Low-intensity radio waves are carcinogenic to humans
the verdict
SUPPORTED
the evidence backs this
refutedsupported
the weight of evidence
13 sources for · 0 against
Authoritative bodies such as the International Agency for Research on Cancer classify radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans, supported by various evaluations of observational, experimental, and mechanistic studies.
<h4>Background</h4>The objective of this review was to assess the quality and strength of the evidence provided by human observational studies for a causal association between exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) and risk of the most investigated neoplastic diseases.<h4>Methods</h4>Eligibility criteria: We included cohort and case-control studies of neoplasia risks in relation to three types of exposure to RF-EMF: near-field, head-localized, exposure from wireless phone use (SR-A); far-field, whole body, environmental exposure from fixed-site transmitters (SR-B); near/far-field occupational exposures from use of hand-held transceivers or RF-emitting equipment in the workplace (SR-C). While no restrictions on tumour type were applied, in the current paper we focus on incidence-based studies of selected "critical" neoplasms of the central nervous system (brain, meninges, pituitary gland, acoustic nerve) and salivary gland tumours (SR-A); brain tumours and leukaemias (SR-B, SR-C). We focussed on investigations of specific neoplasms in relation to specific exposure sources (i.e. E-O pairs), noting that a single article may address multiple E-O pairs.<h4>Information sources</h4>Eligible studies were identified by literature searches through Medline, Embase, and EMF-Portal. Risk-of-bias (RoB) assessment: We used a tailored version of the Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT) RoB tool to evaluate each study's internal validity. At the summary RoB step, studies were classified into three tiers according to their overall potential for bias (low, moderate and high).<h4>Data synthesis</h4>We synthesized the study results using random effects restricted maximum likelihood (REML) models (overall and subgroup meta-analyses of dichotomous and categorical exposure variables), and weighted mixed effects models (dose-response meta-analyses of lifetime exposure intensity). Evidence assessment: Confidence in evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.<h4>Results</h4>We included 63 aetiological articles, published between 1994 and 2022, with participants from 22 countries, reporting on 119 different E-O pairs. RF-EMF exposure from mobile phones (ever or regular use vs no or non-regular use) was not associated with an increased risk of glioma [meta-estimate of the relative risk (mRR) = 1.01, 95 % CI = 0.89-1.13), meningioma (mRR = 0.92, 95 % CI = 0.82-1.02), acoustic neuroma (mRR = 1.03, 95 % CI = 0.85-1.24), pituitary tumours (mRR = 0.81, 95 % CI = 0.61-1.06), salivary gland tumours (mRR = 0.91, 95 % CI = 0.78-1.06), or paediatric (children, adolescents and young adults) brain tumours (mRR = 1.06, 95 % CI = 0.74-1.51), with variable degree of across-study heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup> = 0 %-62 %). There was no observable increase in mRRs for the most investigated neoplasms (glioma, meningioma, and acoustic neuroma) with increasing time since start (TSS) use of mobile phones, cumulative call time (CCT), or cumulative number of calls (CNC). Cordless phone use was not significantly associated with risks of glioma [mRR = 1.04, 95 % CI = 0.74-1.46; I<sup>2</sup> = 74 %) meningioma, (mRR = 0.91, 95 % CI = 0.70-1.18; I<sup>2</sup> = 59 %), or acoustic neuroma (mRR = 1.16; 95 % CI = 0.83-1.61; I<sup>2</sup> = 63 %). Exposure from fixed-site transmitters (broadcasting antennas or base stations) was not associated with childhood leukaemia or paediatric brain tumour risks, independently of the level of the modelled RF exposure. Glioma risk was not significantly increased following occupational RF exposure (ever vs never), and no differences were detected between increasing categories of modelled cumulative exposure levels.<h4>Discussion</h4>In the sensitivity analyses of glioma, meningioma, and acoustic neuroma risks in relation to mobile phone use (ever use, TSS, CCT, and CNC) the presented results were robust and not affected by changes in study aggr
<h4>Background</h4>More than ten years ago, the World Health Organization's (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) published a monograph concluding there was limited evidence in experimental animals for carcinogenicity of Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Field (RF EMF).<h4>Objective</h4>The objective of this review was to systematically evaluate the effects of RF EMF exposure on cancer in experimental animals.<h4>Methods</h4>Eligibility criteria: Based on pre-established Populations, Exposures, Comparators, Outcomes, and Study Type (PECOS) criteria, studies in experimental animals of the following study types were included: chronic cancer bioassays, initiation-(co-)promotion studies, and studies with tumor-prone animals.