Physicians, physician researchers and medical organizations across the globe have questioned the safety of wireless devices we commonly use and called for more protective radiation standards. Strengthening scientific research and observation has changed their perspective from a personal concern, to a feeling of obligation to speak out, in order to prevent harm to their patients and the public.
Here are the voices of physicians and physician groups who have written letters, authored articles, developed policy and spoken out about the health risks of wireless radiation including cell phones and Wi Fi. Physician videos follow at the end.
Many physicians as well as scientists have published research papers on the risks of electromagnetic radiation which are listed in this website, MDSafeTech.org. An international list of both scientists and physicians who have signed a petition calling for reevaluation of safety standards is found at EMF Scientist Appeal as well as those calling for a moratorium on 5G roll-out at 5G Moratorium.
Dr. Dominique Belpomme, Director of the European Cancer and Environment Research Institute and Professor in Medical Oncology Paris V University Hospital, a French public research university in Paris, authored a critical research paper on the biological commonalities of electrohypersensitivity and multiple chemical sensitivities. He found that similar biomarkers could be used to positively identify and diagnose these conditions. His scientific paper, Reliable disease biomarkers characterizing and identifying electrohypersensitivity and multiple chemical sensitivity as two etiopathogenic aspects of a unique pathological disorder, was published in 2015 in Reviews of Environmental Health. In 2015 he spoke about his research at the EHS/MCS 5th Paris Appeal Congress at the Royal Academy of Medicine in Belgium. He found that of the 1200 patients tested, 10% were not electrosensitive or had multiple sensitivities, however, 90% did have these conditions that were linked through common biomarkers that can be clinically tested.
Dr. David Carpenter, author of over 370 publications, received his MD degree from Harvard University and is Director of the Institute for Health and the Environment and Professor at the University of Albany School of Public Health. He wrote a letter to the Kawartha Pine Ridge School District regarding the use of Wi Fi in schools in 2011. He states, “There is clear and strong evidence that intensive use of cell phones increases the risk of brain cancer, tumors of the auditory nerve, and cancer of the parotid gland,the salivary gland in the cheek by the ear…Wi Fi uses similar radio frequency radiation ( 1.8-5.0 GHz), although the intensity of exposure in the immediate environment is much lower than one gets from holding a cell phone close to your head, the difference between a cell phone and a Wi Fi environment, however, is that while the cell phone is used only intermittently a Wi Fi environment is continuous…. Wired facilities don not generate any RF radiation.” Dr Carpenter letter to Kawartha Pine Ridge School District 2011
Dr. Scott Eberle, Hospice physician in Northern California, has written an eloquent article originally published in his local medical society journal, What’s the Diagnosis Doctor? Personal History, about the evolution of his own electrosensitivity. In his personal account he cautions physicians unfamiliar with this diagnosis to be sympathetic with patients and not to discount their symptoms as just physical as electrosensitivity may lead to psychological illness. He writes, “Refer for counseling as indicated. the experience of having one’s environment feel unsafe can induce profound secondary psychological effects, even in people without previous mental health problems. Manifestations may include fear, panic, anxiety, shame, avoidance, helplessness, depression and insomnia-to name just a few. Do not dismiss the possibility of a physical disease by over-interpreting these secondary psychological symptoms as mere paranoia, hypochondriasis or mental illness.” In his published article, An Underworld Journey, Dr. Eberle further explores the dilemma of electrosensitivity, its tendency to be unrecognized and it’s devastating consequences.
Dr. Beatrice Golomb, UCSD Professor of Medicine, writes to the California Legislature to oppose SB649 to fast track placement of small cell antennas throughout neighborhoods in August 2017. She states ” If this bill passes, many will suffer greatly, and needlessly, as a direct result….My research group alone has received hundreds of communications from people who have developed serious health problems from electromagnetic radiation, following introduction of new technologies….most likely these are the tip of an iceberg… Each new roll-out of electromagnetic technology for which exposure is obligatory, swells the ranks of those who develop problems with electromagnetic fields.” Golomb SB649 Letter of opposition 8-22-2017
Dr. Lennart Hardell, well regarded Oncology Professor at the University of Orebro, Sweden wrote to Governor Brown about SB649. He states, “We have for two decades studied human health risks from exposure to radio frequency (RF) radiation…The conclusion [in 2011]… was that RF radiation is a possible human carcinogen. Group 2B. … Since then the evidence of cancer risk has increased and RF radiation should now be regarded as a human carcinogen, Group 1, according to the IARC classification.Dr. Hardell California’s SB 649 Sept 2017
Dr. Martha Herbert, Harvard pediatric neurologist and neuroscientist wrote an open letter to Los Angeles Unified School District regarding placement of Wi-Fi networks in schools. Feb 8, 2013. She writes, “Current technologies were promulgated without taking into account biological impacts other than thermal impacts. We now know that there are a large array of impacts that have nothing to do with the heating of tissue. The claim from Wi Fi proponents that the only concern is thermal impacts is now definitely outdated scientifically. EMF/RF from Wi Fi and cell towers can exert a disorganizing effect on the ability to learn and remember, and can also be destabilizing to immune and metabolic function. This will make it harder for children to learn, particularly those who are already having problems in the first place.” Dr. Herbert Letter
Dr. John West, renowned Orange County breast surgeon, is author of Prevent, Survive and Thrive: Every Woman’s Guide to Optimal Breast Care. He explains in his book how several women developed breast cancer in the exact location where they placed their cell phones in the bra. Dr. West now advises that the “The Bra is a NO PHONE ZONE”. He states in a letter to Governor Brown ” Over the last several years I have been treating more and more women with breast cancer. The women have no genetic marking or family history or no known exposures. Their young ages were especially troubling. Some asked if their cancer had anything to do with carrying their cell phone in their bras for hours daily while their phones were on and connected to a wireless network. I was skeptical at first but after 4 young women, each of whom had multiple invasive cancers directly below where they stored their phones in their bras, I became convinced that cell phones when placed directly in contact with the breast for prolonged periods of time could cause breast cancer….. How can it be that the firefighters, who have known for many years that cell towers can harm them, were given an exemption but our families will not be protected? This is not the California I know and love. Dr. West Letter to Governor Brown SB 649 Oct 2017.
Physician at Large Testimony regarding proposed 2017 Massachusetts legislation to educate physicians about health effects of radio frequency radiation from wireless devices. This physician remains anonymous, to protect her children, but relates the story of her children’s development of eelctrosensitivity at school. She writes, “My 2nd grade daughter reported immediate onset dizziness, nausea, and vertigo whenever the smart board was used in her classroom. With longer exposures (i.e. when the teacher screened movies on the smart board), she reported confusion, with very intense nausea and dizziness. As the year progressed, she developed short term memory loss and had marked behavioral changes.” Regarding her son she states, “In December 2016, after starting a new school, my son developed new onset, autism-like behavioral changes that were progressive. With each passing week at the new school, he became progressively more aggressive and violent, attacking his sister many weeknights by punching and kicking her for no apparent reason. He also regressed developmentally and was no longer willing to dress/undress or wash himself. He had frequent headaches and severe difficulties with concentration most days after coming home from school.” Her children’s symptoms resolved when they were not exposed to wireless devices and it became obvious as both her children had symptoms but with differing severity. The physician notes later in the letter,” Had we not figured out that RFR was the cause of my son’s behavioral changes and violent aggression, he undoubtedly would have ended up institutionalized and medicated. Possibly for life. Currently, there are many kids being medicated for psychiatric conditions, who may not have any medical problem aside from physiologic manifestations of non-ionizing radiation exposure(RFR).” Physician Testimony Massachusetts Bills H.2030 and S.2079 for MD Education 9-4-2017
American Academy of Pediatrics
The American Academy of Pediatrics wrote a letter in 2013 to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regarding “Reassessment of Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields Limits and Policies” urging the FCC to adopt radiation standards that 1) protect children’s health and well-being from radiation emitted by cell phones and other wireless devices; 2) reflect how people actually use their cell phones; and 3) provide sufficient information that enables consumers to make informed decisions when they purchase mobile phones. They point out that the FCC has not addressed the standard for cell phone radiation since 1996 and children will now have a lifetime of exposure to microwave frequencies. “Current FCC standards do not account for the unique vulnerability and use patterns specific to pregnant women and children. It is essential that any new standard for cell phones or other wireless devices be based on protecting the youngest and most vulnerable populations to ensure they are safeguarded throughout their lifetimes.” AAP Letter Reevaluation Safety Standards EMR
Austrian Medical Association
The Austrian Medical Association has developed a thorough set of guidelines with information on how to recognize, diagnose and treat electrosensitivity from wireless electromagnetic radiation. They state these guidelines can be used in the differential diagnosis of non-specific, stress related health problems where electrosmog and other environmental exposures are of concern. They note that there are no legitimate EMR limits to protect the population. “The recommendations of the WHO complied by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP 1998) are based on a thermal model. These recommendations were adopted by the EU…and Austria… without taking into account long-term non-thermal effects.” https://www.degruyter.com/view/j/reveh.ahead-of-print/reveh-2016-0011/reveh-2016-0011.xml?format=INT
Austrian Medical Association Guidelines. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10910251701394/EUROPAEM%20EMF%20Guideline%202016%20for%20the%20prevention%20and%20treatment%20of%20EMF-related%20health%20problems.pdf
Babe Safe Project
The Baby Safe Project, an EPA award winning group, developed in 2015 to make the public and physicians aware of the potential harm from wireless devices on the developing fetus. The Baby Safe Project has signatures from dozens of physicians who agree that precaution is necessary. Baby Safe Project
California Department of Public Health
In December 2017 the California Department of Public Health released it long awaited guidelines for reducing exposure to radiation from cell phone and wireless devices. CDHP Releases Guidelines on How to Reduce Exposure to Radio Frequency Energy From Cell Phones. Their public health physicians and researchers who work with them at the CDPH determined that there was enough science to caution people about the potential health hazards of cell phones. The CDPH recommendations include:
- Keeping the phone away from the body
- Reducing cell phone use when the signal is weak
- Reducing the use of cell phones to stream audio or video, or to download or upload large files
- Keeping the phone away from the bed at night
- Removing headsets when not on a call
- Avoiding products that claim to block radio frequency energy. These products may actually increase your exposure.
