ICBE-EMF – 28july2025
New Peer-Reviewed Study By Professor James C. Lin Calls for Rethinking “Flawed” Wireless Radiation Safety Standards Amid Growing Scientific Evidence of Health Effects
A new review article by Professor James C. Lin, published in Frontiers in Public Health, documents numerous problems with government wireless radiation exposure limits, such as those of the FCC, ICNIRP and IEEE, which he states are “flawed”, “questionable,” with substantial incongruities and inconsistencies“ and not applicable to long-term, low-level exposures.”
“Public health concerns for the biological effects and safety of wireless RF radiation exposure are increasing with the rapid proliferation of cellular mobile telecommunication systems and devices. There is also lack of confidence about the efficacy of promulgated health safety limits, rules, and recommendations for wireless RF radiation including 5G used by these devices and systems. The currently promulgated RF exposure guidelines and standards apply predominantly to restrict short-term heating of RF radiation due to elevated tissue temperatures.”
His review “Health and Safety Practices and Policies Concerning Human Exposure to RF/Microwave Radiation” examines faulty assumptions underlying heat based standards, their origins and how recent military research of the Department of Defense, the RadioBio initiative and U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory, seems to be signaling a “paradigm shift.”
“The new initiatives appear to allow exploration (and perhaps exploitation) of low-level, nonthermal biological response to RF radiation. In this regard, the recent publications from some of the military research laboratories may serve as telltales of more to come. These results are putting a spotlight on an atypical event, a paradigm shift in which a scientific investigation from an U.S. military research laboratory reporting a cytogenetic response or more specifically, an epigenetic role in the cellular response to low-level RF exposure, potentially, with major influences on gene activities.”
Dr. Lin highlights ICBE-EMF’s 2022 publication stating:
“A recent paper challenged the health safety offered by the current exposure limits to RF radiation and called for an independent evaluation of the scientific evidence. It unveiled that the existing exposure limits disregarded many scientific papers which document harmful biological responses at exposure levels below the threshold asserted by these safety guidelines. It further argues that the scientific data invalidates the health suppositions underlying the pronounced RF exposure restrictions.”
Dr. Lin’s article also includes a rigorous critique of the WHO-EMF commissioned systematic reviews, many of which ICBE-EMF experts have previously challenged as methodologically flawed stating:
“The criticisms and challenges encountered by the published WHO-EMF systematic reviews, aside from the most recent one, are serious and severe, including calls for retraction. Examinations of the reviews reveal major problems. In addition to the scientific quality of the less than balanced reviews, they appear to be biased with strong conviction of nothing but heat to worry about with RF microwave radiation. The unsubtle message that cellular mobile phones do not pose a cancer risk is clear. These systematic reviews exhibited a lack of concerns for conflict of interest and display unequivocal support for the recently promulgated ICNIRP RF exposure guidelines for human safety.”
Lin details the long standing influence of the military industry complex:
“The military-industrial complex played a huge role in influencing research on the biological effects from exposure to electromagnetic fields and waves including RF radiation since the inception of related scientific investigation in the middle of the 20th century. It was strongly directed toward tissue heating induced by RF radiation to elevate the body temperature. Ever since, the military industrial complex has tended to be highly critical of research studies that suggested otherwise and defended rigorously the status quo.”
He calls attention to the ICNIRP and IEEE-ICES marginalization of landmark animal studies by the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) and Ramazzini Institute, both of which found evidence of RF-induced cancers. Regarding existing exposure guidelines and standards he states that “there is palpable lack of appreciation of scientific knowledge for chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity regarding RF exposures below the basic restrictions…”
He concludes with the need to apply the ALARA principle—”As Low As Reasonably Achievable”—to RF exposures, particularly in light of ubiquitous wireless device use, in order to mitigate risk.
“Full recognition of a public health risk takes time, and it is taking even longer these days given the fast pace of technological developments and rapidity at which they are launched into the commercial realm. The postulate of “An ounce of prevention is far better than a pound of cure” appears to have banished with little trace . . Its mere mention under the current environment easily stirs robust rejoinders, with momentous opposition from those who may have profited from the massive marketing efforts.”
Lin JC (2025) Health and safety practices and policies concerning human exposure to RF/microwave radiation. Front. Public Health 13:1619781. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2025.1619781
Source – ICBE-EMF – New Peer-Reviewed Study By Professor James C. Lin Calls for Rethinking “Flawed” Wireless Radiation Safety Standards Amid Growing Scientific Evidence of Health Effects
- Smartphones : un expert mondial dénonce la faiblesse des normes de sécurité et l’influence du « complexe militaro-industriel »
- EMR Regulations: Urgent Global Concern
