A Fundamental Flaw in EMF Safety Standards

Cell Phones Heat Heads

Many scientists argue that the safety standards that govern EMF emissions from devices like cell phones are insufficient to protect humans from the medium- and long-term health effects that have been demonstrated by a growing number of studies that have researched this question. Even if they are wrong, there’s a fundamental flaw in EMF safety standards.

The primary regulator of EMF emissions from consumer electronics is the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), though other agencies such as the Food & Drug Administration (FDA) also play a role.

The actual limits established by these agencies are irrelevant for the purposes of this post.

The standards established by these agencies are all based around protecting people from so-called thermal effects of electromagnetic radiation. That is, there are levels of EMF radiation that are powerful enough to heat human tissue (this is, in fact, precisely why a microwave oven works; because powerful enough microwaves can heat and cook). And the standards set by the FCC and similar regulatory bodies are designed to ensure that this does not happen.

(None of these standards consider the potential risk to human health from non-thermal effects resulting from exposures to EMF radiation insufficient to heat human tissue. And none of these standards are designed to protect against medium- and long-term health effects from exposures; they only protect against immediate-term heating of your tissue.)

Multiple EMF Exposures from Multiple Devices
Today we are increasingly surrounded by many different devices, leading to concurrent exposures completely unconsidered by regulations.

Let us, for the sake of argument, assume that the FCC standards are sufficient to protect humans. (This is not what we believe; but let us accept it for the moment.)

Here’s the problem. Even if these limits were safe, they are designed to provide safety from exposures from single sources. In other words, the FCC limits are designed to protect you against the health risks of using a cell phone.

The thing is, with the explosion in wireless technology, people are increasingly exposed to EMF radiation from multiple sources, simultaneously. Such as when you use a cell phone, in a public location, in proximity to multiple other cell phones, covered by over a dozen WiFi networks, possibly near electrical appliances and circuitry that are also emitting lower-frequency EMF.

In short, even if standards set by regulatory bodies like the FCC were sufficient for protecting against the potential health effects of using a cell phone, they do not even attempt to consider overall exposures from multiple devices concurrently, which is what people are exposed to in real life.

As poor as EMF standards are for device emissions, at least they exist. There are absolutely no standards in the United States (or most of the world) regulating overall exposures to consumers, from multiple devices, simultaneously.

There are many flaws with current regulations on EMF emissions; the failure to even attempt to consider concurrent exposures from multiple devices, however, is a fundamental hole in the nature of how EMF emissions are regulated.

Please share to help us spread the word

Want to Learn More About How EMF Affects You and Your Loved Ones?

Get your free ebook.

3 thoughts on “A Fundamental Flaw in EMF Safety Standards

  1. […] more, the weak regulations on EMF exposure that do exist (established by the FCC) are all based on exposure from a single source of radiation. But your iPhone is about to become a source of five simultaneous exposures. All operating on […]

  2. […] So even if cell phone EMF regulations were sufficient to ensure that the EMF from your phone isn’t harmful, those regulations don’t consider that EMF from multiple sources blankets your body simultaneously (so-called ‘concurrent exposures’). This is a fundamental flaw in the design of EMF exposure regulations. […]

  3. […] Establishing a clear and indisputable connection between cell phones and cancer remains a difficult task. As one recent report notes, there are many methodological barriers to designing accurate studies. Largely “due to the fact that EMFs are imperceptible, ubiquitous, have multiple sources, and can vary greatly over time and short distances.” (This is exactly why we here at SYB say EMF exposure regulations are fundamentally flawed.) […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *