Is 5G Even Worse Than We Thought?

A weapon, a warfare system and a threat to life itself? In Part 2 of our series on 5G, we explore the more sinister side of this new technology.

Last week we gained an overview of the key concerns and risks associated with 5G - and you can read that post here:

Why We Must Stop 5G

Today, we’re diving into the claims that 5G is more than just a faster internet connection—it’s an urban radar system, a potential weapon, and a threat to privacy, critical infrastructure, and the environment. Buckle up, because this is a wild ride through science, speculation, and some seriously bold claims.

5G as Urban Radar: Directed Energy in the Air?

5G is unlike its predecessors in one key way: it uses beamforming technology to focus energy into directed signals. This allows for faster data transmission, but it’s also what has sparked concerns about its potential as a directed energy weapon (DEW).

These antennas emit focused, coherent signals that sweep across urban areas, targeting specific devices and creating a network of interconnected beams (ICNIRP, 2020). The technology isn’t entirely new—similar systems have been used in military radar and DEWs to disrupt enemy hardware and even biological targets (Roman et al., 2018). Critics argue that 5G is essentially a civilian repurposing of military tech, raising questions about its true intent.

But here’s the kicker: the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines, which set safety limits for RF exposure, are being called into question. Critics argue that the 61V/m limit for short-term exposure is far too high and doesn’t account for the cumulative effects of multiple 5G antennas in urban areas (Hardell, 2020).

Are we being slowly cooked by a network we can’t see?

Radiation Risks: A Slow Burn?

The debate over 5G’s safety often centers on its radiation emissions. While 5G operates in the non-ionizing radiation spectrum, critics point to studies suggesting that long-term exposure to even low levels of RF radiation can have biological effects. The Council of Europe and other bodies have called for much stricter limits, arguing that current guidelines are based on outdated science and don’t reflect the real-world risks of 5G’s focused, high-power emissions (Council of Europe, 2011).

Even the aviation industry is concerned. Companies like Boeing and Airbus have warned that 5G emissions could interfere with aircraft communication systems, posing a risk to passenger safety (The Guardian, 2021). If 5G can disrupt planes, what’s it doing to us on the ground?

The 60 GHz Oxygen Issue: A Hidden Danger?

At 60 GHz, oxygen molecules absorb electromagnetic waves, crippling signal strength over short distances. While this phenomenon enables some unique benefits for the technology, like reduced interference, it also raises concerns. Critics speculate that the resonant absorption of 60 GHz radiation by oxygen molecules could theoretically alter the behavior of oxygen in biological systems, potentially affecting cellular respiration (PMC, 2021). The long-term effects remain unknown, and the lack of conclusive research is troubling.

Critical Infrastructure Risks: A House of Cards?

The rollout of 5G isn’t just a health concern—it’s also a critical infrastructure risk. The energy demands are staggering, requiring a massive increase in antennas and higher power consumption. This puts additional strain on the electrical grid, which wasn’t designed to handle such a load (Lehto, 2019). The microwave radiation emitted by 5G antennas can also contribute to urban heat islands, raising temperatures in cities and increasing energy consumption for cooling (EPA, 2021). Even building materials aren’t safe—constant bombardment by 5G signals could weaken structures over time, leading to potential failures (Sivani & Sudarsanam, 2012).

And then there’s the electromagnetic pulse (EMP) risk. The latent power capacitance built into 5G hardware could make it vulnerable to electromagnetic pulse attacks, which could cripple entire cities by disrupting communication systems and the electrical grid (DHS, 2020). Are we building a house of cards?

The Bigger Picture: 5G as a Warfare System?

Perhaps the most alarming claim is that 5G is being deployed as a psychological and physical warfare system. The technology’s ability to interrogate and digitize data from entire populations raises serious privacy concerns, but it also opens the door to mass surveillance and targeted attacks. The integration of metamaterials into 5G antennas could allow for the tagging and tracking of individuals, turning cities into battlefields where the enemy is anyone who opposes the regime (Zuboff, 2019). The same technology that powers 5G could be used to disable or eliminate targets with precision, all while maintaining the facade of a harmless telecommunications network (Roman et al., 2018). This isn’t just science fiction—it’s a real-world concern that’s being discussed in military and defense circles. Who’s controlling this technology, and what are their intentions?

