5G and Millimeter Waves: What the Research Actually Shows

Language: en

Between Hysteria and Dismissal: Finding the Evidence

No topic in electromagnetic health has generated more heat and less light than 5G. On one end, social media amplifies claims that 5G towers caused the COVID-19 pandemic, controls minds, or is a depopulation weapon. On the other end, the telecommunications industry and its regulatory allies dismiss all concern as anti-science paranoia, insisting that 5G is “the same as previous generations, just faster.”

Both positions are wrong. The conspiracy theories are baseless. The blanket assurances of safety are unsupported by adequate research.

The honest position — uncomfortable for both camps — is this: 5G represents a significant change in the nature, density, and frequency range of human electromagnetic exposure, and the long-term biological effects of this change have not been adequately studied. The precautionary principle, applied honestly, demands neither panic nor complacency. It demands research, transparency, and prudent exposure reduction while the evidence base develops.

This article examines what is actually known about 5G technology and millimeter wave biology, what is not known, and what a rational approach to this technology looks like from the perspective of consciousness and biological integrity.

What 5G Actually Is

5G (fifth-generation wireless technology) is not a single technology. It is a collection of technologies operating across multiple frequency bands:

Low-Band 5G (600 MHz - 1 GHz)

Sometimes called “broad 5G,” this operates at frequencies similar to 4G LTE. It provides wide coverage and building penetration but only modest speed improvements over 4G. This is the band most widely deployed so far, and its biological profile is essentially identical to 4G — the research on radiofrequency radiation in this frequency range (including the NTP and Ramazzini studies) applies directly.

Mid-Band 5G (1 GHz - 6 GHz)

The “sweet spot” of 5G deployment, offering a balance of coverage, speed, and capacity. The C-band (3.5-4.2 GHz) is the primary mid-band deployment in the United States and most countries. These frequencies are somewhat higher than traditional cellular frequencies but still within the general range of existing wireless technology.

High-Band 5G / Millimeter Waves (24 GHz - 100 GHz)

This is the truly novel element of 5G — the deployment of millimeter wave (mmWave) frequencies that have never been used for widespread public communication before. These frequencies offer extraordinary data speeds (multi-gigabit) but have very short range (a few hundred meters) and poor building penetration. They require a dense network of small cells — mounted on utility poles, buildings, and street furniture — every few hundred feet in coverage areas.

It is the millimeter wave component that raises the most novel biological questions, because it represents a frequency range that has limited biological research and that interacts with the body in fundamentally different ways than lower frequencies.

Millimeter Wave Physics and Biology

How Millimeter Waves Interact with the Body

At frequencies above approximately 10 GHz, the penetration depth of electromagnetic radiation into biological tissue decreases dramatically. While sub-GHz frequencies penetrate deep into the body, millimeter waves (24-100 GHz) are absorbed primarily in the outer layers of the skin — the epidermis and dermis — with penetration depths of typically 0.2-2 mm depending on frequency.

This superficial absorption is the basis for the industry’s safety argument: if the radiation does not penetrate deeply, it cannot affect deep organs like the brain or heart. The argument has a certain logic, but it overlooks several critical considerations:

The skin is not an inert barrier: It is the body’s largest organ, richly supplied with nerve endings, immune cells (Langerhans cells, mast cells), blood and lymph vessels, and sweat glands. Biological effects in the skin can cascade to systemic effects through immune, nervous, and vascular signaling.

Sweat duct resonance: A 2008 paper by Feldman et al. at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem proposed that human sweat ducts function as helical antennae in the millimeter wave range. The coiled structure of eccrine sweat ducts, with dimensions in the sub-millimeter range, may resonantly absorb millimeter wave radiation, concentrating energy in these structures. This theoretical work, published in Physical Review Letters, was based on electromagnetic modeling and has implications that have not been fully explored experimentally.

If sweat ducts do act as resonant antennae, the absorbed energy would be concentrated in structures that contain nerve endings and are connected to the autonomic nervous system. The sweat glands are innervated by sympathetic cholinergic fibers and respond to both thermal and emotional stimuli. Resonant energy absorption in these structures could produce effects disproportionate to the overall energy density of the exposure.

Peripheral nerve effects: The skin contains one of the densest nerve networks in the body. Millimeter wave absorption in the skin exposes these nerves directly. Research by the Soviet/Russian military (which explored millimeter waves therapeutically for decades) documented that low-intensity mmWave exposure produces measurable changes in nerve conduction, pain perception, and immune function — effects mediated through peripheral nerve stimulation rather than thermal heating.

Eye and ear effects: The eyes and ears have thin, superficial structures (cornea, lens, tympanic membrane) that are directly exposed to millimeter waves without the protective depth of tissue that shields internal organs. Limited research suggests that prolonged mmWave exposure may affect these structures.

