.
... Einbinder thinks that some communities will take initiative and want to be 5G economic centers. While that’s encouraging for operators, it may also mean that 5G coverage maps look very different from the familiar red, blue, yellow and magenta maps indicating nationwide coverage. “The resulting coverage maps might have a lot more to do with [communities] than any economic or technological drivers – it’s going to be driven by local preference.”
While early work estimated that as many as 40 to 50 homes could be covered by a single fixed wireless site, according to Rouault of EXFO, that number has turned out to be around five in testing because of the complexity of beamforming necessary to support multiple homes. “It’s not at the point we would say the verdict is out,” Rouault added. “The technology is proven to work, but to make the business case work, the scale is the problem right now.”
So the biggest question is where a breakthrough is going to happen that becomes the point at which 5G becomes a more attractive investment than LTE. “What can 5G do that other systems can’t? This is where there is no clear answer,” said Hemant Minocha, EVP for device and IoT at TEOCO. There is no 5G requirement for IoT [Internet of Things], he points out, and the business case hasn’t yet been proven out for ultra-low latency (not to  mention that LTE is capable of lower latency than it has achieved to this point in networks).
Key Takeaways:
• The industry is moving quickly toward 5G, with momentum in testing and trials. The first official 5G specification from 3GPP is expected in December, with a protocol-focused release coming in the spring of 2018.
• Many features and architectures in LTE, particularly gigabit LTE, will both underpin future 5G networks and provide lessons learned in making 5G systems work. These include dense fiber deployment, higher-order and massive MIMO, network slicing, virtualization, and mobile edge computing.
• The biggest challenge for 5G lies in a millimeter-wave based RAN, with significant challenges ahead for designing and deploying a workable, optimized and profitable mmwave network on a large scale.
The RCR Wireless report, "Transitioning to a 5G World," can be downloaded at

Related posts

5G Hype: 100+ News Stories (Updated 1/24/2023)

Doug Dawson, Pots and Pans, Jan 24, 2023

An F for the Gs: 5G discontent surfaces for 2023
Ian Scales, Telecom TV, Jan 19, 2023

Is 5G worth it? Consumer hype is over, and carriers worried, says report
Ben Lovejoy, 9 to 5 Mac, Nov 23, 2022
The 5G iPhone SE will be for carriers, not customers: Apple’s latest 5G upgrade is more marketing than mandatory. Chaim Gartenberg, The Verge, Mar 7, 2022

5G Has Been a $100 Billion Whiff So Far: Big telecom providers still haven’t persuaded consumers to embrace the faster system. Scott Moritz & Rob Golum, Bloomberg Businessweek, Mar 3, 2022
Why 5G is ‘less exciting’ for consumers, analyst explains
Craig Moffett, Yahoo Finance, Jan 26, 2022

CCG Consulting, POTs and PANs, Jan 19, 2022

Tara Sonenshine, The Hill, Dec 27, 2021
Matt Kapko, sdx Central, Dec 26, 2021
Andy Boxall, Digital Trends, Dec 25, 2021

Sascha Segan, PC Magazine, Oct 15, 2021

Washington Post, Sep 24, 2021

Barely anyone is using mmWave 5G in the U.S.
Pranob Mehrotra, XDA, July 15, 2021

Ernest Worthman, Above Ground Level, May 17, 2021

Dear wireless carriers: the 5G hype needs to stop
Allison Johnson, The Verge, Apr 29, 2021

Sascha Segan, PC Magazine (UK), Mar 5, 2021

Miguel Coma, Wall Street International, Jan 23, 2021

Sascha Segan, PC Magazine, Dec 22, 2020

The failure of 5G: 5G was supposed to be a revolution. So far in 2020, it’s not even been a great evolution
Vlad-Gabriel Anghel, DCD, Dec 15, 2020

U.S. vs. China in 5G: The Battle Isn’t Even Close: China is leading the way in the size and consistency of its 5G network
Dan Strumpf, Wall Street Journal, Nov 9, 2020

Poor 5G connectivity disappoints South Korean users: Over 560,000 consumers return to 4G as applications for dispute mediation rise
Sotoro Suzuki, Nikkei Asia, Nov 7, 2020

