“Not waiting for tests, not waiting for standards, not waiting for governments … rule #1 is that the technology drives the policy and not the policy drives the technology.”
— Tom Wheeler, 2016 National Press Club Interview
Introduction
In 2016, as former–Federal Communications Commission (FCC) Chairman Tom Wheeler stood before the National Press Club, he made an off-the-cuff statement that would send shockwaves through public health circles: he declared the FCC would push forward with new wireless technology—“not waiting for tests, standards, or governments.” To many, it sounded like a vow to champion American innovation. But for others—particularly scientists, doctors, parents, and activists—Wheeler’s words revealed a reckless mindset that placed technological expansion over children’s safety.
This blog post delves into why Wheeler’s “not waiting for tests” philosophy has become such a flashpoint, especially for American children. Drawing from video transcripts, decades of legislation, and emerging scientific data, we uncover:
- How Wheeler’s approach sidestepped the precautionary principle, ignoring possible health hazards from electromagnetic radiation (EMR).
- Why Section 704 of the 1996 Telecom Act, co-shaped by Wheeler, silenced local health concerns.
- What it means for vulnerable populations—children in particular—who now grow up amidst Wi-Fi-saturated schools, ubiquitous cell towers, and untested 5G infrastructure.
- Where the science stands on non-thermal radiation risks, from DNA damage to cognitive disorders.
If you’ve ever questioned why we have advanced wireless devices but no updated, science-driven safety rules, read on. The story points to a single statement—“technology drives the policy”—that critics say is the core of a public health crisis.
“Not Waiting for Tests”: The Statement That Changed Everything
Where It All Began
In a 2016 interview at the National Press Club, Wheeler famously outlined the FCC’s stance on rolling out 5G and other new wireless technologies. Rather than waiting for robust safety studies or updated guidelines, Wheeler insisted the U.S. must “lead the world,” effectively forging ahead without finalizing thorough testing.
- “Not waiting for tests”: Wheeler acknowledged that new technologies were being pushed into the marketplace before comprehensive health data could be collected.
- “Technology drives the policy”: Instead of policy directing technological safety boundaries, Wheeler’s statement flipped the script, prompting the question: if there’s an unforeseen risk—especially for children—would we only learn of it after millions are already exposed?
Why This Matters
Historically, major regulatory agencies (e.g., the FDA or EPA) adopt a stance akin to “test first, deploy second” when dealing with chemicals, pharmaceuticals, or environmental toxins. Wheeler’s remarks signaled a sharp departure: a top official was confessing that policy would follow technology, not guide it. That shift has substantial implications for how swiftly the U.S. vetted new telecom infrastructures, particularly regarding electromagnetic radiation safety.
Tom Wheeler’s Background: From Wireless Lobbyist to FCC Chairman
A Conflict of Interest
Before taking the FCC’s helm in 2013, Wheeler was no stranger to the wireless industry. He previously served as president of:
- National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA)
- Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA)
In these roles, Wheeler vigorously lobbied for rapid telecom expansion, often dismissing mounting health questions about EMR exposures. So when President Barack Obama appointed him to regulate that very industry, alarms rang among consumer advocates. A 2014 Silicon Valley confrontation captured on video featured protesters accusing Wheeler of being “a wolf in sheep’s clothing,” paralleling how the head of a tobacco company might become Surgeon General—a glaring conflict of interest.
In 1996, Congress passed the Telecommunications Act, which was celebrated as a way to modernize America’s communications infrastructure. But hidden within it was a poison pill: Section 704. Rather than simply encouraging growth of new technologies, it gagged local governments, making it illegal to reject cell tower placements based on health concerns. This was:
- Unconstitutional: Violating the First Amendment by preventing local communities from speaking out about health risks, and the Tenth Amendment by overriding states’ rights.
- A Coordinated Attack: Coming at the same time as flawed FCC guidelines, it “mysteriously” aligned to ensure wireless expansion continued unchallenged.
Result: The wireless industry gained carte blanche to build towers in residential areas, near schools, and across every part of the country—externalizing all health risks onto the public.
