(Mercola)—A groundbreaking study has provided compelling evidence that radiation from cellphones can damage cells in your cheeks.¹ Unlike previous research relying on questionnaires, this intervention trial carefully controlled exposure conditions.

Participants used specially designed headsets that delivered precise doses of Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) 3G signal radiation to one cheek for two hours daily over five days. Researchers then examined cheek cells before exposure and three weeks after, looking for various signs of damage.

The results are concerning — while no chromosomal damage was observed, there were clear indications of cell death and disrupted cell division, especially at higher radiation levels. This suggests that pressing a phone against your cheek for extended periods could be harming the delicate tissues inside your mouth.

The study’s controlled nature and use of DNA-specific staining techniques lend significant weight to its findings, addressing limitations of earlier research.

Cellphone Radiation Led to Acute Cell Death and Disrupted Cell Division

The study revealed two primary effects of cellphone radiation on cheek cells. First, there was a significant increase in karyorrhectic cells — those showing fragmented nuclei indicative of cell death. This effect was dose-dependent, with a 57% increase observed in the high-exposure group.²

Additionally, researchers noted more cells with condensed chromatin on the directly exposed side, another sign of impending cell death. Second, the number of binucleated cells increased by 28% after exposure, pointing to disrupted cell division. These binucleated cells occur when the final stage of cell division (cytokinesis) fails to complete properly. Both findings suggest that cellphone radiation interferes with normal cellular processes in your cheek tissue.

While your body can often replace damaged cells, frequent exposure could overwhelm these repair mechanisms. These acute effects were observed after just one week of controlled exposure, raising questions about the long-term impact of regular cellphone use directly against your face.

Mechanisms of Cellular Harm

According to the study, the observed cell death and division abnormalities could result from several mechanisms.³ Radiation may interfere with your cells’ cytoskeleton, which is the internal scaffolding crucial for proper division. It might also activate certain cellular pathways, like p38 MAPK, which can trigger cell death processes.

Additionally, the radiation could potentially cause oxidative stress or inflammatory responses in the tissue. These effects, over time, might contribute to more serious health concerns. It’s important to note that while this study used 3G signals, newer technologies like 5G operate at different frequencies and may have distinct damaging biological effects.

While the researchers emphasized that their findings don’t directly prove cancer risk, they do demonstrate clear cellular stress from cellphone radiation⁴ — a significant cause for caution in how you use your device.

Long-Term Cellphone Use Increases Tumor Risk by 60%

While short-term cell phone use may not show clear dangers, long-term and heavy use paints a concerning picture. A systematic review and meta-analysis revealed that using a cellphone for over 1,000 cumulative hours in your lifetime — equivalent to just 17 minutes per day over 10 years — increased tumor risk by a striking 60%.⁵

The risk also increased with longer latency periods between first use and tumor diagnosis. For latency of 10 or more years, research showed a 62% increased tumor risk.⁶ These results suggest that the dangers of cellphone radiation may take years to manifest, making it crucial to limit your exposure now.

While some of the studies included in the meta-analysis had conflicting results, when analyzing only high-quality studies across all groups, a marginally significant increased tumor risk emerged. This underscores the importance of considering study design and potential biases when interpreting research on cellphone safety.

As a consumer, you should be aware that industry-funded studies may downplay risks, while independent research often reveals more cause for concern. Always look for high-quality, unbiased sources when evaluating the safety of your cellphone use.

Given the findings, consider using speakerphone or a wired headset to keep the phone away from your head, and be especially mindful of children’s use, as their developing bodies may be more vulnerable to these effects.

Beyond Brain Tumors: A Wider Range of Health Concerns

While much of the focus has been on brain tumors, this meta-analysis included studies on a variety of tumor types.⁷ Although not all results were statistically significant, increased risks were observed for malignant brain tumors, head and neck cancers, and other tumor types in some analyses. This suggests that cellphone radiation’s effects may not be limited to the brain.

The study also touches on potential biological mechanisms beyond simple heating effects, including oxidative DNA damage and alterations in protein structure and expression. These findings align with a growing body of research indicating that non-ionizing radiation from cellphones may have widespread biological effects.

For instance, a 2023 study noted that men who used their cellphones more than 20 times a day had significantly lower sperm counts compared to men who only used their phones once a week or less. In the case of women, electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure can increase the risk of miscarriage.⁸

Further, continuous exposure to radiofrequency radiation (RFR) from cellphones operating at 2115 MHz for eight hours was found to have detrimental effects on the brain.⁹ This exposure led to increased lipid peroxidation, formation of carbon-centered lipid radicals and damage to single-strand DNA. As a result, researchers observed reduced neurogenesis (the formation of new neurons) in the hippocampus and neuronal degeneration in the dentate gyrus.

What this means is that prolonged cellphone radiation exposure may have several negative impacts on cognitive function and mental health. Potential consequences include:¹⁰

1. Impaired cognitive abilities
2. Changes in behavior
3. Disrupted mood regulation
4. Increased risk of neurodegenerative disorders (due to oxidative stress in neurons)
5. Higher likelihood of developing psychiatric conditions, particularly anxiety and depression

Chromosomal Aberrations: A Smoking Gun for Cell Tower Risks

Research has also uncovered a troubling link between living near cellphone towers and genetic damage. A study in Germany found that people residing close to cellphone base stations had significantly higher rates of chromosomal aberrations in their blood cells compared to those living farther away.¹¹

These aberrations included dicentric chromosomes, chromatid gaps and DNA fragments — all indicators of genetic instability that can increase cancer risk over time. The closer people lived to cell towers, the more chromosomal damage was observed.¹²

This provides compelling biological evidence to support previous ecological studies that found increased cancer rates near cell towers. Living in proximity to cell towers for extended periods may pose serious long-term health risks, even at radiation levels well below current safety limits.

Living Near a Cell Tower Linked to Oxidative Stress and DNA Lesions

The study also examined other markers of cellular damage from cell tower radiation. While not statistically significant, there were trends toward increased oxidative stress and DNA lesions in the exposed group.¹³ This aligns with previous research showing non-thermal effects of radiofrequency radiation, including the production of harmful free radicals.

Interestingly, the study didn’t find evidence of increased DNA double-strand breaks or micronuclei formation in the exposed group. This could indicate that at lower exposure levels, your body’s DNA repair mechanisms may be able to handle some of the damage.

However, the accumulation of chromosomal aberrations suggests these repair processes become overwhelmed over time with chronic exposure. The findings highlight the complex biological effects of long-term, low-level radiofrequency radiation exposure and the need for more research on how it impacts cellular function over extended periods.

Implications for Current Safety Standards

The chromosomal damage observed in this study occurred at radiofrequency (RF) exposure levels well below current safety limits. When researchers calculated an equivalent ionizing radiation dose based on the chromosomal aberrations, they found it far exceeded the yearly public exposure limit for ionizing radiation.

As such, current RF exposure guidelines may be inadequate to protect against long-term genetic damage. The study also found no threshold effect — chromosomal aberrations increased in correlation with cell tower signal strength, calling into question the assumption that there is a safe level of RF exposure below which no biological effects occur.

This adds to the growing body of evidence that non-thermal biological effects need to be considered when setting RF exposure limits. Further, there’s an urgent need for more research on chronic, low-level RF exposure to ensure that rapidly expanding wireless networks are not putting public health at risk.

Tips for Minimizing Your EMF Exposure

Exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields from cellphones and other sources poses a substantial health risk that requires attention if you’re prioritizing your well-being. To address this issue, consider implementing the following strategies. These measures can help decrease your EMF exposure and lessen the harmful effects of these unavoidable exposures:

• Identify major sources of EMF, such as your cellphone, cordless phones, Wi-Fi routers, Bluetooth headsets and other Bluetooth-equipped items, wireless mice, keyboards, smart thermostats, baby monitors, smart meters and the microwave in your kitchen. Ideally, address each source and determine how you can best limit their use.
• Barring a life-threatening emergency, children should not use a cellphone or a wireless device of any type. Children are far more vulnerable to cellphone radiation than adults due to having thinner skull bones.
• Connect your desktop computer to the internet via a wired Ethernet connection and be sure to put your desktop in airplane mode. Also avoid wireless keyboards, trackballs, mice, game systems, printers and portable house phones. Opt for the wired versions.
• If you must use Wi-Fi, shut it off when not in use, especially at night when you’re sleeping. Ideally, work toward hardwiring your house so you can eliminate Wi-Fi altogether. If you have a notebook without any Ethernet ports, a USB Ethernet adapter will allow you to connect to the internet with a wired connection.
• Avoid using wireless chargers for your cellphone, as they too will increase EMFs throughout your home. Wireless charging is also far less energy efficient than using a dongle attached to a power plug, as it draws continuous power (and emits EMF) whether you’re using it or not.
• Shut off the electricity to your bedroom at night. This typically works to reduce electrical fields from the wires in your wall unless there is an adjoining room next to your bedroom. If that is the case, you will need to use a meter to determine if you also need to turn off power in the adjacent room.
• Use a battery-powered alarm clock, ideally one without any light.
• If you still use a microwave oven, consider replacing it with a steam convection oven, which will heat your food as quickly and far more safely.
• Avoid using “smart” appliances and thermostats that depend on wireless signaling. This includes all “smart” TVs. They are called smart because they emit a Wi-Fi signal and, unlike your computer, you cannot shut the Wi-Fi signal off. Consider using a large computer monitor as your TV instead, as they don’t emit Wi-Fi.
• Refuse a smart meter on your home as long as you can, or add a shield to an existing smart meter, some of which have been shown to reduce radiation by 98% to 99%.
• Consider moving your baby’s bed into your room instead of using a wireless baby monitor. Alternatively, use a hard-wired monitor.
• Replace CFL bulbs with incandescent bulbs. Ideally remove all fluorescent lights from your house. Not only do they emit unhealthy light, but more importantly, they will actually transfer current to your body just being close to the bulbs.
• Avoid carrying your cellphone on your body unless in airplane mode and never sleep with it in your bedroom unless it is in airplane mode. Even in airplane mode it can emit signals, which is why I put my phone in a Faraday bag.14
• When using your cellphone, use the speaker phone and hold the phone at least 3 feet away from you. Seek to radically decrease your time on the cellphone. Instead, use VoIP software phones that you can use while connected to the internet via a wired connection.
• Avoid using your cellphone and other electronic devices at least an hour (preferably several) before bed, as the blue light from the screen and EMFs both inhibit melatonin production.15 Research also clearly shows that heavy computer and cellphone users are more prone to insomnia.16
• The effects of EMFs are reduced by calcium-channel blockers, so make sure you’re getting enough magnesium. Most people are deficient in magnesium, which will worsen the impact of EMFs. As previously noted by EMF expert Dr. Martin Pall:
• “When you’re deficient in magnesium, you get excessive activity of the VGCCs. You also get excessive calcium influx through the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor, caused by magnesium deficiency, which is also problematic, so it’s important to allay that deficiency.”
• Pall has also published a paper17 suggesting that raising your level of Nrf2 may help ameliorate EMF damage. One simple way to activate Nrf2 is to consume Nrf2-boosting food compounds. Examples include sulforaphane-containing cruciferous vegetables, foods high in phenolic antioxidants, carotenoids (especially lycopene), sulfur compounds from allum vegetables, isothiocyanates from the cabbage group, and terpenoid-rich foods.
• Molecular hydrogen has been shown to target free radicals produced in response to radiation, such as peroxynitrites. Studies have shown molecular hydrogen can mitigate about 80% of this damage.18
• Molecular hydrogen will also activate Nrf2, a biological hormetic that upregulates superoxide dismutase, catalase and all the other beneficial intercellular antioxidants. This in turn lowers inflammation, improves your mitochondrial function and stimulates mitochondrial biogenesis.

