Full study here:
Adverse health effects of 5G mobile networking technology under real-life conditions
Ronald N. Kostoffa,*, Paul Herouxb, Michael Aschnerc, Aristides Tsatsakis
Abstract
This article identifies adverse effects of non-ionizing non-visible radiation (hereafter called wireless radiation)reported in the premier biomedical literature. It emphasizes that most of the laboratory experiments conducted to date are not designed to identify the more severe adverse effects reflective of the real-life operating environment in which wireless radiation systems operate. Many experiments do not include pulsing and modulation of the carrier signal. The vast majority do not account for synergistic adverse effects of other toxic stimuli (such as chemical and biological) acting in concert with the wireless radiation. This article also presents evidence that the nascent 5G mobile networking technology will affect not only the skin and eyes, as commonly believed, but will have adverse systemic effects as well.
Introduction
Wireless communications have been expanding globally at an exponential rate. The latest imbedded version of mobile networking technology is called 4G (fourth generation), and the next version (called 5G- fifth generation) is in the early implementation stage. Neither 4G nor 5G have been tested for safety in credible real-life scenarios.Alarmingly, many of the studies conducted in more benign environ-ments show harmful effects from this radiation. The present article overviews the medical and biological studies that have been performed to date relative to effects from wireless radiation, and shows why these studies are deficient relative to safety. However, even in the absence of the missing real-life components such as toxic chemicals and biotoxins (which tend to exacerbate the adverse effects of the wireless radiation),the literature shows there is much valid reason for concern about po-tential adverse health effects from both 4G and 5G technology. The studies on wireless radiation health effects reported in the literature should be viewed as extremely conservative, substantially under-estimating the adverse impacts of this new technology