The FCC Guidelines: Never Legitimate, Never Scientific
Simultaneously, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) issued so-called “safety” standards focusing exclusively on thermal (heat-based) risks. The guidelines:
- Ignored Non-Thermal Risks: Research going back decades—like Robert Becker’s discoveries in bioelectricity and Arthur Guy’s 1980s military studies—pointed to serious biological effects at levels not high enough to heat tissue. Even the industry’s own $25 million study acknowledged dangers beyond thermal effects.
- Bypassing Real Experts: The EPA, with medical know-how, was sidelined. Engineers, not doctors, set guidelines—part of a cover-up to keep the narrative confined to “thermal-only.”
In short, these guidelines were never legitimate. They served to shield the wireless industry while ignoring the potential for DNA damage, oxidative stress, and other biological disruptions that can unfold beneath the thermal threshold.
A RICO-Worthy Plot?
As more details emerged, the interplay of government agencies, industry lobbying, and suppressed research revealed organized wrongdoing on a massive scale—potentially RICO Act territory:
- Data Suppression: Funding “favorable” science, discrediting independent researchers, smearing critics like Dr. Henry Lai, who discovered DNA strand breaks from non-thermal exposures.
- Lobbying Muscle: Telecom giants pushed the Telecommunications Act while influencing the FCC to stay silent on non-thermal effects.
Effect: The unchecked proliferation of cell towers, routers, and personal wireless gadgets, as Americans were lulled into believing “if it doesn’t heat you, it can’t hurt you.”
EMFs: Leading America into a Chronic Disease Crisis
Bioelectric Disruption
Our bodies rely on intricate electrical signals—nerve impulses, heart rhythms, and intercellular communication. Flooding these systems with man-made EMFs can cause:
- Neurological Effects: Potential triggers for autism, ADHD, insomnia, and other cognitive or developmental disorders.
- Chronic Diseases: Synergistic damage when combined with environmental toxins, chemical pollutants, or even certain medical interventions.
Entropic Waste and Constant Assault
The barrage of wireless signals is 24/7, inescapable, and layered. When children receive vaccines or encounter toxins, their bodies might naturally rebound—but if their bioelectric foundation is constantly disrupted by RF radiation, returning to baseline may be impossible. Thus, the hidden cost of wireless technology has been externalized onto families and communities, in the form of chronic diseases that now plague society.
The Allegations of Suppression
During Wheeler’s CTIA tenure, the organization funded a $25 million Wireless Technology Research (WTR) study (1993–1999). Led by Dr. George Carlo, WTR discovered non-thermal biological effects, including DNA strand breaks and potential links to cancer—directly contradicting the industry claim that only “heating” mattered. Instead of transparency, Wheeler allegedly discredited Carlo and buried the findings. This pattern, critics say, continued during Wheeler’s time at the FCC: push forward, suppress contradictory science.
A Legal Framework That Let “Technology Drive the Policy”
Section 704 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act
A central tool in Wheeler’s arsenal was Section 704 of the 1996 Telecom Act. Co-authored under Wheeler’s CTIA leadership, it prohibits local authorities from denying cell towers on health grounds if the proposal meets FCC standards.
- First Amendment Concerns: Communities cannot even cite health fears in official rejections, effectively muzzling free speech.
- Tenth Amendment Concerns: State and local rights are subjugated to a federal policy influenced by telecom lobbyists.
This legislation was pivotal in ensuring that new wireless technologies—from 2G to 5G—faced minimal community pushback, accelerating adoption without updated safety checks.
Public Law 90-602: The Mandate Ignored
Decades earlier, Public Law 90-602 (1968) required continuous federal study and regulation of electronic radiation. However, critics note how Wheeler and industry allies allegedly pressured Congress to defund the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) research into non-thermal EMR, effectively transferring oversight to the FCC—an agency lacking medical or environmental expertise. Under Wheeler, the FCC adhered to thermal-only safety guidelines from the 1990s, ignoring the entire domain of non-thermal biological effects.
Why “Not Waiting for Tests” Endangers Children
Children’s Unique Biology
A child’s skull is thinner, their brain tissue more conductive, and their cells divide more rapidly. This makes them particularly prone to potential genetic or cellular disruptions from EMR. If a technology might cause DNA strand breaks or other sub-thermal effects, children have the longest window for those to manifest as chronic illness later in life.
