Commentary on the Attention-Grabbing 5G-Skin Study

"A recent 5G research study on the effects of future signals on human skin cells was announced with great fanfare...quickly followed by attention-grabbing headlines" - full of bunk

In the May 18,19 news summary, I commented on the announcement of a junk study about 5G and skin.

”The 5G Skin study from Constructor University (Germany) junk research is making the rounds in tech reporting, assuring everyone that 5G concern is unjustified because “For up to 48 hours, these skin cells were blasted with frequencies of 27 and 40.5 GHz…which did nothing. No gene mutations or changes to speak of. Not even a hint of suspicious cell behavior. The study, which ran under tight conditions including temperature control and blind testing, the kinds of processes that make science a trustworthy and worthwhile endeavor, found no changes in gene expression or methylation patterns.”” = Junk

Media reports of the study are still being brought to my attention, so I am posting resources here, in one place.

Just because one research paper claims that 5G does not harm a petri dish of manufactured skin, that does not mean that it is safe.

EMFSA May 2025 Newsletter

If you have not yet read it, EMF South Africa compiled a very comprehensive response which coincidentally could be used for coursework in media and science literacy.

5G Research: One Swallow Does Not Make a Summer - EMFSA

Includes: Framing the Narrative: discredit opposition without addressing substance, Loaded Language & Certainty Overreach, Backward logic, Study Relevance (According to the Authors) and

An independent take on key nuances to be aware of:

The exposure duration was either 2 or 48 hours, which may not reflect real-life chronic, long-term exposure.

Cell cultures in petri dishes are not equivalent to whole human biology—this model lacks the complexity of real tissues and systems.

Only two cell types were used, both from the skin, even though 5G signals (including other than mmwaves) can penetrate deeper or affect neurological and immune systems indirectly.

It’s worth noting that the study used penicillin-streptomycin in the culture media. Emerging research shows that antibiotics in mammalian cell cultures—especially streptomycin—can affect gene expression and epigenetic regulation. This could introduce subtle confounders—particularly in transcriptomic analyses—where even minor gene expression shifts can be misinterpreted. For more on this topic: Antibiotic Use in Mammalian Cell Cultures – EMFSA

References from EMFSA

At the bottom of their post, EMFSA provided references that included some of the mainstream press article headlines causing alarm for the informed community, which could be used to study propaganda techniques in science reporting.

• 5G Bands by Country: A Global Guide to Frequency Allocations [2025] – OneSDR
  https://onesdr.com/5g-bands-by-country-a-global-guide-to-frequency-allocations

• 5G wireless signals were extensively tested and the final verdict is out on their human impact – Earth.com
  https://www.earth.com/news/5g-wireless-signals-are-finally-proven-to-be-completely-safe

• Even if 5G penetrates a few millimetres into the skin, it is safe – Cosmos Magazine
  https://cosmosmagazine.com/technology/internet/5g-safe-gene-expression

• Jyoti Jyoti, Isabel Gronau, Eda Cakir, Marc-Thorsten Hütt, Alexander Lerchl, Vivian Meyer.
  5G-exposed human skin cells do not respond with altered gene expression and methylation profiles.
  PNAS Nexus, Volume 4, Issue 5, May 2025, pgaf127.
  https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgaf127

• Most Rigorous Study Of Human Cells Exposed To 5G Strikes Blow At Common Conspiracy Theory – IFLScience
  https://www.iflscience.com/what-happened-when-scientists-exposed-human-cells-to-5g-absolutely-nothing-79247

• Scientists Blasted Human Cells With 5G to See What Would Happen – Gizmodo
  https://gizmodo.com/scientists-blasted-human-cells-with-5g-to-see-what-would-happen-20006025

• Study debunks 5G health conspiracy theory (again) – Popular Science
  https://www.popsci.com/health/5g-conspiracy-theory-debunk

• Take off your tinfoil hat: Exposure to 5G doesn’t alter your genes, new study finds – Android Authority
  https://www.androidauthority.com/5g-study-human-cells-3558167

