Select Page

WHO EMF Project Systematic Reviews of Wireless RF Health Effects

Dec 9, 2023

In March 1993, almost 30 years ago, the WHO published the last EHC monograph on radiofrequency radiation. This was the last monograph on the issue by the WHO EMF Project. 

In order to update the evaluation, the WHO EMF Project  issued a call for ten systematic reviews of the RF effects research in October 2019. The process has been highly criticized due to heavy ICNIRP involvement. 

As Dr. Joel Moskowitz writes, “apparently, WHO only selected research groups whose members have not criticized ICNIRP’s thermally-based exposure limits. Thus, no EMF scientists who signed the International EMF Scientist Appeal were selected. This biased selection process should be challenged by all who are concerned about protecting public or environmental health.”

Reviews that have been published: 

E. Cordelli, L. Ardoino, B. Benassi, C. Consales, P. Eleuteri, C. Marino, M. Sciortino, P. Villani, M. H. Brinkworth, G. Chen, J. P. McNamee, A. W. Wood, L. Belackova, J. Verbeek, F. Pacchierotti, Effects of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field (RF-EMF) exposure on male fertility: A systematic review of experimental studies on non-human mammals and human sperm in vitro, Environment International (2024), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2024.108509 FULL TEXT LINK
  • Results:One-hundred and seventeen papers on animal studies and 10 papers on human sperm exposed in vitro were included in this review. Only few studies were rated as “low concern” because most studies were at RoB for exposure and/or outcome assessment.
  • Subgrouping the experimental animal studies by species, SAR, and temperature increase partly accounted for the heterogeneity of individual studies in about one third of the meta-analyses. In no case was it possible to conduct a subgroup analysis of the few human sperm in vitro studies because there were always 1 or more groups including less than 3 studies.
  • Among all the considered endpoints, the meta-analyses of animal studies provided evidence of adverse effects of RF-EMF exposure in all cases but the rate of infertile males and the size of the sired litters. The assessment of certainty according to the GRADE methodology assigned a moderate certainty to the reduction of pregnancy rate and to the evidence of no-effect on litter size, a low certainty to the reduction of sperm count, and a very low certainty to all the other meta-analysis results. Studies on human sperm exposed in vitro indicated a small detrimental effect of RF-EMF exposure on vitality and no-effect on DNA/chromatin alterations. According to GRADE, a very low certainty was attributed to these results. The few studies that used EMP exposure did not show effects on the outcomes. A low to very low certainty was attributed to these results.
  • Discussion: Many of the studies examined suffered of severe limitations that led to the attribution of uncertainty to the results of the meta-analyses and did not allow to draw firm conclusions on most of the endpoints. Nevertheless, the associations between RF-EMF exposure and decrease of pregnancy rate and sperm count, to which moderate and low certainty were attributed, are not negligible, also in view of the indications that in Western countries human male fertility potential seems to be progressively declining.
  • It was beyond the scope of our systematic review to determine the shape of the doseresponse relationship or to identify a minimum effective exposure level. The subgroup and the dose-response fitting analyses did not show a consistent relationship between the exposure levels and the observed effects. Notably, most studies evaluated RF-EMF exposure levels that were higher than the levels to which human populations are typically exposed, and the limits set in international guidelines. For these reasons we cannot provide suggestions to confirm or reconsider current human exposure limits.
  • Considering the outcomes of this systematic review and taking into account the limitations found in several of the studies, we suggest that further investigations with better characterization of exposure and dosimetry including several exposure levels and blinded outcome assessment were conducted.

Notable excerpt on funding.

  • Information regarding conflict-of-interest declarations and funding sources were not analysed since, in the vast majority of papers, public funding and absence of conflict of interest were declared.