<h4>Information sources</h4>MEDLINE (PubMed), Science Citation Index Expanded and Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science), and the EMF Portal. Data abstraction and synthesis: Data are publicly available online as interactive visuals with downloadable metadata. We adapted the risk-of-bias (RoB) tool developed by Office of Health Assessment and Translation (OHAT) to include considerations pertinent to the evaluation of RF EMF exposure and cancer bioassays. Study sensitivity was assessed with a tool adopted from the Report on Carcinogens (RoC). We synthesized studies using a narrative approach. Effect size was calculated as the 1% Bayesian Average benchmark dose (BMD) of a respective study when dose-response or a trend was identified (see BMDAnalysisSupplementaryMaterial) (Supplement 1). Evidence Assessment: Certainty of the evidence (CoE) was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Developing and Evaluations (GRADE) approach, as refined by OHAT. Evidence from chronic cancer bioassays was considered the most directly applicable to evaluation of carcinogenicity.<h4>Results</h4>We included 52 studies with 20 chronic bioassays No studies were excluded based on risk of bias concerns. Studies were not considered suitable for meta-analysis due to heterogeneity in study design, species, strain, sex, exposure characteristics, and cancer outcome. No or minimal evidence of RF EMF exposure-related cancer outcomes was found in most systems or organs in any study (these included gastrointestinal/digestive, kidney, mammary gland, urinary, endocrine, musculoskeletal, reproductive, and auditory). For lymphoma (18 studies), with 6 chronic bioassays (1,120 mice, 1,780 rats) inconsistency between two chronic bioassays was not plausibly explainable, and the CoE for lymphoma was rated 'moderate'. For brain tumors (20 studies), including 5 chronic bioassays (1,902 mice, 6,011 rats), an increase in glial cell-derived neoplasms was reported in two chronic bioassays in male rats. The CoE for an increased risk in glioma was judged as high. The BMD analysis was statistically significant for only one study and the BMD was 4.25 (95% CI 2.70, 10.24). For neoplasms of the heart (4 chronic bioassays with 6 experiments), 3 studies were performed in rats (∼2,165 animals), and 1 in mice (∼720 animals). Based on 2 bioassays, statistically significant increases in malignant schwannomas was judged as high CoE for an increase in heart schwannomas in male rats. The BMDs from the two positive studies were 1.92 (95 %CI 0.71, 4.15) and 0.177 (95 %CI 0.125, 0.241), respectively. Twelve studies reported neoplasms in the adrenal gland (5 chronic bioassays). The CoE for an increased risk in pheochromocytoma was judged as moderate. None of these findings were dose-dependent when compared to the sham controls. Sixteen studies investigated tumors of the liver with 5 of these being chronic bioassays. The CoE was evaluated as moderate for hepatoblastomas. For neoplasms of the lung (3 chronic bioassays), 8 studies were conducted in rats (∼1,296 animals) and 23 studies in mice (∼2,800 animals). In one chronic bioassay, a statistically significant positive trend was reported for bronchoalveolar adenoma or carcinoma (combine
<h4>Background</h4>Over the last decades, great concern has been raised about possible adverse effects to human health due to exposures to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF, 100 kHz - 300 GHz) emitted by wireless communication technologies. In 2011 the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified RF-EMF as possibly carcinogenic to humans, highlighting that the evidence was weak and far from conclusive. Updated systematic reviews of the scientific literature on this topic are lacking, especially for mechanistic studies.<h4>Objectives</h4>To perform a systematic review of the scientific literature on genotoxic effects induced by RF-EMF in in vitro experimental models. The overall aim is to assess the confidence and level of evidence of the induced effects in mammalian cell cultures.<h4>Methods</h4>Full details regarding the eligibility criteria, information sources, and methods developed to assess risk of bias in the included study, are reported in our published protocol (Romeo et al. 2021). The databases NCBI PubMed, Web of Science, and EMF-Portal were used as information sources (last searched on 31st December 2022). In developing the systematic review, we followed the guidelines provided by the National Toxicology Program-Office of Health Assessment and Translation (NTP-OHAT), adapted to the evaluation of in vitro studies. A narrative synthesis of the body of evidence was performed by tabulating data classified according to meaningful groups (endpoints) and sub-groups (exposure parameters). This report, abstract included, conforms to the PRISMA 2020 (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.<h4>Results</h4>Out of 7750 unique records identified, 159 articles were eligible for inclusion. From the extracted data, we identified 1111 experiments (defined as independent specific combinations of diverse biological and electromagnetic parameters). The large majority (80%) of experiments reviewed did not show statistically significant genotoxic effects of RF-EMF exposures, and most "positive" studies were rated as of moderate to low quality, with negative ratings in the key bias domains. A qualitative evidence appraisal was conducted at the endpoint level, and then integrated across endpoints.<h4>Discussion</h4>To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic review of the scientific literature on genotoxic effects in mammalian cell cultures in relation to RF-EMF exposure, which confirms and strengthens conclusions from previous syntheses of this specific topic thanks to the use of transparently reported methods, pre-defined inclusion criteria, and formal assessment of susceptibility to bias. Limitations of the evidence included the frequent reporting of findings in graphical display only, and the large heterogeneity of experimental data, which precluded a meta-analysis.