• Stay calm & keep scrolling: New Constructor University study finds no evidence of cell damage from 5G (Constructor University press release)
  https://nachrichten.idw-online.de/2025/05/14/stay-calm-keep-scrolling-new-constructor-university-study-finds-no-evidence-of-cell-damage-from-5g?groupcolor=1

• Constructor University Facebook Reel – “It is safe to use 5G…”
  https://www.facebook.com/reel/1115881970554429

• Constructor University on Instagram –
  

constructor_uni

A post shared by @constructor_uni

• courtesy EMFSA

Safe Tech International: JUNK STUDY ON 5G AND SKIN Commentary

In the May 18,19 news post, I shared a few early examples of pro-industry anti-science- literacy articles making the rounds about the study:

5G: VICE Does 5G Actually Damage Human Cells? Science Has an Answer. By Luis Prada

Despite what your uncle’s Facebook PSAs say, 5G isn’t turning your body into a hotspot or melting your DNA or turning you gay or whatever absolute batshit nonsense conspiracies right-wing lunatics have devised. A recent study from Constructor University just called BS on a conspiracy theory that 5G signals might somehow be zapping our skin cells into death. []In other words, your skin cells don’t care about 5G, even under worst-case conditions. 5G simply has zero effect on your cells. None. Get over it already. One of the big complaints from conspiracy theorists is that 5G operates in frequency bands that freak people out and have them clutching their 5G-blocking amethyst crystals or whatever the hell. Most networks currently use frequencies under 6 GHz, but newer 5G bands could creep into the 24–43 GHz range. Still, these high frequencies don’t penetrate deeply, topping off at only one millimeter of penetration at the absolute most. Take this whole experiment one step further, the researchers acknowledge that high-intensity electromagnetic waves can heat biological tissue. So, they controlled for temperature to rule out any effects caused by heat, throwing cold water on the idea that there are spooky, non-thermal 5G dangers lurking in the air. Now, all of this scientific research that aims to get at the bottom of conspiracies to debunk them, in this case, down to a cellular level, is probably useless. Conspiracy theorists are rarely, if ever, swayed by factual evidence. It’s too easy to wave it off and claim it’s just part of the vast conspiracy to suppress information, man. People have even created chatbots with the express intent of debunking conspiracy theories, but even that requires a willingness to engage with the possibility of having your entire worldview crumble before your eyes. That’s something that I fear conspiracy theorists simply do not want to do. The conspiracies are a warm blanket that makes them feel comfortable in a world they don’t understand, a world they don’t even want to understand. They’d rather live in a fantasy than engage the world on its truest terms. At least we can take heart in knowing that there are people out there doing the work to debunk these ideas with real science so the rest of us can be armed with the information required to either embrace or completely write off people based on their willingness to believe bullshit.