On testosterone

  • Testosterone level Forty studies reported data on testosterone level in either serum or testis. The pooled SMD value of the 29 studies rated at “low or some concern” RoB level was 0.87 (95% CI 0.43 to 1.30), showing a statistically significant decrease of testosterone level in RF-EMF exposed animals. The average SAR tested in these studies was 0.9 W/kg (SD 1.31, 0.001- 4.0 min-max). Eleven studies rated at “high concern” RoB level yielded an SMD value of 0.50 (95% CI -0.22 to 1.23 (Figure 18).
  • The linear curve, with an AIC value of 199, showed a significant decrease of testosterone level with an increase of the exposure level with a coefficient of 1.45. Statistically significant coefficients of the cubic spline fitting seemed to describe the shape of the dose effect relationship with better fitting (AIC=149) (Supplementary File 6), suggesting a non-linear relationship with a decrease of testosterone at low exposure levels, followed by an increase at higher SAR, especially above 8 W/kg.

Röösli M, Dongus S, Jalilian H, Feychting M, Eyers J, Esu E, Oringanje CM, Meremikwu M, Bosch-Capblanch X. The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields exposure on tinnitus, migraine and non-specific symptoms in the general and working population: a systematic review and meta-analysis on human observational studies, Environ Int. 2021 Dec;157:106852. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106852. Epub 2021 Sep 6. PMID: 34500362; PMCID: PMC8484767.

  • “We included 13 papers from eight distinct cohort and one case-control studies with a total of 486,558 participants conducted exclusively in Europe. Tinnitus is addressed in three papers, migraine in one, headaches in six, sleep disturbances in five, and composite symptom scores in five papers. Only one study addressed occupational exposure.

    Synthesis of results: For all five priority hypotheses, available research suggests that RF-EMF exposure below guideline values does not cause symptoms, but the evidence is very uncertain. The very low certainty evidence is due the low number of studies, possible risk of bias in some studies, inconsistencies, indirectness, and imprecision. In terms of non-priority hypotheses numerous exposure-outcome combinations were addressed in the 13 eligible papers without indication for an association related to a specific symptom or exposure source.

    Limitations of evidence: This review topic includes various challenges related to confounding control and exposure assessment. Many of these aspects are inherently present and not easy to be solved in future research. Since near-field exposure from wireless communication devices is related to lifestyle, a particular challenge is to differentiate between potential biophysical effects and other potential effects from extensive use of wireless communication devices such as sleep deprivation or lack of physical activity. Future research needs novel and innovative methods to differentiate between these two hypothetical mechanisms.”

Cordelli E, Ardoino L, Benassi B, Consales C, Eleuteri P, Marino C, Sciortino M, Villani P, Brinkworth MH, Chen G, McNamee JP, Wood AW, Belackova L, Verbeek J, Pacchierotti F. Effects of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field (RF-EMF) exposure on pregnancy and birth outcomes: A systematic review of experimental studies on non-human mammals. Environ Int. 2023 Oct;180:108178. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2023.108178. Epub 2023 Aug 30. PMID: 37729852.

  • Eighty-eight papers could be included in this review. Effects on fecundity. The meta-analysis of studies on litter size, conducted at a whole-body average SAR of 4.92 W/kg, did not show an effect of RF-EMF exposure (MD 0.05; 95% CI −0.21 to 0.30). The meta-analysis of studies on resorbed and dead fetuses, conducted at a whole-body average SAR of 20.26 W/kg, showed a significant increase of the incidence in RF-EMF exposed animals (OR 1.84; 95% CI 1.27 to 2.66). The results were similar in the dose–response analysis. Effects on the offspring health at birth. The meta-analysis of studies on fetal weight, conducted at a whole-body average SAR of 9.83 W/kg, showed a small decrease in RF-EMF exposed animals (SMD 0.31; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.48). The meta-analysis of studies on fetal length, conducted at a whole-body average SAR of 4.55 W/kg, showed a moderate decrease in length at birth (SMD 0.45; 95% CI 0.07 to 0.83). The meta-analysis of studies on the percentage of fetuses with malformations, conducted at a whole-body average SAR of 6.75 W/kg, showed a moderate increase in RF-EMF exposed animals (SMD −0.45; 95% CI −0.68 to −0.23). The meta-analysis of studies on the incidence of litters with malformed fetuses, conducted at a whole-body average SAR of 16.63 W/kg, showed a statistically significant detrimental RF-EMF effect (OR 3.22; 95% CI 1.9 to 5.46). The results were similar in the dose–response analyses. Delayed effects on the offspring health. RF-EMF exposure was not associated with detrimental effects on brain weight (SMD 0.10; 95% CI −0.09 to 0.29) and on learning and memory functions (SMD −0.54; 95% CI −1.24 to 0.17). RF-EMF exposure was associated with a large detrimental effect on motor activity functions (SMD 0.79; 95% CI 0.21 to 1.38) and a moderate detrimental effect on motor and sensory functions (SMD −0.66; 95% CI −1.18 to −0.14). RF-EMF exposure was not associated with a decrease of the size of litters conceived by F2 female offspring (SMD 0.08; 95% CI −0.39 to 0.55). Notably, meta-analyses of neurobehavioural effects were based on few studies, which suffered of lack of independent replication deriving from only few laboratories.

