RF Safe Logo

Protecting Americans from Unnecessary RF Radiation: Why the FDA Must Do Its Job

A Hidden Public-Health Crisis

Few Americans realize that our daily environment—filled with smartphones, tablets, Wi-Fi routers, smart meters, and cell towers—bubbles with a virtually invisible layer of radiofrequency (RF) radiation. Over the past two decades, this wireless revolution has accelerated exponentially, promising convenience, connectivity, and digital transformation. But it also brings legitimate health concerns.

From headaches, dizziness, and concentration problems to more controversial links with cancer risk, an expanding body of scientific studies suggests that continuous exposure to non-ionizing radiation could harm our health—especially if we are bathed in it 24/7. The risk may be “entropic waste”: the large-scale, needless “noise” of electromagnetic energy that saturates our environments without any oversight or minimization efforts. And the crucial federal agency mandated to protect the public from unnecessary electronic product radiation—the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—has largely sidestepped its responsibilities.

In 1968, recognizing that new consumer technologies might harm the public through dangerous emissions, Congress passed Public Law 90-602, instructing the FDA to actively research, monitor, and minimize exposure to “electronic product radiation,” which includes RF signals. Fast-forward fifty-plus years. Wireless devices abound; schools are brimming with laptops and tablets; utility companies install “smart meters” that deliver powerful pulses around the clock; individuals hold phones inches from their brains daily—and the FDA continues to shrug off its legal obligations, offering no meaningful guidelines or surveillance.

This blog seeks to:

By the end, you’ll understand why the FDA must treat RF radiation as a public-health priority, not a mere afterthought—and how we, as concerned citizens, can demand that our government do better.

The Law in Black and White: Public Law 90-602

When it comes to legal requirements, there’s no ambiguity. In 1968, Congress enacted Public Law 90-602, also known as “An Act to Amend the Public Health Service Act to provide for the protection of the public health from radiation emissions from electronic products.” In drafting the legislation, lawmakers explicitly recognized that “the public health and safety must be protected from the dangers of electronic product radiation.” Radiofrequency (RF) emissions from wireless devices, while then less ubiquitous, squarely fall under the umbrella of “electronic product radiation.”

Section 21, Subsection 360ii in the U.S. Code sets forth mandatory tasks for the FDA, including:

  1. Plan, conduct, coordinate, and/or support research, development, training, and operational activities to minimize emissions of—and exposure of people to—unnecessary electronic product radiation.
  2. Study and evaluate emissions and conditions of exposure to electronic product radiation and intense magnetic fields.
  3. Develop, test, and evaluate the effectiveness of procedures and techniques for minimizing exposure to electronic product radiation.

Importantly, these are not optional or contingent on any particular “finding” by the FDA. They are black-letter law—plain, binding instructions from Congress.

FDA Inaction: A Fifty-Year Disregard

Despite these clear obligations, the FDA has:

Consequently, over a half-century has passed, and we’re faced with a scenario in which:

Instead, the agency’s stance has largely been “nothing to see here,” implying that non-ionizing RF radiation is safe if it doesn’t cause immediate tissue heating. Meanwhile, thousands of scientific papers indicate possible biological effects at levels well below the thermal threshold. The agency’s refusal to fulfill its legal mandate not only undermines public health but violates the trust placed in them by Congress and the American people.

Entropic Waste: Why Unnecessary RF Exposure Matters

Before diving deeper, let’s clarify the term “entropic waste.” In many fields, entropic waste can refer to the disordered excess energy that pollutes a system without providing any constructive function. Think of it like the “noise” in a signal line. In the case of wireless devices, we can imagine a swirl of electromagnetic signals—some necessary, but much of it extraneous or far more intense than needed.

Why does it matter? Because repeated or unrelenting RF exposure could:

This hidden pollution accumulates. Our cars, our homes, our offices, even city sidewalks bristle with signals from routers, cell towers, Bluetooth, “smart” everything. The FDA’s job is to see how this daily bombardment might harm public health—and if there are steps to reduce it—yet the agency remains asleep at the wheel.

The Citizens Petition: Holding the FDA Accountable

On May 24, 2023, a coalition led by Americans for Responsible Technology and other groups filed a formal Citizens Petition demanding the FDA perform its statutory obligations:

This petition underscores that the FDA’s duty is not optional. The law is not subject to reinterpretation or indefinite delay. The FDA must:

  1. Plan and conduct studies on current exposure conditions.
  2. Provide guidance on safe usage patterns or engineering solutions.
  3. Communicate risk information so parents, schools, utilities, pregnant women, and clinicians can make informed decisions.

