Our world is more connected than ever before. Smartphones, tablets, laptops, and other wireless devices have become essentials of modern living, even more so since the advent of 5G networks. But with this convenience comes growing concerns about electromagnetic field (EMF) radiation and how it might impact our health in the long term.
The marketplace is saturated with so-called “anti-radiation” or “EMF-blocking” products—many touting near-miraculous claims of blocking up to 99% of harmful signals. But what if these products, instead of protecting you, are actually putting you at greater risk?
In this comprehensive blog post, we draw on over two decades of research and consumer advocacy led by John Coates of RF Safe, dissecting some of the biggest offenders in the “anti-radiation” space, such as SafeSleeve and others. We’ll explore why the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has warned against certain “shielding” practices, how these products can force your phone to emit even higher levels of radiation, and why some widely marketed laptop shields might endanger pregnant women and their unborn babies.
Prepare to learn the truth behind these products, understand how real radiation shielding works, and discover practical steps you can take to reduce your and your family’s exposure to EMF.
Understanding EMF Radiation and Why It Matters
Electromagnetic Field (EMF) radiation is an umbrella term covering everything from ionizing radiation (X-rays, gamma rays) to non-ionizing radiation (radiofrequency or RF waves, microwaves, and visible light).
- Ionizing radiation: Contains enough energy to ionize atoms (eject electrons), which can quickly lead to cellular damage and acute health risks. Think nuclear power plants, high-level radioactive materials, or strong X-rays.
- Non-ionizing radiation: Usually considered less dangerous because it doesn’t directly ionize atoms. However, a growing body of research shows that prolonged, close-range exposure may lead to health concerns such as increased risk of fertility issues, certain cancers, and other biological disruptions.
Smartphones and wireless devices emit non-ionizing microwave radiation. Regulators like the FCC set SAR (Specific Absorption Rate) limits. Still, those guidelines are widely considered outdated, and they only test phones under very controlled conditions that do not reflect real-life usage (like holding a device close to your body or in your pocket).
A Brief History of Anti-Radiation Products
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, the public became increasingly aware of the potential dangers of cell phone radiation. This awareness bred a surge of “radiation shielding” products—phone cases, pendants, stickers, laptop shields, and more. Unfortunately, many were scams, as the FTC later uncovered.
How We Got Here
- 1998: RF Safe was founded by John Coates after the tragic death of his daughter from a neural tube defect he believed was related to EMF exposure.
- 2000: An investigation by Good Housekeeping Magazine, featuring Coates, led to FTC action against two U.S. companies selling phony radiation shields.
- Early 2000s: Companies began marketing laptop radiation shields—originally more relevant when laptops connected via Ethernet cables, not Wi-Fi.
- 2010s: Brands like SafeSleeve and DefenderShield emerged, using strong marketing pitches, crowd-funding, and celebrity or medical endorsements, often lacking scientific rigor.
- Present: With 5G expanding worldwide, the public’s EMF concerns have reached new heights—along with the proliferation of misleading anti-radiation products.
The Rise of SafeSleeve: Deceptive Marketing 101
One of the major players in the anti-radiation phone case market is SafeSleeve, which has been widely criticized for promoting detachable cases containing metal plates and magnets. Both the FCC and FTC have warned the public that any barrier forcing a phone to work harder to maintain signal strength can increase radiation emissions.
Below are five core deceptive tactics SafeSleeve uses (and that you should watch out for with many other brands as well):
1. Interfering With the Phone’s Antenna
SafeSleeve cases often incorporate a large metal plate and magnets to allow a case to be detachable. This design—advertised as convenient—blocks or obstructs your phone’s antenna. When the antenna is blocked:
- The phone boosts its transmit power to maintain a stable signal.
- Result: Higher levels of radiation (often measured as SAR).
- Impact on your body: Increased exposure to microwave radiation.