Bosch-Capblanch X, Esu E, Oringanje CM, Dongus S, Jalilian H, Eyers J, Auer C, Meremikwu M, Röösli M. The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields exposure on human self-reported symptoms: A systematic review of human experimental studies. Environ Int. 2024 Apr 2;187:108612. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2024.108612. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 38640611.

Discussion: Limitations of evidence: experimental conditions are substantially different from real-life situations in the duration, frequency, distance and position of the exposure. Most studies were conducted in young, healthy volunteers, who might be more resilient to RF-EMF than the general population. The outcomes of interest in this systematic review were symptoms, which are self-reported. The available information did not allow to assess the potential effects of exposures beyond acute exposure and in elderly or in chronically ill people. It cannot be ruled out that a real EMF effect in IEI-EMF groups is masked by a mix with insensitive subjects. However, studies on symptoms reporting and/or field perceptions did not find any evidence that there were particularly vulnerable individuals in the IEI-EMF group, although in open provocation studies, when volunteers were informed about the presence or absence of EMF exposure, such differences were consistently observed.

Röösli M, Dongus S, Jalilian H, Eyers J, Esu E, Oringanje CM, Meremikwu M, Bosch-Capblanch X. The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields exposure on tinnitus, migraine and non-specific symptoms in the general and working population: A systematic review and meta-analysis on human observational studies. Environ Int. 2024 Jan;183:108338. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2023.108338. Epub 2023 Dec 6. PMID: 38104437.

Results: Synthesis of results: For all five priority hypotheses, available research suggests that RF-EMF exposure below guideline values does not cause symptoms, but the evidence is very uncertain. The very low certainty evidence is due the low number of studies, possible risk of bias in some studies, inconsistencies, indirectness, and imprecision. In terms of non-priority hypotheses numerous exposure-outcome combinations were addressed in the 13 eligible papers without indication for an association related to a specific symptom or exposure sourc

List of Published Protocols for WHO Systematic Reviews

 

Susanna Lagorio, Maria Blettner, Dan Baaken, Maria Feychting, Ken Karipidis, Tom Loney, Nicola Orsini, Martin Röösli, Marilia Silva Paulo, Mark Elwood. The effect of exposure to radiofrequency fields on cancer risk in the general and working population: A protocol for a systematic review of human observational studies. Environ Int. 2021 Aug 22;157:106828. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106828.

 Status: Not Done 

Meike Mevissen, Jerrold M. Ward, Annette Kopp-Schneider, James P. McNamee, Andrew W. Wood, Tania M. Rivero, Kristina Thayer, Kurt Straif. Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF EMF) on cancer in laboratory animal studies. Environment International. Volume 161, 2022. 107106. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2022.107106.

 Status: Not Done 

Ryan P.W. Kenny, Evelyn Barron Millar, Adenike Adesanya, Catherine Richmond, Fiona Beyer, Carolina Calderon, Judith Rankin, Mireille Toledano, Maria Feychting, Mark S Pearce, Dawn Craig, Fiona Pearson. The effects of radiofrequency exposure on male fertility and adverse reproductive outcomes: A protocol for two systematic reviews of human observational studies with meta-analysis. Environ Int. 158, 2022, 106968. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106968.

