RETRACTED: 5G Technology and induction of coronavirus in skin cells
Authors: T Lotti
K M Lomonosov
M Fioranelli
O Y Olisova
M G Roccia
M Jafferany
A Sepehri
Journal: Journal of biological regulators and homeostatic agents (2020)
Discipline: BIOLOGY & BIOCHEMISTRY
Keywords: Withdrawn; Publisher; Ahead of Print; Article; Research
Affiliations: Department of Nuclear, Sub-nuclear and Radiation Physics, G. Marconi University, Rome, Italy., Central Michigan Saginaw, Michigan, USA., Department of Dermatology and Venereology, I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Moscow, Russia.

Abstract:  Ahead of Print article withdrawn by publisher. 

Retracted: Yes

PubPeer comments:
 As with previous papers by the co-authors Fioranelli and Sepehri, this piece is full of extraordinary claims and little evidence. But extraordinary claims need to be backed by extraordinary findings, and this paper does not provide any data. The paper claims that 5G waves can enter a cell (which might be likely) and that they can then  produce coronavirus (very, very, very extraordinary). The authors state:  In this research, we have shown that new generation mobile technology, like 5G, could have the main role in constructing various types of viruses, such as Coronaviruses, within a cell It has plenty of cartoons that are pretty but that do not prove anything: ![file] And it has lots of impressive looking formulas that do not prove the Coronavirus-generation either. ![file] Where is the prove that radiation can generate new viruses? And why specifically a coronavirus? I invite the authors to provide this proof here. , 
 This composition is listed as an Editorial, and presumably has the journal s full backing. The editorial board is not provided in searchable form, but this appears to be it here. No-one is described in particularly specific detail. Anyway, I m wondering which of the authors is an Editor for this Editorial. https: www.biolifesas.org biolife wp-content uploads 2018 08 Editorial-board.jpg ![file] , 
 Additional mysterious things about this journal, that is included in PubMed: * most DOI links go to a landing page that just has the abstract, or sometimes only a title. There are no links to the actual papers. * the landing pages of the papers contain text that cannot be selected and copied. And just in case the paper discussed here will mysteriously disappear from the journal, here are some The Internet Never Forgets links: http: archive.is lwrOz http: archive.is 3aflm , 
 Just the abstract show that the authors lack scientific preparation. Just a sentence:  DNA is made from charged electrons and atoms Like if uncharged electrons exist and atoms do not contain nuclei. , 
 Title and content do not match. The title is definitive or conclusive, however the manuscript is speculative and only suggests that it may be possible. There is insufficient evidence for claim in introduction (pg. 4, paragraph 1):  5G causes 720 (factorial) different diseases in human beings, and can kill everything that lives except some forms of microorganisms (12). The number of diseases seems unrealistic - 720! equates to 2.6*10^1746. This would be approximately 2.6*10^1724 times larger number than estimated stars in the universe. The cited reference ( https: bioaccent.org cancer-sciences cancer-sciences66.pdf ) is a review that also makes this exact claim four times without a single citation. Thus, this publication also provides no evidence for this claim, and is not a suitable reference. Furthermore, the statement in the currently scrutinized publication may have plagiarized the original publication while providing credit: Fiorenelli et al. 2020, 1 occurrence of 720! (copied and pasted verbatim) Cancer is only one of the many problems. 5G causes 720 (factorial) different diseases in human beings, and can kill everything that lives except some forms of microorganisms (12). Christianto et al. 2019, 4 occurrences of 720! (copied and pasted verbatim, in order) Cancer is only one problem, and one that is easily solved. 4G and 5G cause 720! (factorial) different maladies in human beings, and can kill everything that lives but some forms of micro organisms. Wireless technologies induce 720! Different maladies, cancer included Cancer is only one problem, and one that is easily solved. 4G and 5G cause 720! (factorial) different maladies in human beings, and can kill everything that lives but some forms of micro organisms. Cancer is only one problem, and one that is easily solved. 