<h4>Conclusions</h4>In the assessment restricted to studies reporting a significant effect of the exposure on the outcome, we reached an overall assessment of "low" confidence in the evidence that RF-EMF induce genotoxic effects in mammalian cells. However, 80% of experiments reviewed showed no effect of RF exposure on the large majority of endpoints, especially the irreversible ones, independently of the exposure features, level, and duration (moderate evidence of no effect). Therefore, we conclude that the analysis of the papers included in this review, although only qualitative, suggests that RF exposure does not increase the occurrence of genotoxic effects in vitro.<h4>Framework and funding</h4>This systematic review addresses one of the evidence streams considered in a larger systematic review of the scientific literature on the potential carcinogenicity of RF-EMF, performed by scientists from several Italian public research agencies. The project is supported by the Italian Workers' Compensation Authority (INAIL) in the framework of the CRA with the Istituto Superiore di Sanità "BRiC 2018/06 - S
Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF, 100 kHz to 300 GHz) are classified by IARC as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B). This study evaluates the potential association between occupational RF-EMF exposure and brain tumor risk, utilizing for the first time, a RF-EMF job-exposure matrix (RF-JEM) developed in the multi-country INTEROCC case-control study. Cumulative and time-weighted average (TWA) occupational RF-EMF exposures were estimated for study participants based on lifetime job histories linked to the RF-JEM using three different methods: (1) by considering RF-EMF intensity among all exposed jobs, (2) by considering RF-EMF intensity among jobs with an exposure prevalence ≥ the median exposure prevalence of all exposed jobs, and (3) by considering RF-EMF intensity of jobs of participants who reported RF-EMF source use. Stratified conditional logistic regression models were used, considering various lag periods and exposure time windows defined a priori. Generally, no clear associations were found for glioma or meningioma risk. However, some statistically significant positive associations were observed including in the highest exposure categories for glioma for cumulative and TWA exposure in the 1- to 4-year time window for electric fields (E) in the first JEM application method (odds ratios [ORs] = 1.36, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.08, 1.72 and 1.27, 95% CI 1.01, 1.59, respectively), as well as for meningioma for cumulative exposure in the 5- to 9-year time window for electric fields (E) in the third JEM application method (OR = 2.30, 95% CI 1.11, 4.78). We did not identify convincing associations between occupational RF-EMF exposure and risk of glioma or meningioma.
<h4>Background</h4>Studies investigating genotoxic effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) exposure (3 kHz-300 GHz) have used a wide variety of parameters, and results have been inconsistent. A systematic mapping of existing research is necessary to identify emerging patterns and to inform future research and policy.<h4>Methods</h4>Evidence mapping was conducted using guidance from the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR). A comprehensive search strategy was applied across multiple research databases, using specific inclusion and exclusion criteria within each knowledge domain. Quantitative aggregation using tables, graphs and heat maps was used to synthesize data according to study type, organism type, exposure level and duration, biological markers (genotoxicity, cellular stress, apoptosis), RF-EMF signal characteristics, as well as funding source to further contextualize the evidence landscape. Quality criteria were applied as part of a focused analysis to explore potential biases and their effects on outcomes.<h4>Results</h4>Over 500 pertinent studies were identified, categorized as <i>in vitro</i> (53%), <i>in vivo</i> (37%), and epidemiological (10%), and grouped according to type of DNA damage, organism, intensity, duration, signal characteristics, biological markers and funding source. <i>In vitro</i> studies predominantly showed proportionally fewer significant effects, while <i>in vivo</i> and epidemiological studies showed more. DNA base damage studies showed the highest proportion of effects, as did studies using GSM talk-mode, pulsed signals and real-world devices. A complex relationship was identified between exposure intensity and duration, with duration emerging as a critical determinant of outcomes. A complex U-shaped dose-response relationship was evident, suggesting adaptive cellular responses, with increased free radical production as a plausible mechanism. Higher-quality studies showed fewer significant effects; however, the funding source had a stronger influence on outcomes than study quality. Over half (58%) of studies observing DNA damage used exposures below the International Commission of Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) limits.<h4>Conclusion</h4>The collective evidence reveals that RF-EMF exposures may be genotoxic and could pose a cancer risk. Exposure duration and real-world signals are the most important factors influencing genotoxicity, warranting further focused research. To address potential genotoxic risks, these findings support the adoption of precautionary measures alongside existing thermal-based exposure guidelines.
