1. Introduction In this case report we present a woman aged 52 years who developed health problemscons is tentwith the microwavesyndrome after installation of a 5G base station facing her apartment at 60 meters’distance. These symptoms consistedofe.g., headache, dizziness, concentration difficulties, fatigue, arrhythmia, skin burningandnosebleedingcorrespondingtothemicrowavesyndrome. High radiofrequency (RF) radiation levels were measured in her apartment especially in the part closest to the base station. In her living room at the window 17 500 to 758 000 μW/m2 peak levels were obtained during 10 measurements, each over 1 minute. At the place of her sofa in her living room peak levels from 36 800to222000μW/m2weremeasured.Itisnoteworthythatveryhigh radiation was found at the balcony facing the base station.All ten measurementsatthatplaceyieldedwithin10-15secondspeaklevels>2500000μW/m2 ,whichisthehighestmeasurablelevelwith the meter used in this study. At the playground about 40 meters from the base station peak levels of 1 120 000 μW/m2 and 479 000μW/m2weremeasured,respectively.Aftertemporallyleaving theapartmentforanotherdwellingwithmuchlowerRFradiation, 96 to 2 810 μW/m2 peak levels, almost all symptoms disappeared within a short time.After moving back to her own apartment the symptoms reappeared.This study is in line with the results of our twopreviouscasestudiesshowingthatinstallationof5Gcaused anextremeincreaseinexposureandrapiddevelopmentofthemicrowave syndrome.These case studies indicate that implementation of 5G cannot be done without the risk of harmful effects on human health.
Keywords: Base station; 5G; Radiofrequency radiation; Electromagnetichypersensitivity;Microwave syndrome; Health
2. Introduction The fifth generation, 5G, for wireless communication is rolledout worldwide despite no previous research on possible nega-tive effects on human health and the environment. Exposure to pulsemodulated microwave (radiofrequency; RF) radiation has increased dramatically on a world-wide basis [1,2]. Microwave radiation are frequencies in the range of 300 MHz to 300 GHz within the RF spectrum. In city environments in Sweden, frequencies used for 5G are currently in the 3.5 GHz band (https://pts.se/sv/5g/inforande-av-5g/). Studies on possible health effects from exposure to the 5G frequencies around 3.5 GHz were until recently non-existent [3]. In a study published in October 2022, animalswereexposedtothe5Gfrequency3.5GHz(GSMmodlated)for2hoursadayto1600000μW/m2 ,5daysaweekduring one month. The exposure caused oxidative stress and an increase ofdegeneratedneuronsinthehippocampusregionofthebrain in addition to decreased Irisin levels. The observed effects may triggerneurodegenerativediseases[4].Thelevelofexposurewas nonthermal and well below the guidelines recommended by the InternationalCommissiononNon-IonizingRadiation(ICNIRP) The fifth generation, 5G, for wireless communication is rolledout worldwide despite no previous research on possible nega-tive effects on human health and the environment. Exposure to pulsemodulated microwave (radiofrequency; RF) radiation has increased dramatically on a world-wide basis [1,2]. Microwave radiation are frequencies in the range of 300 MHz to 300 GHz within the RF spectrum. In city environments in Sweden, frequencies used for 5G are currently in the 3.5 GHz band (https://pts.se/sv/5g/inforande-av-5g/). Studies on possible health effects from exposure to the 5G frequencies around 3.5 GHz were until recently non-existent [3]. In a study published in October 2022, animalswereexposedtothe5Gfrequency3.5GHz(GSMmodulated)for2hoursadayto1600000μW/m2 ,5daysaweekduring one month. The exposure caused oxidative stress and an increase ofdegeneratedneuronsinthehippocampusregionofthebrain in addition to decreased Irisin levels. The observed effects may triggerneurodegenerativediseases[4].Thelevelofexposurewas nonthermal and well below the guidelines recommended by the InternationalCommissiononNon-IonizingRadiation(ICNIRP)
