TO OUR READERS – This page will be updated occasionally. These resources are among the most comprehensive we could find for visitors to our site. We ask that you spend time on each site. We are not scientists ourselves. We provide these resources so you can see for yourself a snapshot of the immense body of knowledge that points to harmful health outcomes from exposure to electromagnetic frequencies. From our perspective, when these studies were made, humanity was not bombarded with EMF radiation at the high level we are today — and this level increases on a daily basis due to increased deployment of towers and wireless device usage by the public.
WHAT IS MEANT BY “NON-IONIZING” vs. “IONIZING?
Utility Regulators Need To Update Their Electromagnetic Frequency (EMF) Exposure Guidelines
Utility regulators have yet to adopt an updated guideline to EMF exposure limits for humans and animals. Instead, they are still clinging to the old paradigm of “if it doesn’t heat you, it doesn’t hurt you.” EMFs refer to radio frequencies and microwave radiation. Their health effects are very similar. Non-ionizing means the EMF radiation is non-thermal or non-heating; that is, radiation that does not radiate “heat” like a microwave oven. Utilities base their exposure limits for humans and animals on the outdated “ionizing” or thermal / heating regulations. EMFs from smart meters, Wi-fi, cell phones, and other wireless devices do not radiate heat and, therefore, so the logic goes, do not require any safety features. Nonetheless, independent scientific – not industry – studies reveal that these non-ionizing wireless devices do, in fact, radiate harmful radiation without heat. Sources: https://www.saferemr.com/2015/02/health-experts-caution-about-smart.html and https://www.powerwatch.org.uk/health/sensitivity.asp
“There are thousands of studies on health and biological effects of wireless radio frequency radiation over the last several decades. This includes an abundance of military studies looking at the effects of non-ionizing [non-heating] radiofrequency radiation on personnel using radar in the 1940’s. On the PST [Physicians for Safe Technology] website these are divided into specific biological and health effects. These are not complete lists of all the studies but a good representation. The rate of studies on EMR effects has grown exponentially. We will be updating the research as it is published.”
Updated 12/13/22
Compendiums and Reviews with references include the following:
The Bioinitiative Report at BioInitiative.org
Military Compendiums- Naval, Department of Intelligence, NASA and the EPA among others. See PST Military Compendiums page for more information
The 2011 European Parliament Resolution 1815: The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment. The goals listed include setting preventable thresholds for long term exposure, raising awareness throughout the community, and protecting “early warning” scientists. European Parliament 2011
ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS FROM MOBILE PHONES: HEALTH EFFECT ON CHILDREN AND TEENAGERS.. RUSSIAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE ON NON-IONIZING RADIATION PROTECTION. April 2011, Moscow.Russian Committee on non-Ionizing radiatio 2011 report Children and Teens
Russian National Committee of Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection – 2008 reportRussian-national-committee-of-non-ionizing-radiation-protection-2008-report.-mobile-communication-and-childrens-health.-russia
Early Research on the Biological Effects of Microwave Radiation: 1940-1960. Cook et al. University of Michigan. Early research on the biological effects of microwave radiation- 1940–1960
A Review of the Health Risks of Radiofrequency Radiation Employed in 5G Technology and the Implications for UK Policymaking. Professor Tom Butler, PhD. Cork University. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10604943924787/Prof-Tom-Butler-Submission-on-5G-RFR-Final-27-05-2020-1.pdf
EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses. Abstract here EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 Full Paper here EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 Full Paper
Radiation Risk from Everyday Devices Assessed. European Environment Agency. 2007
https://www.eea.europa.eu/highlights/radiation-risk-from-everyday-devices-assessed
Low-level EMF effects on wildlife and plants: What research tells us about an ecosystem approach. Levitt BB, Lai HC, Manville AM. Frontiers in Public Health, 25 November 2022
Levitt, Lai, Manville. (2021) Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, Part 1. Rising ambient EMF levels in the environment. Rev Environ Health. 2021 May 27. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34047144/
Levitt, Lai, Manville (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. 2021 Jul 8. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34243228/
Levitt, Lai, Manville (2021) Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, Part 3. Exposure standards, public policy, laws, and future directions. Rev Environ Health. 2021 Sep 27. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34563106/
Science Studies at Environmental Health Trust – main page
Sample Studies:
- Recent Scientific Publications by EHT Health Experts and Advisors
- Medical Consensus by Doctors and Public Health Organizations
- EMF Scientist Appeal for a Moratorium to the FCC
- Health Effects Associated with 5G Exposure, Small Cell Densification, and New Wireless Networks
- Powerlines, Magnetic Field and Extremely Low Frequency Fields
THIS IS WHAT A “SMALL CELL ANTENNA” MOUNTED ON LIGHT POLE LOOKS LIKE
EMF Scientists who are urgently calling on the United Nations for greater health protection
BIOINITIATIVE 2012 – CONCLUSIONS Table 1-1
A Snapshot…
“Overall, these 1,800 or so new studies report abnormal gene transcription (Section 5); genotoxicity and single-and double-strand DNA damage (Section 6); stress proteins because of the fractal RF-antenna like nature of DNA (Section 7); chromatin condensation and loss of DNA repair capacity in human stem cells (Sections 6 and 15); reduction in free-radical scavengers – particularly melatonin (Sections 5, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17); neurotoxicity in humans and animals (Section 9), carcinogenicity in humans (Sections 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17); serious impacts on human and animal sperm morphology and function (Section 18); effects on offspring behavior (Section 18, 19 and 20); and effects on brain and cranial bone development in the offspring of animals that are exposed to cell phone radiation during pregnancy (Sections 5 and 18). This is only a snapshot of the evidence presented in the BioInitiative 2012 updated report.
BIOEFFECTS ARE CLEARLY ESTABLISHED
“Bioeffects are clearly established and occur at very low levels of exposure to electromagnetic fields and radiofrequency radiation. Bioeffects can occur in the first few minutes at levels associated with cell and cordless phone use. Bioeffects can also occur from just minutes of exposure to mobile phone masts (cell towers), WI-FI, and wireless utility ‘smart’ meters that produce whole-body exposure. Chronic base station level exposures can result in illness.”
Consequently, these exposure limits, which are based on false suppositions, do not adequately protect workers, children, hypersensitive individuals, and the general population from short-term or long-term RFR exposures. Thus, urgently needed are health protective exposure limits for humans and the environment. These limits must be based on scientific evidence rather than on erroneous assumptions, especially given the increasing worldwide exposures of people and the environment to RFR, including novel forms of radiation from 5G telecommunications for which there are no adequate health effects studies.
Roseville Aware 