This rat study examined 60-day RF-EMF exposure at 3.5 GHz and 24 GHz for 1 or 7 hours per day and assessed testicular cytokines, apoptosis-related gene expression, and sperm quality. The authors report changes consistent with altered immune signaling and pro-apoptotic pathways, alongside reduced sperm parameters (frequency- and duration-dependent). The conclusion frames these findings as an EMF safety concern and suggests longer daily exposure worsened negative effects.

This paper evaluates and critiques 12 WHO-commissioned systematic reviews and meta-analyses on RF-EMF health effects across outcomes including cancer and reproductive endpoints. It argues that serious methodological flaws and limitations in the WHO reviews prevent them from providing assurance of safety for cell phones and other wireless devices. The authors highlight reported evidence in the animal cancer review (high certainty for heart schwannomas; moderate certainty for brain gliomas) and describe dose-related adverse effects on male fertility and reproductive outcomes, including at exposure levels below current ICNIRP thresholds.

This scoping review and evidence map (PRISMA-ScR) summarizes over 500 studies on RF-EMF exposure and genotoxicity across in vitro, in vivo, and epidemiological research. The authors report a higher proportion of significant DNA damage findings in in vivo and epidemiological studies than in vitro studies, with DNA base damage commonly reported under real-world/pulsed/GSM talk-mode conditions and longer exposures. They conclude that DNA damage has been observed at exposure levels below ICNIRP limits and recommend precautionary measures and updates to guidelines to address potential non-thermal effects.

This cross-sectional study compared 183 higher-exposed residents with 126 matched reference residents and assessed symptoms via questionnaire alongside in-home RF-EMF power density measurements from mobile phone base stations. Higher exposure (including proximity within 50 m and power densities of 5–8 mW/m2) was reported to be associated with increased symptom prevalence across mood-energy, cognitive-sensory, inflammatory, and anatomical categories. The authors conclude that current public exposure limits may be inadequate for long-term, non-thermal biological impacts and call for precautionary policy updates.

This randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled study tested whether CACNA1C rs7304986 genotype modifies sleep EEG responses to 5G RF-EMF exposure. The authors report a genotype-by-exposure interaction, with 3.6 GHz exposure in T/C carriers associated with a faster NREM sleep spindle center frequency versus sham. The abstract also notes longer sleep latency in T/C compared with T/T carriers, and concludes that genetically susceptible groups may show differential physiological responses to 5G RF-EMF.

This cross-sectional observational study assessed sperm motility after one hour of in vitro exposure of semen samples to EMFs from different laboratory sources in an IVF setting. It reports a statistically significant reduction in progressive sperm motility after exposure to mobile phones and Wi-Fi repeaters, while other EMF-emitting equipment showed no significant effect. The authors interpret the findings as indicating a potential negative impact of specific RF sources and call for further research, alongside practical mitigation suggestions in IVF laboratories.

This laboratory study examined whether a 900 MHz radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) influences the behavior of newly emerged honey bee workers. Compared with controls, the exposed groups showed behavioral changes, with some parameters showing statistically significant differences seven days after exposure. The authors frame RF-EMF as a potential environmental stressor and call for further research, including gene expression analyses.

This paper is a commentary reviewing how Bradford Hill’s epidemiological criteria can be applied to multidisciplinary evidence on RF-EMF exposure and adverse health effects. It reports that systematic reviews and meta-analyses in this area often reach substantially different conclusions, and argues that key weaknesses in primary studies—especially exposure measurement error and insufficient time for long-latency tumors—help explain the divergence. The author suggests these limitations may cause underestimation of potential causation if the associations are truly causal, and calls for independent guidelines to improve future epidemiological research quality.

This animal study examined maternal mobile phone exposure during different gestational windows in Wistar rats and assessed ovarian development and hormones in neonatal offspring. Compared with sham (phone off), exposed groups (standby and conversation/standby) were reported to have lower neonatal estrogen and progesterone and reduced primordial follicle/primary oocyte measures, with stronger effects after longer exposure. The study also reports increased primordial follicle apoptosis, particularly in the conversation/standby condition, and notes effects even with first-week gestational exposure.

This policy brief focuses on how RF-EMF exposure should be quantified in health research, emphasizing the role of near-field sources and proposing cumulative dose (J/kg/day) as a health-relevant metric. It reports mean cumulative dose estimates of 0.29 J/kg/day for the whole body and 0.81 J/kg/day for the brain. The brief notes established RF-EMF effects (heating, microwave hearing under highly pulsed radiation, and stimulation) and discusses indications of biological effects below thermal thresholds, while stating that improved metrics do not by themselves confirm harm.

This letter critiques the WHO-sponsored systematic review by Karipidis et al. (2024) on RF-EMF exposure and cancer risk. The authors argue the review has serious methodological and interpretative flaws, including issues with study selection and data analysis. They contend that the review’s conclusion of "no clear evidence" may be misleading and should not be used as a basis for health policy or safety guidelines.