4G and 5G cause 720! (Factorial) different maladies in human beings and can kill everything that lives but some forms of micro organisms. Lack of conceptual clarity in introduction (pg. 4, paragraph 1): However, most waves have a length more than the size of cells and pass them without any effect. Only limited waves with lengths smaller than millimeter could penetrate into cell membrane and interact with DNA inductors. According to this statement, waves can only affect something larger than their wavelength. Thus a cell larger than 1 millimeter could be affected by a radiation with a frequency smaller than 1 millimeter. However, the nucleus containing all of the DNA in a human cell is much smaller than 1 millimeter (~10 micrometers, https: www.sciencedirect.com science article pii S0006349500762825#:~:text=A%20human%20nucleus%20is%20%E2%88%BC,nucleus%20(Rabl%2C%201885 ), thus 5G that has millimeter wavelengths (pg. 3, paragraph 3) should not be able to affect DNA. However, I may be misunderstanding, thus my desire for greater clarity. Lack of conceptual clarity in introduction (pg. 4, paragraph 1): Millimeter waves have shorter range than microwaves, therefore the reactive cells are those with smaller size (8-10). Consequently, biological cells also could act like a receiver for these waves. The range of wavelengths for microwaves is smaller than the range of wavelengths for 5G and other millimeter waves, hence the prefixes  micro- versus  milli- . Perhaps range means the physical distance the wave travels, ie the range of a tower that produces the waves? For example, Wikepedia pages for these forms of radiation agree that the distance range for microwaves (up to 25 km) is larger than the distance range for 5G ( 1 meter to a few hundred meters). However, it then becomes unclear how this would relate to biological cell sizes. This also raises the questions of other, smaller wavelengths of radiation, e.g. light or x-rays, that have been extensively and causally linked to biological interactions with human cells but have been completely neglected. Improper structure: Methods. The Methods section contains no methods; they are currently only a proposal for a mechanism to test. Concerns with overall approach: magnetic field measurements. This publication offers no direct evidence (ie measurements) for effects of magnetic fields on human cells or their substructures or of their ability to produce magnetic fields, which is thoroughly described and diagrammed and is an essential component of the presented inductor theory. Measuring and visualizing magnetic fields and biological interactions with them is possible for individual bacterial cells, therefore it may be applicable to human cells as a proof-of-concept ( https: journals.plos.org plosone article?id=10.1371 journal.pone.0082064 and https: www.sciencedirect.com science article pii S000634950771398X ). Lack of conceptual clarity in  Methods (pg. 4, paragraph 3): all of it. The authors mention nerve cells that could receive radiation via a dermatological antenna cell, however nerve cells are never mentioned again. It is unclear why nerve cells would not be similarly affected by external radiation, or why these cells were introduced at all. Lack of conceptual clarity and or insufficient evidence for claim (pg. 6, paragraph 3): The wavelength of emitted waves from a DNA is equal or less than its size within a cell. Also, shapes of radiated waves by a DNA have direct relations with the shapes of their genetic source. A DNA is formed from hexagonal and pentagonal manifolds; thus, its emitted waves have hexagonal and pentagonal shapes. These waves produce hexagonal and pentagonal holes within the liquids of a nucleus and a cell. To fill these holes, hexagonal and pentagonal molecules are built. These concepts are not well-enough known to not be cited. With my training in genetics and microbiology, I have never come across the idea that DNA emits waves. Although more rudimentary, my understanding of electromagnetic radiation cannot have pentagonal or hexagonal waveforms. I would appreciate it if more of this crucial information was shared, because I am skeptical that the only citation is a self-citation and is, again, purely theoretical. Lack of conceptual clarity throughout the publication: pentagonal and hexagonal  bases ,  shapes ,  holes ,  molecules ,  disks ,  manifolds , as well as  holes in liquids and bases  fill the holes . Do these terms all refer to the nucleotides adenosine, cytosine, guanine, thymine, and uracil given their 5- or 6-membered ring structures? Do only some of them refer to nucleotides? It is rarely clear what these mean. The idea of a  hole in liquid is difficult to comprehend, and the figures do not sufficiently render this concept. My understanding of this phrase conflicts with my fundamental understanding of liquids. This is similar for bases that fill the holes. Lack of conceptual clarity in the results (pg. 6, paragraph 4-?): DNA microstate This term is never defined, and is not well-enough known not be