I just stumbled across this article and as one working in the laboratory informatics field, I was rather concerned regarding the possible issues described in this article.  So much so that I located a copy of the original article, 'Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health' by Martin L Pall (DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2018.01.035).  His article seemed to be consistent with what you described.

However, on digging deeper, in a later issue of the same publication, Environmental Research, I stumbled upon a Comment regarding this article from Alberto Najera, titled 'Comments on “Wi-Fi is an important threat to human health”' (DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2018.07.026).  In his two page comment, Dr. Najera covered a number of issues regarding the methodology and naming of this paper.  Instead of attempting to recap it, I'd suggest that people go out and read it, as it is an Open Access document.

I am not a researcher in this field, so I would hesitate to make an immediate assessment of Dr. Pall's work.  However, given the issues that Dr. Najera raises, I have concerns regarding the implication of your article.  Obviously, if there is an interaction, that is something that everyone would want to know.  Given Dr. Pall's protocol and the fact that a major fraction of the references he provided are to either his own work or work not involving humans, the article headline seems rather incitefull.  Particularly as, assuming the publications dates are correct, Dr. Pall's article was published in July of 2018, Dr. Najera's comment was published in January of 2019, while your article was not published until 18 April 2019.  It seems reasonable to me that, at the very least, reference to the comment from Dr. Najera should have been included in your article.

My concern here is that given the protocol, I would hate to see a rabid movement against Wi-Fi similar to the anti-vaxers, whose whole movement was triggered by medical 'research' that was eventually proven to be fraudulent, resulting in the loss of that author's medical license (though not stopping the movement), and putting entire generations at risk, as illustrated by the number of measles outbreaks.

I think it is quite reasonable for someone to want to evaluate Dr. Pall's work with a new set of experiments, as well as testing for possible hazards from the future 5G cellular networks, which use an even higher frequency.  I would consider that just being prudent and, I guess you would refer to it as, just doing your Due Diligence.  But given the amount of time that Wi-Fi and other devices working in the same frequency range have been around, it doesn't seem like an urgent need for us to start wearing aluminum foil hats.  (Though yes, I know that there are plenty of people that feel that we already should.)

Thank you for your time and consideration,

Dr. John Joyce