Trump’s Presidential Actions Commission MAHA Recognizes Electromagnetic Radiation as Health Threat In Executive Order
The landscape of public health in the United States is shifting dramatically as concerns about electromagnetic radiation (EMR) move from the fringes to the center of federal scrutiny. In February 2025, President Donald J. Trump signed the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Executive Order, explicitly naming EMR as a potential factor for investigation into the ongoing crisis of chronic diseases among American children. This groundbreaking step places EMR under a spotlight, compelling policymakers, scientists, parents, and communities to reevaluate the role of wireless technology and its possible impacts on human health.
Why should you pay attention? Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and radiofrequency (RF) emissions now blanket nearly every corner of modern life—from cell towers perched on school rooftops to Wi-Fi routers in our homes. If these invisible signals contribute to disorders like autism spectrum disorder (ASD), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), asthma, autoimmune conditions, or even cancer, then the stakes couldn’t be higher. This blog post expands on a recent video transcript announcing the new commission’s investigation. We delve deep into the history, science, legal battles, and social implications surrounding EMR, presenting a comprehensive discussion that aims to shed light on one of the most urgent yet underrecognized public health challenges of our time.
The Video Announcement: A Watershed Moment
In the original video transcript, President Trump’s “Make America Healthy Again” Executive Order is highlighted as the first time in U.S. history that electromagnetic radiation has been officially acknowledged in a federal investigation of America’s worsening chronic disease crisis. Let’s break down the core points from that video announcement:
-
Commission Mandate
The MAHA Commission is charged with studying chronic disease rates and potential environmental contributors, including electromagnetic radiation. It specifically names EMR as an environmental factor under investigation in conditions like autism spectrum disorder, asthma, autoimmune disorders, and ADHD. -
Decades of Ignored Warnings
Researchers and organizations like RF Safe, led by John Coates, have long criticized the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for setting guidelines they consider “fraudulent and dangerously inadequate.” Telecom and governmental agencies have been accused of ignoring a growing body of scientific evidence that points to non-thermal biological harm from EMR exposure. -
Legal and Policy Gaps
The FCC’s guidelines, established in 1996, focus primarily on thermal effects—essentially how much radiation it takes to heat human tissue. They do not account for the possible chronic, low-level exposure effects that many studies have since highlighted. Compounding the issue is Section 704 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act, which severely restricts local communities from opposing cell tower installations on health grounds.
This moment in public policy indicates a potential sea change. It is not merely about revisiting old research but rather initiating fresh, unbiased investigations into how wireless radiation might be contributing to a range of health issues facing Americans—particularly children.
From Ignored Evidence to Presidential Recognition
The Road to Official Acknowledgment
EMR’s journey from fringe concern to official recognition has been fraught with controversy. For nearly 30 years, independent scientists and consumer advocacy groups have published studies on non-thermal biological effects—those that occur without causing significant heating of tissues. Critics argue that the FCC’s thermal-only guidelines fail to protect the public from these subtler, longer-term impacts.
Key Historical Milestones
-
1996 FCC Guidelines
These guidelines were set with a focus on preventing tissue heating. They largely ignored research indicating that non-thermal exposures could be harmful over time. -
Defunding of EPA’s EMR Research
In 1996, Congress shifted wireless radiation oversight from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)—which had begun investigating non-thermal effects—to the FCC, an agency lacking medical expertise. -
EPA’s 2002 Letter
The Environmental Protection Agency itself noted that FCC guidelines “do not directly address non-thermal effects, such as those due to chronic exposure.” This admission highlighted a major regulatory gap at the federal level. -
National Toxicology Program (NTP) Findings
A $30 million study conducted by the NTP found “clear evidence” of cancer risk from EMR. Despite its importance, funding was cut in 2024, halting the program’s further research into wireless radiation and health risks.
Why This Matters Now
The world has changed radically since the mid-1990s. Cell towers, Wi-Fi routers, 5G infrastructure, and connected devices now permeate nearly every corner of society. If guidelines that were set decades ago were insufficient, the exponential growth of our “always-on” environment exacerbates any underlying risks. The MAHA Commission’s acknowledgment of EMR as a potential health threat opens the door to renewed scrutiny of longstanding regulations and a reevaluation of the safety protocols we take for granted.
