If You’re Reading This, You Are the Resistance
This RF Safe commentary frames readers as part of a “resistance” movement seeking changes to U.S. wireless policy and RF exposure governance. It argues that current FCC RF exposure rules and related laws constrain local decision-making and rely on a “thermal-only” safety framework that the author says is outdated. The post cites a WHO-commissioned 2025 systematic review on RF-EMF and cancer in experimental animals as part of a broader WHO review effort, and advocates shifting indoor connectivity toward light-based technologies.
Key points
- Claims Section 704 limits communities from raising health/environmental concerns about wireless infrastructure placement if FCC RF limits are met.
- Argues Public Law 90-602 requires an electronic product radiation control program including standards development and research, and suggests agencies are not complying.
- References a D.C. Circuit remand criticizing the FCC for retaining 1996 RF limits without what the author considers adequate explanation for non-cancer and long-term exposure issues.
- States the FCC is not a health agency and calls for health authority to be returned to agencies focused on health risk evaluation.
- Promotes a transition from “microwave-era” indoor wireless to light-based indoor data transmission (e.g., LiFi) as a safer alternative.
- Cites a WHO-commissioned 2025 systematic review in Environment International on RF-EMF exposure and cancer in experimental animals to challenge a “thermal-only” narrative.
Referenced studies & papers
Relevant papers in OpenMel
Source:
Open original
AI-generated summaries may be incomplete or incorrect. This content is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice.
AI-generated summaries may be incomplete or incorrect. This content is for informational purposes only and is not medical advice.
Comments
Log in to comment.
No comments yet.