As the 2024 election draws closer, a critical public health issue is emerging, yet it remains largely ignored by political candidates and the media. Advocates for wireless radiation safety are raising alarms about the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) outdated safety guidelines, which fail to account for the non-thermal biological effects of radiofrequency (RF) radiation. The consequences are far-reaching, not only contributing to America’s chronic disease epidemic but also hindering medical breakthroughs that could revolutionize cancer treatment and healthcare.
At the heart of the issue is the refusal to update FCC guidelines, which are based on 1990s standards focused solely on thermal effects—those caused by heating tissue from RF exposure. Scientific advancements in the past decade, however, have shown that RF radiation can have biological interactions at much lower, non-thermal levels, impacting everything from cellular signaling to immune system modulation. This knowledge is crucial to addressing chronic diseases and unlocking new healthcare treatments, yet it has been systematically ignored.
The Missing Link in Chronic Disease and Healthcare Innovation
In a striking exchange on social media, advocates like John Coates from RF Safe highlighted the misclassification of RF radiation risks and how this has stunted both healthcare progress and scientific understanding. Coates pointed to the U.S. National Cancer Institute (NCI) conference on cancer bioelectricity in September, which emphasized bioelectric signals’ critical role in cancer development. Unfortunately, the non-thermal effects of RF radiation—a major disruptor of bioelectric processes—remain under-researched because funding for such studies has been blocked or cut.
“Yes, bad food is bad, but the misclassification of RF radiation risks is worse,” Coates stated. “If we were studying the non-thermal effects of EMR (electromagnetic radiation), we would have many more scientists funded to explore how bioelectric effects on metabolic processes are influenced by entropic waste from our technology.”
Advocates argue that the failure to recognize RF radiation’s non-thermal effects contributes to the chronic disease epidemic by disrupting the body’s bioelectric and cellular functions. Simultaneously, it delays medical advancements that could harness RF radiation for treatments. Recent studies have pointed to the therapeutic potential of RF-EMF treatments, which could help target cancer cells via bioelectrical and electrochemical mechanisms—while minimizing harm to healthy tissue.
Regulatory Capture: The FCC and Corporate Influence
A significant obstacle to progress is regulatory capture—a phenomenon where regulatory agencies, like the FCC, are unduly influenced by the industries they are meant to oversee. The FCC has long been accused of being more responsive to corporate interests than public health. This has stifled research into the non-thermal effects of RF radiation, even as studies like the National Toxicology Program’s (NTP) research have uncovered links between RF exposure and cancer.
Under the Biden-Harris administration, funding for the NTP’s cancer research was halted just as studies began to reveal RF radiation’s carcinogenic potential. The FCC continues to operate under guidelines established in the 1990s that ignore these risks, leaving millions of Americans exposed to potential long-term health hazards. Advocates, including RF Safe, are calling on candidates in the 2024 election to take a clear stand on this issue.
Why This Matters: The Roadblocks to Progress
The implications of inaction are severe. RF radiation’s ability to disrupt bioelectric processes may contribute to chronic diseases such as cancer, heart disease, and neurological disorders—compounding daily exposure risks from wireless technologies. As Coates noted, RF radiation research has demonstrated biological interactions beyond thermal effects. For example, the FDA-approved TheraBionic treatment uses RF radiation at power levels much lower than those emitted by cell phones to treat inoperable liver cancer. This demonstrates that non-thermal RF interactions can be life-saving, yet remain underexplored due to outdated regulations.
The failure to update the FCC’s guidelines leaves the public vulnerable and blocks research that could bring about groundbreaking healthcare innovations.
“We are missing an eye-opening opportunity during this election to inform the public of health risks they have little chance to escape without knowledge of them,” Coates urged, calling for more action.
A Call to Action: The Public’s Role in Demanding Change
Advocates are urging the public to demand that candidates commit to three key actions:
- Update FCC Safety Guidelines: Current guidelines must reflect non-thermal biological effects of RF radiation. The growing evidence is clear—these effects contribute to chronic health problems and stifle scientific progress.
- Restart NTP Cancer Research: Funding for the NTP’s research must be reinstated to fully explore the health impacts of RF-EMF exposure, especially its link to cancer and other chronic diseases.
- End FCC Regulatory Capture: The FCC must prioritize public health over corporate profits by adopting science-based standards that reflect modern research.
As the 2024 election approaches, where candidates stand on this issue could have profound implications for public health and medical innovation in America. Advocates like RF Safe encourage voters to choose candidates who will address wireless radiation risks and support long-overdue regulatory reforms.
For more information on RF Safe’s advocacy and how you can take action, visit RFsafe.com.
#RFSafeVote #ProtectOurFuture #Election2024 #ChronicDiseaseCrisis