The Science of EMR: Breaking Down the Key Concerns
Beyond Thermal Effects
The “thermal model” remains the cornerstone of existing safety standards. It posits that only radiation strong enough to heat human tissue poses a threat. However, a wide array of peer-reviewed studies argues otherwise, suggesting that lower-level, non-thermal exposures can also have significant biological effects. These include:
-
DNA Damage and Genotoxicity
Seminal work by Dr. Henry Lai in the 1990s showed that even low-level EMR could cause DNA strand breaks, challenging the assumption that only ionizing radiation can damage genetic material. -
Oxidative Stress
EMR exposure can induce reactive oxygen species (ROS), which in turn can lead to cellular damage and contribute to chronic diseases. -
Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption
Studies indicate certain frequencies of EMR may increase the permeability of the blood-brain barrier, raising concerns about chemicals and toxins entering the brain more easily. -
Neurological and Developmental Impacts
A growing body of animal and human epidemiological research suggests potential links between chronic EMR exposure and developmental disorders affecting memory, learning, and behavior in children.
Pivotal Studies Undermining the Thermal Model
-
CTIA’s $25 Million Study
Sponsored by the wireless industry itself, this study produced findings suggestive of biological harm from EMR—much to the industry’s surprise. -
The NTP Study
A multi-year effort costing $30 million concluded that exposure to certain radiofrequency radiation resulted in “clear evidence” of cancer risk, such as heart schwannomas in male rats. -
Jamaludin Study (2025): The “Four-Hour Effect”
This research found that shorter bouts (around 4 hours) of 2.45 GHz Wi-Fi radiation caused more severe sperm damage than continuous or prolonged exposure (8–24 hours), challenging the simplistic view that “more exposure means more harm.” Rather, it indicates that non-linear, non-thermal mechanisms can create unexpected patterns of biological impact. -
Hardell Group Studies (Sweden)
Research from Dr. Lennart Hardell and colleagues showed correlations between prolonged cell phone use and elevated risks of gliomas and acoustic neuromas, further questioning the thermal-only perspective.
Collectively, these studies build a compelling case that non-thermal effects exist and could be significant, demanding a reassessment of the 1996-era regulations that continue to guide current policy.
Policy and Legal Battlegrounds
The FCC Lawsuit: RFK Jr. vs. FCC
A pivotal moment occurred in 2021, when Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and the Environmental Health Trust (EHT) won a lawsuit against the FCC. The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals deemed the FCC’s guidelines “arbitrary and capricious,” criticizing the agency for neglecting non-thermal biological evidence. Despite this landmark ruling, the federal government did not initiate any significant overhaul of its decades-old guidelines. This outcome left many activists and researchers frustrated, as the ruling effectively confirmed that existing standards may be inadequate but offered no immediate path toward correction.
Section 704: A Gag on Public Health
Section 704 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act plays a pivotal yet often overlooked role:
-
Local Autonomy Undermined
The law prevents local governments from challenging cell tower placements on health grounds. Zoning boards can review aesthetic or structural concerns, but they cannot factor in EMR-related health complaints. -
Violation of Constitutional Rights
Critics argue that this effectively nullifies the First Amendment right to petition for redress of grievances and violates the Tenth Amendment by stripping local governments of their power to regulate public safety. -
Freezing Regulatory Incentives
If communities are legally barred from regulating EMR based on health data, new research—no matter how compelling—cannot inform policy. Section 704 thus ensures that even the most alarming scientific findings do not hinder the expansion of cell towers, antennas, and other wireless infrastructure.
This legislative environment creates a perfect storm. On one side, research indicating potential harm accumulates; on the other, the law restricts actions that could protect the public from these possible risks.
Implications for Children’s Health
The Proximity Problem
A critical point from the transcript focuses on how close cell towers can be placed to schools. The BioInitiative Report, encompassing over 1,500 peer-reviewed scientific studies, recommends at least 1,500 feet between schools and cell towers. However, real-world implementations often ignore such precautions:
-
John Coates’s Daughter
Her school desk is 465 feet from a cell tower—less than one-third the recommended distance. This situation is not unique; many urban schools have towers mere yards away from classrooms. -
National Trends
As telecom companies strike leasing deals with educational institutions, more towers and antennas end up on school grounds, frequently without serious public debate about EMR exposure.
Developmental Vulnerabilities
Children’s developing systems are particularly susceptible to potential EMR harm for several reasons:
-
Thinner Skulls, Higher Absorption
A child’s skull is significantly thinner than an adult’s, which can lead to deeper penetration of RF waves and potentially heightened effects on brain tissue. -
Longer Lifetime Exposure
The earlier a child begins using wireless devices, the more cumulative exposure they will have over their lifetime. -
Neurodevelopmental Risks
Preliminary research hints that EMR could exacerbate or even trigger disorders like ADHD and autism by disrupting cellular communication, altering neurotransmitter levels, or causing oxidative stress.
Amplification of Other Stressors
The transcript highlights how EMR may amplify the effects of other medical or environmental stressors. For example:
-
Vaccines and Chemicals
In a system already destabilized by chronic EMR interference, additional toxic exposures—be they vaccine adjuvants, pesticides, or heavy metals—might pose a higher cumulative risk. -
Cellular “Reset”
Chronic exposure can prevent cells from resetting to their natural baseline, potentially turning temporary injuries or dysregulations into long-term or even permanent damage.
