Why Voting for Kamala Harris Might Give You a Brain Tumor

In the rapidly advancing age of wireless technology, where cell towers sprout like weeds and 5G infrastructure promises faster connectivity, the looming question is not if these developments have an impact on our health, but how much damage has already been done. And it’s a question that can no longer be ignored as we examine the political forces enabling this unchecked expansion. Enter Kamala Harris: Vice President of the United States and a key figure in an administration that has systematically allowed corporate interests to override public safety. The truth is, casting a vote for Harris isn’t just a vote for more of the same; it’s potentially a vote for your own future health crisis—a future that might include brain tumors and neurological disorders.

YouTube Video Thumbnail

The Capture of the FCC: A Story of Corporate Overreach

Let’s take a step back to understand how we got here. The Democrats have long played a central role in the corporate capture of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Under the Obama-Biden administration, a man named Tom Wheeler was appointed to head the FCC—a man who, before his appointment, was literally the face of the wireless industry as the head of the CTIA (Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association). If you want to talk about the fox guarding the henhouse, this is where the conversation starts.

Wheeler’s appointment paved the way for policies that prioritized the interests of the wireless industry over public health. Despite mounting evidence from independent researchers around the world suggesting that RF (radiofrequency) radiation from cell phones and wireless networks could have serious non-thermal health effects, including cancer, Wheeler’s FCC did nothing to update the woefully outdated safety standards. Those standards, still in use today, are from 1996—before smartphones, before Wi-Fi became ubiquitous, and long before the advent of 5G.

Wheeler’s tenure marked a critical moment in the corporate capture of the FCC, turning the agency into a de facto arm of the wireless industry. Despite clear evidence of risks, the FCC continues to allow telecom companies to roll out new technologies like 5G, while burying concerns over the non-thermal effects of RF radiation, including oxidative stress, disruption of cellular signaling, and yes, cancer.

The NTP’s Cancer Findings and the Biden-Harris Administration’s Negligence

Under the Biden-Harris administration, things have only worsened. For years, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) conducted a decade-long study that uncovered clear evidence that RF radiation from cell phones could cause cancer, particularly gliomas (brain cancer) and schwannomas (heart tumors) in rats. This was no small finding. It was, and remains, one of the most significant studies ever conducted on the health impacts of RF radiation.

You’d think an administration that champions “science” and “facts” would seize on these findings, pushing for more research and stricter safety standards. But instead, the opposite happened. Under the Biden-Harris administration, funding for the NTP’s wireless research was diverted, effectively shutting down one of the few U.S. government programs that had the courage to investigate the dangers of RF radiation.

The irony here is chilling: Joe Biden lost his son, Beau Biden, to brain cancer—the very kind of cancer that RF radiation has been linked to in scientific studies. And yet, his administration has turned a blind eye to the mounting evidence, allowing the wireless industry to continue pushing technologies that may be causing the very health crises that claimed his own son’s life.

RFK Jr.’s Legal Victory and the Ongoing Corporate Influence

If this weren’t bad enough, let’s talk about the 2021 court victory by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and the Environmental Health Trust, who successfully sued the FCC for failing to update their safety standards in light of new scientific evidence. The court ruled that the FCC had neglected its duty by not addressing the non-thermal effects of RF radiation, including the kinds of health impacts that are invisible to the naked eye but can wreak havoc on the body’s bioelectric systems.

This should have been a watershed moment, a turning point where the government stepped up to protect the public from the dangers of RF radiation. But what has the Biden-Harris administration done since this ruling? Absolutely nothing. The FCC continues to operate under the same outdated standards that were established nearly 30 years ago. Non-thermal effects? Still unregulated. Neurological disorders? Still ignored. Cancer risks? Swept under the rug.

Public Health Neglect and the Bioelectric Threat

The science is clear. RF radiation doesn’t just heat up your tissues. It disrupts the very bioelectric signals that regulate cellular health. This bioelectric dissidence leads to oxidative stress, the formation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), and disruptions in cellular signaling—disruptions that can lead to cancer, neurological disorders, and a host of other health problems. And yet, despite the growing body of evidence, the Democratic Party, through both the Obama-Biden and Biden-Harris administrations, has done more to protect corporate profits than public health.

Kamala Harris, as a key figure in the current administration, bears a share of this responsibility. Her administration has allowed the wireless industry to push forward unchecked, rolling out new technologies like 5G without fully understanding—or caring about—the long-term health consequences. In a world where RF radiation is increasingly inescapable, from our cell phones to our Wi-Fi routers to the 5G towers sprouting up in every neighborhood, the Democratic Party’s complicity in this corporate takeover is endangering all of us.