5G; IFL SCIENCE What Happened When Scientists Exposed Human Cells To 5G? Absolutely Nothing A recent study exposed human cells to electromagnetic frequencies well beyond those of 5G towers, and nothing happened. he results are in, and we finally know what happens to human cells exposed to 5G signals. In a sealed experiment at Constructor University in Germany, scientists bombarded human skin cells with electromagnetic waves that were ten times stronger than the recommended exposure limit, way above those produced by 5G towers, for up to 48 hours. The results were damning: nothing happened. The experiment was the most rigorous to date and directly challenges the common myth that 5G wireless signals cause harm. The 5G standard in mobile communication technology was introduced because of the sheer amount of data being transmitted across mobile networks. Basically, we are using internet technology more than ever, and as this use increases, the more demand there is for faster speeds, lower latency, and increased capacity. However, for some people, this basic reason belies a more sinister set of motives. [] From the moment these conspiracy theories started to spread online, scientists attempted to correct the narrative by emphasizing that low-energy radio waves used in phone technologies do not produce ionizing radiation, which causes cancer or other illnesses (mobile phones emit what’s called radiofrequency radiation, which is non-ionizing). [] The new study attempted to change this and represents the most rigorous study that has ever been conducted on this subject. The team took two types of human skin cells – known as keratinocytes (outer skin cells) and fibroblasts (cells that form connective tissues) – and exposed them to electromagnetic waves of different frequencies (27 GHz and 40.5 GHz). These frequencies are significantly higher than those produced by most 5G towers, but the team also experimented with their intensity. They used power fluctuations that varied from relatively low exposure to one that was 10 times higher than the permissible exposure limits. []The cells were monitored over two exposure windows: 2 hours of exposure and 48 hours of exposure. The researchers conducted whole-genome RNA sequencing to measure any changes in the cells' genetic activity, as well as DNA methylation arrays, which can offer insights into the regulation of gene expression. Ultimately, after they concluded their analysis, the team had found nothing to raise concern at all. “Our results show with great clarity that in human skin cells, even under worst-case conditions, no significant changes in gene expression or methylation patterns are observed after exposure,” the team explains in their paper. “Due to the heterogeneities in previous studies, we devised a comprehensive experimental setup and design that includes variations in cell type, power flux density, frequency, and time of exposure to 5G EMF under compensation of temperature increase.” The tests took place in an exposure facility that allowed for blinded exposure and temperature monitoring. In addition, they included two control groups – cells exposed to ultraviolet light and cells that received a sham-exposure (they were handled exactly like the test cells but not actually exposed to the 5G electromagnetic fields). The results showed that the only cells that experienced any changes were those exposed to UV light, and those changes were predictable.But could chance have played a role in these results? Well, to avoid this, the team also used a technique that shuffled the labels of the sham-exposed and properly exposed cells hundreds of times. This allowed them to check whether the signal of any gene disruption was noticeable when compared to random assignment. This too was negative. “Overall, the data show no indication that the gene expression and methylation of human skin cells were altered by the exposure conditions selected here,” the team concludes. This work is a thorough rebuttal to the myths, misconceptions, and conspiracies surrounding 5G networks.“In spite of assessments from the WHO in 2010 and the National Toxicology Program (NTP), this topic is still prevalent in the media, in public opinion and in the political sphere. This is in part due to a few isolated scientific studies providing opposing evidence,” the authors explain. “Due to our strong emphasis on highly controlled experimental conditions and our combinatorial analysis, we hope to close this debate and in particular cast fundamental doubt on the existence of possible nonthermal biological effects of exposure.” The study is published in PNAS Nexus.

RBC UKRAINE Scientists debunk main myth about 5G: What new study reveal

Supporters of conspiracy theories about the harm of 5G have been claiming for many years that this technology is supposedly dangerous to health. However, a new scientific study has definitively refuted their main arguments, according to the Android Authority online media outlet, which covers the world of Android and technology.

COSMOS Even if 5G penetrates a few millimetres into the skin, it is safe

Public concern grew when 5G was first developed in 2008 and its widescale implementation in 2019. This has persisted despite a report from the WHO in 2010 which outlined research showing that 5G was not dangerous. A separate 2024 report by the US National Toxicology Program also outlined the safety of 5G technology.

EARTH.COM

hyperlink includes: 5g-wireless-signals-are-finally-proven-to-be-completely-safe and
5G wireless signals were extensively tested and the final verdict is out on their human impact People keep debating whether fifth-generation wireless signals might be risky. Some fear that these signals, traveling at higher frequencies, could damage our cells. Scientists have now studied how 5G waves affect the activity of human skin cells and 5G wireless signal testing ends, final safety verdict issued - Earth.com

NORWAY Einar Flydal: How to bluff with research: Alexander Lerchl rides again…

On May 24, Einar Flydal in Norway blogged about the study, and his work is referenced in the article from South Africa.

