Radiofrequency Radiation and Cancer

Abstract

It is difficult to envision any phenomenon as ubiquitous or crucial to human existence as electromagnetic radiation (EMR). We are surrounded by an invisible symphony of light that permeates everything we experience, from the visible light that illuminates our world, to the x-rays that have revolutionized diagnostic imaging and cancer treatments, to the broadcast and mobile communications transmitted worldwide by radiofrequency radiation (RFR). This last facet has of late proved especially contentious; while EMR is an inescapable part of our universe, there is increasing public concern over whether RFR poses a cancer risk. Such is the depth of feeling on the issue that it has led to a spate of arson attacks on phone masts and assaults on telecommunications engineers.By 1 estimate, 20% of the US population believe that their cell phones cause cancer and that the government covers up harmful effects of RFR. 1 Such beliefs are passionately held and widely evangelized, despite being unrealistic. The recent adoption of 5G technology has been met by an explosion of claims on social media asserting all manner of harm, including not only claims that it can cause cancer, but even outlandish and thoroughly debunked assertions that 5G towers could cause COVID-19. 2 For cell phones, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and 5G, however, claims that these RFR sources can induce cancer are the most routinely invoked. For clinicians and scientists in cancer, it is important to understand the current evidence base.IMPORTANCE Concerns over radiofrequency radiation (RFR) and carcinogenesis have long existed, and the advent of 5G mobile technology has seen a deluge of claims asserting that the new standard and RFR in general may be carcinogenic. For clinicians and researchers in the field, it is critical to address patient concerns on the topic and to be familiar with the existent evidence base.OBSERVATIONS This review considers potential biophysical mechanisms of cancer induction, elucidating mechanisms of electromagnetically induced DNA damage and placing RFR in appropriate context on the electromagnetic spectrum. The existent epidemiological evidence in humans and laboratory animals to date on the topic is also reviewed and discussed. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEThe evidence from these combined strands strongly indicates that claims of an RFR-cancer link are not supported by the current evidence base. Much of the research to date, however, has been undermined by methodological shortcomings, and there is a need for higher-quality future research endeavors. Finally, the role of fringe science and unsubstantiated claims in patient and public perception on this topic is highly relevant and must be carefully considered.

Evidence Base on the Potential Carcinogenicity of Radiofrequency Radiation

“…To the Editor Epidemiological research and laboratory studies on rodents show an association of nonionizing electromagnetic radiation with harm to fetal growth and development, changes in brain activity, and an increased risk of tumor development. These concerns about potential human health effects should not be discounted, contrary to the argument in the Review by Grimes published recently in JAMA Oncology .…”

“…Grimes focuses on DNA damage as the primary pathway to carcinogenesis, missing the vast literature that demonstrates the carcinogenic effects of agents that are not mutagens. The author devotes more than 2 pages to the plain scientific fact that radiofrequency radiation is nonionizing, then uses this platform to dismiss key scientific studies, including the National Toxicology Study and research by the Ramazzini Institute .…”

Evidence Base on the Potential Carcinogenicity of Radiofrequency Radiation

“…To the Editor We write with serious concerns about the Review article by Dr Grimes on cancer and radiofrequency radiation (RFR) with respect to basic factual accuracy and misrepresentation. The article contains extensive commentary on ionizing radiation and does not address the substantial body of science on nonionizing RFR effects.…”

Evidence Base on the Potential Carcinogenicity of Radiofrequency Radiation

“…To the Editor We are writing to raise serious concerns about the Review article on radiofrequency radiation (RFR) and cancer by Dr Grimes published recently in JAMA Oncology . Over the past decade, our research center has conducted many studies to investigate the potential adverse health effects of human exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, including the long-term effects, such as increased risk of cancer.…”

“…Grimes comments that epidemiological studies reject any link between RFR and cancer and states: “To date, no adverse health effects have been established as being caused by mobile phone use.” While animal studies have shown that RFR is able to increase levels of cellular reactive oxygen species (ROS), the concentration of ROS is not large enough to damage DNA at low exposure levels . However, when the ROS level increases, for example, by increasing the exposure time, radiation power density or specific absorption rate, RFR can damage DNA.…”