A Vote for Harris Is a Vote for Neglect

Kamala Harris’s political career is not just a story of corporate capture; it’s a story of public health neglect. By failing to prioritize the health risks posed by RF radiation, her administration has allowed the wireless industry to continue operating without meaningful oversight, placing millions of Americans at risk.

Cancer rates are rising. Neurological disorders are becoming more common. And the science tells us that RF radiation may be a contributing factor. Yet, the FCC, under Democratic leadership, has done nothing to address these risks. So when you cast your vote for Kamala Harris, remember: you’re not just voting for the status quo—you’re voting for a future where your health and the health of your children are at risk.

It’s time for a change, and it starts with holding our leaders accountable for the public health crises they’ve allowed to fester. Don’t let Kamala Harris’s record go unnoticed. Your vote might just be the most important decision you make—for your health and your future.

With recent scientific studies confirming the harmful effects of radiofrequency (RF) radiation, RF Safe is calling for decisive action to protect our children and communities.


The Urgent Need for Action

The upcoming election presents a pivotal opportunity to influence policy on issues that have been overlooked for too long. RF Safe emphasizes that this is not a partisan matter but a public health crisis that demands immediate attention.

Recent scientific studies have settled the debate over cell phone radiation hazards: RF radiation is harmful. The National Toxicology Program (NTP), in one of the most comprehensive studies on this topic, found clear evidence linking RF radiation to cancer. The study revealed the development of malignant brain tumors known as gliomas and heart tumors called schwannomas in animal models.

Expert Insight:

“The NTP study demonstrated that prolonged exposure to RF radiation can lead to DNA damage and oxidative stress, which are precursors to cancer. These findings are particularly concerning for vulnerable populations like children, whose developing brains and thinner skulls make them more susceptible.”

Children absorb more radiation than adults, and their longer lifetime exposure compounds the risks. It’s not just about cancer; non-thermal effects like DNA strand breaks and cellular dysfunction have been linked to infertility, neurological disorders, and sleep disturbances.


RF Safe’s Mission: Protecting Future Generations

Founded by John Coates, RF Safe was established not as a commercial enterprise but as a platform to raise awareness about electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure. The organization is dedicated to educating the public on how to reduce risks through practical measures and advocating for updated safety guidelines that reflect current scientific understanding.

John Coates shares:

“RFsafe.com was created in dedication to my daughter, Angel Leigh Coates, a tragedy of EMFs, to forever perpetuate her innocent love and purpose on earth. Now, she is a true angel in heaven—I feel she guides me closer to understanding. I must also be thankful for my daughter’s memory and thank God for giving me a part in His divine plan.”


Candidate Stances: Know Where They Stand

Understanding where candidates stand on RF-EMF safety and research is vital for voters concerned about public health and technological advancement. RF Safe is compiling information on the positions of key candidates:

Despite the 2021 U.S. Court of Appeals ruling that the FCC had failed to properly justify maintaining outdated RF radiation exposure guidelines, the Biden-Harris administration has allowed these antiquated standards to persist. Rather than enforcing the court’s mandate to reassess these guidelines in light of new scientific evidence, the administration has remained passive, effectively allowing the FCC to continue neglecting public health.

What’s worse, under Vice President Kamala Harris, the National Toxicology Program (NTP)—which conducted one of the most comprehensive studies linking RF radiation to cancer—was allowed to run out of funding. This halted further research that could have provided even more concrete evidence that the current FCC guidelines fail to protect the public, especially vulnerable populations like children.

In short, Harris has not made any effort to safeguard public health from a threat that has been clearly recognized by the courts. Her inaction has left millions, including children, exposed to potential risks from RF radiation, even as scientific and legal findings demand urgent reform.

Voting for Harris in 2024 is not just a vote for corporate interests—it’s a vote that could directly impact the public’s health, putting millions at risk of developing brain tumors and other serious conditions.

During his first term as president, Donald Trump’s FCC appointees maintained the status quo, favoring corporate interests in the rollout of 5G technology. One of his key appointees, Ajit Pai, a former Verizon lawyer, was criticized for not prioritizing public health in updating RF radiation safety standards. This approach allowed the telecommunications industry to push forward without proper oversight, perpetuating outdated safety guidelines set in 1996, long before today’s wireless technology boom.

However, in his current campaign, Trump has acknowledged his past mistakes. Through discussions with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Trump has expressed a commitment to rectifying these oversights. Both figures have recognized the long-standing issue of regulatory capture at the FCC, where the agency has been influenced by the industries it is supposed to regulate. This capture has led to decades of inaction on RF radiation safety standards despite growing scientific evidence linking RF exposure to cancer, neurological disorders, and other health risks.

