WHO’s new study results questioned

September 27, 2024 

Does wireless radiation cause brain tumours and other cancers or not?

That depends on who you ask.

A recent review1 on the link between radiofrequency radiation and cancer risk was published earlier this month, attracting lots of media interest.

According to a media statement by ARPANSA (the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency), the study found ‘no association between mobile phone use and head cancer’ and Associate Professor Ken Karipidis, who led the review said, ‘we can be more confident that exposure to radio waves from wireless technology is not a human health hazard.’2

But there’s more to the story than that.

The review was commissioned by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and it received funding from the WHO and from ARPANSA, among other sources. It is the fourth recently published review commissioned by the WHO to report low evidence of risks from radiofrequency radiation.

The authors claimed to find low cancer risks from exposure to radiofrequency radiation (RFR) from:

  • mobile and cordless phones:

    • ‘For near field RF-EMF exposure to the head from mobile phones, there was moderate certainty evidence that it does not increase the risk of glioma, meningioma, acoustic neuroma, pituitary tumours, salivary gland tumours or paediatric brain tumours.’

    • ‘For near field RF-EMF exposure to the head from cordless phones, there was low certainty evidence that it may not increase the risk of glioma, meningioma or acoustic neuroma.’

  • mobile phone base stations and other transmitters:

    • ‘For whole-body far-field RF-EMF exposure from fixed-site transmitters (broadcasting antennas or base stations), there was moderate certainty evidence that it likely does not increase childhood leukaemia risk, and low certainty evidence that it may not increase the risk of paediatric brain tumours.’

  • and occupational sources of RFR:

    • ‘For occupational RF-EMF exposure, there was low certainty evidence that it may not increase the risk of brain cancer/glioma’.


However, the study contradicts the findings of a 2020 review conducted by J Choi and team. This found ‘significant evidence linking cellular phone use to increased tumor risk, especially among cell phone users with cumulative cell phone use of 1000 or more hours in their lifetime (which corresponds to about 17 min per day over 10 years), and especially among studies that employed high quality methods.’3

Dr Joel Moskowitz, Director of the Center for Family and Community Health at the University of California, has identified serious flaws with the Karipidis study, including its reliance on earlier biased studies.4

Among the studies included in the Karipidis review was a 2018 study of which Karipidis was also the lead author. That paper produced a no-risk result and was widely criticised for its flaws.

Science journalist Dr Louis Slesin points out that many of the authors of the 2024 Karipidis paper are members of what he calls the ‘no-risk club’. They have previously published no-risk findings and are linked with the no-risk international body, ICNIRP (International Commission on NonIonizing Radiation Protection). ICNIRP, in turn, has close links with the WHO.

‘ICNIRP has always rejected a cancer risk,’ says Slesin. ‘No one on ICNIRP has ever broken ranks.’5  Karipidis is currently Vice Chair of ICNIRP.

So, is the Karipidis study the final word on wireless radiation safety?

Not at all.

Slesin says that ‘Missing from all the coverage and commentary is the elephant in the room: The $30 million NTP animal study which found “clear evidence” that RF radiation caused malignant tumors in rats. There is also the Ramazzini study, which complement the NTP results. Many say that the strongest evidence for a cancer risk is now the animal work —no longer the epidemiology.’

References

  1. Ken Karipidis, Dan Baaken, Tom Loney, Maria Blettner, Chris Brzozek, Mark Elwood, Clement Narh, Nicola Orsini, Martin Röösli, Marilia Silva Paulo, Susanna Lagorio, The effect of exposure to radiofrequency fields on cancer risk in the general and working population: A systematic review of human observational studies – Part I: Most researched outcomes, Environment International, Volume 191, 2024, 108983, ISSN 0160-4120, 

  2. ARPANSA, 

  3. Choi Y-J, Moskowitz JM, Myung S-K, Lee Y-R, Hong Y-C. Cellular Phone Use and Risk of Tumors: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(21):8079. 

  4. ‘Biased WHO-commissioned review claims no cancer link to cellphone use’, www.saferemr.com/2024/09/biased-who-commissioned-review-claims.html

  5. Dr Louis Slesin, Old Wine in New Bottles: Decoding New WHO–ICNIRP Cancer Review Game Over? Likely Not’,

Discover your exposure

Would you like to know how much radiation you’re exposed to at home, work and in your neighbourhood?

Our CEMProtec 31 is a handy, easy-to-use and economical device for detecting radiofrequency radiation. You can see more here.

What else can you do?

  • Protect yourself from wireless radiation with our shielded mobile phone cases, here.

  • Download your free copy of our September issue of EMR and Health here.

  • forward this email to others to inform them, too.

Back to Blog