If you want to use research as false evidence, then start a project that is so deeply technical in some auxiliary science that no one but the specialists in those fields can follow the details. Then you bring in some experts in those fields who have no idea about the assumptions and the context, and into all of this you put in some assumptions that will get you the result you want...

The research may seem so impressive and advanced that the media swallows the conclusion "with bait and switch" when it is disseminated by the state radiation protection agency and in press releases from the telecom companies' PR people in the Public Relations Department.

A new study, this time on 5G and higher frequencies and funded by the German Federal Office for Radiation Protection (Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz), seems to be based on this recipe. It is now being covered in major media around the globe, and mass media are reporting that the research has finally established that 5G is not harmful in the slightest, despite the fact that the study completely lacks support for its conclusion…

What the researchers have done is to investigate whether they find any harmful effects on genetically controlled processes in cells in the outermost layer of the skin after exposure to higher radio frequencies than those currently used by the population. They have varied between two frequencies (27 GHz and 40.5 GHz), two different intensities (10,000,000 µW/m ² ) and 100,000,000 µW/m ² ), and two different durations (48 hours and 2 hours). The entire project is presented in the figure.

https://einarflydal.com/2025/05/24/hvordan-bloffe-med-forskning-alexander-lerchl-rir-igjen/

How to bluff with research: Alexander Lerchl rides again… | I have something on my mind…(translates at link)

Who is Alexander Lerch?

Alexander Lerchl – Microwave News archive https://microwavenews.com/news-tags/alexander-lerchl

Who is Constructor University?

Who is Constructor University? (Wikipedia): “computer science, physics and digital transformation” (not a resource for health and safety)

Constructor University,^[2][3] formerly Jacobs University Bremen, is an international, private, residential research university located in Vegesack, Bremen, Germany. It offers study programs in engineering, humanities, natural and social sciences, in which students can acquire bachelor's, master's or doctorate degrees. The financing of Constructor University has been the subject of controversy, especially in Bremen. For a long time, the university generated income from various sources such as tuition fees, donations, third-party funding and grants from the Jacobs Foundation. Funding from the state of Bremen, amounting to three million euros annually, expired in 2017. In June 2018, the Jacobs Foundation decided to support the private university with a maximum of another 100 million Swiss francs until 2027. Also in June 2018, the city of Bremen decided that it would take over a loan from the university's founding phase. In the summer of 2020, the Jacobs Foundation announced its withdrawal from funding. The foundation's majority shares were transferred to the Verein zur Förderung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung in Bremen e.V. In September 2021, the Bremen Senate approved the sale of Bremen's shares to the Schaffhausen Institute of Technology (SIT).^[11] The new majority owner plans to invest 50 million euros in Jacobs University, half of which by the end of 2024. In November 2022 SIT changed its name to Constructor Group.^[12] Constructor Group,^[17] previously known as the Schaffhausen Institute of Technology, abbreviated SIT, is a private non-profit institute in Switzerland founded in 2019 by entrepreneur Serg Bell. The institute focuses on computer science, physics and digital transformation. Its partners are Carnegie Mellon University and the School of Computing at the National University of Singapore.^[18] The development of the institute was funded by the Canton of Schaffhausen with 3 million Swiss francs.^[19] The academic focus is led by 2010 Nobel Prize winner in physics Konstantin Novoselov.^[20] Research projects at Constructor University are funded by the German Research Foundation or by the European Union's Framework Program for Research and Innovation, as well as by globally leading companies.^[28]

The WHO-Funded Review: Cancer

Within days of the skin study, a WHO (partially funded) study confirmed the link between exposures and cancer.

Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure on cancer in laboratory animal studies, a systematic review

Evidence Assessment: Certainty of the evidence (CoE) was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Developing and Evaluations (GRADE) approach, as refined by OHAT. Evidence from chronic cancer bioassays was considered the most directly applicable to evaluation of carcinogenicity.