California Medical Association
In 2014 the California Medical Association joined the American Academy of Pediatrics in calling for reevaluation of safety standards to consider non-thermal biological and health effects in order to protect public and environmental health.
CMA Resolution 107-14
WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS PUBLIC SAFETY STANDARDS REEVALUATION
Resolved: That CMA supports efforts to reevaluate microwave safety exposure levels associated with wireless communication devices, including consideration of adverse non thermal biologic and health effects from non ionizing electromagnetic radiation used in wireless communications; and be it further
Resolved: That CMA support efforts to implement new safety exposure limits for wireless devices to levels that do not cause human or environmental harm based on scientific research.
A group of Canadian physicians authored a Declaration: Doctors Call for Protection from Radio Frequency Radiation Exposure calling for Health Canada to:
- develop and support strategies to raise awareness about microwave radiation impacts and to minimize prolonged exposure to microwave radiation in schools and other places where children are regularly exposed.
- acknowledge that a full literature review was not part of its latest update of Safety Code 6 (the safety guideline for wireless exposure pertaining to thermal effects on the tissue of adult males) and request a comprehensive literature review for all age ranges with less reliance on industry-funded studies.
- provide guidelines and resources to assist Canadian physicians in becoming apprised of microwave exposure and related health problems and clinical presentations that may be associated with over-exposure or sensitivity and similar to Austrian Medical Association Guidelines.
Environmental Protection Agency
In 2002 the Environmental Protection Agency wrote a detailed response letter regarding the issue of safety of radio frequency exposures. The EPA writes, ” The FCC’s current exposure guidelines as well as those of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and the International Commission on Non-ionizing Radiation Protection, are thermally based, and do not apply to chronic, non thermal exposure situations. They are believed to protect against injury that may be caused by acute exposures that result in tissue heating or electric shock or burn. The hazard level (for frequencies or generally greater than 3 MHz) is based on a specific absorption dose-rate, SAR, associated with an effect that results from an increase in body temperature. The FCC’s exposure guideline is considered protective of affects arising from a thermal mechanism but not from all possible mechanisms. Therefore, the generalization by many that the guidelines protect human beings from harm by any or all mechanisms is not justified. “ Letter from EPA to EMR Policy 2002
European Academy of Environmental Medicine
The EUROPAEM EMF Guideline 2016 for the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of EMF-related health problems and illnesses, gives an “overview of the current knowledge regarding EMF-related health risks and provides recommendations for the diagnosis, treatment and accessibility measures of EHS to improve and restore individual health outcomes as well as for the development of strategies for prevention.” Their goal is to reduce the environmental burden of disease. They note “Chronic diseases and illnesses associated with non-specific symptoms are on the rise…the emerging electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) is more and more recognized by health authorities, disability administrators and case workers, politicians, as well as courts of law. We recommend treating EHS clinically as part of the group of chronic multisystem illnesses (CMI), but still recognizing that the underlying cause remains the environment. In the beginning, EHS symptoms occur only occasionally, but over time they may increase in frequency and severity. Common EHS symptoms include headaches, concentration difficulties, sleep problems, depression, a lack of energy, fatigue, and flu-like symptoms.” EUROPAEM EMF Guideline.
Irish Doctor’s Environmental Association
The Irish Doctor’s Environmental Association wrote a letter regarding Wi Fi in schools. They note that there is no evidence that it is safe. They recommend the adoption of the precautionary principle with use of this technology and state, “While we fully support the promotion of technology in education we urge you to use wired technologies for you own safety and that of your pupils and staff. the tragedy of avoidable illness is only superseded by the knowledge that it could have been avoided.” Irish Doctor’s Environmental Association on Wi Fi in Schools 2013.
Maryland Children’s Environmental Health and Protection Advisory Council
In December 2016 the MCEHPAC issued a report “Wifi Radiation in Schools in Maryland Final Report”. This state agency is tasked with identifying environmental health issues that impact children and to protect them from exposure to environmental hazards. Under their state code Md. Code Ann., Health-General §13–1506, their responsibilities include
- Gather and disseminate information to the public, including the research and medical communities, community–based organizations, schools, and State agencies, on how to reduce, treat, and eliminate children’s exposures to environmental hazards to further the public’s understanding of the environmental hazards that may potentially affect children;
Recommend uniform guidelines for State agencies to follow to help reduce and eliminate children’s exposure to environmental hazards, especially in areas reasonably accessible to children…
After gathering abundant testimony, including that of former IARC member Dr. Anthony Miller, the Advisory Board for Marland Children’s Health and with transparent discussion, the Maryland Children’s Environmental Health and Protection Advisory Council Report recommendations were developed and include:
- Formally petition the FCC to revisit the exposure limits to wireless radio frequency radiation
- Consider using wired devices in those already wireless and design classrooms with wired connections.
- Have children place devices on desks to serve as barrier between the device and children’s bodies.
- Teach children to turn off WiFi when not in use.
- Consider placing routers as far away from students as possible.
Physicians for Safe Technology
Physicians For Safe Technology Letter to Governor Brown regarding SB649 after it passed both the Senate and Assembly. Sept 19, 2017. The letter states, “Physicians realize now that the incremental increases in daily radiofrequency (RF) exposure already exceed human health tolerance for many people. Cumulative effects of RF exposure from multiple sources are not addressed under any current health standards. We need to be reducing rather than increasing new sources of involuntary RF exposure in our communities. Chronic disease in California from environmental toxic exposures already cost our State millions of dollars annually. SB649 will make this situation worse. We should be acting to reduce preventable toxic exposures, particularly where it is known that chemicals and wireless radiation exposures can act in a synergistic way to amplify health harm.” Physicians for Safe Technology Letter to Governor Brown PDF9:19:17
Videos of Talks and Testimony Regarding Health Risks of Radio frequency Radiation
Dr. Hugh Taylor, Chair of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, Yale School of Medicine, on his research on prenatal effects
Dr. Taylor, as part of a Baby Safe press conference, describes his research looking at how prenatal cell phone radiation can cause behavioral changes in the offspring. Mice exposed to cell phone radiation had decreased memory and were more likely to be hyperactive. Dr. Taylor directly observed the differences in both groups of mice, those exposed and unexposed control group. It did appear that there was a dose response relationship. He makes the connection between exposure to cell phone radiation in utero and potential to develop attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. He suggests precaution by lowering exposure to cell phone radiation by reducing usage and keeping the phone as far as possible from the baby.
Dr. Hugh Taylor, Yale Professor, Dr. Leo Trasane, MD, MPP, and Devra Davis, PhD, explain childhood brain development and toxic exposures including wireless radiation
In this video produced by the Baby Safe Project, Dr. Hugh Taylor, Yale Professor explains his study on mice, along with Dr. Leo Trasande, NYU Langone School of Medicine, who explains the delicate nature of neural development and how prenatal toxic exposures to the brain can cause permanent and lifelong learning, memory and behavior disorders.
Dr. Randall Oyer is interviewed about his young patient who had breast cancer
Dr. Oyer, an oncologist in Pennsylvania, has seen 2 young women who have developed breast cancer in the same area the cell phone was placed in their bra. He sates, “”We don’t see breast cancer at this age. When we do, we have to ask some serious questions about what is going on.”
Dr. Mark Arazi, French Physician on “Phonegate” 2017
Dr. Marc Arazi, discusses the “Phonegate” issue with France’s 2016 cell phone safety testing at an Environmental Health Trust event. The French Health Agency tested a variety of common cell phones including Apple, Motorola, Samsung and Nokia, at typical user distances which is on the body. Their report revealed that 89% of cell phones tested exceeded the safety standards by 3 fold. Dr. Azari urges cell phones to be tested in the way in which people commonly use them, adjacent to the body. He also implores more research taking into account children’s smaller size and increased absorption of radiation. In Canada, a Marketplace report revealed similar findings in The Secret Inside Your Cellphone, that we are told to keep cellphones away from the body or we will exceed safety standards.
