First, I'd like to state that I'm aware of the issues associated with 5G cell towers and the health risks associated with them. Cities and communities across the world have vocally opposed and even banned their construction, and I think they are right to do so.
However, I am curious as to whether the 5G problem is associated with "5G" cell phones.
I have a based friend who may end up needing a new phone for work. Problem is, every phone on the market is "5G", and he wants to take care of himself as best as he can, hence why he's been hesitant to take the plunge on a newer phone.
Fortunately, we live in a county that recently denied multiple permit requests for 5G towers, so we're not as worried about 5G towers.
But do 5G smartphones have the same health risks as the 5G towers?
I'd appreciate feedback from people in the know.
It is physically impossible for non-ionizing radiation to cause cancer.
UV causes sun burns and increases the probability of skin cancer because it is ionizing radiation. It strips electrons away from molecules, altering and damaging them. If that damage happens to DNA, and cellular repair mechanisms can’t fix it properly, that’s when the risk of cancer goes up. Sun burns are your skin cells committing mass suicide because they’re too damaged to repair themselves properly. X-rays and gamma rays do the same thing.
Visible light, infrared, micro, and radio waves can’t do that. They cannot alter molecular structures. At worst they impart heat, which is how a microwave cooks your food and why sunlight feels warm.
There are plenty of people who think non ionizing radiation can cause cancer, but all they have is statistical correlation, which does not imply causation and is almost meaningless unless they can explain and experimentally demonstrate a physical mechanism by which non ionizing radiation can cause cancer.
Non ionizing radiation contributing to cancer risk is known, with proposed mechanisms, just not widely known. Of course not. Talk to curious researchers trying to get more funding for those kinds of well formed studies. Rejecting the possibility of mechanisms involving NIR is, illogically, based on the assumption that no other mechanism is known beyond that of ionizing radiation, as you described.
The mechanisms are in fact being uncovered in the field of biophysics. So we should not be shocked that if non-ionizing radiation exposures, particularly non-native ELFs and RFs, are altering water chemistry in and around the cells, of course the energetics of the cell are altered and ROS will be elevated.
https://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/Entropy/entropy-15-03822.pdf
Also no surprise for example NIR increases glucose metabolism and causes calcium efflux. Nora Volkow has done direct research on Cell Phones effect on Brain Metabolism, where NIR increases glucose consumption drastically while also slowing the efficiency of circadian clocks genes in front of every human gene and is a hallmark of a Warburg Metabolism.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3184892/
This coheres with studies going back to the 1960s and Allen Frey demonstrating how polarizing electromagnetic radiation from non-ionizing sources increases permeability of the blood-brain-barrier (which separates the circulating blood from the brain extracellular fluid in the central nervous system), and also of voltage gated ion channels in excitable cell membranes (which regulate the release of neurotransmitters and endocrine signaling among many other functions).
It is your job to prove that non-ionizing radiation can cause cancer. It is not my job to give you the benefit of the doubt. I did not say that ionizing radiation is the only thing that can cause cancer, I said that non-ionizing radiation does not have a known mechanism to cause cancer. Those are not the same claims.
I'm going to more thoroughly read that paper you linked, but keyword searching does not reveal that they even attempt to show a link between non-ionizing radiation and cancer, or any disease for that matter. Most of the mentions of "radiowaves", "microwaves", and "electromagnetic" concern diagnostic methods. I see one urge to not eat microwaved food, with no explanation given. This makes no sense as microwaved food does not give off microwaves and is not chemically altered by microwaves. I see nothing at all about cell phones or personal use of any communications device.
I'm also seeing discussion of "structured water" in this paper, which is a huge red flag. "Structured water" is a branch of pseudoscience extremely popular with New Agers and scam artists. In fact, it's not even pseudoscience; it's just wrong. Structured water is merely ice; liquid water by nature cannot be structured as it is in a constantly shifting fluid state. I'm hoping that the authors are using this term in a different sense than the New Age quantum mystic scammers.