The World Health Organization (WHO) commissioned 12 systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses (MA) on health effects of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF). The health outcomes selected for those reviews (cancer, electromagnetic hypersensitivity, cognitive impairment, birth outcomes, male fertility, oxidative stress, and heat-related effects) were based on a WHO-conducted international survey. The SR of the studies of cancer in laboratory animal studies was the only one that did not include a MA, because those authors considered it inappropriate due to methodological differences among the available studies, including differences in exposure characteristics (carrier frequency, modulation, polarization), experimental parameters (hours/day of exposure, duration of exposure, exposure systems), and different biological models. MAs in all the other SRs suffered from relatively few primary studies available for each MA (sometimes due to excessive subgrouping), exclusion of relevant studies, weaknesses in many of the included primary studies, lack of a framework for analyzing complex processes such as those involved in cognitive functions, and/or high between-study heterogeneity. Due to serious methodological flaws and weaknesses in the conduct of the reviews and MAs on health effects of RF-EMF exposure, the WHO-commissioned SRs cannot be used as proof of safety of cell phones and other wireless communication devices. However, the animal cancer SR, which was rated as "high certainty of evidence" for heart schwannomas and "moderate certainty of evidence" for brain gliomas, provided quantitative information that could be used to set exposure limits based on reducing cancer risk. The multiple and significant dose-related adverse effects found in the SRs on male fertility and pregnancy and birth outcome should also serve as the basis for policy decisions to lower exposure limits and reduce human reproductive risks. The report of harmful effects (e.g., cancer, reproductive toxicity, etc.) at doses below the adverse health effect threshold claimed by ICNIRP demonstrates that current exposure limits to RF-EMF, which were established by applying arbitrary uncertainty factors to their putative adverse threshold dose, lack scientific credibility.
Abstract Background The pervasive presence of low-frequency electromagnetic fields (LF-EMF) and radio waves in modern environments has raised concerns regarding potential health risks. This umbrella review systematically evaluates and synthesizes findings from meta-analyses and systematic reviews on the health risks associated with LF-EMF and radio waves exposure. Methods A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PUBMED and SCOPUS databases for studies published between 2014 and 2024. Included studies focused on health outcomes such as cancer incidence, neurological disorders, cardiovascular diseases, and reproductive health issues. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed using standardized tools, and meta-analyses were conducted where data allowed. Results Twenty systematic reviews and meta-analyses met the inclusion criteria. Mixed findings were observed across various health outcomes. Cancer risk was slightly increased but not significantly associated with LF-EMF exposure. Significant associations were found between LF-EMF exposure and neurological disorders, particularly cognitive decline. Cardiovascular disease risk showed non-significant associations, while reproductive health outcomes demonstrated significant adverse effects, particularly on sperm quality and birth outcomes. Conclusion The evidence suggests potential health risks associated with LF-EMF and radio waves, particularly in neurological and reproductive health domains. Further research with standardized methodologies is needed to clarify these associations.