The Absence of Accountability

One of the most troubling aspects of the 5G rollout is the lack of oversight. Telecom companies are largely self-certifying their compliance with safety guidelines, and there’s no independent body ensuring that these guidelines are being followed. Meanwhile, the insurance industry has refused to cover 5G-related harms, citing the unknown risks of the technology. Governments are rushing to deploy 5G without conducting obligatory environmental impact assessments, leaving the public exposed to potentially harmful levels of radiation (Principia Scientific, 2021). If 5G does cause harm, who’s responsible? The answer, it seems, is no one (Taylor & Meissner, 2020).

Caution Over Convenience

The debate over 5G is far from over. While the technology promises faster internet speeds and greater connectivity, the potential risks to health, privacy, and critical infrastructure cannot be ignored. What’s needed is transparency, independent research, and robust regulatory frameworks to ensure that 5G is deployed safely and responsibly. Until then, the question remains: is 5G a technological leap forward or a Pandora’s box of unintended consequences? Only time—and science—will tell.

This critical take on 5G underscores the urgent need for caution. The dangers are real, and ignoring them could have dire consequences for humanity and the planet. The World Council for Health demands a moratorium on the technology.

---

---

References

• Balmori, A. (2015). Anthropogenic radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as an emerging threat to wildlife orientation. Science of the Total Environment, 518-519, 58-60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.02.077

• Council of Europe. (2011). The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment. Resolution 1815. https://assembly.coe.int/nw/xml/XRef/Xref-XML2HTML-en.asp?fileid=17994

• Cucurachi, S., Tamis, W. L. M., Vijver, M. G., Peijnenburg, W. J. G. M., Bolte, J. F. B., & de Snoo, G. R. (2013). A review of the ecological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF). Environment International, 51, 116-140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2012.10.009

• Hardell, L. (2020). World Health Organization, radiofrequency radiation and health—A hard nut to crack (Review). International Journal of Oncology, 57(2), 409-416. https://doi.org/10.3892/ijo.2020.5086

• ICNIRP. (2020). Guidelines for limiting exposure to electromagnetic fields (100 kHz to 300 GHz). Health Physics, 118(5), 483-524. https://doi.org/10.1097/HP.0000000000001210

• Lehto, M. (2019). Cybersecurity in the 5G era. Journal of Information Warfare, 18(3), 1-12.

• https://www.jinfowar.com

• Pall, M. L. (2016). Microwave frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) produce widespread neuropsychiatric effects including depression. Journal of Chemical Neuroanatomy, 75(Pt B), 43-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jchemneu.2015.08.001

• Pall, M. L. (2018). Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health. Environmental Research, 164, 405-416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2018.01.035

• Roman, R., Lopez, J., & Mambo, M. (2018). Mobile edge computing, fog et al.: A survey and analysis of security threats and challenges. Future Generation Computer Systems, 78, 680-698. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2016.11.009

• Sivani, S., & Sudarsanam, D. (2012). Impacts of radio-frequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) from cell phone towers and wireless devices on biosystem and ecosystem—A review. Biology and Medicine, 4(4), 202-216.

• https://www.biolmedonline.com

• Taylor, L., & Meissner, F. (2020). The ethics of 5G: Privacy, surveillance, and the future of connectivity. Routledge.

• The Guardian. (2021, December 21). Airbus and Boeing express concerns over 5G interference in US. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2021/dec/21/airbus-and-boeing-express-concerns-over-5g-interference-in-us

• Twenge, J. M. (2019). iGen: Why today’s super-connected kids are growing up less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy—and completely unprepared for adulthood. Atria Books.

• U.S. Department of Homeland Security. (2020). DHS combats potential electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack. https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/09/03/dhs-combats-potential-electromagnetic-pulse-emp-attack

• van Deursen, A. J. A. M., & van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2019). The first-level digital divide shifts from inequalities in physical access to inequalities in material access. New Media & Society, 21(2), 354-375. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818797082

• Yakymenko, I., Tsybulin, O., Sidorik, E., Henshel, D., & Kyrylenko, O. (2016). Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, 35(2), 186-202. https://doi.org/10.3109/15368378.2015.1043557

• Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. PublicAffairs.

---