3. Methods On 13 January 2023, the authors visited the study person at her home. Thereby her symptoms were investigated and discussed in person. She had previously answered a questionnaire on health with a list of symptoms adapted after Belpomme el al [19]. Four time periods were investigated. The first time period was in her homewithout5G,thesecondathomewith5G,thethirdtimestay- ing in another apartment without 5G, and finally returning to her homewith5Gexposure.Therebythewash-outperiodofno5GexposurebetweenthethirdandfourthtimeperiodgavethepossibiltytoinvestigatehealthduringonandoffexposuretoRFradiation from 5G. The measurements were made during daytime with the deviceSafeandSoundProII.Thetrueresponsedetectionrangeis between 400 MHz and 7.2 GHz. It was calibrated by the manufacturer and has an accuracy of ±6 dB (https://safelivingtechnologies.com/products/safe-and-soundpro-ii-rf-meter.html).Thefrequenciesusedfor5GincityenvironmentsinSwedenaremostlyaround3.5GHz.Theupperdetection limit for peak values of the exposimeter is 2 500 000 μW/m2 .At everyinvestigatedplaceintheapartment10or20measurements were made for 1 minute each.
4. Results HealthSymptoms Table1givestheresultsforself-assessedhealthatfourtimeperiods.InJuly2022shewashealthy.Thebasestationfor5Gthatwas installed in October 2022, was located opposite to her apartment with a small playground between the buildings, see Figure 1-3. Afterinstallationof5Gsheratherquicklydevelopedseverehealth problems with unbearable pain and/or discomfort due to a large number of symptoms such as headache, dizziness and balance problems, concentration problems, loss of immediate memory, confusion,fatigue,anxiety,emotive,cough,nosebleeding,symptoms from lungs, stomach, urinary system, and the skin. Interestinglyonemonthlater,stayinginanotherapartmentwithno5G,all symptoms disappeared except for minor problems with dizziness and tiredness both with grade 2, see Table 1. Within short after returning to her apartment in January 2023 the symptoms reapeared. This time her health declined and was even worse adding insomnia, suicidal ideation, heart problems, and irritation to the list of severe health issues. MeasurementofRFRadiation Table2displaystheresultsformeasurementsofRFradiation.The highest levels were found in the part of the apartment facing the base station. In the living room close to the window at 30 cm distance, the peak radiation varied between 17 500 to 758 000 μW/ m2 . Figure 4 illustrates the considerable variation of RF radiation within the measured time periods of 1 minute each and that 5G emitshighrepetitivepulsesofmicrowaveradiation.Alsoveryhigh RF radiation was measured at the sofa in her living room 220 cm from the window facing the 5G antenna; 36 800 to 222 000 μW/ m2 , see Figure 5 (note different scale for RF radiation compared with Figure 4). High radiation was also found in the bathroom, highest in the bathtub closest to the window. Considerably lower RFradiationwasmeasuredinthebedroomyieldingpeaklevel variationfrom120to616μW/m2 .Also,inthekitchenlowerpeak levelsweremeasuredfrom156to1420μW/m2 .Boththebedroom and the kitchen are facing the other side of the apartment, thus withlargerdistancetothebasestationandadditionalwallsin-between. The balcony of the apartment is facing the base station at 60metersdistance.RFradiationwasmeasured10times1minute each time. Within 10-15 sec the highest measurement peak level for the meter, >2 500 000 μW/m2 , was obtained each time. Thus, the highest peak level was not possible to measure with the used exposimeter.The courtyard with a playground is located between thestudysubject’shouseandthebuildingwiththebasestationon the roof, see Figure 1. The distance is approximately 40 meters. Twomeasurementsweremade,3minuteseachwithcircularwalk aroundtheplayground.Thisyieldedpeaklevelsof1120000μW/ m2 and 479 000 μW/m2 , respectively.