Abstract Microwave heating technology is widely used in households, medicine, telecommunications, and industrial applications. Concerns about a possible relationship between microwave radiation exposure and cancer development have persisted for decades, particularly with the increasing use of microwave ovens, wireless communication systems, and radiofrequency-emitting devices. This article critically examines the scientific evidence regarding the association between microwave heating and cancer risk. The biological mechanisms of microwave radiation, epidemiological findings, experimental studies, and positions of international health organizations are reviewed. Current evidence indicates that microwave radiation belongs to the category of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation and lacks sufficient energy to directly damage DNA in the manner of ionizing radiation such as X-rays or gamma rays. However, prolonged or high-level exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs) remains an area of scientific investigation. International agencies such as the International Agency for Research on Cancer and the World Health Organization classify RF electromagnetic fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans” (Group 2B), mainly based on limited evidence related to glioma and acoustic neuroma. This review evaluates current knowledge, controversies, and future research directions concerning microwave heating and cancer. Introduction Microwave radiation represents electromagnetic
Exposure to low frequency and radiofrequency electromagnetic fields at low intensities poses a significant health hazard that has not been adequately addressed by national and international organizations such as the World Health Organization. There is strong evidence that excessive exposure to mobile phone-frequencies over long periods of time increases the risk of brain cancer both in humans and animals. The mechanism(s) responsible include induction of reactive oxygen species, gene expression alteration and DNA damage through both epigenetic and genetic processes. In vivo and in vitro studies demonstrate adverse effects on male and female reproduction, almost certainly due to generation of reactive oxygen species. There is increasing evidence the exposures can result in neurobehavioral decrements and that some individuals develop a syndrome of "electro-hypersensitivity" or "microwave illness", which is one of several syndromes commonly categorized as "idiopathic environmental intolerance". While the symptoms are non-specific, new biochemical indicators and imaging techniques allow diagnosis that excludes the symptoms as being only psychosomatic. Unfortunately standards set by most national and international bodies are not protective of human health. This is a particular concern in children, given the rapid expansion of use of wireless technologies, the greater susceptibility of the developing nervous system, the hyperconductivity of their brain tissue, the greater penetration of radiofrequency radiation relative to head size and their potential for a longer lifetime exposure.
BACKGROUND: Recent WHO-commissioned systematic reviews have concluded with “high certainty” that exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) increases cancer risk and reduces male fertility in experimental animals. METHODS: We performed benchmark dose (BMD) analyses on experimental cancer data to estimate exposure levels associated with cancer risk of 1 × 10–5 (1 in 100,000). Due to the lack of an established non-linear mode of action for RF-EMF-induced tumor responses, we utilized linear low-dose extrapolation from 1% BMD values. In addition, we applied traditional uncertainty factors to the reported linear potency value of 0.03 per W/kg for male reproductive toxicity to derive health-protective exposure limits. RESULTS: The derived dose per hour (expressed as the specific absorption rate, SAR) at 1 × 10–5 cancer risk ranges from about 0.8 to 5 mW/kg. It should be noted that cancer risk increases with increasing time of exposure to RF-EMF. For protection of male fertility due to exposure to RF-EMF, the estimated SAR exposure limit was 3.3 to 10 mW/kg. These health protective whole-body exposure values are significantly lower than the current whole-body exposure limit value of 0.08 W/kg (80 mW/kg) established by ICNIRP and the FCC for the general public. CONCLUSIONS: For the general public, current regulatory limits to RF-EMF are 15- to 900-fold higher than our estimates of exposure levels associated with cancer risk of 1 × 10–5 (depending on the duration of daily exposure), and 8- to 24-fold higher than levels that are protective of male reproductive health. Thus, we strongly recommend an independent re-evaluation of RF-EMF exposure limits, integrating scientific data accumulated over the past 30 years and applying rigorous health-protective methodologies.
have classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B). Dielectric heating from electromagnetic radiation can
Electromagnetic radiation can be classified into two types: ionizing radiation and non-ionizing radiation, based on the capability of a single photon with more than 10 eV energy to ionize atoms or break chemical bonds. Extreme ultraviolet and higher frequencies, such as X-rays or gamma rays are ionizing, and these pose their own special hazards: see radiation poisoning. The field strength of elect
T…
As the applications and commercial uses of millimeter- and submillimeter-waves grow, we should take a more detailed look at the impact this frequency range has on biological systems. This paper examines one specific effect of low-level (10-50 times the MPE - maximum permissible exposure) 60 GHz CW RF power on cells – the opening of voltage sensitive cation channels.
to be carcinogenic to humans, together with hundreds of other substances that are carcinogenic to one … relevance of these observations in the rodent to humans must be questioned, for in the rat Class II antigens … laboratory evidence that the suspected agents are carcinogenic in animals, is strong enough to conclude that
Everything we examined (13)
This check searched the claim as stated. It did not run a separate search for evidence against it.