to defined. What it might be is unclear based on the (lack of) available context. Lack of conceptual clarity and or insufficient evidence for claim (pg. 7, paragraph 5): all of it. The goal of these calculations is unclear. The size of the human genome is known, and the number of genes and its gene density are also known. Furthermore, the wording makes it sound as though the non-coding intergenic regions are ignored in these calculations, which likely ignores large portions of the genome as well. Insufficient evidence for claim (pg. 9, paragraph 2): This figure [Figure 6] indicates that by decreasing the wavelength ( 10-3m), waves pass the cell membrane and interact with DNAs. The probability function contains no value or equation involving a cell membrane, thus it cannot indicate waves passing it. Insufficient evidence for claim (pg. 9, paragraph 2): These waves produce hexagonal and pentagonal holes within a cell. To fill these holes, extra bases are produced. These bases could join to each other and form viruses such as COVID-19. These were the proposed mechanism; there is no evidence provided or cited for any of these claims. The results of the models don t offer the impacts of the interaction of the waves with DNA, only that the interaction may occur. The mathematical model built doesn t include anything about holes in liquids, how bases are produced, or how bases fill the holes. There is a clear assumption that if the holes were filled with bases, these bases would not only spontaneously assemble into DNA matching SARS-Cov-2 (an RNA virus with 27,000-34,0000 nucleotides in a specific order), but also that this DNA would become a viral particle containing the RNA genome and structural proteins. There is additionally no evidence to support a conclusion that it wouldn t construct an unrelated virus. , 
 Fioranelli et al. concluded that 5G millimeter waves will increase the probability of evolution using a physics model. ![file] This curve is derived from Eq. 42 $$P_{DNA} = e^{(K_{s} E_{DNA} T_{cell})} Omega_{DNA, tot}$$ Author described the derivation of $E_{DNA}$ term in Eq. 41, which is a function of $lambda_{EM}$: ![file] $T_{cell}$, temperature of cell, can be estimated. However, I don t find description of $K_s$ and $Omega_{DNA, tot}$. How were these two terms derived? How was the normalization performed so that $P_{DNA}$ - 1.0 when wavelength - 0? Thanks. P.S. I am physicist. , 
 A theoretical mathematical model to consider the effects of waves on evolutions of cells In this article u201c5G Technology and induction of coronavirus in skin cellsu201d we reconsider the effects of waves on cells and its relation with viruses in the era of covid19. We describe the hypothesis of a theoretical model to consider this problem by using mathematical biology and mathematical physics. Main result of our article is in Figure 6 :u201cThe probability of the effect of waves on the evolutions of a DNA within a cell in terms of wavelengthu201d. In this figure we underlie a concept: by decreasing wavelengths, waves will have chances to penetrate the cells and nucleus and cause some diseases. This figure shows results which we observe many times in nature. For example, the effect of waves in producing some cancers like melanoma or blood cancers have been asserted; however its mechanism is not clear. We have proposed a theoretical model by using mathematical devices and consider the effects of waves on evolutions of cells. This theoretical model is applicable to all viruses. We focus on COVID19, because many scientists are trying to convince official institutes for dangerous in 5G technology and next technologies and their relation with humanu2019s healthy. We show that there is a minor probability for millimeter waves in 5G to induce many viruses, possibly covid19 also; however this probability isnu2019t zero and it may be occurred. However, by decreasing wavelengths in next and future technologies, this probability grows. We give a probability less than 10 100 for millimeter waves, but this probability will increase to for more energetic waves. About inducing covid 19 in cells, its mechanism is very similar to mechanisms which proposed by Montagnier: As figure 6 shows, ultraviolet rays can have more effects. Most of experiments of Montagnier and his group focused on viral transduction and thus, we only propose a theoretical model which confirms their experiments in biological cells. We have not isolated any viruses; we are discussing only a theoretical model. These are only hypotheses that will have to be confirmed experimentally with subsequent studies. Bibliography Montagnier L., Au00efssa J., Ferris S., Lavallu00e9e C. (2009).Electromagnetic signals are produced by aqueous nanostructures derived from bacterial DNA sequences. Interdiscip. Sci. Comput. Life Interdiscip Sci Comput Life Sci (2009) 1: 81u201390 DOI: 10.1007 s12539-009-0036-7 Montagnier L., Giudice E.D., Au00efssa J, Lavallee C., Motschwiller S., Capolupo A., Polcari A., Romano P., Tedeschi A., Vitiello G., (2015). Transduction of DNA information through water and electromagnetic waves. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, 34:2, 106-112, DOI: 10.3109 15368378.2015.1036072 Mao, P., Brown, A.J., Esaki, S. et al. ETS transcription factors induce a unique UV damage signature that drives recurrent mutagenesis in melanoma. Nat Commun 9, 2626 (2018). https: doi.org 10.1038 s41467-018-05064-0.) , 