SOURCES and RESOURCES

• ¹ Environmental Research June 15, 2024, Volume 251, Part 1, 118634
• ^2, 3, 4 Environmental Research June 15, 2024, Volume 251, Part 1, 118634, Results
• ^5, 6, 7 International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2020, 17(21), 8079; doi: 10.3390/ijerph17218079
• ⁸ Malays J Med Sci. 2023 Oct; 30(5): 70–80, Abstract
• ^9, 10 Neurotoxicology January 2023; 94: 45-58
• ^11, 12, 13 Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety July 1, 2024, Volume 279, 116486
• ¹⁴ Amazon.com Mission Darkness Faraday Bag for Phones
• ¹⁵ Brain Commun. 2024 May 17;6(3):fcae173. doi: 10.1093/braincomms/fcae173. eCollection 2024
• ¹⁶ Asian J Psychiatr. 2024 Aug:98:104124. doi: 10.1016/j.ajp.2024.104124. Epub 2024 Jun 21
• ¹⁷ Sheng Li Xue Bao. 2015 Feb 25;67(1):1-18
• ¹⁸ Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy October 2020, Volume 130, 110589

The study authors — including Michael Kundi, Ph.D., with the Center for Public Health at the Medical University of Vienna, Austria — said they found “clear evidence for induction of acute toxicity and disturbance of the cell cycle (cytokinesis) as a consequence of exposure” to radiofrequency (RF) radiation levels used by 3G smartphones.

“These processes may possibly lead to the formation of neoplastic cells,” they wrote in their report, published in Environmental Research.

Malignant neoplasms are cancerous tumors, according to the Cleveland Clinic.

Kundi and his co-authors said their study — which used people, not mice — was the “first controlled human intervention trial concerning cytotoxic/genotoxic effects of mobile phone radiation.”

Dr. Rob Brown, a diagnostic radiologist with more than 30 years of experience, told The Defender that the cell damage found in the study “is significant and should be looked at with great concern.”

Brown is also the vice president of scientific research and clinical affairs for Environmental Health Trust (EHT), a nonprofit research and education group focused on the effects of wireless radiation.

He said the study is “particularly valuable” because it is an in-vivo study. “Most research to date exploring the biological effects of electromagnetic fields and radiofrequency radiation has been performed on in-vitro cell cultures, plants and animal models,” Brown said. “Because of this, they have been easier to discount by industry and policymakers.”

Kundi and his co-authors undertook their study because prior research suggests that cellphone radiation “may cause cancer in humans but the underlying molecular mechanisms are currently not known.”

Their results shed light on the molecular mechanisms that may be involved.

For instance, they found that 3G cellphone radiation didn’t cause chromosomal damage, but it did cause the formation of nuclear anomalies that are indicative of “acute cytotoxic effects” and “disturbed cytokinesis.”

Devra Davis, Ph.D., MPH — EHT’s founder and president emerita whose prior research cited “substantial scientific evidence” linking cellphone radiation to cancer — said that just because authors of the Austrian study didn’t find chromosomal damage in the exposed cells shouldn’t be interpreted as suggesting that cancer won’t develop.

“In fact, chromosomal damage is not a necessary precondition for carcinogenesis,” Davis told The Defender. “Carcinogenesis can occur without mutagenesis,” she said, “Factors contributing to cancer include damage to rates of cellular signaling and repair such as were found in this study.”

She said the study — which she called “well-designed” — added to prior studies showing harms from RF radiation by elucidating “additional reasons why phones should not be used close to the head or body.”

Participants wore RF radiation headsets mimicking cellphone radiation exposure

For the study, the authors randomly assigned 41 participants, whose average age was 29, to be in a high RF radiation exposure group — designed to simulate holding a cellphone using 3G next to their head — or a low RF radiation group, ostensibly designed to mimic other real-world exposures to RF radiation.

Participants wore a headset that emitted either high- or low-level RF radiation on one side of the head for two hours on five consecutive days.

The study authors collected buccal smear samples to examine the cells inside both cheeks just before and three weeks after the participants wore the RF radiation headsets.

The researchers also asked the participants to use hands-free devices three weeks before, during and three weeks after the intervention, to minimize other possible cellphone RF radiation to the cheek.

The participants recorded in a journal any potential confounding factors such as gingival bleeding, eating a spicy meal or visiting the dentist during the study timeframe. The journals showed such confounding factors were very rare or not present.