Real Consequences
- Brain Tumors: The Interphone Study (2010) and Hardell’s Swedish research (2013) both suggest increased glioma risk with prolonged phone use.
- Breast Cancer: Case reports document young women developing tumors in exact phone-storage spots (like a bra).
- Behavioral and Cognitive Issues: Emerging research hints at links between EMR exposure and neurodevelopmental problems, with children showing higher risk due to still-developing nervous systems.
By “not waiting for tests,” Wheeler left these children unprotected. Without policy-informed guidelines that consider child vulnerability, devices were marketed to families with zero labeling or caution.
The 2014 Silicon Valley Showdown
Video Highlights
A pivotal moment came in January 2014, when activists confronted Wheeler in Silicon Valley:
- One man lamented his brother’s brain tumor, located on the side of his head where he used a cell phone.
- Another demanded, “How many young ladies have to die from breast cancer because there’s no warnings…?”
- Protesters accused Wheeler of “buying” his FCC appointment and ignoring evidence of “smart meter” harms, migraines, and electro-hypersensitivity (EHS).
The anguish was palpable—these were real families convinced that long-term EMR exposure had dire health impacts. Their frustration? The FCC, under Wheeler, was forging ahead, refusing to address emerging data.
Wheeler’s Response
Wheeler insisted the FCC “receives scientific information from scientific agencies to set safety levels.” But activists pointed out:
- The EPA was defunded and sidelined.
- The FDA had minimal involvement.
- The FCC based guidelines on decades-old, thermal-only thresholds.
In essence, “the technology drives the policy” translated to children being the unwitting test subjects for an unmonitored experiment.
George Carlo’s $25 Million Warning
The WTR Project: A Missed Chance
Carlo’s Wireless Technology Research, initiated under Wheeler’s CTIA leadership in the 1990s, was the largest industry-funded attempt to settle EMR safety questions. Instead of confirming “all is well,” it suggested:
- DNA breaks and cell damage.
- Possible tumor risks.
- Non-thermal interactions that defy older safety assumptions.
Wheeler allegedly fired Carlo, suppressed the findings, and publicly claimed cell phones were safe. Later, in 2016, Wheeler’s stance at the FCC—“not waiting for tests”—aligned precisely with the earlier cover-up: keep the official narrative of “no proven harm” and push forward.
If Only…
Had Carlo’s warnings been heeded in the late 1990s, the U.S. might have implemented a precautionary approach—child-specific guidelines, real labeling, or more rigorous testing pre-market. Instead, we got unbridled expansion, culminating in 5G networks that saturate schools, homes, and neighborhoods with minimal oversight.
Non-Thermal Radiation: What Wheeler Chose to Overlook
Science Beyond the Heating Model
Regulatory agencies historically focus on whether EMR heats tissues. But an abundance of studies indicate non-thermal pathways:
- Oxidative Stress: Low-level EMR may generate free radicals, damaging DNA and accelerating aging or cancer risk.
- Calcium Channel Dysregulation: Dr. Martin Pall’s research shows how EMFs open voltage-gated calcium channels, potentially causing neuronal overstimulation and other health effects.
- Blood-Brain Barrier Leaks: Even minor EMR exposure can temporarily make the brain’s protective barrier more permeable.
Wheeler’s “not waiting” approach meant these issues stayed effectively off the FCC’s official radar. Meanwhile, parents trying to shield kids from potential dangers had limited recourse—no mandatory labeling, no revised limits, and local governments gagged by Section 704.
The True Toll on American Children
A “Silent Catastrophe”
Critics call it a “silent catastrophe” because the damage unfolds slowly, overshadowed by the convenience of smartphones and “smart” everything. Brain tumors can take years to develop. Neurological disorders or learning difficulties might only become clear after a child has been exposed for a decade. By then, say some experts, we’ll see a public health crisis we could have mitigated.
Real-Life Stories
From the 2014 transcript:
- A man’s brother is one of many known cases where neurosurgeons observe consistent tumor placement correlating with phone use.
- Young women with breast tumors forming exactly under their phone’s location.