Dr. Toril Jelter, California Pediatrician, on Clinical Health Effects of EMR
Dr. Toril Jelter is an experienced Board Certified Pediatrician and General Practitioner in Walnut Creek, California. She treats both children and adults with multiple sclerosis, autism, ADHD, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue and electrohypersensitivity. Here, Dr. Jelter discusses her clinical experience with autism. She has seen improved and at times dramatic behavioral changes in many of her autistic/ADHD patients when they have reduced electromagnetic radiation in the home and environment. She has developed a 2 week trial for families for diagnosis.
Dr. Ann Lee Testifies in California 2017 About Her Sons’ Electrosensitivity
Dr. Ann Lee and her son testify in Sacramento California against SB 649 to streamline small cell antenna placement throughout cities and counties. Her son was found to be sensitive to wireless EMR from a cluster of antennas, reporting heart palpitations with near exposure. Extensive tests by his physician could not find any cardiac pathology.
Dr.Anthony Miller, Physician Epidemiologist, on IARC Classification of RF EMR
Dr. Anthony Miller, a physician epidemiologist, former Director of Epidemiology, National Cancer Institute of Canada, prior Senior Epidemiologist for the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and Professor Emeritus, Dall Lama School of Public Health provides testimony against cell tower installation in Toronto Canada. In this video from 2013, Dr. Miller states that the 2011 WHO/IARC classification of RF radiation should be changed from current designation as a Class 2B possible carcinogen to a Class 2A probable carcinogen. Most recently, in 2017, he stated we should designate RF as a Class 1 carcinogen considering the evidence published since 2011.
Dr. Victoria Dunkley, Integrative Psychiatrist Discusses Screen Time
Dr Victoria Dunkley discusses electronic screen time and the overstimulated child. She is an experienced Board Certified integrative child psychiatrist and author of “Reset Your Child’s Brain: A Four-Week Plan to End Meltdowns, Raise Grades and Boost Social Skills by Reversing the Effects of Electronic Screen Time”. In this video she discusses the clinical and physiologic affects she has seen from the overuse of digital devices on those with or without a preexisting psychologic dysfunction.
Dr. Erica Mallery-Blythe, Emergency Medicine with Overview
Dr. Erica Mallery-Blythe expertly discusses non-thermal effects of non-ionizing radiation used in wireless devices. She is founder of PHIRA, Physicians Health Initiative for Radiation and Environment.
Dr. Lisa Thornton, Chicago Pediatrician, on Cell Phone Use in Kids
Dr. Lisa Thornton, Pediatrician and Medical Director of Pediatric and Adolescent Rehabilitation at the University of Chicago Medicine, discusses why Smart phones can be harmful to children along with sensible advice about wireless devices.
Dr. Santosh Kesari, Neurosurgeon, on Brain Tumors and Cell Phones
Dr. Kesari is a neurosurgeon and co-author of Why Children Absorb More Microwave Radiation Than Adults: The consequences. Journal of Microscopy and Ultrastructure. April 2014. He discusses his concern with the long term use of cell phones and the association with brain tumors. Children Absorb More Radiation
Dr. Hema Kalan, South African General Practitioner, Interviewed About Electro-Hypersensitivity.
In this 2018 South African Broadcast 3 people with hypersensitivity were interviewed. They describe symptoms including ringing in the ears, nausea, disorientation and headaches. Dr. Hema Kalan, a general practitioner in South Africa, was also interviewed (at 5:15) She stated that doctors do not recognize EHS as they are not taught about the condition in medical schools or at conferences, nor is there a test to easily diagnose it. In addition, the symptoms are wide ranging and differ in individuals. An interview with James Lech, who has EHS, reveals that he has completed a masters dissertation on electohypersensitivity from Rhodes University. He stated that electrohypersensitivity should instead be called Electromagnetic Field Intolerance Syndrome (EFIS). Mr. Lech has applied to the high court in South Africa and states has been officially been given a diagnosis of EFIS. It was noted in the video that ICD10 codes can be used for this condition. Z58.4 – Exposure to radiation or Z58.89 or Z58.9- Problem related to physical environment could be used .Find a Code ICD10 or W99.xx Exposure to other man-made environmental factors Find a Code ICD10. It is noted that the United States uses a modified ICD-10 coding called ICD-10-CM. In the US codes which could be used are W90.0XXA -Exposure to radio frequency or ICD-10-CM W85-W99 -Exposure to electric current. Broadcast of Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity in South Africa. Feb 26, 2018. Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity in South Africa-TV Interview