EMF regulation

World Health Organization (WHO) resources on electromagnetic fields (EMFs)

Selected publication:

"Establishing a dialogue on risks from electromagnetic fields" (2002)

https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9241545712

How do electric and magnetic fields act on the human body?

Note that electric fields build up a charge on the surface, while magnetic fields encounter no obstacle. More details below.

Featuring Figure 2 (page 4) - figure text: Electric fields do not penetrate the body significantly but they do build up a charge on its surface, while exposure to magnetic fields causes circulating currents to flow in the body.

Figure 1

Health and environmental impact of 5G

The European Parliament's Science & Technology Panel requested two systematic literature studies on the impact of 5G: on health and the environment (fauna-flora). They were presented on 31st May 2021.

Below is the introduction by MEP/Eurodeputy Michèle Rivasi.

EN: "When we give public money at the levels given to operators, the very least we should do is to conduct health-impact studies; because people are asking whether 5G have health impacts. And these studies show that it does have impacts and that we need to be extremely cautious concerning the development of this technology. Thank you."

FR : "Lorsqu'on donne de l'argent public à des niveaux auxquels on a donné aux opérateurs, le minimum du minimum c'est de faire des études d'impact sanitaire; parce que les gens se posent la question de ‘est-ce que la 5G peut avoir des impacts sanitaires’. Et là, ces études montrent que ça a des impacts et qu'il faut être hyper-prudent par rapport au développement de cette technologie. Merci."

The health literature study is available at the following link: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/stoa/en/document/EPRS_STU(2021)690012

It was written by Dr Fiorella Belpoggi, BSC, PhD, Ramazzini Institute, Italy, at the request of the Panel for the Future of Science and Technology (STOA). It was published by the Scientific Foresight Unit, working under STOA guidance, within the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS).

This document is prepared as background material to assist Members the European Parliament in its parliamentary work.

Dr Belpoggi's video presentation is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLm4mutYu4Q

Excerpts from the document are provided below.

Health impact of 5G 

(page I)

"The upcoming deployment of 5G mobile networks will allow for significantly faster mobile broadband speeds and increasingly extensive mobile data usage. Technical innovations include:

🔹a different transmission system (MIMO: use of multiple‐input and multiple-output antennas), 

🔹directional signal transmission or reception (beamforming), and 

🔹the use of other frequency ranges."

"At the same time, a change is expected in the exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) of humans and the environment. In addition to those used to date, the 5G pioneer bands identified at EU level have frequencies of 700 MHz, 3.6 GHz (3.4 to 3.8 GHz) and 26 GHz (24.25 to 27.5 GHz)." 

"The first two frequencies are similar to those used for 2G to 4G technologies and have been investigated in both epidemiological and experimental studies for different end points (including carcinogenicity and reproductive/developmental effects), while 26 GHz (FR2) and higher frequencies have not been adequately studied for the same end points." 

"The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified radiofrequency (RF) EMF as 'possibly carcinogenic to humans' (Group 2B) and recently recommended RF exposure for re-evaluation 'with high priority' (IARC, 2019)." 

"Since 2011 a great number of studies have been performed, both epidemiological and experimental. The present review addresses the current knowledge regarding both carcinogenic and reproductive/developmental hazards of RF as exploited by 5G. There are various in vivo experimental and epidemiological studies on RF at a lower frequency range (450 to 6000 MHz), which also includes the frequencies used in previous generations' broadband cellular networks, but very few (and inadequate) on the higher frequency range (24 to 100 GHz, centimetre/MMW)."

"The review shows: 

1) 5G lower frequencies (700 and 3 600 MHz): 

a) limited evidence of carcinogenicity in epidemiological studies; 

b) sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental bioassays; 

c) sufficient evidence of reproductive/developmental adverse effects in humans; 

d) sufficient evidence of reproductive/ developmental adverse effects in experimental animals; 

2) 5G higher frequencies (24.25-27.5 GHz): the systematic review found no adequate studies either in humans or in experimental animals. 