The FTC Warning
“…shields may interfere with the phone’s signal, cause it to draw even more power to communicate with the base station, and possibly emit more radiation.”
SafeSleeve’s marketing suggests it is blocking radiation, but its use of metal dangerously reflects or disrupts the phone’s antenna. By doing so, the phone ramps up output power, effectively amplifying your exposure. This matches the FTC’s description of a scam.
2. Misleading “FCC Testing” Claims
SafeSleeve claims its materials are tested by FCC-certified labs, giving the impression that the entire phone case has been thoroughly tested. However, investigations by KPIX 5 (San Francisco) revealed that only the raw shielding material—not the entire phone-in-case setup—was tested with a signal generator, which does not replicate real-world phone usage.
Real vs. Fake Testing
- Real FCC testing: Tests a specific phone model in various positions near the head and torso to measure SAR.
- What SafeSleeve tested: A piece of material, in isolation, with no phone inside it, and not in real usage conditions.
Consumers see “FCC-certified,” assume it applies to the phone case in actual use, and thus gain false confidence in a design that might be counterproductive.
3. Misuse of the Trefoil Symbol (Radioactive Warning)
SafeSleeve’s packaging and online ads often display the trefoil symbol, commonly used to indicate ionizing radiation (like nuclear hazards).
- Cell phones emit non-ionizing radiation, so using this symbol is intentionally misleading.
- It plays on fear, equating nuclear and cell phone radiation in the consumer’s mind.
This fearmongering is ethically questionable and waters down the real significance of the trefoil symbol, which warns of potentially lethal ionizing radiation (such as in nuclear facilities).
4. Video Demonstrations That Don’t Test RF Microwave Emissions
SafeSleeve frequently posts video demos showing a TriField meter’s readings go down when the case is in use. However, the meter is not set to measure RF/microwave fields— it’s measuring electric or magnetic fields. Smartphones primarily emit radiofrequency microwaves, so:
- The demos measure the wrong type of radiation.
- Consumers see a drop in readings but it’s not measuring the actual cellular frequency band.
- Some consumers who own TriField meters report no decrease—and sometimes an increase—in RF radiation when using SafeSleeve cases.
5. Pointless Shielding for Laptops and Tablets
SafeSleeve also sells laptop and tablet shields:
- Modern laptops/tablets emit RF via Wi-Fi. Placing a shield under the device might block some radiation to your legs, but the transmitters are still near the top, sides, and keyboard—all closer to your torso.
- Reflective Danger: Shielding the underside can redirect or focus some radiation upwards, ironically increasing exposure near sensitive areas like the abdomen (crucial for pregnant women or those trying to conceive).
Laptop or tablet usage with partial shielding is an exercise in futility. The device’s radiation is still hitting your body from multiple angles, and the user’s false sense of security could reduce other protective behaviors (like using a desk or table).
Laptop Radiation Shields: An Even Bigger Concern
Beyond phone cases, laptop radiation shields have been on the market for years— often marketed to “protect your legs and reproductive organs.” Companies like SafeSleeve and DefenderShield claim to address the problem of laptop EMF radiation. However, the reality is that wireless laptops inherently have:
- Multiple internal antennas (Wi-Fi, Bluetooth).
- Emissions from various parts of the device—not just the bottom.
Endorsements That Endanger Babies
One of the most disturbing aspects is the endorsement of such shields by certain medical professionals, like Dr. Jeremy E. Kaslow, M.D., highlighted in SafeSleeve’s promotional materials. The endorsement can mislead pregnant women into thinking they’re fully protected, while critical areas (i.e., the abdomen) remain exposed.
- False sense of security: “If it’s doctor-endorsed, it must be safe, right?”
- Real hazard: The shield blocks only the bottom, leaving the rest of the device effectively unshielded.
Why RF Safe Stopped Making Laptop Shields
John Coates, founder of RF Safe, once produced laptop radiation shields in the 1990s, back when laptops were typically wired. However:
- Wi-Fi became standard: The transmitters moved beneath the keyboard and closer to the user’s torso.