Through scientific analysis of the buccal samples, the researchers found that the cells from the cheeks of participants in the high RF radiation group showed “a significant increase of binucleated cells” — cells that contain two nuclei — “which are formed as a consequence of disturbed cell divisions, and of karyolitic cells, which are indicative for cell death.”

“No such effects were seen in cells from the less exposed side,” they said.

Their analysis revealed increased chromatin fragmentation in the cells, which prior research associated with two forms of cell death: apoptosis and necrosis.

“Both forms of cell death are preceded by condensation of chromatin,” they explained. “Notably in the present study we found also an increase of CC,” or condensed chromatin.

Brown said the findings provide “strong evidence that at least some frequencies emitted by the cellular phone passed through the entire thickness of the cheek’s soft tissue (typically 1 centimeter in thickness or more) to affect the sampled cells.”

He added, “A similar depth of penetration and perhaps even greater should therefore be expected in all parts of the body in which a cellphone may make contact.”

Many young people use a cellphone for more than 2 hours a day

The study authors noted that a limitation of their study was that the participants wore the RF radiation headset for only two hours during each exposure session.

Davis pointed this out, too. “The exposure times used in this study appear much less than those reported in surveys of phone use in many sections of the globe and in younger age groups.”

“For instance,” she said, “Gen Z users report about 6 or more hours daily use of smartphones.”

U.S. Americans on average spend 3 hours and 39 minutes a day on their smartphones, reported ExplodingTopics.com on June 4.

It’s difficult to accurately determine how many of those hours are spent with the phone held close to the head, Davis said.

The National Toxicology Program (NTP) has no plans to further study the effects of cellphone radiofrequency radiation (RFR) on human health — even though the program’s own $30 million study that took about 10 years to complete in 2018 reported evidence of cancer and DNA damage.

The NTP said in an updated January 2024 fact sheet that it was abandoning further investigation because “the research was technically challenging and more resource-intensive than expected.”

For decades, the NTP has been the premier governmental testing program for pharmaceuticals, chemicals and radiation, according to Devra Davis, Ph.D., MPH, a toxicologist and epidemiologist who served on the board of scientific counselors for the NTP when it was launched in the 1980s.

Commenting on the news, Davis said, “It is the ultimate arrogance and folly to stop doing research on this major growing environmental pollutant, precisely when we have ample evidence of harm.”

Davis has authored more than 200 peer-reviewed publications in books and journals, ranging from The Lancet to the Journal of the American Medical Association.

In February 2023, she and her colleagues published a review of more than 200 studies that linked wireless radiation to negative biological effects including oxidative stress and DNA damage, cardiomyopathy, carcinogenicity, sperm damage, memory damage and other neurological effects.

They will soon publish a “major new article” in Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development journal about “new science” on RFR and call for precaution, she said.

Davis — who also is the founding director of the Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology of the U.S. National Research Council at the National Academy of Sciences and the founder and president of Environmental Health Trust — called out the U.S. government for failing to ensure that wireless radiation is safe:

“The government’s decision to stop funding research on cellphone radiation is consistent with the Chinese proverb ‘If you don’t want to know, don’t ask.’

“The US government has a variation of that in the policy of, ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ If you don’t want to know whether cell tower radiation is having a biological impact, stop doing the research!”

Miriam Eckenfels-Garcia, director of Children’s Health Defense’s (CHD) Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) and Wireless program, told The Defender:

“Discontinuing government-funded research because it is ‘technically challenging’ and ‘resource-intensive’ is not what we expect from government agencies that are supposed to protect people from the harms of big industry.

“This research is important so that people can make informed decisions when it comes to the use of technology.”

W. Scott McCollough, lead litigator for CHD’s EMR cases, agreed. “I am concerned that the absence of evidence will be contorted into a claim of evidence of absence.”

As of early last year, the NTP was still conducting RFR research. A February 2023 fact sheet said scientists had “overcome several technical issues” and developed a better system for exposing animals to RFR for their studies.

NTP said researchers were “now making progress” on four research goals:

• Determining the impact of RFR exposure on behavior and stress.
• Conducting physiological monitoring, including evaluation of heart rate.
• Investigating whether RFR induces heating.
• Further evaluating whether RFR exposure causes DNA damage.