Conclusions: 

1) cancer: 

FREQ1 (450 to 6 000 MHz): EMF are probably carcinogenic for humans, in particular related to gliomas and acoustic neuromas; 

FREQ2 (24 to 100 GHz): no adequate studies were performed on the higher frequencies; 

2) reproductive developmental effects: 

FREQ1 (450 to 6 000 MHz): these frequencies clearly affect male fertility and possibly female fertility too. They may have possible adverse effects on the development of embryos, foetuses and newborns; 

FREQ2 (24 to 100 GHz): no adequate studies were performed on non-thermal effects of the higher frequencies."

Expertise by the French Agency for Health* 

*French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety.

FR: Les ondes électromagnétiques : les actions de l'Anses - EN: Electromagnetic waves

References mentioned in the FR webpage:

"AVIS de l'Anses relatif aux lignes directrices visant à limiter l’exposition des personnes aux champs électromagnétiques (100 kHz – 300 GHz)"

https://www.anses.fr/fr/content/avis-2021-sa-0192

(Sept. 2023)

Infolettre PRIARTEM (2024-02) : "L’Agence sanitaire française porte plusieurs expertises – toujours en cours – sur des sujets aussi importants que la cancérogénicité des radiofréquences ou encore la remise en question des valeurs limites d’exposition actuellement en vigueur confirmée" dans l'avis mentionné ci-dessus.

“There is strong experimental evidence that the biological effects of the mobile telephony fields are actually due or mainly due to the included ELFs and not to the carrier itself.”

Lecture of EMF-biophysicist Dr. Dimitris J. Panagopoulos entitled “Health effects of man-made electromagnetic fields (EMFs)”— London 2019

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdUwiyNhR4k&t=89s

“We are mostly concerned about mobile telephony or microwave telecommunication electromagnetic fields. I will use equally MT for both mobile telephony or microwave telecommunications, because all microwave telecommunications, EMFs, they all combine an RF carrier, a radio frequency carrier, high‑frequency carrier, which is pulsed and modulated on ELF, on extremely low frequencies, in order to carry the information. Because the information is included in the ELFs, and in order to increase the density of bits of information, they have to pulse the radiation. So, we have a combination of RFs and ELFs.”

“I already told you that ELF modulation is necessary for the transmission of information, and ELF pulsing is necessary for increasing the density of information. There is strong experimental evidence that the biological effects of the mobile telephony fields are actually due, are mainly due to the included ELFs and not to the carrier itself. There have been many experiments. These are very good examples of experiments that have compared an unmodulated and unpulsed continuous carrier wave of high frequency with the same wave pulsed and modulated by ELFs, and it was effective biologically only in the second case. The RF carrier alone was not effective biologically.”

“This is a carrier wave, and this is the low‑frequency wave, the LF, that carries the information. This is amplitude modulation of the carrier by the ELF, and this is frequency modulation. And this is pulse modulation. We have rectangular pulses here, and within each pulse we have the carrier, and then it is zero. And then the next pulse comes, etc., etc.”

“This is how a simulated mobile telephony signal is. This is an ideal figure for a pulsed signal, a variable pulse signal.”

“But how is a real signal from a mobile phone? It’s like this." (left-hand side image of post).

And how is a real signal from a mobile phone base antenna? From the level of the base antenna, it’s much more complicated, because at the same time it communicates signals from thousands of users, communicates with thousands of mobile phones. So, it’s like this.”(right-hand side image of post).

New article:

Panagopoulos, D. J., Litovsky, R., & Chamberlin, K. (2026). Recording the extremely low frequency pulsations of wireless communication electromagnetic fields. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, doi: 10.1080/15368378.2026.2654072

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42002914/

Figure 2: On the left: real mobile phone signal. On the right: real signal from base station (cell tower)