# WEB-055 — 3.5 GHz: reversible suppression of neuronal firing at high SAR

Why this matters
Recording during exposure can reveal a temporary response that disappears afterwards. This experiment found such inhibition in neuronal cultures at its highest exposure level. Its lower-dose results and heating comparison help define the conditions under which that finding belongs in the discussion.

Id: WEB-055

Author: Canovi et al.

Full Authors: Anne Canovi; Rosa Orlacchio; Florence Poulletier de Gannes; Philippe Lévêque; Delia Arnaud-Cormos; Isabelle Lagroye; André Garenne; Yann Percherancier; Noëlle Lewis

Year: 2023

Title: In vitro exposure of neuronal networks to the 5G-3.5 GHz signal

Journal: Frontiers in public health

Citation: Anne Canovi; Rosa Orlacchio; Florence Poulletier de Gannes; Philippe Lévêque; Delia Arnaud-Cormos; Isabelle Lagroye; André Garenne; Yann Percherancier; Noëlle Lewis. In vitro exposure of neuronal networks to the 5G-3.5 GHz signal. Frontiers in public health. 2023. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2023.1231360.

Doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1231360

Pmid: 37608978

Topic: 3.5 GHz cellular experiments; Neuronal network activity; 5G-modulated signals

Verification Group: Original text reviewed

Record Role: Original text reviewed

Featured: False

Exposure: 3.5 GHz continuous wave or actual 5G NR-modulated signal; 15 min at SAR 1, 3 or 28 W/kg; temperature rise below 1°C at the highest level.

Design: Primary cortical-neuron networks; multi-electrode recordings, sham controls, direct heating and 1.8 GHz comparisons.

Finding: At 28 W/kg, bursting/firing rates fell roughly 35–43% during exposure and recovered afterwards. No conclusive effect at 1/3 W/kg. Direct heating also inhibited activity.

Statistics: See the original results; effect sizes were not independently recalculated.

Boundary: High-SAR effect, with thermal contributions unresolved. Reversible cultured-neuron inhibition is not neuronal death or demonstrated harm from ordinary 5G use.

Related: Bordeaux/Limoges programme; 2025 co-exposure follow-up DOI 10.1002/bem.70026 found no marked network effect at 1/4 W/kg.

Protection Question: Which exposure conditions reproduce this finding, and what would establish its relevance beyond the experimental model?

Access: Original methods/results and interpretation reviewed; raw data and supplements were not independently audited.

Locator: Original methods and results

Notice: Linked Europe PMC/PubMed notice fields checked 21 October 2026; no correction/retraction surfaced for this record. Publisher/citation screening is not exhaustive.

Funding: See original disclosure; funding details were not established in this check.

Conflicts: A disclosure statement is present in the original article; consult it for the declared relationships.

Source Url: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1231360

Retrieval Links: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2023.1231360 | https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/37608978/ | https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10441122/

Verification Date: 2026-10-21

Discovery Id: TARGETED-20261021-28

Technology Tracks: 5g

Technology Connection: Relevant carrier-frequency research; the record distinguishes actual 5G modulation from other laboratory waveforms.

Publication Type: Original journal research

Study Setting: Cells / isolated tissue

Browse Categories: brain|cells