What the Research Shows

The research base for millimeter wave bioeffects is smaller than for lower frequencies, but not empty. Key findings include:

Russian/Soviet research: The former Soviet Union conducted extensive research on millimeter waves beginning in the 1960s, both for therapeutic applications (mmWave therapy is still practiced in Russia and Ukraine) and for military assessment. This body of research — comprising hundreds of studies, many translated from Russian — documents non-thermal biological effects including immune modulation, altered cell membrane permeability, changes in enzyme activity, and effects on gene expression at power densities far below thermal thresholds.

The therapeutic application is instructive: Russian mmWave therapy uses extremely low power (typically 1-10 mW/cm²) at specific frequencies to treat conditions including wound healing, immune dysfunction, and pain. If mmWaves at these power levels produce therapeutic effects, they produce biological effects — and the claim that mmWaves at communication-relevant power levels are biologically inert becomes difficult to sustain.

Skin cell effects: In vitro studies have documented that mmWave exposure alters gene expression profiles in human skin cells, including upregulation of stress-response genes and changes in membrane permeability. A 2009 study by Habauzit et al. documented changes in gene expression in human skin keratinocytes exposed to 60 GHz mmWaves.

Immune effects: Exposure to 42.2 GHz mmWaves has been shown to affect neutrophil function, including chemiluminescence (a measure of oxidative burst activity) and calcium signaling. These effects were non-thermal — the exposures did not produce measurable tissue heating.

Bacterial effects: Research has demonstrated that mmWave exposure alters bacterial growth rates, antibiotic susceptibility, and gene expression. If mmWaves can alter bacterial biology, the assumption that they cannot alter human cellular biology requires justification.

What the Research Does NOT Show

It is equally important to catalog what the evidence does not support:

No evidence of acute health effects at 5G exposure levels: The power densities to which the public is exposed from 5G installations (typically microwatts per square centimeter at ground level) are far below the levels associated with known acute effects. No credible research links 5G at real-world exposure levels to immediate health effects.

No evidence linking 5G to COVID-19: This conspiracy theory is biologically nonsensical. Viruses are biological entities transmitted through respiratory droplets and fomites. Electromagnetic radiation cannot create, transmit, or amplify a virus.

No evidence of mind control or weaponization: While directed-energy weapons using millimeter waves exist (the Active Denial System, a crowd-control device that produces a painful burning sensation), these operate at power densities millions of times higher than 5G communications equipment.

Limited long-term exposure data: The most important gap in the research is long-term epidemiological data. Since high-band 5G deployment is only a few years old, there are no long-term human exposure studies for mmWave communications. The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

The Infrastructure Change: Small Cells and Densification

Perhaps more significant than the frequency change is the infrastructure change that 5G requires. Millimeter wave deployment necessitates “network densification” — placing small cell antennas every few hundred feet in coverage areas, mounted on utility poles, traffic lights, buildings, and dedicated structures.

This changes the exposure paradigm in important ways:

Closer proximity: Previous cellular infrastructure placed large towers at relatively large distances from most people. Small cells place transmitters at pole-height (20-30 feet) directly adjacent to residences, schools, and workplaces. The proximity increases average exposure levels for nearby occupants.

Higher density: Rather than a few towers per neighborhood, densified 5G may require dozens or hundreds of small cells per neighborhood. The cumulative exposure from this dense network is higher than from previous generations.

Continuous exposure: Small cells transmit continuously (they must maintain network connectivity), not only when a call is in progress. Residents near small cells experience 24/7 exposure.

Reduced choice: With small cells on every block, it becomes impossible for individuals to create distance from transmitters, even in their own homes. This differs fundamentally from personal device exposure, which the individual can control.

Regulatory preemption: In the United States, the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (Section 704) prohibits state and local governments from regulating wireless facilities based on health concerns, as long as the facilities comply with FCC emission standards. The FCC’s emission standards, last updated in 1996, are based exclusively on thermal effects and do not account for non-thermal biological effects. This means that even if residents experience health effects from nearby small cells, they have no regulatory recourse.

The Regulatory Gap

The safety standards for electromagnetic radiation in the United States (FCC) and internationally (ICNIRP) are based on a single criterion: tissue heating. If the radiation does not heat tissue by more than a specified amount (typically 1°C), it is considered safe.

These standards were established in the 1990s, based on research conducted primarily in the 1980s, using exposure paradigms (short-term, high-intensity, thermal endpoints) that do not reflect modern exposure patterns (long-term, low-intensity, chronic). They predate the vast majority of research on non-thermal biological effects.

For millimeter waves specifically, the regulatory gap is even more pronounced:

Limited human exposure data: The safety standards for mmWaves are based largely on extrapolation from lower-frequency research and on thermal modeling, not on direct human exposure studies at 5G-relevant frequencies.

