The US government FCC limits allow very high levels of radiofrequency in the air., compared to numerous governments which have set limits far more stringent than U.S. limits for the maximum permissible RF levels allowed in the air from cell towers and base station antennas, especially in areas considered “sensitive” such as home and school.  

Source for limits in the image: Australia China, Greece,ICNIRP, Italy, India, Japan, Switzerland, United States 

Hundreds of scientists from leading research institutions and medical practitioners have called upon governments, regulatory bodies, and wireless companies to reduce public exposure to wireless radiation, especially for children who are more vulnerable due to their developing physiology and their longer expected period of exposure.

U.S. RF exposure regulations have not changed since they were implemented 28 years ago by the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”). Nor has the FCC undertaken a full and comprehensive scientific review of those regulations.    

An enormous body of peer-reviewed, independent scientific research has been published in recent years linking human and animal wireless exposures to a myriad of serious health impacts from cancer to memory, brain development, endocrine system, thyroid, testosterone, reproduction, and DNA/genetic damage.,  Additionally, recently published reviews document evidence of RF radiation’s  negative impacts to wildlife, plants, and trees, and recommend RF mitigation measures.  


Scientific groups and medical organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), have issued recommendations to reduce children’s exposure because RF radiation penetrates deeper in children’s brains and bodies, and their rapidly developing brains are more more susceptible to adverse health impacts. Lawsuits have alleged health damages from the wireless emissions, and international  court cases have settled with compensation.

As noted above, the DC Circuit, in EHT, et al. v  FCC , found the FCC to have inadequately addressed the issue of children’s vulnerability. This issue had been highlighted in repeated letters from the American Academy of Pediatrics calling for RF limits to be updated: 

Current FCC standards do not account for the unique vulnerability and use patterns specific to pregnant women and children. It is essential that any new standard for cell phones or other wireless devices be based on protecting the youngest and most vulnerable populations to ensure they are safeguarded throughout their lifetimes. 

Numerous published research studies have linked negative health effects to exposures occurring well below the FCC limits and issued science-based recommendations to significantly strengthen RF limits so that they adequately protect against the biological impacts documented in the research. As an example, Lai and Levitt’s review of 112 low-intensity studies found that biological effects of RFR could occur at a median specific absorption rate (0.0165 W/kg), far lower than the “fundamentally flawed” and “insupportable” FCC limits. In 2011, the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer (WHO/IARC) designated wireless RF radiation as a class 2 B “possible” carcinogen. Many scientists state that additional studies have corroborated the association, and they conclude the current evidence base is robust enough to determine that RF is now at least a probable, if not proven, human carcinogen.

MORE INFO HERE  Retired NIH scientist: FDA downplaying clear evidence of cellphone-cancer link

Published analysis of the $30 million NIH’s National Toxicology Program animal study concluded that U.S. government FCC limits should be lowered by 200 to 400 times to protect children according to current risk assessment guidelines. In addition to brain cancer, Yale research funded by the American Cancer Society found thyroid cancer to be associated with higher hours of cell phone use in people with genetic susceptibility. Many scientists state that evidence of the link between cancer and RF is robust enough to say that RF is now at least a probable, if not proven human carcinogen.

Chris Portier, PhD, former Director of the U.S. National Center for Environmental Health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta and the Director of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, who served on the WHO/IARC panel, submitted a comprehensive review of the scientific research in a major cell phone/brain cancer lawsuit, concluding:

MORE INFO HERE  “Mammography Using...

The evidence on an association between cellular phone use and the risk of glioma in adults is quite strong . . . in my opinion, RF exposure probably causes gliomas and neuromas and, given the human, animal and experimental evidence, I assert that, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, the probability that RF exposure causes gliomas and neuromas is high.’

The European Parliament requested a research report, Health Impact of 5G,” that 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. Source: Environmental Health Trust