Radiation Health Effects from WiFi & Smartphones

Since the mobile phone boom in the 1990s the exposure of entire populations to Electromagnetic Fields (EMFs) continues to increase exponentially. EMFs, also called Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR), are electrically charged space in and around you. People cannot see or hear EMR. It is hypothesised to travel in waves with peaks and troughs. The distance between peaks is called a wavelength.

EMR ranges within a spectrum of radiation. At the higher end of the spectrum we find the dense radiation, high frequency, shorter wavelengths of ionising radiation from ultraviolet (UV) rays, x-rays and gamma rays. Wavelengths shorten along the spectrum. The global Big Tech industrial complex accepts that exposure to ionising radiation is harmful.


At the lower end of the spectrum we find the lower radiation, low frequency, longer wavelengths of non-ionising radiation from radio waves, microwaves, infrared and visible light. The lower end radio waves and microwaves are also referred to as radio frequency radiation.

Mobile phone and internet antennas on masts using 3G, 4G or 5G, smart meters, radio, TV, smart phones, microwave ovens, digital cordless phones, electric cars, WiFi and WiMax are some of the technologies that use or give off non-ionising radiation.

The harmful element of EMR is not only associated with the width of the wavelengths but also with exposure (time and frequency) and the intensity of the radiation. The shorter the wavelength the faster the manifestation of adverse health effects, ranging from instant to days, weeks, months or years.

Humans have evolved with exposure to very low natural levels of EMR. Just a couple of hundred years ago, in pre-industrial times, the background electromagnetic radiation was millions of times lower than it is today. As we may not be equipped to cope with what has not been around during our evolutionary time, it therefore may make us sick or may even kill us.

The radiation guidelines that Big Tech follow are set by the International Commission for Non-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) and are endorsed by the World Health Organisation. This standard, adopted in the late-1990s, was reaffirmed in 2020 and was based on results from behavioural studies conducted in the 1980s. It is underpinned by two major assumptions: (a) that any biological effects are due to excessive tissue heating and (b) that no effects would occur below the so established threshold of Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) i.e the absorption of the radiation into the human body.


The authors of a peer-reviewed study published in October 2022, in the Environmental Health Journal, of the Biomedic Centre (BMC), warn of the health risks from exposure to this type of radiation, especially from 5G technology, to human health and wildlife. They argue that the assumptions underlying the ICNIRP standard are dangerously flawed.

This study, called “Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions underlying the ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for radio frequency radiation: implications for 5G”, was conducted and published by the International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF).

Dr. Lennart Hardell, an oncologist, author of more than 100 papers on non-ionizing radiation and lead author of the study, said “Multiple robust human studies of cell phone radiation have found increased risks for brain tumors, and these are supported by clear evidence of carcinogenicity of the same cell types found in animal studies.”

The ICBE-EMF called for an independent assessment of the dangers and impacts of wireless radiation, a campaign to inform the public of the health risks associated with radiation and “an immediate moratorium on further rollout of 5G wireless technologies until safety is demonstrated and not simply assumed.”

Joel M. Moskowitz, director of the Center for Family and Community Health at the University of California, Berkeley School of Public Health, commented “The (5G) Millimeter radiation waves target and are mostly absorbed within one to two millimeters of human skin and in the surface layers of the cornea. Since skin contains capillaries and nerve endings, the bio-effects may be transmitted (further into the body) through molecular mechanisms by the skin or through the nervous system.”

The implementation of 5G technology without informed consent and adequate health effects information raises many serious questions.


The study asks whether exposure to 5G radiation would compromise the skin’s ability to provide protection from pathogenic microorganisms or exacerbate the development of skin diseases or increase the risk of sunlight-induced skin cancers or increase the risk of damage to the lens or cornea or increase the risk of testicular damage inducing reduced male fertility.

Joel Moskowitz said that none of the few available Big Tech studies that employ carrier frequencies used in 5G have, “modulated or pulsed the signal as required by 5G or used other features of 5G technology (e.g., beamforming, massive Multiple Input & Multiple Output, and phased arrays) that are likely to affect the nature and extent of biological or health adverse effects from exposure to this radiation.” The new 5G communication networks will result in exposures to a form of radiation that has not been previously experienced by the public at large.

Dr Hardell in an interview with Robert F Kennedy (Jr)’s Children’s Health Defense, stated that “radio frequency radiation is an environmental pollutant that needs to be investigated and properly regulated. It needs to be classified as a Group 1 human carcinogen (directly carcinogenic to humans) by the International Agency for Research on Cancer”

The narrative that pushes technology at the detriment of our natural biological health is false.

This article was sent for publication to the Times of Malta on the 18th November 2022 – to date it has not been published

If you are interested in the harms of electromagnetic radiation please read these other articles