Currently, the FDA does none of this. The petition aims to force the FDA to confront its decades-long nonfeasance. If the FDA fails to comply, further legal action may be warranted. Submitting a comment in support of this petition is among the most direct ways citizens can press the FDA to do its legally required job.

Wireless Radiation in Schools: A Brewing Crisis

One of the most pressing concerns is the school environment, where students now rely on Wi-Fi-enabled devices for routine lessons, testing, homework, and collaboration. This trend exploded in the last 10-15 years:

Though the FCC tests individual devices to ensure they meet outdated exposure guidelines based on thermal effects alone, no federal agency systematically measures the aggregate RF load in a typical classroom filled with 25-30 students and an arsenal of wireless tech. Nor does the FDA step in to:

Meanwhile, anecdotal reports from teachers and parents note increasing complaints of headaches, dizziness, trouble concentrating, sometimes even nosebleeds or palpitations. Though more formal studies are needed, the FDA’s mandated role would be to orchestrate and evaluate such studies. By ignoring these possible correlations, the FDA fosters an environment where the next generation may be subject to uncontrolled radiation exposures.

The National Toxicology Program (NTP) Study: A Game-Changer Ignored

A watershed moment arrived when the National Toxicology Program (NTP)—part of the National Institutes of Health—released the results of a multi-year, $30 million experiment requested by the FDA itself. Researchers sought to determine whether chronic, non-ionizing RF radiation (like that from phones, routers, and more) could cause biological harm in animals.

Key findings:

Rather than championing a robust public conversation about how to translate these findings for human safety, the FDA retreated. The wireless industry, employing a page from the “tobacco industry playbook,” launched efforts to dismiss or downplay the study, focusing on minor technicalities or claiming the results are irrelevant to humans.

Despite the study’s meticulous design, large sample size, and track record of the NTP’s research rigor, the FDA has effectively shelved it. No new advisories. No updated guidelines for pregnant women, children, or the general public. This posture aligns perfectly with industry interests but flies in the face of the FDA’s mission to protect public health.

Misleading Physicians: The FDA’s Failure to Inform Clinicians

Most physicians trust the FDA to keep them apprised of known or emerging hazards from everyday consumer products. In the realm of RF radiation, however, the FDA’s stance that “there is essentially no danger” leads many doctors to:

This is more than a theoretical concern. If a patient complains of chronic dizziness or unexplained fatigue that might correlate with heavy device usage or a newly installed smart meter at home, a physician lacking any official guidance from the FDA would rarely consider “electromagnetic hypersensitivity” or “excess RF exposure” as part of a differential diagnosis.

That means doctors could be:

All because the FDA, by not fulfilling its obligations, perpetuates the myth that there is no clinically relevant risk from everyday electronic product emissions. This outcome violates the fundamental duty of care that the FDA owes both to medical professionals and the public at large.

Smart Meters: Unseen Sources of High RF Spikes

A vivid example of unchecked RF exposure is the proliferation of “smart meters”, used by utilities to measure water, gas, or electricity consumption. These meters:

While many local or national consumer-protection groups have flagged these health complaints, the FDA has:

Thus, an entire segment of the population—those forced to accept a wireless meter on their property—might endure constant, high-intensity pulses without any recourse or knowledge about mitigating measures. In a rational regulatory framework, the FDA would be studying these exposures and developing solutions. Instead, it remains silent.

Vulnerable Populations: Children, Pregnant Women, and Consumers Unaware

Among the general population, certain groups face even higher risks:

  1. Children: Their thinner skulls, rapidly developing bodies, and higher fluid content may make them more susceptible to RF penetration. With schools saturated by Wi-Fi, children have virtually no respite.
  2. Pregnant Women: Animal studies (including Yale University research) hint that in-utero exposure to cell phone radiation correlates with abnormal brain development and later behavioral issues in offspring. Yet the FDA offers zero cautionary guidance.
  3. Young Men: Studies suggest that storing phones in pant pockets could contribute to sperm damage and potentially higher rates of colorectal cancer. This population receives no official warnings, even though manufacturers themselves bury disclaimers not to keep the device directly against the body.
  4. Individuals with EHS (Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity): A recognized condition in some countries, EHS can manifest with headaches, fatigue, skin complaints, and more when exposed to RF. The FDA’s silence fosters skepticism among clinicians, so these individuals struggle to find solutions or acceptance.

Instead of addressing these concerns systematically, the FDA lumps all non-ionizing exposures under an obsolete narrative—“no proven harm if it doesn’t heat tissue.” That position is decades out of date, and it fails to reflect the concerns validated by peer-reviewed research, the NTP study, and real-world anecdotal data.