5. Discussion Inthisarticlewepresenta52-year-oldwomanwhodevelopedthe microwave syndrome within short time after installation of a 5G base station 60 meters from her apartment.A4G base station antennawaspreviouslyactiveatthesamespotbutitwasnotuntilthe 5Gdeploymentthathersymptomsdeveloped.Herhomeislocated onthesecondfloorandthebasestationisinstalledontheroofofa threefloorbuildingontheothersideofthecourtyardanddirected towards her apartment, Figure 1,2. This person answered a structured questionnaire on a series of symptomsassociatedwiththemicrowavesyndrome.Thisformula was similar as the one we had used in previous case studies, thus allowingthepossibilitytocomparesymptomsindifferentpersons withsimilarexposure[6,7].Ofcoursetheresponseisself-assessed and the evaluation of the health effects and their severity subjec- tive. However, there were obvious signs of bruises on her armsas an objective marker of her complaint. It should also be noted that the study person has education in medicine, working as an assistant nurse. There is a truism in medicine that ‘the patient is always right”. Early research on effects of long term non-thermal microwave exposure concluded that the sensitivity to radiation mayvaryconsiderablyamongindividualsandthatwomeningen- eral are more sensitive than men [13,18]. As presented in Table 1 the study person had a large number of severe symptoms inherent in the microwave syndrome.These included pain and a number of neurological symptoms such as dizziness,balanceproblems,concentrationdifficulties,lossofimmediatememoryandconfusion.Nosebleedingandheadachewere severe problems as well as cardiac symptoms with irregular and transitoryhighpulse.Inspiteoffatigueshedescribedinsomniaas a problem. Body pain wasanother major symptom including skin burning on hands and arms. Nausea was also a major problem, grade 10, as well as diarrhea and urgency to urinate. Almost all symptoms disappeared after leaving her home to another accommodation with no 5G radiation. Using the same exposimeter RF radiation was measured at that place from 1 210 to 2 810 μW/m2 in the living room 30 cm from the window, and 96 to 183 μW/m2 inthekitchen30cmfromthewindow.Thesemeasurementswere done daytime and five times at each place during 1 minute each. Only slight dizziness and fatigue remained, both graded 2 on the 10 grades scale. AspresentedinTable1hersymptomsrecurredaftermovingback toherdwelling.Somewereworsesuchastinnitus,grade8,cardiovascular abnormalities, grade 10, and irritability grade 10. This time she did not note any nose bleeding. This woman had since before slight hypertension. Living in her apartment she had no health complaints consistent with the microwavesyndromesincebefore,althoughtherewasa4Gantenna at the same spot as the 5G base station. However, she had only lived in the apartment since October 1, 2022, thus less than 2 months of exposure to the 4G. No measurements are available of theradiationintheapartmentbeforethe5Gdeployment.Ourfirst case study indicated a sharp increase in radiation exposure from 5G compared to previous 4G antennas [6]. The windows of her apartment are energy efficient with thin metallic layers which are knowntoreduceincomingRFradiation.Ourmeasurementsalso showed clearly lower peak levels inside of the window compared to the balcony on the outside. Since almost all symptoms disappeared after moving to another dwelling with no 5G exposure and low RF radiation levels and returnedwithinshortaftermovingbacktoherapartment,thismust be regarded as a classic example of a provocation test. The woman’s dog also showed signs of ill health after the 5G deployment.Accordingtoher,thedoggotdiarrheasoonafterthe5G deployment. This disappeared during the washout period in the other apartment with no 5G, but returned when they moved back to her own apartment. The dog also reluctantly returns to the 5G apartment after walks. RF radiation