Australian radiation standards – do they protect us?

The Australian standard and Guidelines of the International Commission on Nonionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) are based on a number of premises or assumptions that may or may not be correct:

  • Premis: Radiation only causes health problems if it heats the body to 1 degree Celsius.
  • Premis: Risks can be calculated by averaging the impact of signals over a six-minute period.
  • Premis: There is no need to protect against the occurrence of harmful biological effects.
  • Premis: Nonionizing radiation does not cause chemical changes in the body.

There is evidence that the standards do not protect against the harmful effects of radiofrequency radiation:

  • Harmful effects occur at levels that comply with the Australian and ICNIRP limits.
  • The IARC classified the radiofrequency radiation found in the everyday environment as a Class 2B carcinogen.
  • 248 scientists from 42 nations have called on the World Health Organisation and European Union to develop stricter standards for radiation protection.

Numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plant and animal life.  

These findings justify our appeal to the United Nations (UN) and, all member States in the world, to encourage the World Health Organization (WHO) to exert strong leadership in fostering the development of more protective EMF guidelines, encouraging precautionary measures, and educating the public about health risks, particularly risk to children and fetal development.

International Appeal, https://www.emfscientist.org/index.php/emf-scientist-appeal

Some countries have stricter radiation standards than the Australian standard and ICNIRP Guidelines, including

    • Russia
    • Italy
    • Switzerland
    • Belgium
    • Vienna
    • Salzburg
  • The Australian Radiation Protection (RPS3) standard is located on the website of the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) which has the following disclaimer:

ARPANSA provides this website free of charge to disseminate for the benefit of the public regulatory information and general information on the impact of radiation on health. This website is not a substitute for independent professional advice specific to your personal circumstances. Nothing contained in this site is intended to be used as medical advice and, in particular, it should not be used to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease in individual cases, nor should it be used for therapeutic purposes or as a substitute for your own health practitioner’s professional advice. ARPANSA does not accept any liability for any injury, loss or damage incurred by use of or reliance on the information provided on this website. …

Users should carefully evaluate the accuracy, currency, completeness and relevance of information on this site as it relates to their own circumstances, and should obtain personalised advice from relevant professionals to ensure the guidance is appropriate to their particular circumstances before relying on it for any purpose other than the advancement of knowledge on this subject. ARPANSA cannot guarantee, and assumes no legal liability or responsibility for, the relevance, accuracy, currency or completeness of the information.

‘…we conclude that glioma is caused by RF radiation. Revision of current guidelines for exposure to RF radiation is needed,’

Michael Carlberg and Lennart Hardell, ‘Evaluation of Mobile Phone and Cordless Phone Use and Glioma Risk Using the Bradford Hill Viewpoints from 1965 on Association or Causation’, BioMed Research International, Vol 2017, Article ID 9218486, https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/9218486

Back to Blog