Averaged metrics: SAR (Specific Absorption Rate) — the standard measure of electromagnetic energy absorption — is calculated as an average over tissue volume (typically 1 gram or 10 grams). For mmWaves, which concentrate their energy in the outer millimeters of skin, volume-averaged SAR dramatically underestimates the actual energy density in the absorbing tissue. Recognizing this, ICNIRP has shifted to power density (W/m²) as the primary metric for frequencies above 6 GHz, but the threshold values are still based on thermal considerations alone.

No consideration of modulation: 5G signals use complex modulation schemes (OFDM, beamforming, massive MIMO) that produce electromagnetic waveforms qualitatively different from the simple continuous waves used in most research studies. The biological relevance of modulation characteristics — pulse patterns, data encoding, beam steering — is essentially unstudied.

No consideration of synergistic effects: Safety standards evaluate 5G in isolation, without considering the combined effect of 5G exposure plus WiFi plus Bluetooth plus 4G plus power-line fields plus dirty electricity. No human is exposed to a single electromagnetic signal.

The Precautionary Approach: Neither Panic Nor Denial

The precautionary principle, properly applied, is not a call for technology prohibition. It is a framework for decision-making under uncertainty that prioritizes avoiding potentially irreversible harm.

Applied to 5G, the precautionary principle suggests:

For Regulators

Update safety standards: The thermal-only model is scientifically insufficient. Safety standards should account for documented non-thermal biological effects, including oxidative stress, DNA damage, VGCC activation, and reproductive effects.

Fund independent research: The majority of studies finding no effects of EMF have industry funding. The majority finding effects have independent funding. This funding-effect correlation demands large-scale, independently funded research on 5G mmWave biological effects.

Implement buffer zones: Until long-term safety data is available, maintain minimum distances between small cell installations and homes, schools, hospitals, and childcare facilities.

Require monitoring: Mandate continuous public EMF monitoring near 5G installations, with accessible real-time data.

Protect opt-out rights: Individuals should have the right to limit their own EMF exposure, including the ability to opt out of smart meter installations and to request relocation of small cells near their homes.

For Individuals

Reduce personal device exposure: The greatest EMF exposure from 5G (as with 4G) comes from your own device held against your body — not from towers or small cells. Use speaker phone, wired earbuds, and maintain distance from the device.

Bedroom protection: Shield the bedroom from external 5G signals using EMF shielding paint (on walls facing small cells), shielding curtains, or window film. The bedroom represents 8 hours of continuous exposure during the most biologically vulnerable period.

Support the body’s electromagnetic resilience: Antioxidant support (glutathione, NAC, vitamin C, vitamin E, selenium, polyphenols, melatonin) may buffer the oxidative stress associated with EMF exposure. Grounding/earthing reconnects the body’s electrical system with the Earth’s potential.

Stay informed: Follow independent research (not industry press releases or conspiracy sites). Organizations like the Environmental Health Trust, the BioInitiative Working Group, and Scientists for Wired Technology provide evidence-based information.

Maintain perspective: The electromagnetic exposure from your own WiFi router, cordless phone, and personal devices likely exceeds your exposure from 5G small cells (assuming typical residential distances). Addressing personal device exposure first is both more impactful and more within your control.

The Consciousness Dimension

Every increase in the density and frequency range of the electromagnetic environment adds to the noise floor through which consciousness operates. The biological system — calibrated by evolution to the Earth’s natural electromagnetic environment — must now process an ever-increasing cacophony of artificial signals.

5G, particularly the millimeter wave component, represents the next escalation in this electromagnetic noise:

Higher frequencies: Millimeter waves interact with biological tissue in ways that differ qualitatively from lower frequencies. Skin absorption, sweat duct resonance, and peripheral nerve exposure represent novel interaction modes.

Higher density: Network densification creates a continuous, inescapable electromagnetic bath in urban environments. The concept of an EMF-free zone becomes increasingly impossible.

Higher complexity: 5G’s advanced modulation and beamforming create signal characteristics unprecedented in biological experience. The consciousness system must process these novel signals alongside all the existing electromagnetic noise.

Whether these additions to the electromagnetic environment produce clinically significant health effects in most people remains to be determined. But the precautionary principle suggests that in the absence of long-term safety data, prudence is warranted — particularly for the most vulnerable populations (children, pregnant women, the elderly, and the electrosensitive).

The consciousness that operates through your nervous system does not distinguish between electromagnetic pollution and electromagnetic information. It processes everything in its environment. The question is not whether the additional noise matters, but how much it matters — and whether we are willing to find out the answer after the infrastructure is built and the exposure is universal, or before.

The engineering principle is simple: do not deploy a system-wide upgrade without testing it in the production environment first. The human electromagnetic environment is the production environment. And the upgrade is being deployed at global scale, in real time, on all of us simultaneously.

Proceed with eyes open. That is all the precautionary principle asks.