A Pattern of Neglect: Why the FDA’s Silence Endangers Public Health

Why has the FDA chosen not to act on its clear statutory mission? Some suggest the agency is:

Whatever the reasons, the outcome is consistent: the FDA has refused to systematically evaluate how Americans are exposed to cumulative RF from a multitude of sources. In doing so, it is ignoring not just a critical public-health challenge, but the explicit instructions from Congress. Americans incorrectly assume the FDA must have concluded “it’s perfectly safe,” yet no official risk-benefit analysis or updated safety determination has been undertaken.

Strategies for Change: Minimizing Exposure, Demanding Reform

Given the FDA’s inertia, consumers, educators, and local governments have begun to fill the gap. Some recommended strategies include:

  1. Measuring Real-World Exposures: Schools, communities, or individuals can use affordable RF meters to check cumulative levels, especially in high-density areas like classrooms or apartment complexes.
  2. Hardwiring: Replacing Wi-Fi with Ethernet connections in offices or schools can drastically reduce ambient RF.
  3. Smartphone Practices: Encouraging people to keep devices off their bodies, use speakerphone or wired headsets, and minimize phone time in low-signal conditions.
  4. Building Shielding: Special paints, films, or window materials can block or reduce intrusion from external sources like cell towers or neighbor’s routers.
  5. Creating “Wireless-Free” Zones: For children’s bedrooms or pregnant women, a daily window of zero wireless signals can help reduce 24/7 exposure.
  6. Local Activism: Municipalities can pass resolutions urging the FDA and other agencies to address RF hazards, or require better disclosure from local utilities regarding smart meter pulses.

Yet local or grassroots efforts cannot substitute for federal leadership. The FDA holds the legal mandate—and presumably the scientific expertise—to unify research, guidelines, and best practices. Communities can only do so much alone.

Action Steps: How You Can Support the Citizen Petition and Comment to the FDA

A cornerstone of American democracy is the ability to petition our government. The recent Citizens Petition to the FDA, filed on May 24, 2023, gives individuals a clear avenue to voice concerns and demand action. Here’s what you can do:

  1. Read the Citizens Petition: Familiarize yourself with the main arguments and the legal foundation.
  2. Submit a Formal Comment: The FDA is required to review public comments on the petition. Explain why you believe the FDA must begin to actively research and reduce RF exposures.
  3. Share with Medical Professionals: Encourage doctors, nurses, and other healthcare providers to read about the NTP study and how FDA inaction might be misleading medical practice.
  4. Contact Elected Representatives: Urge your representatives to pressure the FDA to comply with Public Law 90-602. Congressional oversight can be a powerful motivator.
  5. Educate Your Community: Write letters to local media, speak at school board meetings, or hold workshops on reducing RF exposure.
  6. Document Health Complaints: If you or neighbors experience symptoms after a new smart meter, a classroom Wi-Fi upgrade, or increased cell tower density, keep records and communicate these to local public-health authorities.

Remember, the FDA is legally obligated to respond to petitions. Public engagement can help highlight the seriousness of the issue and push the agency to fulfill its statutory obligations.

Conclusion: Toward a Safer Wireless World

In an era where wireless devices are integral to modern living, it is tempting to assume that thorough safety measures and robust federal oversight protect us from unintended harm. In reality, the FDA—entrusted by law to address electronic product radiation—has failed to do so for more than fifty years. The convenience and profit potential of ubiquitous wireless technology overshadow the mounting evidence that such radiation can have biological impacts at non-thermal levels.

As a result, children in Wi-Fi-saturated classrooms, pregnant women inadvertently exposing developing fetuses, utility customers forced into receiving high-powered wireless smart meters, and healthcare providers lacking crucial guidance all find themselves in uncharted territory—where no agency is evaluating risk, no standards are updated, and no official strategies exist to reduce “entropic waste” from RF signals.

Yet, the law is unambiguous: the FDA must plan, conduct, and support research and strategies to minimize exposure. The agency must evaluate how these exposures add up, caution the public about potential harm, and test or recommend solutions. The Citizens Petition of 2023 is a vital step in demanding accountability. Americans for Responsible Technology and allied organizations have put the FDA on notice: ignoring black-letter law is no longer acceptable.

The implications go far beyond any single device. We face a systemic problem of unregulated, aggregated electromagnetic fields in every corner of daily life. If we wish to create a safer wireless world, we need:

In short, we need the FDA to obey the law—the very law passed over half a century ago to protect us from precisely the scenario we face today: an explosion of electronic product radiation. By uniting our voices, supporting the Citizens Petition, and demanding that the agency uphold its legal responsibilities, we can reduce the “entropic waste” that stealthily saturates our environment. When government agencies fulfill their mandates, and citizens push for transparent accountability, public health prevails—and we can enjoy the benefits of modern technology without gambling recklessly on its risks.

Additional Resources & References