A neoplasm is an abnormal growth of cells—often referred to as a tumor. These growths can be benign, meaning they do not spread to surrounding tissues and are less likely to be life-threatening, or malignant, meaning they can invade nearby tissues or spread throughout the body (metastasize). In everyday language, malignant neoplasms are most commonly associated with what we call cancers.
A recent report on U.S. mortality trends, titled “US – Trends in Death Rates from Neoplasms, Ages 15–44”, reveals a concerning rise in cancer-related deaths among younger adults, with excess mortality accelerating especially in 2021 and 2022. Researchers note that what began as a moderate rise in 2020 (potentially linked to pandemic disruptions in diagnosis and treatment) has progressed into a more significant uptick. While many factors—such as delayed screenings, shifts in lifestyle, or post-infection inflammatory processes—are under investigation, it is also reasonable to ask whether electromagnetic field (EMF) or radiofrequency radiation (RFR) exposures could be playing a role in these unexpected trends.
Below, we explore why EMF/RFR might warrant consideration as part of the wider effort to understand increases in neoplasm deaths among younger adults.
1. A Concerning Trend in Younger Adults
Rising Neoplasm Deaths (Ages 15–44)
- Excess Mortality: From 2020 through 2022, the report shows a statistically significant departure from the pre-2020 downward trend in cancer mortality rates among this age group.
- Multiple-Cause vs. Underlying-Cause: The study indicates that multiple-cause (MC) cancer-related deaths have risen faster than underlying-cause (UC) ones, suggesting some individuals might have pre-existing cancers that become fatal in the presence of other causes (infection, for instance).
Why It Matters
Young adults (15–44) typically have lower baseline cancer risk compared to older populations. A surge in neoplasm-related mortality—particularly over a short timescale—raises questions about whether novel factors (environmental, biological, or behavioral) might be influencing cancer onset or cancer progression.
2. Enter EMF & RFR: Why Consider These Exposures?
A Growing Layer in Modern Life
We live in an era saturated with electromagnetic waves, whether from:
- Power lines and household electrical appliances (ELF-MF, usually 50–60 Hz).
- Wireless devices (cell phones, tablets, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers), which emit RFR at higher frequencies (hundreds of MHz to GHz).
Although the new Neoplasms in Ages 15–44 study does not specifically investigate EMF or RFR, the pervasive nature of these exposures in modern life makes them a relevant piece of the broader public health puzzle.
3. What Recent Research Suggests
ELF-MF Meta-Analysis (December 2024)
A new paper in Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology—“Effects of extremely low frequency magnetic fields on animal cancer and DNA damage: a systematic review and meta-analysis”—suggests that:
- No Major Overall Increase: ELF-MF did not significantly raise rates of lymphoma, breast cancer, or brain cancer in rodents across most studies.
- Possible Leukemia Risk: Mice exposed to ELF-MF showed an increased odds of developing leukemia (though results in rats were not significant).
- DNA Damage: Certain cell types (e.g., rodent brain cells) could exhibit DNA damage under ELF-MF exposure, though it was not observed in all cell lines (e.g., neuroblastoma).
These findings underscore the idea that electromagnetic fields can have selective biological impacts—and that certain cancers, tissues, or species appear more susceptible than others. While this study focused on ELF-MF rather than RFR, it highlights a need for nuanced, frequency-specific research.
RFR & Human Health
For higher-frequency exposures (like those from mobile phones and Wi-Fi), research is similarly mixed but continues to reveal areas of potential concern:
- IARC Classification: The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified RFR as a “possible” carcinogen (Group 2B), citing limited evidence in humans for glioma and acoustic neuroma.
- Non-Thermal Effects: Studies point to possible oxidative stress, DNA strand breaks, and other non-thermal mechanisms that may influence cancer risk, though consensus is not yet reached.
4. Could EMF/RFR Be a Contributing Factor?
Multiple Variables at Play
While EMF or RFR exposure alone may not fully explain the upward shift in neoplasm death rates, it could serve as one of several environmental or lifestyle factors that, in combination with genetic predisposition or other stressors, potentially accelerates cancer onset or progression.
Younger Adults & Enhanced Susceptibility
- Developing Physiology: Younger individuals may have different tissue sensitivities, and emerging research suggests that cumulative exposures—beginning in childhood or adolescence—could have long-tail effects on cancer risk.
- Changing Exposures: A generation more reliant on mobile devices and always-on connectivity may face higher, more constant RFR levels than adults in previous decades.
5. Next Steps & Ongoing Questions
- Stratified Research
- Break down data by cancer subtype, age brackets, and sex to see if certain tumors correlate with known effects from EMF/RFR exposure or if other etiologies dominate.
- Longitudinal Studies
- Follow younger populations who have significant device usage and environmental exposures over years or decades to track potential shifts in neoplasm incidence.
- Policy & Precaution
- Encourage guidelines that reflect emerging science on non-thermal biological effects, especially for sensitive populations.
- Some countries already adopt precautionary measures, urging minimal children’s screen time and limiting Wi-Fi in nurseries or primary schools.
- Holistic Public Health
- Consider other pandemic-related influences: delayed screenings, disruptions in healthy routines, stress, or post-infection inflammatory states.
- EMF/RFR is but one piece of a complex mosaic requiring multidisciplinary collaboration among epidemiologists, oncologists, and environmental scientists.
Conclusion: A Worthy Avenue for Exploration
The recent report pointing to increasing cancer-related mortality in 15–44-year-olds sounds an alarm for public health officials and researchers. While issues like pandemic-driven healthcare disruptions and changes in behavior are high on the list of probable contributors, EMF/RFR exposure remains a topic deserving deeper investigation—particularly in light of ongoing studies that suggest selective vulnerability in certain tissues or subpopulations.
Ultimately, this is not about assigning singular blame but expanding the scope of inquiry. As the body of research grows, a more complete picture of how environmental factors—including electromagnetic exposures—intersect with genetic, lifestyle, and healthcare variables will emerge. In the meantime, practical caution and further research remain prudent steps in safeguarding younger adults from avoidable cancer risks.
Stay Informed with RF Safe
- Subscribe to RF Safe’s newsletter for updates on EMF, RFR, and public health research.
- Advocate for balanced EMF/RFR guidelines and precautionary measures in schools and public spaces.
- Join the conversation about how we can integrate technology while minimizing unintended health consequences—particularly for our children and younger generations.
Because in a rapidly changing world, knowledge and cautious innovation are our best allies against rising health concerns.
