5G effects endocannabinoid system

5G conspiracy theories run a little off the radar from science. Unlike 4G, high-band 5G does disperse energy into the upper layers of the skin according to Health Canada. Neither electromagnetic frequency (EMF) range can, however, induce ionizing radiation or damage DNA. Interestingly, lower-range EMF promotes an environment that helps to produce endocannabinoids. This means that 5G radio waves can affect the endocannabinoid system but issues might occur after chronic exposure.

5G is non-ionizing radiation, which might affect the endocannabinoid system by exciting atoms.

Effects of low range EMF — ionization vs biological switches

Flipping biological switches and ionization is the difference between a flower gently blowing in the wind as opposed to having one of its petals torn off. In the same sense, EMF signals from cell towers appear to push atoms around in our bodies without tearing them apart or affecting DNA.

To get to the point fairly quickly, many processes in your body depend on the movement of atoms with a positive or negative charge. Those atoms include sodium, calcium, or potassium ions, for example. Nerves, in part, send signals by switching atoms back and forth in a consecutive series. Moreover, some of these biological switches are electrically gated. (1)

Imagine then how external electromagnetic activity can mildly affect internal biological processes. While even higher 5G frequencies are too weak to cause causing ionization — the removal of electrons from atoms. Cell signals appear to still manipulate biological processes by affecting switches controlled by the flow of atomic ions within the body. And while a gentle electromagnetic breeze shouldn’t cause much of an effect. The long-term effects of 5G signals are still unknown.

The ECS and EMF, bound by calcium

One atomic ion that happens to be boosted by EMF is calcium, an environment that happens to prime endocannabinoid production. Countering itself, the ECS, in turn, reduces calcium activity. Essentially, the ECS works like a cutoff switch to maintain balance throughout the body, also known as homeostasis.

The movement of atomic ions also causes them to vibrate and heat up. (4) Our bodies have sensors that respond to temperature changes known as Transient Receptor Potential (TRP) channels. These channels help to control the flow of calcium channels and also are considered part of the endocannabidiome.

Calcium currents are one mechanism that 5G radiofrequency effects that can induce oxidative stress. (1-3) To avoid being short-sighted, of course, EMF can cause oxidation through several other processes.

Radiofrequency and oxidation

True — we need oxygen to survive much like our hearts and blood vessels need nitric oxide to avoid damage. To protect against oxidative stress that occurs as a result, though, our bodies use endocannabinoids. Pitted against oxidative stress from 5G, EMF and elsewhere, the endocannabinoid system (ECS) embodies a large system found in all humans and vertebrae.

Radio Frequencies (RF) are offered in a range of non-ionizing bands. For example, high-band 5G operates at up to 47 GHz. That is well above that 6GHz threshold that Health Canada uses when testing EMF exposure in the workplace under Safety Code 6. Alternate tests are used above 6GHz since energy becomes dispersed into the outer layer of the skin at that frequency.

5G endocannabinoid system
5G signals use a higher frequency but they are also emitted in millimetre waves. 5G tower pictured courtesy of Canva.

EMF from 5G towers vs phones

Dr. James Orgill holds a Ph.d. in chemical engineering but more famously runs the channel Action Labs. Orgill broadcast an experiment on the strength of 5G signals. He compared the EMF emitted by the cell towers to frequencies given off by his cellphone. The latter of the two emitted a remarkably stronger frequency due to a difference in distance from the two sources.

At the end of the video, Dr. Orgill explained that while 5G cell signals do not induce one type of radiation, they do induce another. That is, ionizing radiation is not a threat from 5G phones — let alone the more distant towers. Signals from 5G pocket computers do, however, affect sugar molecules according to Youtuber, James Orgill, Ph.d.

Skipping on providing scientific citations for 5G and sugar molecules, it seems that radio waves from cell services do have biological effects. Scientists have repeatedly tried to transmit their humble concerns to regulatory bodies with little success. In one study from Iran in mice, rosemary essential oil was even explored as one potential treatment for oxidative stress caused by lower EMF frequencies. (2)

Higher Electromagnetic Frequencies (EMF) can induce ionization that damages DNA. Whereas current research instead suggests a safer story for weaker radio waves used by cell signals and 5G services. With that said, 5G and general low-range EMF still induces oxidation constantly maintained by the endocannabinoid system. Should we, therefore, demand more research on the biological effects of EMF and 5G signals before ramping high-band density? And what about sixth-generation services above 100GHz?

Let us know in the comments if you have noticed an effect from your 5G cellphone. And check out this story to learn more about oxidative stress and the ECS.


  1. Pall ML. Electromagnetic fields act via activation of voltage-gated calcium channels to produce beneficial or adverse effects. J Cell Mol Med. 2013;17(8):958-965. doi:10.1111/jcmm.12088
  2. Henschenmacher B, Bitsch A, de Las Heras Gala T, et al. The effect of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on biomarkers of oxidative stress in vivo and in vitro: A protocol for a systematic review. Environ Int. 2022;158:106932. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2021.106932
  3. Asl JF, Goudarzi M, Shoghi H. The radio-protective effect of rosmarinic acid against mobile phone and Wi-Fi radiation-induced oxidative stress in the brains of rats. Pharmacol Rep. 2020;72(4):857-866. doi:10.1007/s43440-020-00063-9
  4. Elzanaty, Ahmed & Chiaraviglio, Luca & Slim-Alouini, Mohamed. (2021). 5G and EMF Exposure: Misinformation, Open Questions, and Potential Solutions. 10.3389/frcmn.2021.635716.