In its January 2024 fact sheet, the NTP reported the researchers had “tested the new exposure system … in vivo rodent studies” and that their research was “complete.”

The NTP did not say whether the researchers had achieved those four research goals and, if so, what the results were. It did, however, make clear that its previous studies — which used 2G and 3G cellphones — “do not apply” to 4G or 5G technologies.

The Defender reached out to NTP’s press office for clarification about why the new fact sheet appears to contradict the NTP website (updated Jan. 8, 2024) on cellphone radiation research which says NTP still has “current research efforts,” however NTP did not respond by our publication deadline.

The NTP’s discontinuation of its RFR research suggests the U.S. government has no intention of studying the possible biological effects of 5G.

Meanwhile, researchers such as Davis continue to say there is reason for concern. Davis pointed out that infertility clinics ask men about their wireless devices and cellphone habits:

“They tell them to take these phones off their bodies and out of their pockets because there is evidence … where the greater the exposure, the lower the sperm count, and the poorer the sperm quality.

“This has been repeatedly shown in studies with human sperm done under controlled conditions, as well as cross-sectional studies.”

“In fact,” she added, “whether the government stops doing the research or not, there is a massive study underway because we have billions of people being exposed to ever-increasing levels of wireless radiation throughout the world. Millions of American children are exposed every day in classrooms.”

“The only problem is there is no control group anymore, which will make it difficult, but not impossible, to discern the impacts of wireless radiation,” Davis said.

What NTP’s 2018 study found

As The Defender previously reported, NTP researchers in 2018 concluded there was “clear evidence” that male rats exposed to high levels of RF similar to those emitted by 2G and 3G cellphones developed cancerous heart tumors, and “some evidence” of tumors in the brain and adrenal gland of exposed male rats.

Davis said NTP’s conclusions were consistent with and corroborated dozens of other studies. “It wasn’t like it [the NTP study] was a one-off study,” she said.

Once the word got out that the findings of the NTP study were positive — meaning the government researchers had found an association between cellphone radiation and the growth of cancerous tumors — the telecommunication industry “started its tactics” to suppress the findings, Davis said.

Davis has been researching those tactics for more than a decade. She is the author of “Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation, What the Industry Is Doing to Hide It, and How to Protect Your Family.”

Instead of the NTP study report being released in 2016, when it was first ready, she said, the telecom industry exerted pressure to subject the study’s conclusions to an unprecedented level of scrutiny.

“When the first drafts began to circulate internally, it was elevated for a peer review unlike any that has ever been conducted in the history of the entire program — and I can say that with great certainty. No other compound or substance [studied by the NTP] has ever been subject to this level of peer review,” Davis said.

A panel of external scientific experts convened for a three-day review of the study and its conclusions in March 2018.

However, rather than downplaying the study’s conclusions, the experts concluded that the scientific evidence in the study was so strong they recommended the NTP reclassify some of its conclusions from “some evidence” to “clear evidence” of carcinogenic activity.

To date, more than 250 scientists — who together have published more than 2,000 papers and letters on the biologic and health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produced by wireless devices, including cellphones — signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal, which calls for health warnings and stronger exposure limits.

This article was originally published by The Defender — Children’s Health Defense’s News & Views Website under Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Please consider subscribing to The Defender or donating to Children’s Health Defense.

The peer-reviewed article was published in the journal Annals of Clinical and Medical Case Reports.

The researchers urged the authorities to listen to other experts from the RF scientific community by establishing a “more stringent regulatory framework” on RF radiation and postponing the rollout of 5G technologies, along with smart meters and 5G cell towers, until “qualified scientists independent of industry” have had enough time to thoroughly review the risks of the technology.

It’s time for an “ethical discussion” on 5G

Mona Nilsson, the lead author of the article and managing director of the Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation, described the situation as “absurd.”

While the first two studies published on 5G’s effects on humans and animals reported serious negative side effects, government authorities and telecom companies kept putting up 5G cell towers and smart meters near people’s homes.

Dr. Lennart Hardell, a co-author of the article and a respected scientist on cancer risks from radiation, warned that it is time to “have an ethical discussion” about 5G and RF radiation. Hardell has also written over 100 papers on non-ionizing radiation.