levels were measured with Safe and Sound Pro II. Ten measures were made at every place during one minute each, except for 20 measures made at the window in the living room. There was a high variation of the peak level during that time, whichisshowninFigure4and5.Asexpected,highestlevelswere measuredinthepartoftheapartmentfacingthebuildingwiththe 5Gbasestationontheroof.Thelevelsmeasuredinthisstudy,and inourtwopreviouscasestudies,wereveryhigh.Theselevelsapparentlyprovoked,withinashorttimeperiod,illhealthinthestud- ied persons. They are far above levels that have been reported to provokeillhealthfrompreviousgenerationsofwirelesstechnology[20-27],andalsofarabovelevelsrecommendedbyexperts.In 2012, the BioInitiative Report suggested a limit of 30-60 µW/m2 forhumanexposure,lowerforsensitivepersonsandchildren,3-6 µW/m2 [28]. Even lower guidelines were proposed in 2016, maximum 10 – 1 000 µW/m2 , lower at night time 1-100 µW/m2 , and for sensitive persons 0.1-10 µW/m2 [29]. On the other hand, the measuredlevelsfrom5Garestillfarbelowthelevelsrecommend- ed by ICNIRP [5] and the FCC [30].According to ICNIRP 2020 exposure can be as high as 10 000 000 μW/m2 for whole body exposure averaged over 30 minutes, thus allowing peak levels to be even very much higher [31]. 5G apparently leads to very high microwave exposure with sharp peak pulses confirming warnings on high RF radiation from scientists several years before the 5G roll out. In the 5G Appeal, scientists and medical doctors called for a moratorium on the 5G deploymentduetothe“massiveincreaseofmandatoryexposure” tomicrowavesandthefactthatthehealthhazardsofthisnewtechnologyhadnotbeenpreviouslyinvestigated[10](www.5gappeal. eu). Thechildren’splaygroundislocated40metersfromthebasesta- tion, Figure 1. High RF levels were measured on the playground. For medical reasons it must be regarded to be a harmful place to be used, especially by children. Children are more vulnerable to RFradiationexposurethanadults[32].Themicrowavesyndrome issimilartoelectromagnetichypersensitivity;EHS[12].However, unlikethemicrowavesyndrome,individualssufferingfromEHS can develop deliberating symptoms at extremely low exposure levels that are tolerated by most other people. That is in contrast to the very high RF radiation levels seen in our three case studies where healthy individuals, with no prior major reactions to wirelesstechnology,quicklydevelopedsymptomsduetothesharpincrease in exposure from 5G. The sensitivity to RF radiation is known to vary considerably betweendifferentpersons[33,34].Mostprevalentsymptomsarerelated to the nervous system, the heart, the skin and the hormone systemjustasexemplifiedforthispresentedcaseandinourprevouscases.Foroccupationalexposuresimilarsymptomsincluding alsoheadache,sleepingproblems,heartpalpitations,moodswings and balance disorders were described some 50 years ago [17,18]. Themicrowavesyndromehaspreviouslybeenassociatedwithliv- ing close to base stations in several studies since almost two decades[20-27].AGermanstudyfoundeffectsonbiologicalmarkers suchasneurotransmittersandsymptomssimilartothemicrowave syndromeamonginhabitantslivinginavillageaftertheactivation ofaGSMbasestation[35].Anincreasedfrequencyofmicronuclei andlipidperoxidationwasseeninculturedhumanlymphocytesin persons living within 80 meters from the base station, compared withadistanceof300meters[36].In2011theInternationalAgencyforResearchonCancer(IARC)classifiedRFradiationasapossiblehumancarcinogen,Group2B[37].Additionalresearchboth on humans and laboratory animals since 2011 has confirmed the risk for cancer associated with RF radiation [8] appearing below the ICNIRPthermal limits. In spite of that, current guidelines for exposurepropagatedbyICNIRP[5]andtheFederalCommunicationsCommissioninUSA[30]havenotbeenloweredalthoughthe scientificevidenceofvarioushealtheffectsbelowtheseguidelines has increased over the years. They are based only on acute ther- mal effects, observed within very short exposure from extremely intense RF radiation [5].These guidelines do not take account of e.g.,long-termexposure,people’ssensitivity,particularlyvulnerable persons such as children, sick and old ones, and important physical properties of the RF radiation for instance pulse modulation [8,9].They are clearly not adapted to prolonged 24 hours a day during lifetime. It is obvious that during the recent two decades there has been increasing evidence on detrimental effects on both human health and the environment from RF radiation. Unfortunately, the recommendations of much lower limits than those by ICNIRPand FCC have not resulted in any practical steps to reduce the obviousrisksforthepublic.OnthecontraryambientRFradiation hasincreased[1,2].Inarecentarticleaformerlong-timemember of ICNIRPconcluded that “There are substantial abnormalities in these putative health safety protection guidelines and standards. Some of the safety limits are irrelevant, debatable, and absent of scientific justification from the standpoint of safety and public health protection” [9]. In a recent review on health risks from the wireless technology it wasconcludedthat“Awiderangeofevidenceindicatesthatthere are numerous non-thermal effects from wireless radiation on reproduction,development,andchronicillness”[38].Further,inan Essayitwasstatedthat“Basedontheprecautionaryprinciple,the author echoes the calls of others for a moratorium on the further roll-outof5Gsystemsglobally,pendingmoreconclusiveresearch ontheirsafety…Inshort,oneshould‘erronthesideofcaution’.In thecaseof5Gtransmissionsystems,thereisnocompellingpublic health or safety rationale for their rapid deployment” [39].
6. ConclusionThisstudyconfirmsourpreviouspublicationsonmicrowavesyndromecausedbyRFradiationemissionsfrom5G[6,7].Ourthree studies are to our knowledge among the first to have investigated health effects from 5G base stations. 5G substantially increases exposure to microwave radiation and in the present case, as well as in the previous case studies, the 5G deployment was followed by a rapid development of symptoms known as the microwave syndrome. Urgent attention is needed to the 5G health hazards by the responsible governmental agencies.
7. AcknowledgementsNot applicable.
8. FundingNofundingwasreceived.
9. AvailabilityofDataandMaterialsThe information generated and analyzed during the current study is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
10. Authors’ContributionsBothauthorsparticipatedintheconception,designandwritingof themanuscript,andhavereadandapprovedthefinalversion.
11. EthicsApprovalandConsentto ParticipateNot applicable
12. Patient Consent forPublicationNot applicable
13. Competing InterestsTheauthorsdeclarethat theyhavenocompeting interests.
References References 1. Koppel T,Ahonen M, Carlberg M, Hardell L. Very high radiofrequencyradiationatSkeppsbroninStockholm,Swedenfrommobilepho nebasestationantennaspositionedclosetopedestrians’heads.Environ Res. 2022; 208: 112627.
2. KoppelT,HardellL.Measurementsofradiofrequencyelectromagneticfields,including5G,inthecityofColumbia,SC,USA.WorldAcad Sci J. 2022; 4: 22.
3. ANSESExpositionauxchampsélectromagnétiquesliéeaudéploiement de la technologie 5G.
2021.https://www.anses.fr/fr/system/files/AP2019SA0006Ra.pdf4. BektasH,AlgulS,AltindagF,YeginK,AkdagMZ,DasdagS,etal.Effect s of 3.5 GHz radiofrequency radiation on ghrelin, nesfatin-1,and irisin level in diabetic and healthy brains. J Chemical Neuroanatomy. 2022; 126: 102160.
5. International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection(ICNIRP). Guidelines for limiting exposure to electromagneticfields (100 kHz to 300 GHz). Health Phys. 2020; 118: 483-524.
6. HardellL,NilssonM.CaseReport:TheMicrowaveSyndromeafterinsta llationof5Gemphasizestheneedforprotectionfromradiofre-quency radiation. Ann Case Report. 2023; 8: 1112.
