As the 2024 U.S. presidential election approaches, understanding where candidates stand on the safety of wireless radiation and its potential health effects is crucial for safeguarding public health, especially for our children. This detailed comparison explores the positions of Kamala Harris, Donald Trump, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on RF (radiofrequency) radiation safety and related research.
The American people deserve leadership that prioritizes health and environmental well-being over political posturing and corporate interests. It is imperative to elect officials committed to restoring essential health research, updating safety regulations, and ensuring that federal agencies act in the public’s best interest. By moving beyond partisan politics and focusing on substantive issues, we can safeguard the health of our families and the environment for future generations.
RF-EMFs are a type of non-ionizing radiation emitted by wireless devices. Unlike ionizing radiation (e.g., X-rays), RF-EMFs do not have enough energy to remove tightly bound electrons from atoms. However, they can still interact with biological tissues, potentially leading to various health effects.
Several studies, including the Interphone Study, National Toxicology Program (NTP) Study, and Ramazzini Institute Study, have investigated the link between RF radiation and cancer. Findings suggest a possible association between high levels of RF-EMF exposure and certain types of cancer, such as gliomas and malignant schwannomas.
Emerging research explores potential links between RF-EMF exposure and neurological conditions like autism, ADHD, Alzheimer's, and Parkinson's disease. While evidence is not yet conclusive, these studies highlight the need for further investigation.
Some studies indicate that RF-EMF exposure may impact reproductive health, including fertility and sperm quality. However, more research is needed to establish definitive connections.
Chronic exposure to RF-EMFs may lead to immune system dysregulation, resulting in chronic inflammation and immune suppression. These effects could increase susceptibility to various diseases.
Understanding where candidates stand on RF-EMF safety and research is vital for voters concerned about public health and technological advancement. Below is a detailed comparison of the stances of Kamala Harris, Donald Trump, and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. based on available information up to October 2023.
Joseph “Beau” Biden III, son of President Joe Biden, died from glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), a form of brain cancer. The irony that Beau Biden, President Biden’s own son, died from glioblastoma—the very type of cancer linked to RF radiation exposure in the NTP study. This tragedy underscores the real, human cost of these decisions, yet the Biden-Harris administration chose to stop funding research that could prevent others from suffering the same fate. Beau Biden’s death underscores the urgent need for comprehensive research into all potential environmental risk factors contributing to such diseases.
As a parent, the rising rates of autism and cancer linked to RF-EMF exposure are deeply troubling. My young child will soon need a cell phone for school and communication, raising concerns about her future health and well-being. Ensuring that our safety standards reflect the latest scientific evidence is paramount to protecting her and other children from potential harm.
The safety guidelines for RF-EMFs are widely regarded as outdated and insufficient in addressing the full spectrum of health risks. Decades of research, including the Interphone Study, Hardell Group Studies, CERENAT Study, Ramazzini Institute Study, REFLEX Project, and the BioInitiative Report, have consistently found evidence of increased health risks associated with RF radiation. These studies collectively point to an increased risk of cancer, neurological disorders, and other health problems.
The BioInitiative Report, a comprehensive review of over 3,800 peer-reviewed studies on the biological effects of EMFs, concluded that “the existing public safety limits are inadequate to protect public health.” The report recommends that exposure limits be significantly lowered to reflect the latest scientific understanding of the risks associated with RF radiation.
Researchers like Robert Becker in the 1970s warned about the potential health risks of EMFs, emphasizing that humanity's reliance on wireless technology was introducing significant sources of entropic waste—energy forms that disrupt bioelectric signaling at a subcellular level. Ignoring these early warnings has contributed to the current public health crisis.
The health risks associated with RF radiation have been a subject of concern since the early days of wireless communication. Initial studies focused primarily on the thermal effects of RF radiation—the heating of tissues due to energy absorption. This focus laid the groundwork for the safety standards established by regulatory agencies like the FCC.
Despite early warnings, the wireless industry rapidly expanded, exerting significant influence over regulatory bodies. Regulatory capture, where industry interests dominate regulatory agencies, has led to the adoption of safety guidelines that ignore non-thermal biological effects. The appointment of industry-friendly figures like Tom Wheeler as FCC Chairman exemplifies this issue, resulting in outdated and inadequate safety standards.
The wireless industry has actively worked to suppress scientific research that challenges the safety of its products. The “Wargame” memo by Motorola in 1994 outlined a strategy to discredit researchers like Dr. Henry Lai, whose studies showed that RF radiation could cause DNA damage. This suppression extended to government-funded research programs, such as those by the EPA and NTP, which faced termination or dismissal despite significant findings.
Bioelectricity refers to the electrical signals generated by cells and tissues, essential for coordinating biological processes. These signals govern everything from neuron firing in the brain to tissue regeneration. Disruptions to these bioelectric signals can lead to various health issues, including autism and cancer.
Research has shown that RF radiation can interfere with bioelectric signaling, even at levels that do not cause significant heating. Studies indicate that RF exposure can alter the electrical properties of cell membranes, disrupt ion channels, and induce oxidative stress, leading to DNA damage and impaired cellular communication.
The ceLLM (cellular Latent Learning Model) suggests that cells operate through a neural network-like system, with bioelectric signals guiding their responses. EMFs introduce entropic waste, disrupting these signals and leading to bioelectric dissonance. This disruption can impair cellular functions critical for brain development and overall health, potentially contributing to autism and other disorders.