Hardell questioned what kind of society the country has, where the government willingly exposes citizens to hazardous pollution in their own homes without any chance of escape.

From an ethical point of view, this is a “very problematic societal situation.” Despite the growing body of research on 5G and its adverse effects on human health, the government continues to ignore the data.

Hardell, Nilsson and their co-authors are leaders of independent organizations in Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden that study RF radiation.

The research team reported that the first study on 5G’s adverse effects revealed how people experienced different symptoms, such as:

• Concentration problems
• Confusion
• Dizziness
• Fatigue
• Heart and lung symptoms
• Heart palpitations
• Impaired short-term memory
• Severe sleep disturbances
• Skin complaints
• Tendency toward depression
• Tinnitus

Reports showed that people experienced these negative symptoms only days after a 5G cell tower was installed above their apartments.

Data from the second 5G study revealed that rats exposed to 5G had an increased incidence of damage to neurons and increased oxidative stress in the brain. (Related: 5G rollout must be stopped to avoid widespread exposure to EMF and RF radiation.)

The adverse effects observed in these animal subjects could eventually led to degenerative brain diseases, such as dementia, Alzheimer’s and other neurological diseases, warned the researchers.

If you are worried that you are at risk of developing Alzheimer’s, making lifestyle changes like following a balanced diet can help. But no matter how much you exercise to maintain a healthy weight, the risk will still be there if you live near 5G cell towers.

Nilsson added that other earlier studies prove the adverse effects of RF radiation on the brain and nervous system.

A compilation by Henry Lai, professor emeritus of bioengineering at the University of Washington, showed that at least 244 studies between 2007 and 2022 have proven the negative neurological effects of RF radiation, said Nilsson.

She added that despite the glut of scientific research and researchers clamoring to be heard, nothing is being done to ensure public health because “those institutions that have influenced the authorities … are captured by the industry.”

Hardell and Rainer Nyberg, co-author and a professor emeritus of education and welfare studies at Abo Akademi University in Finland, launched the 5G Appeal in 2017.

The appeal encouraged policymakers to halt 5G deployment because of serious human health consequences. If enforced, the appeal will give researchers with no ties to the industry enough time to investigate any potential risks.

As of Jan. 10, 430 medical doctors and scientists from across the globe have signed the 5G Appeal.

Authorities continue to ignore evidence of health risks

The research team emphasized that even though there is an increasing number of scientific evidence of many harmful effects, authorities “ignore the increasing evidence of clear risks.”

For example, regulatory authorities insist that current guidelines are enough to protect citizens from harm.

However, the same authorities depend on a “limited group of experts” who are not representative of the scientific community at large to support their position.

And suspiciously enough, many of these same experts are linked to the telecom companies that will benefit from the harmful technology.

To fix this problem, the authors suggest forming a new committee made up of qualified scientists independent of the industry for “a sound scientific evaluation of 5G.”

5G Rollout violates human rights

Data show that 5G RF radiation already exceed levels known to be harmful to human life and wildlife. According to the study authors, it is “a violation of human rights to impose this harmful radiation on people in their own homes without their informed consent.”

However, Hardell doubts regulatory authorities would listen to their advice because the telecom industry and politicians have already convinced themselves that there is nothing to worry about.

Hardell noted that their research and the 5G Appeal are important evidence of how researchers like him have warned about the severe health effects of 5G. The case reports published by Hardell and Nilsson on 5G’s effects also show that people had no other choice but to abandon their homes to get relief from their symptoms.

Hardell is concerned about those who are not financially capable of relocating to improve their health conditions.

Visit 5GAlert.com for more information about the negative side effects of 5G and RF radiation.

Watch the video below to learn how 5G technology can penetrate the human blood-brain barrier.

This video is from the NoVaxx channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:

• Crime against humanity: 5G is a weapons deployment system masquerading as a communications enhancement.
• New study links cell phone radiation to Alzheimer’s disease.
• Wireless radiation from mobile devices causing REAL HARM to people.

Sources include:

• ChildrensHealthDefense.org
• CDC.gov
• Brighteon.com
• NATURAL NEWS