The WHO-commissioned systematic reviews on health effects of radiofrequency radiation provide no assurance of safety.

IF 5.3 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Ronald L Melnick, Joel M Moskowitz, Paul Héroux, Erica Mallery-Blythe, Julie E McCredden, Martha Herbert, Lennart Hardell, Alasdair Philips, Fiorella Belpoggi, John W Frank, Theodora Scarato, Elizabeth Kelley
{"title":"The WHO-commissioned systematic reviews on health effects of radiofrequency radiation provide no assurance of safety.","authors":"Ronald L Melnick, Joel M Moskowitz, Paul Héroux, Erica Mallery-Blythe, Julie E McCredden, Martha Herbert, Lennart Hardell, Alasdair Philips, Fiorella Belpoggi, John W Frank, Theodora Scarato, Elizabeth Kelley","doi":"10.1186/s12940-025-01220-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The World Health Organization (WHO) commissioned 12 systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses (MA) on health effects of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF). The health outcomes selected for those reviews (cancer, electromagnetic hypersensitivity, cognitive impairment, birth outcomes, male fertility, oxidative stress, and heat-related effects) were based on a WHO-conducted international survey. The SR of the studies of cancer in laboratory animal studies was the only one that did not include a MA, because those authors considered it inappropriate due to methodological differences among the available studies, including differences in exposure characteristics (carrier frequency, modulation, polarization), experimental parameters (hours/day of exposure, duration of exposure, exposure systems), and different biological models. MAs in all the other SRs suffered from relatively few primary studies available for each MA (sometimes due to excessive subgrouping), exclusion of relevant studies, weaknesses in many of the included primary studies, lack of a framework for analyzing complex processes such as those involved in cognitive functions, and/or high between-study heterogeneity. Due to serious methodological flaws and weaknesses in the conduct of the reviews and MAs on health effects of RF-EMF exposure, the WHO-commissioned SRs cannot be used as proof of safety of cell phones and other wireless communication devices. However, the animal cancer SR, which was rated as \"high certainty of evidence\" for heart schwannomas and \"moderate certainty of evidence\" for brain gliomas, provided quantitative information that could be used to set exposure limits based on reducing cancer risk. The multiple and significant dose-related adverse effects found in the SRs on male fertility and pregnancy and birth outcome should also serve as the basis for policy decisions to lower exposure limits and reduce human reproductive risks. The report of harmful effects (e.g., cancer, reproductive toxicity, etc.) at doses below the adverse health effect threshold claimed by ICNIRP demonstrates that current exposure limits to RF-EMF, which were established by applying arbitrary uncertainty factors to their putative adverse threshold dose, lack scientific credibility.</p>","PeriodicalId":11686,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Health","volume":"24 1","pages":"70"},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12490090/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Health","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-025-01220-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The World Health Organization (WHO) commissioned 12 systematic reviews (SR) and meta-analyses (MA) on health effects of exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF). The health outcomes selected for those reviews (cancer, electromagnetic hypersensitivity, cognitive impairment, birth outcomes, male fertility, oxidative stress, and heat-related effects) were based on a WHO-conducted international survey. The SR of the studies of cancer in laboratory animal studies was the only one that did not include a MA, because those authors considered it inappropriate due to methodological differences among the available studies, including differences in exposure characteristics (carrier frequency, modulation, polarization), experimental parameters (hours/day of exposure, duration of exposure, exposure systems), and different biological models. MAs in all the other SRs suffered from relatively few primary studies available for each MA (sometimes due to excessive subgrouping), exclusion of relevant studies, weaknesses in many of the included primary studies, lack of a framework for analyzing complex processes such as those involved in cognitive functions, and/or high between-study heterogeneity. Due to serious methodological flaws and weaknesses in the conduct of the reviews and MAs on health effects of RF-EMF exposure, the WHO-commissioned SRs cannot be used as proof of safety of cell phones and other wireless communication devices. However, the animal cancer SR, which was rated as "high certainty of evidence" for heart schwannomas and "moderate certainty of evidence" for brain gliomas, provided quantitative information that could be used to set exposure limits based on reducing cancer risk. The multiple and significant dose-related adverse effects found in the SRs on male fertility and pregnancy and birth outcome should also serve as the basis for policy decisions to lower exposure limits and reduce human reproductive risks. The report of harmful effects (e.g., cancer, reproductive toxicity, etc.) at doses below the adverse health effect threshold claimed by ICNIRP demonstrates that current exposure limits to RF-EMF, which were established by applying arbitrary uncertainty factors to their putative adverse threshold dose, lack scientific credibility.

世卫组织委托进行的关于射频辐射对健康影响的系统审查没有提供安全保证。
世界卫生组织(世卫组织)委托对接触射频电磁场(RF-EMF)的健康影响进行了12次系统审查和荟萃分析。为这些综述选择的健康结果(癌症、电磁超敏反应、认知障碍、出生结果、男性生育能力、氧化应激和热相关影响)是基于世卫组织进行的一项国际调查。实验动物癌症研究的SR是唯一没有包括MA的,因为这些作者认为现有研究的方法差异不合适,包括暴露特性(载流子频率、调制、极化)、实验参数(暴露小时/天、暴露持续时间、暴露系统)和不同的生物学模型的差异。在所有其他SRs中的MA,每个MA可获得的主要研究相对较少(有时是由于过度亚分组),排除了相关研究,许多纳入的主要研究存在弱点,缺乏分析复杂过程(如涉及认知功能的过程)的框架,和/或研究之间的高度异质性。由于在进行射频电磁场接触对健康影响的审查和评估时存在严重的方法缺陷和弱点,世卫组织委托编制的sr不能作为手机和其他无线通信设备安全性的证明。然而,动物癌症SR(心脏神经鞘瘤被评为“高证据确定性”,脑胶质瘤被评为“中等证据确定性”)提供了定量信息,可用于在降低癌症风险的基础上设定暴露限值。在放射性放射性物质中发现的与剂量有关的对男性生育力以及怀孕和分娩结果的多重重大不利影响,也应作为降低接触限值和减少人类生殖风险的政策决定的依据。关于剂量低于ICNIRP声称的有害健康影响阈值时的有害影响(例如癌症、生殖毒性等)的报告表明,目前通过对假定的有害阈值剂量应用任意不确定性因素确定的RF-EMF暴露限值缺乏科学可信度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Environmental Health
Environmental Health 环境科学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
10.10
自引率
1.70%
发文量
115
审稿时长
3.0 months
期刊介绍: Environmental Health publishes manuscripts on all aspects of environmental and occupational medicine and related studies in toxicology and epidemiology. Environmental Health is aimed at scientists and practitioners in all areas of environmental science where human health and well-being are involved, either directly or indirectly. Environmental Health is a public health journal serving the public health community and scientists working on matters of public health interest and importance pertaining to the environment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信