In parallel with the exponential growth of mobile telephony and the use of Wi-Fi, medicine is also seeing such growth in various health problems. It remains to be determined with sufficient probity whether there is a cause and effect relationship between the two. Such a link has already been suspected for several decades. And it will be up to everyone to choose whether they prefer to continue using or not using such technologies.
Those working for the big business of telecommunication and computer science generally refuse to admit the slightest negative effect of pulsed electromagnetic waves and microwaves on the health of human beings (and living beings in general). For this, they consider only the thermal effects of these waves used for the telecommunication of digital information (Wi-Fi, telephony, smart meters, Bluetooth …). They ignore, knowingly or unknowingly, the other effects (apart from the ionizing effects that do not normally occur with the carrier waves used, often in the microwave frequency band).
Physics has made it possible to know the ionizing effects of very high frequency and highly penetrating electromagnetic rays such as X-rays, gamma rays and cosmic rays. These rays easily alter the DNA of living beings and are known to be mutagenic, carcinogenic, and even lethal in high doses. Low-energy, lower-frequency rays were generally not considered to be so dangerous, as the only effects that medicine tended to recognize were thermal (due to the heat produced). And from this point of view, the most harmful are ultraviolet rays that can cause more or less serious burns depending on the intensity and duration of radiation. Sunburns are a well-known example. However, even in their case, it has been relatively demonstrated the existence of an increase of skin cancers in persons abusing tanning (see in particular here).
The following radiations, less and less energetic, are usually considered harmless, except, perhaps, in the case of high exposure: visible light, infrared rays, microwaves, radio waves, low-frequency waves, VLF and ELF. However, these radiations can have effects other than thermal, even if they are most often ignored (voluntarily or by ignorance).
One of the phenomena is that of resonance (see Wikipedia). Through it, the application of a weak electromagnetic wave can be enough to produce significant physical effects, especially on the human body. It is enough then that the frequency of the wave is equal to the natural frequency of biological tissues, cells or cellular components affected, and that it is maintained for a certain time which depends on the intensity. A high intensity wave does not need to be maintained long to achieve a noticeable effect, whereas a low intensity wave requires longer application. In the same way, strong pushes exerted on a child sitting on a swing can propel it almost horizontally in a short time, while it takes a large number of small pushes to swing it so strongly. In extreme cases, the resonance can break the object that undergoes it (see in particular How can resonance collapse bridges?).
The other is the electromagnetic induction and the connected phenomena that are the induced currents and the auto-induction (see Wikipedia). A variable magnetic field generates an electric current in nearby metals. And conversely, a metal traversed by an electric current emits a magnetic field. An electromagnetic wave contains a magnetic component and an electrical component. The professor Paul Héroux of McGill University in Montreal has demonstrated that a weak variable magnetic field such as that induced by cell phones is enough to significantly disrupt the metabolism of sugar in the human body. This field harms more or less seriously the manufacture of ATP from glucose in mitochondria, by inhibiting the rotation of the natural electrical nanomotors that are ATP syntase molecules. Glucose not converted to ATP tends to accumulate and an excess of 20% glucose in the brain could be raised. One of the related effects would be the alteration of the DNA strands and thus an alteration of the genome transmissible to the offspring.
These two phenomena, which can work together, are most likely responsible, or at least clearly aggravating factors, for the following health problems:
- Neurological symptoms: headache, vertigo, nausea, difficulty concentrating, loss in memory, irritability, depression, anxiety, insomnia, fatigue, weakness, muscle spasms, change in reflex reaction, sore joints, leg pain, fever, as well as more severe symptoms causing paralysis or psychosis.
- Cardiac symptoms: palpitations, arrhythmia, chest pain, change in blood pressure, change in cardiac rhythm, shortness of breath.
- Respiratory symptoms: sinusitis, bronchitis, pneumonia, asthma.
- Dermatological symptoms: redness, itchiness, burning sensations.
- Ophthalmological symptoms: pain and burning sensations, deterioration of vision, cataracts.
- Other symptoms: digestive problems, abdominal pain, thyroid problems, pain in the ovaries or the testicles, dryness of the mouth, the tongue or the eyes, extreme thirst, dehydration, nosebleeds, bleeding, change in sugar levels, immunity problems, loss of hair, tooth pain, deterioration of the senses, loss of the sense of smell, ringing in the ears.
(See Definition of EMS).
An additional problem occurs when electromagnetic waves are pulsed due to a binary coding of 0 and 1 such as for Wi-Fi, wireless telephony, Bluetooth and smart meters. The information thus transmitted by these waves is equivalent to billions of pulses received every second by the cells of the body. Each pulse is comparable to a hammer strike or a lightning strike striking the cell or one of its components (depending on the frequency of the carrier wave). Such a wave is, of course, not natural and the body is not adapted to it. The pulses are too fast and too short, occurring billions of times per second, and the magnetic field induced at the cellular level is therefore much too unstable for the cell and its components to adapt and protect themselves.
Moreover, in physics, such a pulse is equivalent, by Fourier transform, to the superposition of hundreds of thousands of waves of different frequencies. These frequencies are more numerous than the pulse is vertical, stiff or brutal. And this is all the more the case that we bring the pulses closer to encode a very large number per second to transmit more information. In other words, 5G will be even worse at this level than predecessors such as 3G and 4G could be. Not only will the cell receive more hammer hits per second, but the equivalent frequencies will be present in greater numbers. And the more frequencies there are in the received signal, the more opportunities there are to find resonance with cellular components and with the biological cycles involved. In other words, the more telecommunication technology evolves to 5G and beyond, the more it increases its ability to interact with living things and affect their health and genetic makeup. From this point of view, the first generation of wireless phones (which was analog and not digital) was significantly less harmful.
In addition to the harmful effects on physical health, this technology of transmission of information by pulsed waves has psychological effects, in the particular case of social networks and the Internet. It tends to cause cyber dependency similar to drug and alcohol dependence.
Finally, some sources also indicate an occult effect (which remains to be demonstrated): the destruction of invisible telepathic or psychic relations between human beings who use this technology instead of more direct communication or wired (cable networks and telephony).
As often, for each independent study demonstrating the harmfulness of a given technological element, the world of the industry is capable of producing ten times more contrary studies, but generally biased, since in this case, it is at the same time judge and part. So, it is up to everyone to learn, to exercise his judgment, and to determine what sounds the most right to his heart and his head and to whom he prefers to place his trust. In particular, does he prefer to do this to independent researchers who often have everything to lose in their approach? Or does he prefer to give it to those who have much better financial means and much better wages? The former are often discredited when they are not simply ignored. The latter are often presented as key experts by the mainstream media. Each one draws the conclusions which suit him or seem to him most just.