GSMArena, Nov 5, 2020

Study Finds That US 5G Speeds Are Slower Than 14 Other Countries
Jason Cohen, PC, Oct 30, 2020

Doug Dawson, CircleID, Oct 29, 2020

Why the 5G Pushiness? Because $$$. Selling 5G capability is a huge opportunity for phone companies. Be careful.
Shira Ovide, New York Times, Oct 22, 2020

JR Raphael, Computerworld, Oct 22, 2020
Shara Tibken, c|net, Oct 18, 2020

Ignore Phone Companies About 5G. The cellular networks might be life-changing in the future. Not today. 
Shira Ovide, New York Times, Oct 15, 2020

John Xie, The News Lens (Voice of America), Oct 12, 2020

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, Computerworld, Sep 17, 2020

The 5G lie: The network of the future is still slow
Geoffrey A. Fowler, Washington Post, Sep 8, 2020

AT&T’s current 5G is slower than 4G in nearly every city tested by PCMag
Jon Brodkin, Ars Technica, Sep 8,2020
Jon Brodkin, Ars Technica, Jul 15, 2020

Clare Duffy, CNN, May 20, 2020

The 5G revolution has been a big fail so far
Philip Michaels, Toms Guide, May 16, 2020

Verizon’s nationwide 5G will only be a “small” upgrade over 4G at first
Jon Brodkin, Ars Technica, May 13, 2020

Could 5G spell trouble for Android flagships?
J.R. Raphael, Computerworld, May 12, 2020
Mary Cuddehe, Columbia Journalism Review, Spring 2020

The 5G of T-Mobile, Verizon and AT&T all rank badly for different reasons
Linda Hardesty, Fierce Wireless, Mar 3, 2020

Kevin Werbach, CNN, Feb 3, 2020

Karl Bode, TechDirt, Jan 27, 2020

Noah Kulwin, The Outline, Jan 13, 2020

Alex Sherman, Todd Hazelton, CNBC, Jan 9, 2020

Monica Alleven, Fierce Wireless, Jan 2, 2020

Eun-Young Jeong, Wall Street Journal, Dec 31, 2019

Roger Cheng, c|net, Dec 24, 2019
Jon Brodkin, Ars Technica, Sep 6, 2019

Dhara Singh, c|net, Aug 14, 2019

Jeremy Horwitz, Venture Beat, Aug 7, 2019

The Downside of 5G: Overwhelmed Cities, Torn-Up Streets, a Decade Until Completion
Christopher Mims, Wall Street Journal, Jun 29, 2019

Threat Lab, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Jun 26, 2019

Karl Bode,, Jun 14, 2019

Choosing the Wrong Lane in the Race to 5G
Jessica Rosenworcel (FCC Commissioner), Wired, Jun 10, 2019

Wait, why the hell is the ‘race to 5G’ even a race? No one has a good answer to this question.
Nilay Patel, Verge, May 23, 2019
The future of wireless technology holds the promise of total connectivity. But it will also be especially susceptible to cyberattacks and surveillance.
Sue Halpern, The New Yorker, Apr 26, 2019

Millimeter-wave 5G isn’t for widespread coverage, Verizon admits ... 5G's highest speeds will only be for select areas
Jon Brodkin, ars Technica, Apr 23, 2019

5G is still just hype for AT&T and Verizon
Chaim Gartenberg, The Verge, Apr 5, 2019

Verizon 5G Home service too expensive to scale, attracts few users
Jeremy Horwitz, Venture Beat, Mar 22, 2019

What is 5G and will it live up to the hype?
Staff, The Week, Mar 17, 2019

Executives Don’t Believe the Hype Around 5G, According to Accenture Study
Patrick Kulp, Adweek, Mar 1, 2019
Ernesto Falcon, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Feb 11, 2019

Corinne Reichert, ZDNet, Feb 11, 2019
5G can't fix America's broadband problems
Don't expect the new generation of wireless tech to replace fiber.... 
Karl Bode, The Verge, Feb 6, 2019

Apple just endorsed AT&T’s fake 5G E network
Chaim Gartenberg, The Verge, Feb 4, 2019

