Objective: To update the regulatory framework around Radiofrequency Radiation (RFR) to better reflect current scientific evidence regarding non-thermal biological effects, protect public health, and promote scientific advancements in both RF safety and therapeutic uses.
Background:
- Outdated Guidelines: The FCC’s current safety guidelines, established in 1996, focus solely on thermal effects of RF radiation and do not account for non-thermal biological effects, such as DNA damage, oxidative stress, and cellular dysfunction. Numerous studies—including those by the National Toxicology Program (NTP), Ramazzini Institute, and Interphone Study—have conclusively demonstrated these non-thermal effects, linking RF exposure to cancer, reproductive harm, and neurological disorders.
- Court Rulings and Inaction: In 2021, the U.S. Court of Appeals ordered the FCC to re-evaluate its guidelines, noting the failure to consider non-thermal effects. Despite this ruling, the Biden-Harris administration has not prioritized this issue, allowing outdated safety standards to remain in place while ending NTP research on RF health risks.
- Scientific Consensus: Multiple studies have confirmed that RF radiation has non-thermal effects that pose significant risks, especially to vulnerable populations such as children. The World Health Organization’s IARC classified RF radiation as a possible carcinogen, and growing evidence shows RF radiation may exacerbate various health conditions.
Policy Recommendations:
- Reclassification of RFR:
- Immediate action to reclassify RF radiation risks to include non-thermal effects, ensuring that regulatory bodies, including the FCC, acknowledge the biological harm that can occur at levels below current thermal guidelines.
- RF radiation should be classified as a Group 1 carcinogen, given the overwhelming evidence linking it to cancer and other health risks.
- Restoration of NTP Research:
- Reinstate funding and support for the NTP’s research on RF radiation, which has been prematurely ended. The NTP’s findings are crucial for understanding long-term exposure risks, particularly in relation to cancers and neurological disorders.
- Allocate federal funds specifically to research non-thermal biological effects to fill the gaps in scientific knowledge and ensure safety regulations are grounded in the most up-to-date evidence.
- Establish Precautionary Standards:
- Revise FCC safety standards to include non-thermal biological effects based on the most current scientific evidence. The focus should be on minimizing RF radiation exposure, especially for children, pregnant women, and individuals in high-exposure occupations.
- Encourage the adoption of safer technologies with reduced RF emissions for wireless devices and cellular infrastructure, including but not limited to 5G and future technologies.
- Mandatory Health Warnings:
- Require manufacturers of wireless devices to include clear and prominent health warnings about the potential risks of RF exposure. These should specifically address non-thermal biological effects and provide guidance for safer usage.
- Public Education Campaign:
- Launch a federal public health campaign to educate consumers on the potential risks of RF radiation and best practices for reducing exposure, especially for children and other vulnerable groups.
- Provide grants to independent research institutions to continue studies on RF radiation’s health effects, ensuring that findings are not influenced by industry-funded research.
- Regulatory Independence:
- Implement reforms to prevent regulatory capture, ensuring that the FCC and other regulatory agencies operate independently from industry influence. This should include appointing leadership without industry ties and prioritizing public health over corporate profits.
- Global Leadership in RF Research:
- Establish the U.S. as a global leader in RF safety research and technological innovation by promoting international collaboration on the health effects of RF radiation.
- Ensure that U.S. guidelines set a global standard for RF safety, prioritizing long-term public health protection and innovative solutions for safer wireless technology.
Conclusion:
This policy proposal calls for immediate reclassification of RFR health risks based on substantial scientific evidence, the restoration of critical research efforts, and a shift in regulatory priorities toward protecting public health. Without prompt action, the U.S. risks falling behind on one of the most pressing public health issues of the modern age. The health of our children and future generations depends on leaders willing to prioritize science and public safety over corporate interests.
By enacting these measures, we can ensure that the U.S. leads the world in both technological advancement and public health protection, creating a safer and healthier future for all.