In this campaign, Trump has vowed to:

With RFK Jr.’s expertise and relentless advocacy in holding regulatory agencies accountable, Trump sees an opportunity for real change. A Trump-Kennedy partnership would focus on reforming the FCC, ensuring that it serves public health rather than corporate profits. Trump’s promise not to repeat the mistakes of his first term signals a potential shift in the government’s approach to RF radiation safety, offering hope for long-overdue reform in 2024.

In stark contrast to Harris, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has been a tireless advocate for RF radiation safety. His 2021 lawsuit against the FCC resulted in a historic court ruling that the agency had “failed to justify” its outdated safety standards. Kennedy has long pushed for a complete overhaul of these guidelines, emphasizing the need for regulatory bodies to recognize the dangers posed by non-thermal RF radiation exposure.

Kennedy’s stance is firmly rooted in science. He has pointed to major studies, including the NTP’s decade-long investigation, which found increased rates of brain and heart tumors in animals exposed to cell phone radiation. Kennedy has also criticized the FCC’s cozy relationship with the telecommunications industry, calling for independent research and stricter oversight to protect the public from the dangers of wireless radiation.

A vote for Kennedy in 2024 is a vote for updated safety guidelines and a government that prioritizes public health over corporate profits.

Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Advocacy:

RFK Jr. has been a vocal advocate for raising awareness about the potential health risks associated with cell phone radiation, especially for children. He emphasizes the need for updated safety guidelines and comprehensive research into the long-term effects of RF radiation exposure.

RF Safe encourages voters to directly ask candidates about their plans to address these urgent matters.


Key Issues: RF Safe’s Three-Step Action Plan

1. Update FCC Safety Guidelines: Embrace Modern Science

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) continues to rely on outdated safety guidelines established in the 1990s, which only consider the thermal effects of RF-EMF. Recent peer-reviewed studies have conclusively demonstrated that non-thermal biological effects pose significant health risks.

Why This Matters:

Our Demand:

The FCC must immediately update its safety guidelines to reflect current scientific understanding, incorporating both thermal and non-thermal effects to adequately protect public health.


2. Restart National Toxicology Program (NTP) Cancer Research

The NTP’s groundbreaking research on RF radiation was abruptly halted, leaving a dangerous void in understanding RF radiation’s impact on human health.

Why This Matters:

Our Demand:

Immediate restoration of funding and support for the NTP’s research is essential for crafting informed policy decisions and protecting public health.


3. End FCC Regulatory Capture: Prioritize Public Health Over Profits

Regulatory capture has allowed industry interests to influence the FCC, resulting in policies that favor corporate profits over public safety.

Why This Matters:

Our Demand:

The FCC must implement measures to eliminate industry influence, ensuring that public health and safety are the primary considerations in all regulatory decisions.


The Misclassification of RF Radiation Health Risks

The misclassification of RF radiation risks has far-reaching implications:


Moving Beyond the Debate

Given the accumulating scientific evidence, the conversation should shift from debating whether RF radiation is harmful to determining how best to protect public health.

Key Actions:


Take Action Now: Your Voice Can Make a Difference

The urgency of these issues cannot be overstated. Scientific evidence underscores the need for immediate action to protect our health and that of future generations.

How You Can Help:

  1. Contact Elected Officials: Express your concerns and demand action on updating safety guidelines and supporting research.
  2. Spread Awareness: Share credible information about the risks of RF-EMF exposure.
  3. Support Legislation: Advocate for laws that mandate lower radiation emissions and promote safer technology.
  4. Practice Safe Technology Use: Reduce personal exposure by using wired connections and keeping devices away from your body.

The Science Unveiled: Challenging the Myth

Landmark Studies Sound the Alarm

The National Toxicology Program (NTP) Study

Overview:

Key Findings:

Implications:

This study provided some of the most robust evidence to date that RF radiation could cause cancer in mammals. It challenged the notion that only thermal effects are harmful and highlighted the need to reconsider safety guidelines.

The Ramazzini Institute (RI) Study

Overview:

Key Findings:

Implications:

The RI study reinforced the NTP findings, suggesting that the risk is not limited to heavy cell phone use but may also stem from general environmental exposure to RF radiation.

Genetic Profiling Links to Human Cancer

Overview:

Key Findings:

Implications:

This groundbreaking research bridged the gap between animal studies and human health, indicating that the carcinogenic effects observed in animals are relevant to humans. It challenged skeptics who dismissed animal study results as non-applicable to human health.