In the world of politics, it’s often the unseen, underreported issues that end up carrying the most weight. As we gear up for the 2024 election, the alliance between Donald Trump and Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has revealed a critical “sleeper issue” that could have far-reaching implications for public health and democracy: the unchecked health effects of wireless radiation caused by regulatory capture.
The current safety guidelines for RF radiation exposure, established by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in 1996, are grossly outdated. These guidelines were based on the assumption that only the thermal (heating) effects of radiation could pose a risk to human health. However, over the past few decades, scientific evidence has mounted, showing that non-thermal effects of RF radiation—such as DNA damage, oxidative stress, and disruptions in cellular communication—are significant health risks. Yet, despite this growing body of evidence, the FCC has failed to update its guidelines.
This failure is not accidental. The FCC has long been dominated by industry insiders and corporate lobbyists, a phenomenon known as regulatory capture. Under the Obama-Biden administration, Tom Wheeler, a former head of the wireless industry, was appointed to lead the FCC. His tenure prioritized corporate profits over public safety, allowing telecom giants like AT&T and Verizon to expand their wireless infrastructure without proper oversight or consideration of public health impacts.
In his first term, Trump made similar mistakes, appointing Ajit Pai, a former Verizon lawyer, to head the FCC. Pai’s leadership continued the FCC’s close alignment with corporate interests, ignoring the calls for updated guidelines that could protect Americans from the health risks of wireless radiation.
The dangers of wireless radiation are not speculative. Several key studies have provided clear evidence of the health risks associated with prolonged RF radiation exposure, particularly from cell phones. These studies include:
Despite these findings, the FCC has refused to update its guidelines. The agency’s insistence on ignoring non-thermal effects has put millions of Americans at risk, particularly children, who are more vulnerable to RF radiation due to their developing brains and bodies.
Perhaps the most damning example of failing the American people is the Biden-Harris administration's cancellation of the NTP’s wireless radiation research. This research, which provided some of the clearest evidence to date linking RF radiation to cancer, was abruptly halted despite its groundbreaking findings.
Kamalla Harris, as Vice President, played a significant role in shaping the administration’s policies that affected RF safety. The decision to divert funds away from the NTP’s wireless radiation research and toward other priorities—such as military spending—represents a profound failure to protect public health.
This cancellation is particularly concerning given the personal connection to the issue. Beau Biden, the president’s son, died of glioblastoma, the very type of brain cancer that the NTP linked to RF radiation in its study. While the official cause of his cancer has not been publicly linked to cell phone radiation, the scientific evidence pointing to RF radiation as a risk factor for brain tumors cannot be ignored.
By ending the NTP’s research, the Biden-Harris administration has left families across America without the information and protections they need to safeguard their health. This is a stark reminder of the dangers of allowing corporate interests to dictate public policy.
The halt of the NTP’s research is part of a broader pattern of regulatory capture that has plagued the FCC and other agencies for decades. When government agencies meant to protect the public become dominated by corporate interests, the result is a lack of accountability and policies that prioritize profits over people.
The revolving door between government and industry has allowed telecommunications companies to evade proper regulation, resulting in the continued exposure of Americans to potentially harmful levels of RF radiation. The decision to halt the NTP’s research and continue using outdated FCC guidelines is not just bureaucratic inertia—it is a deliberate choice that puts the health of millions at risk.
During his first term, Trump made several critical errors in his attempts to drain the swamp. By appointing individuals with ties to the very industries they were supposed to regulate, such as Ajit Pai at the FCC, Trump unintentionally perpetuated the same corporate influence he sought to eliminate.
However, Trump’s willingness to admit these mistakes and take corrective action is what sets him apart from other politicians. In recent interviews, Trump has acknowledged that he was unprepared for the scope of the task and relied too heavily on lobbyists and business interests when filling key positions. He now recognizes the importance of appointing individuals who prioritize public health over corporate profits.
This is where RFK Jr. enters the picture. As a staunch advocate for public health and environmental protections, RFK Jr. has spent decades fighting corporate influence in government. He has successfully sued the FDA, CDC, NIH, and USDA, exposing how these agencies have been captured by industries such as Big Pharma and agribusiness. Most importantly, RFK Jr. won a major legal battle against the FCC in 2021, forcing the agency to reconsider its outdated RF radiation safety guidelines.
By teaming up with RFK Jr., Trump is making a clear statement: This time, the swamp will be drained.
RFK Jr.’s legal expertise and track record of holding regulatory agencies accountable make him the perfect ally for Trump in the fight against corporate capture. Together, they have the opportunity to reform the FCC by:
What makes the Trump-RFK Jr. alliance so significant is its bipartisan nature. In an era of extreme political polarization, this partnership represents a rare moment of unity between a Republican and an independent candidate to address an issue that affects all Americans—regardless of political affiliation.
This is not just a political campaign—it is a movement to restore trust in government and protect the health and safety of future generations. By prioritizing public health over corporate profits, Trump and RFK Jr. are setting a new standard for what it means to lead.
At its core, the issue of regulatory capture is a threat to democracy. When corporate interests control government agencies, the public loses trust in democratic institutions. By tackling this issue head-on, Trump and RFK Jr. have the potential to restore faith in the government’s ability to serve the people.
The failure of the Biden-Harris administration to address regulatory capture, and their decision to end critical research on wireless radiation, has left millions of Americans vulnerable to serious health risks. In contrast, Trump and RFK Jr. offer a vision of government that works for the people, not corporations.
We must stand together to demand that our leaders address FCC capture and prioritize public health. Here's how you can help: