5G: Microwave News Article Archive (2004 - )

“A Comprehensive Review of 5G NR RF-EMF Exposure Assessment Technologies: Fundamentals, Advancements, Challenges, Niches and Implications,” Environmental Research, November 2024. Sees need for “low-cost measurement devices” and “real-time, fast-sampling solutions to understand the highly irregular temporal variations EMF distribution in next-generation networks.” Open access.

“Biological Effects of EMFs on Insects: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” Reviews on Environmental Health, November 23, 2023. “Biological effects of non-thermal EMF on insects are clearly proven in the laboratory, but only partly in the field, thus the wider ecological implications are still unknown. There is a need for more field studies, but extrapolating from the laboratory ... already warrants increasing the threat level of environmental EMF impact on insects.” A major review with162 references. Open access.

The precautionary principle should be applied to public exposures to RF radiation. So say four senior academic scientists —including the former director of the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP)— in a strongly worded appeal, published today.

Writing in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Research, Paul Ben Ishai, Linda Birnbaum, Devra Davis and Hugh Taylor point to a “plethora of both experimental and epidemiological evidence establishing a causal relationship between EMF and cancer and other adverse health effects.”

My wife and I spent a few days in Basel, Switzerland, earlier this month. One afternoon as we were walking through town, I spotted a carefully crafted warning on the side of an otherwise unremarkable building. “The Odious Smell of Truth,” it called out.

With a little Googling, I learned that the expression comes from the title of an exhibition held at the Royal College of Art in London in the spring of 2017. The show was organized by Peter Kennard, a noted British political artist, and his students. They called themselves the Rage Collective. What does it mean, they wanted to know, to tell the truth in a world of false news and social media misinformation.

As it happens, a few days later, I received an email from Peter Hensinger, the scientific director of Diagnose:Funk, with a commentary he had just published which was sharply critical of Martin Röösli, an associate professor at the University of Basel.

“Health Safety Guidelines and 5G Wireless Radiation” by James Lin, IEEE Microwave Magazine, January 2022. “Some of the updated [IEEE and ICNIRP] safety recommendations are marginal, questionable, and lack scientific justification from the perspective of safety protection.”

“Environmental Impacts of 5G: A Literature Review of Effects of RF EM Exposure of Non-Human Vertebrates, Invertebrates and Plants,” by Arno Thielens of the University of Ghent for the European Parliament, June 2021.

“Electromagnetic Fields, 5G and Health: What About the Precautionary Principle?” Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health, January 19, 2021, by John William Frank of the University of Edinburgh. “After reviewing the evidence cited above, the writer, an experienced physician-epidemiologist, is convinced that RF-EMFs may well have serious human health effects."

“Human EMF Exposure in 5G at 28 GHz,” IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine, Nov/Dec 2020. Compares skin penetration and SARs for 3G, 4G and 5G phone exposures.

“Absorption of 5G Radiation in Brain Tissue as a Function of Frequency, Power and Time,” IEEE Access, June 12 2020, updated July 2, 2020.

”We examine the beam penetration, absorption and thermal diffusion at representative 4G and 5G frequencies and show that the RF heating increases rapidly with frequency due to decreasing RF source wavelength and increasing power density with the same incident power and exposure time.”