Human Studies Echo Animal Research

The Interphone Study

Research by Dr. Lennart Hardell


Unveiling the Mechanisms: How RF Radiation Affects the Body

Non-Thermal Biological Effects

The traditional view held that only thermal effects of RF radiation were harmful. However, recent studies have identified non-thermal mechanisms by which RF radiation can affect biological systems:

Exacerbation of Chronic Diseases

By disrupting cellular processes, RF radiation may exacerbate existing chronic diseases or contribute to the development of new health issues, including:


Why Haven’t We Heard This Before?

Regulatory Capture and Industry Influence

Despite the growing body of evidence, safety guidelines have remained unchanged, primarily due to:

Outdated Safety Guidelines


The Public’s Right to Know

Transparency and Accountability


Taking Action: Protecting Yourself and Others

Personal Precautions

  1. Limit Exposure:
    • Use speakerphone or wired headsets to keep the phone away from your head.
    • Text instead of calling when possible.
  2. Avoid Body Contact:
    • Do not carry your phone in pockets close to your body.
    • Use a bag or purse to carry your phone.
  3. Turn Off Wireless Functions:
    • Disable Wi-Fi and Bluetooth when not in use.
    • Use airplane mode when you don’t need connectivity.
  4. Protect Children:
    • Limit children’s use of cell phones and wireless devices.
    • Educate them about safe usage practices.

 

Challenging the Thermal-Only View:

Imagine if, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, authorities insisted that the Earth is the center of the universe. Such a refusal to accept scientific truth would seem absurd today. Yet, a similar scenario is unfolding in the realm of radiofrequency (RF) radiation safety guidelines. Despite decades of research demonstrating that RF radiation can have biological effects beyond mere heating, current regulations remain anchored to the outdated thermal-only perspective. This oversight isn’t just a scientific misstep—it’s a public health concern that demands immediate attention.


The Outdated Thermal Hypothesis

For years, the prevailing assumption has been that RF radiation can only cause harm through thermal effects—by heating tissues to a point where damage occurs. This “thermal hypothesis” suggests that if exposure levels are kept below thresholds that cause significant heating, then no adverse health effects will ensue. While this made sense based on early research, it fails to account for a growing body of evidence demonstrating non-thermal biological effects.


Decades of Research Indicate Non-Thermal Effects

Over 30 Years of Scientific Studies

Over the past three decades, more than 2,500 studies have investigated the effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) on biological systems. Researchers like Dr. Henry Lai, Professor Emeritus at the University of Washington, have contributed significantly to this field. Their findings challenge the thermal-only view, showing that EMFs can induce biological changes at exposure levels well below those that cause heating.

Key Findings


Medical Advancements Highlight Non-Thermal Effects

Innovative Cancer Treatments

Recent advancements in medical science have harnessed non-thermal effects of RF radiation for therapeutic purposes. Treatments like TheraBionic use specific radio frequencies to target cancer cells without relying on heat. These therapies work by interfering with cellular signaling pathways, leading to cancer cell death while sparing healthy tissue.

Implications for Safety Guidelines

If medical treatments can utilize non-thermal RF radiation to produce biological effects, it stands to reason that similar exposures in everyday life could also have unintended consequences. This challenges the notion that only thermal effects are relevant for safety considerations.


The Absurdity of Ignoring Non-Thermal Effects

An Outdated Perspective in a Modern World

Clinging to the thermal-only hypothesis in light of overwhelming evidence is akin to denying well-established scientific facts. With the proliferation of wireless technologies—smartphones, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth devices—the public is exposed to RF radiation more than ever before. Ignoring non-thermal effects under these circumstances is not just outdated; it’s irresponsible.

The Precautionary Principle

The precautionary principle suggests that in the face of scientific uncertainty and potential risks, protective measures should be taken to prevent harm. Given the significant evidence of non-thermal biological effects, it’s prudent to reevaluate safety guidelines to protect public health.


Understanding the Mechanisms of Non-Thermal Effects

How EMFs Interact with Biological Systems

Non-thermal effects occur without a significant rise in temperature. Proposed mechanisms include:

Cumulative and Individual Variability


The Need to Update Safety Guidelines

Inadequacies of Current Regulations

Current safety standards primarily protect against immediate thermal damage, not long-term non-thermal effects. This leaves a significant gap in public health protection.

Calls from the Scientific Community

Scientists and health experts are urging regulatory bodies to:

https://www.rfsafe.com/articles/cell-phone-radiation/why-voting-for-kamala-harris-might-give-you-a-brain-tumor.html