7. Nilsson M, Hardell L. Development of the microwave syndromein two men shortly after installation of 5G on the roof above theiroffice. Ann Clin Case Reports. 2023; 8: 2378.
8. InternationalCommissionontheBiologicalEffectsofElectromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF). Environ Health. 2022; 21: 92.
9. Lin JC. Incongruities in recently revised radiofrequency exposureguidelines and standards. Environ Res. 2023; 2222: 115369.
10. HardellL,NybergR.Appealsthatmatterornotonamoratoriumonthede ploymentofthefifthgeneration,5G,formicrowaveradiation.Mol Clin Oncol. 2020; 12(3): 247-257.
11. Nyberg NR, McCredden JE, Weller SG, Hardell L. The Europe-an Union prioritises economics over health in the rollout of radiofrequency technologies. Rev Env Health. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1515/reveh-2022-0106.
12. CarpenterDO.Themicrowavesyndromeorelectro-hypersensitivity:historicalbackground.RevEnvironHealth.2015;30:217–222.
13. Marha K, Musil J, Tuha H. Biological effects of electromagneticwavesandtheirmechanism.In:ElectromagneticField sandtheLifeEnvironment. San Francisco Press. 1971; 29-38.
14. Dodge,C.Clinicalandhygienicaspectsofexposuretoelectromagneticfields:areview.2022.https://www.magdahavas.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Dodge_1969.pdf.
15. Johnson Liakouris AG. Radiofrequency (RF) sickness in the Lilienfeld study: An effect of modulated microwaves. Arch EnvironHealth. 1998; 53: 236-238.
16. Pollack H. The microwave syndrome. Bull NY Acad Med. 1979;55: 1240-1243.
17. Healer J. Review of studies of people occupationally exposed to radiofrequency-radiations.In:BiologicalEffectsandHealthImplications of Microwave Radiation. Cleary SF (Ed).U.S. Symposium Proceedings Richmond, Virginia, September 17-19, 1969 Department of Health, Education andWelfare. Public Health Service Bureau of Radiological Health Rockville, Maryland 20852.
18. MarhaK.MaximumadmissiblevaluesofHFandUHFelectromagneticradiationatworkplacesinCzechoslovakia.In:BiologicalEf- fects and Health Implications of Microwave Radiation. Cleary SF (Ed).U.S.SymposiumProceedingsRichmond,Virginia,September
17-19, 1969 Department of Health, Education and Welfare. Public HealthServiceBureauofRadiologicalHealthRockville,Maryland 20852. Volume10Issue16 -2023 CaseReport http://www.acmcasereports.com/ 10
19. BelpommeD,CampagnacC,IrigarayP.Reliablediseasebiomark -ers characterizing and identifying electrohypersensitivity and mul - tiplechemicalsensitivityastwoetiopathogenicaspectsofauniquepatho logical disorder. Rev Environ Health. 2015; 30: 251 -271.
20. HutterHP,MoshammerH,WallnerP,KundiM.Subjectivesymp -toms, sleeping problems, and cognitive performance in subjectslivingnearmobilephonebasestations.OccupEnvironMed.20 06;63: 307 -313.
21. EgerH,JahnM.SpezifischesymptomeundmobilfunkstrahlunginSelbi tz (Bayern) - Evidenz für eine dosiswirkungsbeziehung; Um -welt - Medizin -Gesellschaft. 2010; 23: 130 -139.
22. AlazawiSA.Mobilephonebasestationshealtheffects.Diyala J Med.2011;1:44 -52.
23. Martin S, De Giudici P, Genier JC, Cassagne E, Doré JF, Duci - metièreP,etal.Healthdisturbancesandexposuretoradiofrequencyelec tromagnetic fields from mobile -phone base stations in Frenchurban areas. Environ Res. 2021; 193: 110583.