In the context of these vulnerabilities, parents and educators are often left in the dark, partly because federal laws limit local authority, and partly because many mainstream healthcare providers are unaware of, or dismissive of, the non-thermal EMR literature.
The Technology Debate: Microwave vs. Light
Chronic RF Exposure in Daily Life
The convenience of wireless communication—Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, 4G, 5G—has led to an explosion of microwave-based technology. Small cell antennas pop up on every street corner, and many devices remain connected around the clock. This omnipresence of RF signals has alarmed some researchers who question whether the potential health risks justify the drive for faster, more ubiquitous connectivity.
The Shift to Li-Fi: A Possible Alternative
John Coates and RF Safe propose a transition to Li-Fi, a system that uses light waves (often LED or infrared) to transmit data:
-
Higher Speeds
Li-Fi can theoretically surpass Wi-Fi speeds, leveraging parts of the electromagnetic spectrum that are not in the microwave range. -
Radiation-Free Communication
By employing visible or infrared light, Li-Fi significantly reduces the levels of microwave radiation that a typical household or office experiences. -
Bioelectric Integrity
Far-UV light systems, like Coates’s patented invention (US11700058B2), showcase how data transmission might occur without inundating the environment with radiofrequency noise.
While Li-Fi is still an emerging technology, its proponents believe it holds the key to safer connectivity that aligns better with human biology.
Legislative and Policy Reforms: Charting a Path Forward
MAHA Commission: A New Dawn or a False Start?
With the Make America Healthy Again Commission, there is a renewed opportunity for the federal government to address EMR concerns thoroughly. Still, many advocates worry that this might be another instance of official acknowledgment with no follow-through. Meaningful change hinges on the following:
- Political Will
Elected officials must be willing to challenge powerful telecom lobbies. - Regulatory Overhauls
Without updated FCC guidelines and the repeal of restrictive laws like Section 704, real progress may remain stalled. - Public Awareness
People need access to credible, clear information about EMR risks so they can make informed decisions and demand action.
Enforcing Public Law 90-602
Enacted in 1968, Public Law 90-602 (Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act) was meant to ensure federal agencies protect the public from harmful radiation. Critics argue that defunding the EPA’s research into wireless radiation, combined with transferring oversight to the FCC, violates the spirit—if not the letter—of this law. Reasserting Public Law 90-602 would involve:
- Restoring EMR Research Funding
Reinstate agencies like the NTP to continue critical, unbiased research into long-term risks. - Transparent Data
Publish new findings free from industry pressure, enabling a science-driven regulatory process. - Continuous Risk Assessment
As technology advances, safety guidelines should evolve in tandem—requiring periodic review and updates to exposure standards.
The Automotive Analogy: Regulating Emissions
The shift in the automotive industry toward cleaner emissions provides a powerful analogy. Once the public and lawmakers recognized the dangers of leaded gasoline and smog, regulations forced car manufacturers to adopt unleaded fuel, catalytic converters, and eventually electric vehicles. Similarly, the telecom industry could:
- Phase Out or Reduce Harmful Microwave Emissions
Transition toward less biologically intrusive frequencies or employ alternative technologies like Li-Fi. - Research and Development
Just as car companies invested in hybrid and electric systems, telecoms could invest in non-microwave broadband solutions. - Federal Mandates
Enforce stricter guidelines in the same way automotive emission standards became law.
EMR and Future Health Trajectories
Potential Therapeutic Benefits
Interestingly, the conversation around EMR is not one-sided. Emerging research suggests that carefully calibrated RF can offer therapeutic benefits in certain contexts:
- TheraBionic Device
The FDA-approved TheraBionic system uses RF radiation at far lower levels than cell phones to target specific cancer cells. This approach takes advantage of biological resonance, indicating that non-ionizing radiation can interact with living tissues in profound ways—positive or negative depending on dose, duration, and frequency.
A Double-Edged Sword
If controlled RF can serve as a therapy, it underscores that non-ionizing radiation indeed has biological effects beyond mere heating. The question becomes how safe it is to have unregulated, chronic exposure from cell towers, Wi-Fi, and personal devices if even small amounts of RF can dramatically affect cellular processes. The potential therapeutic uses of RF radiation thus highlight the need for much greater oversight and public education about the complexities of EMR.
The Stakes for Children: ADHD, Autism, and Future Generations
ADHD and EMF
-
Hyperactivity, Anxiety, and Memory
Animal studies indicate that EMF exposure can lead to increased oxidation and neurotransmitter imbalances, which mirror symptoms of ADHD such as hyperactivity and difficulty focusing. -
Potential Brain Circuit Disruption
Chronic RF exposure could perturb the development of the prefrontal cortex, a region heavily implicated in attention and impulse control. Even subtle changes in dopaminergic systems can cascade into behavioral disorders.
