A Small Sampling of the Numerous Scientific Research Studies Released After December 4, 2019- The Day the FCC Closed Their Inquiry on Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Radiation (RFR).
A July 2021 report by the European Parliament “Health Impact of 5G” concluded that commonly used RFR frequencies (450 to 6000 MHz) are probably carcinogenic for humans and clearly affect male fertility with possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, fetuses and newborns.
A landmark three part 2021 research review on wildlife effects by U.S experts including former U.S. Fish and Wildlife senior biologist Albert Manville states current science should trigger urgent regulatory action citing more than 1,200 scientific references which found adverse biological effects to wildlife from even very low intensities of non ionizing radiation with findings of impacts to orientation and migration, reproduction, mating, nest, den building and survivorship (Levitt et al., 2021a, Levitt et al., 2021b, Levitt et al., 2021c).
- February 2020- Scientists of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences National Toxicology Program published a study finding “significant increases in DNA damage” in groups of male mice, female mice and male rats after just 14 to 19 weeks of exposure to RFR (Smith-Roe et al., 2020).
- March 2020– Yale researchers published a study supported by the American Cancer Society linking thyroid cancer to cell phone use in people with a type of common genetic variation (Luo et al., 2020).
- May 2020- A meta analysis of 300 peer-reviewed scientific publications (1990-2015) describing 1127 experimental observations in cell-based in vitro models on RFR published in Environmental Research found less differentiated cells such as epithelium and spermatozoa are more sensitive to RF (Halgamuge et al., 2020).
- May 2020– A review on real world exposure to 5G found that 5 G will have systematic effects as well as adverse effects to the skin and eyes (Kostoff et al., 2020).
- November 2020- A systematic review and meta-analysis of case-control studies found evidence that linked cellular phone use to increased tumor risk (Choi et al., 2020).
- February 2021– A 4G study found kidney inflammation and damage to the testes in mice (Hasan et al., 2021).
- March 2021– The Switzerland Institute of the Environment expert published review found increased oxidative stress in the majority of the animal studies and in more than half of the cell studies with exposures within the range of the regulatory limits (Schuermann et al., 2021)
- July 2021– Environmental Working Group published study analysing the data from the National Toxicology Program study and concluded that FCC limits should be strengthened by 200 to 400 times to protect children according to current risk assessment guidelines (Uche 2021).
- July/August 2021– Two systematic reviews find harm to sperm (Sungjoon et al, 2021, Yu et al., 2021).
- August 2021– A review on impacts to the thyroid found RFR “might be associated with thyroid gland insufficiency and alterations in serum thyroid hormone levels, with a possible disruption in the hypothalamic-pituitary-thyroid axis.” (Alkayyali et al., 2021)
- August 2021- 2400 MHz effected the structural integrity of the hippocampus in mice (Hasan et al., 2021).
- September 2021– A systematic review on the effects of RFR to male reproductive hormones found that wireless can decrease testosterone reduction (Maluin et al, 2021).
- September 2021- A review on the genetic effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields found DNA strand breaks, micronucleus formation, and chromosomal structural changes (Lai 2021).
- September 2021– A systematic review published in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences found that neuronal ion channels are particularly affected (Bertagna et al 2021).
- October 2021– A review published in the International Journal of Oncology described how EMFs lead to dysfunction of ion channels which lead to reactive oxygen species/free radical overproduction providing “ a complete picture” of “how human‑made EMF exposure may indeed lead to DNA damage and related pathologies, including cancer,” (Panagopoulos et al. 2021).
REFERENCES
Alkayyali T et al.,(2021) An Exploration of the Effects of Radiofrequency Radiation Emitted by Mobile Phones and Extremely Low Frequency Radiation on Thyroid Hormones and Thyroid Gland Histopathology. Cureus. Aug 20;13(8)
Bertagna et al (2021) Effects of electromagnetic fields on neuronal ion channels: a systematic review. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 2021 Sep;1499(1):82-103
Choi Yoon-Jung , Joel M. Moskowitz, Seung-Kwon Myung, Yi-Ryoung Lee, Yun-Chul Hong. (2020) Cellular Phone Use and Risk of Tumors: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 17(21), 8079
Halgamuge MN, Skafidas E, Davis D. (2020) A meta-analysis of in vitro exposures to weak radiofrequency radiation exposure from mobile phones (1990–2015). Environmental Research, Volume 184
Hasan et al., (2021) Hematobiochemical and histopathological alterations of kidney and testis due to exposure of 4G cell phone radiation in mice. Saudi J Biol Sci. May;28(5):2933-2942
Hasan et al., (2021) Effect of 2400 MHz mobile phone radiation exposure on the behavior and hippocampus morphology in Swiss mouse model, Saudi Journal of Biological Sciences, August
Kostoff, R., Heroux, P., Aschner, M., & Tsatsakis, A. (2020). Adverse health effects of 5G mobile networking technology under real-life conditions. Toxicology Letters, 323, 35-40
Lai H. (2021) Genetic effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields. Electromagn Biol Med. 2021 Apr 3;40(2):264-273
Levitt BB, Lai HC, Manville AM. (2021) Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, part 1. Rising ambient EMF levels in the environment. Rev Environ Health May 27.
Levitt BB, Lai HC, Manville AM. (2021) Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, Part 2 impacts: how species interact with natural and man-made EMF. Rev Environ Health. Jul 8.
Levitt BB, Lai HC, Manville AM. (2021) Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, Part 3. Exposure standards, public policy, laws, and future directions. Rev Environ Health. Sep 27.
Luo, J., et al.(2020) Genetic susceptibility may modify the association between cell phone use and thyroid cancer: A population-based case-control study in Connecticut, Environmental Research, Volume 182
Maluin SM et al., (2021) Effect of Radiation Emitted by Wireless Devices on Male Reproductive Hormones: A Systematic Review. Front Physiol. Sep 24;12:732420
Panagopoulos, D.J., Karabarbounis, A., Yakymenko, I., & Chrousos, G.P. (2021). Human‑made electromagnetic fields: Ion forced‑oscillation and voltage‑gated ion channel dysfunction, oxidative stress and DNA damage (Review). International Journal of Oncology, 59, 92.
Schuermann, David, and Meike Mevissen (2021) “Manmade Electromagnetic Fields and Oxidative Stress—Biological Effects and Consequences for Health” International Journal of Molecular Sciences 22, no. 7: 3772. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms22073772
Smith-Roe, SL., et al. (2020) “Evaluation of the genotoxicity of cell phone radiofrequency radiation in male and female rats and mice following subchronic exposure.” Environmental and molecular mutagenesis, Feb;61(2):276-290
Sungjoon Kim, Donghyun Han, Jiwoo Ryu, Kihun Kim, Yun Hak Kim. (2021) Effects of mobile phone usage on sperm quality – No time-dependent relationship on usage: A systematic review and updated meta-analysis. Environ Res. 2021 Jul 29;111784.
Uche, U.I., Naidenko, O.V. (2021) “Development of health-based exposure limits for radiofrequency radiation from wireless devices using a benchmark dose approach.” Environmental Health 20, 84 (2021)
Yu G et al (2021) Current progress on the effect of mobile phone radiation on sperm quality: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of human and animal studies. Environ Pollut. Aug 1;282:116952.
https://ehtrust.org/examples-of-science-on-emfs-published-since-december-4-2019/ Source: Environmental Health Trust