Verizon and AT&T Jumped the Gun on 5G
Sascha Segan, PC Magazine, Jan 31, 2019

Amir Nasr, Slate, Jan 30, 2019

Emily Jackson, Ottawa Citizen, Jan 24, 2019

Time to move beyond 5G hype
Tom Wheeler, Brookings, Jan 11, 2019

Beware the 5G Hype: Wireless Rivals Fuel Confusion
Drew FitzGerald, Wall Street Journal, Jan 9, 2019

Verizon and T-Mobile bash AT&T over 'fake 5G'
Marguerite Reardon, c|net, Jan 8, 2019
Isaac Mayer, Techspot, Dec 22, 2018

2018 was the year of 5G hype. The 5G reality is yet to come
Brian Fung, Washington Post, Dec 21, 2018

AT&T will put a fake 5G logo on its 4G LTE phones
Jacob Kastrenakes, The Verge, Dec 21, 2018

Troy Wolverton, Business Insider, Dec 14, 2018

Don’t buy a 5G smartphone—at least, not for a while
Ron Amadeo, Ars Technica, Dec 14, 2018

Why 5G Hype is Out of Control This Week
Sam Rutherford, Gizmodo, Dec 7, 2018

The first ‘real world’ 5G test was a dud
Sean Hollister, The Verge, Dec 4, 2018

5G Corporate Grail: Smart cities/dumb people?  
Joyce Nelson. Watershed Sentinel, Nov 5, 2018.

Do we even need 5G at all?
Jeremy Kaplan, Digital Trends, Oct 26, 2018

Why 5G is out of reach for more people than you think
Shara Tibken, c|net, Oct 25, 2018

Volkswagen a winner as EU set to favour wifi over 5G: draft
Foo Yun Chee, Reuters, Oct 19, 2018

The 5G hype cycle is about to run into a hard truth: Subsidies needed!
Strategy Analytics, Business Wire, Oct 18, 2018
Dexter Johnson, IEEE Spectrum, Oct 11, 2018

Experts worry 5G can widen digital divide in cities
Ali Breland, The Hill, Sep 30, 2018

Why 5G will disappoint everyone
Mike Elgan, Computerworld, Sep 29, 2018

Has 5G Hype Outpaced Reality?
Kate Patrick, Government Technology, Sep 28, 2018

Rural America worries it will miss out on 5G
Ali Breland, The Hill, Sep 26, 2018

FCC angers cities and towns with $2 billion giveaway to wireless carriers
Kieren McCarthy, The Register, Sep 19, 2018

The Problem with 5G (PC Magazine censored Dvorak's article and replaced it with another article. The link is to the internet archive.)
John C. Dvorak, PC Magazine, Aug 22, 2018.

Ed Sperling, Semiconductor Engineering. Aug 22, 2018.

Jof Enriquez, RF Globalnet, June 1, 2018

The ‘Race to 5G’ Is Just Mindless Marketing Bullshit
Karl Bode, Motherboard, May 4, 2018

MWC and the 5G Hype Machine Keep on Giving, and Giving and Giving...
Ernest Worthman, AGL Media Group, Apr 19, 2018
Bruce Kushnick, Medium, Mar 8, 2018

The 5G Hype Machine Continues to Mislead
Ernest Worthman, Above Ground Level, Feb 1, 2018

Super-fast 5G wireless is coming this year, but it probably won't be cheap
David Lazarus, Los Angeles Times, Jan 9, 2018

Upgrade to 5G Costs $200 Billion a Year, May Not Be Worth It
Olga Kharif and Scott Moritz, Bloomberg, Dec 18, 2017

Impact of EMF Limits on 5G Network Rollout
Christer Tornevik, ITU Workshop on 5G, EMF and Health, Dec 5, 2017

Microwave Radiation Coming to a Lamppost near You
Merinda Teller, MPH, PhD, Weston A. Price Foundation, Dec 1, 2017

5G Is Not the Answer For Rural Broadband
Larry Thompson and Warren Vande Stadt, Broadband Communities. March/April, 2017

The Next Generation of Wireless -- "5G"-- Is All Hype
Susan Crawford, Wired, Aug 11, 2016