- False security: Shielding the underside could increase usage on the lap, ironically bringing the radiation source closer to sensitive organs.
- Danger for pregnant women: Coates, who lost his daughter to a neural tube disorder (which he attributes to EMF exposure), realized the risk to developing fetuses is heightened when devices are near the abdomen.
As a result, RF Safe discontinued these products in 2000, deciding the best practice is to simply keep laptops off your lap whenever Wi-Fi or wireless modes are active.
Real Risks vs. False Security
Across all these examples (phone cases, laptop shields, “anti-radiation” pendants, stickers, etc.), the overarching theme is that some of these products can:
- Interfere with the device’s normal signal flow.
- Force the device to boost power output, potentially increasing user exposure.
- Give consumers a false sense of security, leading them to keep devices closer to their bodies for longer periods.
The Power-Boost Effect
Phones and tablets are designed to maintain strong connections. When signal strength drops (due to interference from a shield or metal plate):
- The device increases its power to compensate.
- The net effect can be higher radiation exposure near your body.
Non-Ionizing vs. Ionizing Radiation
SafeSleeve’s marketing ploys often conflate ionizing and non-ionizing radiation by using the trefoil symbol. While both can be harmful over time, cell phone radiation (non-ionizing) doesn’t cause immediate burns the way ionizing radiation might. The danger lies in chronic, low-level exposure affecting biological processes.
Distance Is Your Best Friend
Distance is the single most effective way to reduce EMF exposure from a device. Every inch away from your body dramatically reduces the Specific Absorption Rate.
- Holding your phone away from your ear while on speakerphone.
- Keeping laptops on a desk instead of your lap.
- Turning off Wi-Fi or Bluetooth when not in use.
SafeSleeve, DefenderShield, and Other Questionable Brands
SafeSleeve isn’t alone. Other companies, such as DefenderShield, have marketed partial laptop covers or phone cases, some with magnets, metal loops, or questionable “99% blocking” claims. The pattern repeats: a flashy brand, fear-based marketing, questionable testing, and ignoring fundamental design principles about phone antenna placement.
Buyer Beware: If you see bold claims of “blocks 99% of phone radiation” or large metal plates behind the phone, investigate further. It might be more hazard than help.
Exposing a Decades-Long Mission: John Coates and RF Safe
The Good Housekeeping Investigation
Around 2000, Good Housekeeping Magazine interviewed John Coates about phone radiation hazards. This investigation exposed two fraudulent “anti-radiation” device makers, prompting the FTC to take legal action. Since then, Coates has tirelessly:
- Educated the public on wireless hazards.
- Shown how many “anti-radiation” products backfire by forcing devices to work harder.
- Advocated for distance, safer phone usage, and truthful product marketing.
FTC Actions and Warnings
Following the Good Housekeeping investigation, the FTC:
- Prosecuted two companies for selling fraudulent EMF shielding products.
- Published consumer alerts titled “Cell Phone Radiation Scams”, explicitly warning about shields that may cause more harm than good.
ceLLM Theory and Bioelectric Disruption
Coates developed the cellular Latent Learning Model (ceLLM), hypothesizing that cells interpret environmental signals (including EMFs) and that bioelectric disruption can lead to health issues, especially during early developmental stages.
Neural tube disorders, such as the one that took his daughter’s life, are a particular concern; if environmental factors (like microwaves) disrupt embryonic development, the consequences can be dire.
Practical Tips: How to Truly Reduce EMF Exposure
It’s important to remember: there’s no single “magic bullet” that eliminates all EMF exposure. Real safety involves common-sense precautions, thoughtful device usage, and choosing only properly tested shielding solutions.
1. Maintain Distance
- Use speakerphone: Instead of holding your phone directly to your head.
- Put devices on a desk: Not on your lap, especially if you’re pregnant.
