Archive
4 postsThe Federal Script Just Changed on Cellphone Radiation: FDA Deletes “Old Conclusions” as HHS Launches a New Study
RF Safe reports that HHS confirmed plans to launch a new study on cellphone radiation and that an HHS spokesperson said the FDA removed webpages with “old conclusions” while new research is undertaken to identify knowledge gaps, including for emerging technologies. The article frames the FDA webpage changes as a meaningful shift away from categorical reassurance, while noting Reuters’ reporting that some FDA and CDC pages still state there is no credible evidence of health problems from cellphone radiation. It also links the development to the 2021 D.C. Circuit decision in Environmental Health Trust v. FCC, arguing the ruling exposed weaknesses in the FCC’s reliance on other agencies’ statements.
Ethical Connectivity Is Not Optional: A Public Challenge to Beast Mobile and Trump Mobile
RF Safe argues that celebrity-branded mobile services (citing reported plans for “Beast Mobile” and the announced “Trump Mobile”) could normalize near-body, all-day phone use—especially among children—and therefore carry ethical responsibility for scaled RF exposure. The piece cites legal and scientific developments (including the 2021 Environmental Health Trust v. FCC decision, the U.S. NTP animal studies, and a WHO-commissioned systematic review) to claim the evidence base has “moved decisively” toward concern about long-term RF-EMF effects. It also promotes a proposed mechanistic framework ("S4–Mito–Spin") and suggests shifting indoor connectivity toward Li‑Fi (IEEE 802.11bb) as a harm-reduction approach.
RF-EMF Risk Perception & Trust in Radiation Protection Authorities: Comparative Study on Precautionary Information in Germany & Greece
This randomized experimental study (N=2,169) tested how different precautionary information formats about RF-EMF (with emphasis on 5G) affect public risk perception and trust in radiation protection authorities in Germany and Greece. Simple precautionary tips generally did not increase risk perception or reduce trust, while a conceptual explanation of the precaution/prevention distinction increased perceived risk compared with simpler information. Precautionary messages improved self-efficacy and perceived message consistency, and responses differed by country and gender.
Policy & governance: why the failure is structural (S4 MITO spin + “Clean Ether Act”)
This RF Safe article argues that the main barrier to addressing radiofrequency radiation (RFR) and other non-native EMFs is structural policy and governance failure rather than a lack of scientific evidence. It cites the 2021 D.C. Circuit decision in Environmental Health Trust et al. v. FCC as criticism of the FCC’s rationale for keeping 1996 RF exposure limits, and it points to the Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act of 1968 as a mandate for HHS to run a research-backed radiation control program. The piece also references the U.S. National Toxicology Program’s animal findings and frames the lack of further NTP RF studies as a policy shortcoming, while promoting an “S4 MITO spin” mechanistic framework and a proposed “Clean Ether Act.”