This paper presents a methodological discussion about how to interpret exposure-response patterns and synthesize evidence in low-intensity RF-EMF research, focusing on animal cancer bioassays. It references an exchange around a systematic review on RF-EMF and cancer in experimental animals and critiques/considers approaches to statistical inference and evidence synthesis. The authors emphasize that methodological choices can materially influence carcinogenic hazard identification and argue for rigorous, evidence-based analysis in risk assessment.

This editorial introduces a special issue supporting the WHO assessment of health effects from RF-EMF exposure, based on nine protocols and twelve systematic reviews developed over four years by more than 80 experts. It summarizes that human evidence for major cancers was moderate-certainty for no or only small effects, with lower certainty for some cancer sites, while animal evidence reported higher-certainty effects for several cancer types and adverse effects on male fertility. For cognition, symptoms, and oxidative stress, certainty was generally lower and findings more variable, and the editors note ongoing methodological challenges and the possibility of unidentified mechanisms.