 It appears that the journal this article appears in was a formerly respected journal within Italy. It has been indexed by PMC since 1987. Sometime within the last few years it appears that the old publisher, Wichtig Publishing, had sold J Biol Regul Homeost Agents to Biolife. It appears that in 2018 Wichtig Publishing was acquired by SAGE. Some of the old articles from the 1980s, 1990s, early 2000s indexed within PMC have disappeared, likely they were lost when Wichtig transferred the title to SAGE. Information on the Journal s history is not available from Biolife s website. My guess is that this is an example of a Predatory Publisher acquiring a previously respected Journal and using the Journal s status as an PMC-indexed Journal to sell publications. I think PMC should stop indexing this Journal from PMC. , 
 To be support their claims, the authors shall show that by irradiating human cells with electromagnetic waves possessing the wavelenght and intensity of 5G broadcasting device they are able to detect exogenous viral DNA or RNA in irradiated cells but not in control cells. The evidence can be obtained by using standard essays like PCR, qPCR or sequencing technologies and downstream bioinformatics analysis like Blast. The authors do not provide such direct and simple evidence. , 
 Retracted, see https: pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov 32668870  2020 Jul 16. Online ahead of print. WITHDRAWN: 5G Technology and induction of coronavirus in skin cells. No authors listed. PMID: 32668870. Abstract. Ahead of Print article withdrawn by publisher. , 
 We are all pleased to see the article was retracted and hope those who handled the submission will be more careful in the future and let s conspiracy  scientist complain of cancel culture etc. However, this has already been taken up by conspiracy sites like this https: archive.fo SSGuu who present the pubmed abstract as if the article was from  the US National Library of Medicine and provide a link to an archived pubmed page (they were quick in doing this, if they did link to the actual pubmed page one would see it s marked  WITHDRAWN ). Probably pubmed should have a disclaimer on each page to warn that theirs is a database of publication abstracts and that the presence in the database is not an endorsement by NLM. Pietro Ghezzi , 
 The page of the now retracted paper states:  This article has been retracted at the request of the Editor. After a thorough investigation the Editor-in-Chief has retracted this article as it showed evidence of substantial manipulation of the peer review. https: www.biolifesas.org biolife 2020 07 27 retracted-5g-technology-and-induction-of-coronavirus-in-skin-cells Two queries: 1) Was the decision to retract made by an Editor, or the Editor-in-Chief? 2) Were peer reviewers suggested by the authors, or recruited by the journal? , 
 #5 *The cited reference ( https: bioaccent.org cancer-sciences cancer-sciences66.pdf ) is a review that also makes this exact claim four times without a single citation.* The ref. is to Christianto, Boyd Smarandache, in a journal from BioAccent, a famously low-rent parasitical publisher. I had no idea that Florentin Smarandache had branched out into anti-5G exploitation. He used to be more associated with  [Neutrosophy]  , a made-up discipline that purported to be at once a philosophy, an all-embracing extension of mainstream mathematics, and anything else that Smarandache wants it to be. Perhaps Neutrosophy has lost its cachet. http: eusa-riddled.blogspot.com 2014 06 full-metal-zizek-we-read-self-promoting.html , 
 See also https: retractionwatch.com 2020 07 28 some-papers-can-slip-through-the-net-says-journal-that-published-5g-covid-19-paper and https: retractionwatch.com 2020 07 26 paper-blaming-covid-19-on-5g-technology-withdrawn , 
 #13 *The cited reference ( https: bioaccent.org cancer-sciences cancer-sciences66.pdf ) is a review that also makes this exact claim four times without a single citation.* The cited reference no longer exists, as the Bioaccent predatory publishers folded their tents and silently stole away. ,