- Store phones away: Keep them out of pockets or at least ensure the shielded side faces your body.
2. Proper Usage of Shielding Cases
- Look for products that have been tested with an actual phone in real-world conditions.
- Avoid cases with metal loops, magnets, or large metal plates near your phone’s antenna.
- If you use a flip-style shielding case, keep the front cover (shielded side) between you and the phone when texting or calling.
3. Disable Wireless Features When Not Needed
- Turn off Wi-Fi on your tablet or laptop if you’re just typing offline.
- Airplane Mode: If you don’t need connectivity, especially around children.
4. Choose Low-Emission Hardware
- Laptops with SSDs (solid-state drives) emit fewer magnetic fields than older models with spinning discs.
- Updated phone software: Efficient firmware can reduce your phone’s power usage—and by extension, its radiation emissions in some scenarios.
5. Remember: No Silver Bullet
Even the best-designed shielding accessories do not replace basic safety practices:
- Minimizing screen time for kids.
- Avoiding direct contact with your body.
- Maintaining healthy usage habits.
Calling Out Deceptive Trade Practices
In California, false advertising is addressed under Business and Professions Code §17500, which can impose fines and even criminal penalties on companies that knowingly mislead consumers. If you suspect a product:
- Misrepresents its safety tests.
- Uses scare tactics (like the trefoil symbol for non-ionizing radiation).
- Claims an unrealistic percentage of blocked radiation (like 99%).
- Doesn’t clearly instruct how to use the case or shield to minimize exposure.
Then it’s worth reporting to consumer-protection agencies or state attorneys general.
SafeSleeve and similar companies risk falling afoul of deceptive trade practice lawsuits and regulations if they continue to make unsubstantiated or grossly misleading claims.
Conclusion
Wireless radiation isn’t going away. Our modern society depends on smartphones, tablets, laptops, and wearable gadgets for nearly everything. But awareness and education are essential. Here’s what you need to remember:
- Shielding products can be counterproductive if they obstruct your device’s antenna, forcing it to emit even higher levels of microwave radiation.
- Misleading “FCC-certified” claims often refer to raw materials tested in isolation, not the entire phone in real-life usage.
- Using the trefoil symbol for non-ionizing radiation is a scare tactic that trivializes the symbol’s real purpose (warning of ionizing, nuclear hazards).
- Laptop shields can create a false sense of security, especially for pregnant women, potentially exposing vulnerable areas to more radiation.
- Real EMF safety involves distance, responsible usage, and scientifically validated design principles.
Final Call to Action
- Stay informed: Check reputable sources for independent lab tests on products that genuinely minimize EMF exposure.
- Adopt safer habits: Turn off wireless features when not needed, use speakerphone, and keep devices off your body.
- Report deceptive practices: If you see a product with unsubstantiated claims, file a complaint with your state attorney general or the FTC.
- Spread the word: Share this information with friends, family, and online communities so more people understand the potential risks and real solutions.
A Note from John Coates and RF Safe
For over 20 years, RF Safe has been at the forefront of consumer advocacy against phone radiation scams. Founder John Coates understands the tragic human cost of misinformation regarding EMF exposure. He continues to push for honest marketing, credible product testing, and lifestyle changes that can significantly reduce your exposure to wireless radiation.
“It literally takes an act of God for us to miss an opportunity to answer questions related to the public’s exposure to RF Radiation and how to lessen the potential for adverse health effects.”
— John Coates, RF Safe Founder
Wireless technology has transformed our lives in remarkable ways. By staying informed and adopting best practices, we can enjoy the benefits of these technologies while minimizing potential harms. Remember: No single product will keep you 100% safe. The greatest protection lies in knowledge, distance, and a commitment to safe usage.
Stay smart, stay safe, and reject the myths perpetuated by the flashy marketing of so-called anti-radiation products. You—and your loved ones—deserve real protection, grounded in science, common sense, and truth.