- EHS sufferers forced to relocate to “white zones” away from cell towers or Wi-Fi, as no mainstream protections exist.
The heartbreak is that Wheeler’s stance actively prevented early awareness campaigns—no warnings to keep phones off children’s bodies, no impetus to explore safer alternatives like wired systems in schools.
Constitutional Backlash: Section 704 Under Fire
Violations of the First and Tenth Amendments
Lawyers argue that Section 704’s ban on citing “environmental” or “health” reasons for tower opposition effectively:
- Silences communities (First Amendment).
- Usurps state/local power (Tenth Amendment).
Hence, many call it an unconstitutional measure, orchestrated by Wheeler’s lobby (the CTIA) to ensure unfettered growth. By the time Wheeler repeated his “technology drives policy” mantra at the FCC, the legal framework—that he’d helped create—was already denying localities the ability to demand proof of safety or challenge expansions.
Potential Judicial Reversal
Some advocates hope new lawsuits or future Supreme Court challenges might overturn Section 704. If a court deems the law unconstitutional, local communities could again weigh health factors—an outcome that might drastically reshape the wireless landscape.
“Make America Healthy Again” Commission: A Turning Point?
Trump’s Executive Order
In 2025, amid growing grassroots anger, an executive order from then-President Donald Trump created the “Make America Healthy Again” commission. This body was empowered to investigate environmental and technological factors behind America’s chronic disease epidemic, explicitly naming electromagnetic radiation.
Because the window of time in which we can reverse this trajectory is rapidly closing. And every moment wasted in distraction is another child neurologically lost to the entropic chaos we have unleashed. Donald Trump must repeal Section 704. Public Law 90-602 must be enforced. Wireless infrastructure must be re-evaluated as a neurodevelopmental hazard.
- Recommend child-specific guidelines or new federal laws to supersede Section 704.
Could Wheeler Face Consequences?
If the commission finds Wheeler knowingly disregarded or buried evidence of non-thermal EMR harm, it might brand his FCC tenure as a catastrophic failure of public trust. Some speculate on potential legal accountability. Others believe any repercussions might be limited to reputational damage. Still, the fact that a federal inquiry is analyzing past decisions indicates that the “not waiting for tests” era could end with an official condemnation.
The Price of “Technology First”
Tom Wheeler’s 2016 utterance—“not waiting for tests, standards, nor governments”—wasn’t a minor blunder. It defined a regulatory posture that let the wireless industry gallop ahead while public health concerns lagged far behind. By burying critical science, sidelining environmental agencies, and championing laws that gag local objections, Wheeler’s approach left American children as primary test subjects in a national experiment on electromagnetic radiation.
Key Takeaways
- Children as Collateral: The youngest, with developing brains and thinner skulls, face the longest, most intense exposures—yet remain unprotected by updated safety rules.
- Policy Shaped by Industry: Wheeler’s past as a wireless lobbyist deeply influenced FCC decisions, sidelining the FDA/EPA’s mandates on non-thermal research.
- Legal Battles Ahead: Section 704 stands as a roadblock to local self-determination, possibly violating core constitutional rights.
- Hope in New Investigations: Trump’s “Make America Healthy Again” commission—and grassroots activism—may force a re-evaluation of Wheeler’s legacy and spark critical reforms.
A Call to Action
- Support Repeal or Amendment of Section 704: Restore the right of communities to raise health concerns about cell tower placements.
- Demand Child-Centered Guidelines: Pressure the FCC to adopt exposure standards reflective of non-thermal effects—especially crucial for kids.
- Fund Independent Research: Revive the spirit of Public Law 90-602 by ensuring ongoing, peer-reviewed investigations into EMR’s long-term impacts.
- Adopt Safe Tech Habits: Until official guidelines catch up, limit children’s phone use, favor wired connections, and keep devices away from sensitive areas of the body.
In the end, “not waiting for tests” may have driven American telecom policy, but it also eroded trust, undermined scientific integrity, and left children’s health in the crosshairs. Reversing course means acknowledging Wheeler’s stance as the wrong blueprint for the digital age. Only then can we ensure that technology—and the policy guiding it—truly serves the public good rather than sacrificing it on the altar of corporate profit.