 Status: Completed 

Francesca Pacchierotti, Lucia Ardoino, Barbara Benassi, Claudia Consales, Eugenia Cordelli, Patrizia Eleuteri, Carmela Marino, Maurizio Sciortino, Martin H.Brinkworth, Guangdi Chen, James P. McNamee, Andrew William Wood, Carlijn R. Hooijmans. Rob B.M. de Vries. Effects of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Field (RF-EMF) exposure on male fertility and pregnancy and birth outcomes: Protocols for a systematic review of experimental studies in non-human mammals and in human sperm exposed in vitro. Environment Int. Volume 157, December 2021, 106806

 Status: Not Done  

Geza Benke, Michael J Abramson, B M Zeleke, Jordy Kaufman, Ken Karipidis, Helen Kelsall, Steve McDonald, Chris Brzozek, Maria Feychting, Sue Brennan. The effect of long-term radiofrequency exposure on cognition in human observational studies: A protocol for a systematic review. Environ Int. 158, 2022. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106972.

Status: Not Completed 

Blanka Pophof, Jacob Burns, Heidi Danker-Hopfe, Hans Dorn, Cornelia Egblomassé-Roidl, Torsten Eggert, Kateryna Fuks, Bernd Henschenmacher, Jens Kuhne, Cornelia Sauter, Gernot Schmid. The effect of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields on cognitive performance in human experimental studies: A protocol for a systematic review. Environ Int. 2021 Jul 29;157:106783. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106783.

 Status: Not completed 

Martin Röösli, Stefan Dongus, Hamed Jalilian, Maria Feychting, John Eyers, Ekpereonne Esu, Chioma Moses Oringanje, Martin Meremikwu, Xavier Bosch-Capblanch. The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields exposure on tinnitus, migraine and non-specific symptoms in the general and working population: A protocol for a systematic review on human observational studies. Environ Int, Volume 157, 2021. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106852.

 

Xavier Bosch-Capblanch, Ekpereonne Esu, Stefan Dongus, Chioma Moses Oringanje, Hamed Jalilian, John Eyers, Gunnhild Oftedal, Martin Meremikwu, Martin Röösli. The effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields exposure on human self-reported symptoms: A protocol for a systematic review of human experimental studies. Environ Int. 158, 2022, 106953. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106953.

 

Bernd Henschenmacher, Annette Bitsch, Tonia de las Heras Gala, Henry Jay Forman, Athanassios Fragoulis, Pietro Ghezzi, Rupert Kellner, Wolfgang Koch, Jens Kuhne, Dmitrij Sachno, Gernot Schmid, Katya Tsaioun, Jos Verbeek, Robert Wright. The effect of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on biomarkers of oxidative stress in vivo and in vitro: A protocol for a systematic review. Environ Int. 158, 2022, 106932. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021.106932.

 

Jos Verbeek, Gunnhild Oftedal, Maria Feychting, Eric van Rongen, Maria Rosaria Scarfì, Simon Mann, Rachel Wong, Emilie van Deventer. Prioritizing health outcomes when assessing the effects of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields: A survey among experts. Environ Int. 146, 2021. 106300. doi:10.1016/j.envint.2020.106300.

 

Stephanie M. Eick, Dana E. Goin, Nicholas Chartres, Juleen Lam, Tracey J. Woodruff. Assessing risk of bias in human environmental epidemiology studies using three tools: different conclusions from different tools. Syst Rev 9, 249 (2020). doi: 10.1186/s13643-020-01490-8.

——————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Factcheck: The World Health Organization has not made a determination that cell towers are safe.

First, there are two distinct and separate entities under the WHO addressing the issue; 1. the WHO EMF Project who drafted several online web pages that seem to show safety and 2. the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer which issues scientific determinations of the strength of cancer associations based on a review of the research.

In 2011, the World Health Organization (WHO)  International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)  classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer1, associated with wireless phone use” as stated in the 2011 Press Release by the WHO IARC. Since that date the several new studies have found associations between cell phone radiation and cancer.

Since 2011, the scientific evidence linking wireless to cancer has significantly increased and today several published reviews include that the current body of evidence indicates cell phone radiation is proven Group 1 human carcinogen (Miller et al 2018, Peleg et al 2018 Carlberg and Hardell 2017, Belpomme et al 2018).

The WHO/IARC advisory committee released a 2020 report  recommending wireless radiation be re-evaluated by 2024 as a  “high priority.”