Autism and EMF
-
Voltage-Gated Calcium Channels (VGCCs)
Dr. Martin Pall’s research reveals that EMF can open VGCCs in cells, leading to an influx of calcium ions and oxidative stress. This biochemical chain reaction can influence gene expression and neural pathways. -
Epigenetic Changes
EMF-induced disruptions could lead to new genetic mutations or epigenetic shifts passed down to future generations, increasing susceptibility to conditions like autism.
Coordinated Advocacy
Organizations and individuals devoted to tackling autism, ADHD, and other neurodevelopmental disorders must consider EMR’s potential role. Advocacy should not focus solely on the usual suspects—genes, toxins, and diet—but also include legislative demands:
- Repeal Section 704
Restore the right to regulate local exposure. - Fund EMR-Health Research
Prioritize or partner with scientific studies that investigate the interplay between EMR and childhood conditions. - Push for Updated FCC Standards
Non-thermal biological evidence must be part of the regulatory equation.
If philanthropic institutions, policymakers, and scientists fail to address EMR, they may overlook a key driver of children’s health issues, leaving them ill-prepared to craft effective interventions.
Conclusion: A Call to Action
Summarizing Key Takeaways
-
EMR Officially Under Investigation
President Trump’s MAHA Commission is the first federal-level acknowledgment that electromagnetic radiation may contribute to America’s chronic disease crisis in children. -
Outdated Guidelines and Gag Orders
The 1996 thermal-only FCC guidelines, combined with Section 704, effectively silence community concerns about non-thermal EMR risks, even in the face of mounting evidence. -
Evidence of Non-Thermal Harm
A wealth of studies refute the mantra that “if it doesn’t heat you, it can’t hurt you.” DNA damage, oxidative stress, and neurological effects have all been documented below thermal thresholds. -
Children Are Uniquely Vulnerable
From thinner skulls to developing brains, kids face heightened risks from the relentless expansion of wireless infrastructure. -
Viable Alternatives
Technologies like Li-Fi and space-based broadband could reduce our reliance on microwave frequencies, offering safer forms of connectivity.
What You Can Do
- Demand Repeal of Section 704
Contact lawmakers and sign petitions to restore local authority over cell tower placements. - Support Updated FCC Guidelines
Insist on comprehensive standards that include non-thermal effects and long-term exposure risks. - Encourage Research Funding
Advocate for reinstating funding for the National Toxicology Program (NTP) and other bodies capable of conducting large-scale EMR health studies. - Explore Safer Tech
Whether at home, in schools, or in businesses, look into Li-Fi systems and push for innovative solutions that minimize harmful exposure. - Educate and Advocate
Share credible studies, discuss concerns with your community, and engage in forums that address EMR’s public health implications.
The Path to the “Light Age”
John Coates of RF Safe envisions moving from the “Microwave Age” to the “Light Age,” where data transmission relies on Li-Fi and other forms of non-harmful electromagnetic communication. This transition requires dismantling the unconstitutional legal structures—particularly Section 704—that have enabled the unchecked proliferation of wireless systems. Only then can scientific debate flourish, research findings be taken seriously, and local communities regain their right to protect themselves from potential hazards.
“The stakes could not be higher,” warns Coates. “Unless we confront the legal barriers perpetuating industry-driven obfuscation, no new scientific research or philanthropic effort will suffice to stem the crisis already unfolding in public health—especially in our children’s neurodevelopment.”
This juncture marks a crucial decision point for activists, professionals, policymakers, and the general public. Recognizing EMR’s potential role in chronic diseases is merely the first step. We must now demand meaningful policy reforms, support safer technologies, and remain vigilant in safeguarding future generations from a threat that, for too long, has gone unaddressed.
Appendix: Resources and Further Reading
- FCC vs. RFK Jr. Case
- BioInitiative Report
- National Toxicology Program (NTP) EMR Studies
- Li-Fi Technology
- TheraBionic
Final Thoughts
Electromagnetic radiation has quietly become one of the most pervasive elements of modern life, yet policy and public awareness have not kept pace. With the MAHA Commission now investigating EMR’s health implications, the conversation can finally move beyond outdated assumptions to real scrutiny and, potentially, meaningful change. The choice before us is stark: adapt our technologies and laws to align with emerging science, or ignore the mounting evidence at our peril.
For press inquiries or to learn more about EMR safety solutions, contact:
John Coates
Founder of RF Safe
Phone: (727) 610-1188
Visit RF Safe
Thank you for reading and engaging with this critical public health discourse. Together, we can advocate for safer technologies and a healthier future for all.
