Wackiness aside, there is some evidence that some wireless technologies can and do present real dangers (e.g., a Scandanavian study a few years back that showed pelvic blade bone density was as much as 30% less on the side men carried their GSM phones on their belts.)<p>5G is also a horribly imprecise term - it can include anything from 600 MHz UHF to 40 GHz mm wave, and widely varying modulation and power control schemes. The lower bands are probably not a problem, as we've been using some of them for quite a while, though not on our persons. The mm-wave and THz stuff really is a huge unknown.<p>One problem is that these technologies don't ever get seriously tested for biological effects: They just get deployed due to industry/govt/carrier/market pressure, and by the time we have enough data to even know therer might be a danger (viz, the GSM study above), we're already experimenting on the population as test subjects for the next generation of risk. At least as much as the frequency, the modulation method seems to matter, too, with the very sharp-edged full-power square waves of TSM/GSM type signals probably being considerably worse than the noise-like CDMA, for instance. (IMO, there is probably no current (4G/5G) LTE technology that is nearly as safe as CDMA.) More recent research does seem to show that there are RF health effects that are NOT related to heating, but heating is the only thing any of the gov't/industry "RF safety" regs cover.<p>This really is one of those areas where an honest person is forced to recognize that we have no idea what we don't know. RF and biology is a barely studied field, yet we know that many (most? all?) living things do have biophoton systems that we don't understand, and have largely ignored. 5G could be heinously dangerous, or relatively benign. So the answer to your question is no, there isn't (much) solid evidence yet that 5G is dangerous, and we won't really know for many years. But neither is there any actual evidence that it is safe and harmless...