Not really. It is a very probable and real danger, but by completely another reasons.

Shortly, the only difference of 5G in comparison with previous cellular network generations is enhanced bandwidth between user device and base station. However, today even 3G bandwidth is not utilised fully, because of absense of wide enough uplinks from base staions to network backbone, not even speaking about 4G and 5G. So, there is no any need for enhanced bandwidth for consumers, it can't be ultilised by customers because of narrow uplinks. But there is perfect reason for much higher bandwith between user device and base station for total surveillance agenda. As I see how it is implemented - every 5G base station have local temporary storage of surveillance data. High-bandwith constant surveillance streams from all end-user devices stored locally on base stations. If surveillance state need an access to that surveillance data of specific person, it just download corresponding records from base station. It is perfect scheme of total surveillance system. No need for any centralized storage for insane amount of data or giant network of high-bandwith uplinks to every base station. It is also highly distributed, so very reliable. Only thing needed comparing to 3G/4G is higher bandwidth between user device and base station and some not very large storage at base station.

All that bullshit about "5G is harmful" or "5G is a weapon" is to distract those who suspect something weird about 5G from the aforementioned real 5G threat for people. Pretty traditional move of TPTB - to pose those who try to ask reasonable questions as insane lunatics who spread bullshit that could be easily debunked, created on purpose by TPTB puppets and pushed to every single alt-media.