A Report on Non-Ionizing Radiation

IEEE: Microwave News Article Archive (2004 - )

May 9, 2023

“RF Health Safety Limits and Recommendations,” IEEE Microwave Magazine, June 2023. Jim Lin offers his most stinging criticism to date of the FCC, IEEE and ICNIRP exposure limits for RF and 5G radiation.

January 28, 2023

“Incongruities in Recently Revised RF Exposure Guidelines and Standards,” Environmental Research, posted January 23, 2023. Jim Lin, a former member of ICNIRP member and editor of Bioelectromagnetics, expresses concerns over safety limits for mm waves set by the IEEE in 2019 and ICNIRP in 2020. “Current scientific database is inadequate at mm wavelengths to render a trustworthy appraisal or to reach a judgment with confidence.” More here.

December 6, 2021

“Health Safety Guidelines and 5G Wireless Radiation” by James Lin, IEEE Microwave Magazine, January 2022. “Some of the updated [IEEE and ICNIRP] safety recommendations are marginal, questionable, and lack scientific justification from the perspective of safety protection.”

May 15, 2021

“Exposure to ELF Magnetic Fields and Childhood Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,” PLoS One, May 14, 2021. Significant associations were observed between exposure to ELF-MFs and childhood leukemia. Furthermore, a possible dose-response effect was also observed.”

November 10, 2020

“Human EMF Exposure in 5G at 28 GHz,” IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine, Nov/Dec 2020. Compares skin penetration and SARs for 3G, 4G and 5G phone exposures.

September 25, 2020

Very little has been written in the popular media about the waveforms used in 5G signals. Two outstanding questions are: How fast are the pulses? How powerful are they?

In 2018, Esra Neufeld and Niels Kuster of the IT’IS Foundation in Zurich issued a warning in a...

November 30, 2018

“Systematic Derivation of Safety Limits for Time-Varying 5G RF Exposure Based on Analytical Models and Thermal Dose,” Health Physics, December 2018.

“Another conclusion of this study is that the current ICNIRP (1998) and IEEE (2005, 2010) guidelines urgently need to be revised, as the duty cycle of 1,000 currently tolerated can produce unacceptable temperature increases that may result in permanent tissue damage.” From IT’IS in Zurich.

August 7, 2012

In its much-anticipated report, released today, the GAO told the FCC to take a fresh look at its cell phone exposure standard and the way the phones are tested for compliance with that limit. The 46-page report is available here.

Julius Knapp, the chief of the FCC's Office of Engineering and Technology, responded that he...

June 17, 2011

You can now get free copies of IEEE EMF and RF safety standards —thanks to the U.S. military. The Naval Surface Warfare Center is sponsoring downloads of five IEEE standards, including those specifying exposure limits for RF/MW radiation (C95.1–2005) and those for power-line frequencies (C95.6–2002). The other three cover how to do...

May 3, 2010

Fifteen years ago Om Gandhi pointed out that children are exposed to higher levels of radiation from cell phones than adults. He was right then and he is right today. Yet, no one could blame you for thinking otherwise.

In an article published in the May issue of Harper's, Nathaniel Rich uses this putative controversy, among a number of other examples, to make the case that confusion reigns in all aspects of cell-phone research. "The brain of a child absorbs a much greater amount of radiation from a cell phone than does the brain of an adult," he writes, adding immediately after, "No, it does not."

July 13, 2007

When the residents of the Oak Hill Park community in the Boston suburb of Newton fought the expansion of a local 5kW AM station, WNUR, they complained about radiofrequency interference (RFI)—to their telephones, stereos, VCRs, wheelchairs and baby monitors. They also objected to the possible effects on local wildlife, particularly to the blue-spotted salamander. And they worried about the visual blight posed by the towers.

What community activists hardly mentioned were the possible impacts on their health.

November 16, 2006

The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) approved the new IEEE RF/MW radiation exposure standard on November 2, according to ANSI's Standards Action [see p.12]. The new standard is designated ANSI/IEEE C95.1-2006. The IEEE approved the standard on October 3, 2005 —it's a revision of IEEE C95.1-1991. 

May 19, 2006

How comprehensive and objective is the new IEEE RF exposure standard (C95.1-2005)? Not at all, says Vladimir Binhi of the General Physics Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences in Moscow and the author of Magnetobiology. In a recent short comment, Binhi claims that the IEEE standard is biased, arguing that it dismisses non-thermal biological effects and ignores a large body of work documenting their existence. For its part, the IEEE committee, chaired by C.K. Chou of Motorola and John D'Andrea of the U.S. Navy (at Brooks Air Force Base), maintains that, "All relevant reported biological effects at either low '("non-thermal') or high ('thermal') levels were evaluated."

January 14, 2005

As the aftershocks from the Stewart report continue to reverberate, the telecom industry is brazenly moving forward with its plan for a major relaxation of the US limit for radiation exposures from cell phones. Yesterday and today, some members of the IEEE International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety (ICES) are meeting to hammer out their revision of the IEEE RF safety standard (known as C95.1).

One of the major planned changes is to replace the current SAR limit of 1.6 W/Kg, averaged over 1g of tissue, with a standard of 2.0 W/Kg, averaged over 10g.

Subscribe to IEEE: Microwave News Article Archive (2004 - )