24. Gómez -Perretta C, Navarro EA, Segura J, Portolés M. Subjectivesymptoms related to GSM radiation from mobile phone base sta -tions: a cross -sectional study. BMJ Open. 2013; 3(12): e003836.
25. Khurana VG, Hardell L, Everaert J, Bortkiewicz A, Carlberg M,Ahonen M, et al. Epidemiological evidence for health risks frommobilephonebasestations.IntJEnvOccupHealth.2016;16:263 - 267.
26. SinghK,NagarajA,YousufA,GantaS,PareekS,VishnaniP,etal.Effect of electromagnetic radiations from mobile phone base sta -tions on general health and salivary function. J Int Soc Prev Com -munity Dent. 2016; 6: 54 -59.
27. Balmori A. Evidence for a health risk by RF on humans livingaround mobile phone base stations: From radiofrequency sicknessto cancer. Env Research. 2022; 214: 113851.
28. BioInitiativeWorkingGroup,CindySageandDavidO.Carpenter, Editors. BioInitiative Report: A rationale for a biologically -based public exposure standard for electromagnetic radiation. https://bi - oinitiative.org/.
29. BelyaevI,DeanA,EgerH,HubmannG,JandrisovitsR,KernM,etal.EU ROPAEMEMFGuideline2016fortheprevention,diagnosisand treatment of EMF -related health problems and illnesses. RevEnviron Health. 2016; 31: 363 –397.
30. Federal Communications Commission (FCC). “Proposed ChangesintheCommission’sRulesRegardingHumanExposuretoRad iof-requency Electromagnetic Fields; Reassessment of Federal Com -munications Commission Radiofrequency Exposure Limits andPolicies”, FCC19 –126, 2019.
31. Hardell L, Nilsson M, Koppel T, Carlberg M. Aspects on the In - ternationalCommissiononNon -IonizingRadiationProtection(IC - NIRP) 2020 guidelines on radiofrequency radiation. J Cancer SciClin Ther. 2021; 5: 250 -283.
32. Uche UI, Naidenko OV. Development of health -based exposurelimits for radiofrequency radiation from wireless devices using abenchmark dose approach. Environ Health. 2021; 20(1): 84. Volume10Issue16-2023 CaseReport http://www.acmcasereports.com/ 11
33. Hedendahl L, Carlberg M, Hardell L. Electromagnetic hypersensitivity–anincreasingchallengetothemedicalprofession.RevEnvi-ron Health. 2015; 30(4): 209-315.
34. Stein Y, Udasin IG. Electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS, microwave syndrome) - Review of mechanisms. Env Res. 2020; 186:109445.
35. Buchner,K,Eger,H.Changesofclinicallyimportantneurotransmitters under the influence of modulated RF Fields-Along-term studyunderreal-lifeconditions.Umwelt-MedizinGesellschaft.2011;24: 44-57.
36. Zothansiama,ZosangzualiM,LalramdinpuiiM,JagetiaGC.Impactof radiofrequency radiation on DNA damage and anti¬oxidants inperipheral blood lymphocytes of humans residing in the vicinity ofmobile phone base stations. Electromagn Biol Med. 2017; 36: 295305.
37. IARC Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Non-ionizing radiation, Part 2: Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. IARC Monogr Eval Carcinog Risks Hum. 2013; 102: 1-460.
38. Davis D, Birnbaum L, Ben-Ishai P, Taylor H, Sears M, Eng M, etal. Wireless technologies, nonionizing electromagnetic fields andchildren: Identifying and reducing health risks. Curr Probl PediatrAdolesc Health Care. 2023; 53: 101374.
39. FrankJW.Electromagneticfields,5Gandhealth:whatabouttheprecautionaryprinciple?Essay.JEpidemiolCommunityHealth.2021;75: 562-566
Hardell L. Case Report: A52-Year Healthy Woman Developed Severe Microwave Syndrome Shortly After Installation of a 5G Base Station Close to HerApartment. Annals of Clinical and Medical Case Reports 2023