Results

We included 52 studies with 20 chronic bioassays No studies were excluded based on risk of bias concerns. Studies were not considered suitable for meta-analysis due to heterogeneity in study design, species, strain, sex, exposure characteristics, and cancer outcome. No or minimal evidence of RF EMF exposure-related cancer outcomes was found in most systems or organs in any study (these included gastrointestinal/digestive, kidney, mammary gland, urinary, endocrine, musculoskeletal, reproductive, and auditory).

For lymphoma (18 studies), with 6 chronic bioassays (1,120 mice, 1,780 rats) inconsistency between two chronic bioassays was not plausibly explainable, and the CoE for lymphoma was rated ‘moderate’.

For brain tumors (20 studies), including 5 chronic bioassays (1,902 mice, 6,011 rats), an increase in glial cell-derived neoplasms was reported in two chronic bioassays in male rats. The CoE for an increased risk in glioma was judged as high. The BMD analysis was statistically significant for only one study and the BMD was 4.25 (95% CI 2.70, 10.24).

For neoplasms of the heart (4 chronic bioassays with 6 experiments), 3 studies were performed in rats (∼2,165 animals), and 1 in mice (∼720 animals). Based on 2 bioassays, statistically significant increases in malignant schwannomas was judged as high CoE for an increase in heart schwannomas in male rats. The BMDs from the two positive studies were 1.92 (95 %CI 0.71, 4.15) and 0.177 (95 %CI 0.125, 0.241), respectively.

Twelve studies reported neoplasms in the adrenal gland (5 chronic bioassays). The CoE for an increased risk in pheochromocytoma was judged as moderate. None of these findings were dose-dependent when compared to the sham controls.

Sixteen studies investigated tumors of the liver with 5 of these being chronic bioassays. The CoE was evaluated as moderate for hepatoblastomas.

For neoplasms of the lung (3 chronic bioassays), 8 studies were conducted in rats (∼1,296 animals) and 23 studies in mice (∼2,800 animals). In one chronic bioassay, a statistically significant positive trend was reported for bronchoalveolar adenoma or carcinoma (combined), which was rated as moderate CoE for an increase in lung neoplasms with some evidence from 2 initiation-(co–)promotion studies.

This review was partially funded by the WHO radioprotection programme.

The protocol for this review was registered in Prospero reg. no. CRD42021265563 and published in Environment International 2022 (Mevissen et al. 2022).

In addition:

Phoenix Center Bombshell – 5G Had 'No Measurable Economic Impact'

As reported by Broadband Breakfast on May 29, The Phoenix Center yesterday released a paper with a startling conclusion: Wireless 5G has been a bust. Say what? “Despite the industry’s sweeping promises, the data show no measurable economic impact from 5G so far,” said Phoenix Center Chief Economist Dr. George S. Ford, the study’s author. “All regression coefficients are small and statistically indistinguishable from zero across every economic outcome measured – employment, wages, business establishments, personal income, and GDP.”

Ford’s paper comes just days after the House passed a massive budget bill that projects to raise $88 billion from the FCC auction of 600 megahertz of spectrum for 5G and higher wireless services over the next 10 years. In the Senate, Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has sponsored legislation calling for 5G spectrum auctions substantially larger than what’s in the House bill. And FCC Chairman Brendan Carr has been vocal about the vast economic and political benefits that accrue from investing in 5G by dint of spectrum auctions.”

We shouldn’t hold our breath to wait for the reporters who promoted the 5G Skin Study to update their coverage. But we can ask them to do so.

We recognize the power that truth-telling yields. Despite righteous anger, we can hold space for those needing to recognize the fact that they have been betting on the wrong horse, and welcome them, with compassion and forgiveness, to the other side.

Being able to hold composure while reading triggering and ridiculing headlines is an expression of self-mastery. But we can also call out and confront the lies in constructive ways, when the reports of the 5G junk study pass as journalism.

Those who were part of the problem have a responsibility to be a part of the solution.

Many thanks to EMFSA, Einar, and others who heeded the call to correct the record, and thanks for your support.