6,486 Studies Reviewed. 85.2% of Original Studies Found Biological Effects. The Evidence is Clear.
Shield Your Body
Whole Body / General

B. Blake Levitt, Henry C. Lai, Albert M. Manville. Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, Part 3. Exposure standards, public policy, laws, and future directions. Rev Environ Health. 2021 Sep 27. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2021-0083

Bioeffects Seen

Authors not listed · 2021

Share:

Rising ambient EMF levels from wireless technologies have become a ubiquitous biologically active environmental pollutant requiring a new vision for regulating exposures to non-human species at the ecosystem level.

Plain English Summary

Summary written for general audiences

The review examines government standards adopted for human exposures for their applicability to wildlife. It states that existing environmental laws such as the National Environmental Policy Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act should be strengthened and enforced, and new laws written for increasing EMF exposures. Radiofrequency radiation exposure standards warrant more stringent controls given 5G signaling characteristics, and no current standards take wildlife into consideration. Numerous studies indicate low-level EMF exposures have adverse effects on orientation, migration, reproduction, and other behaviors, and cyto- and geno-toxic effects have long been observed.

Why This Matters

Many species of flora and fauna have distinctive physiologies making them sensitive to exogenous EMF in ways that surpass human reactivity. Such exposures may be capable of affecting endogenous bioelectric states in some species. The authors argue it is time to recognize ambient EMF as a novel form of pollution and develop rules designating air as habitat so EMF can be regulated like other pollutants. Wildlife loss is often unseen and undocumented until tipping points are reached. A robust dialog regarding technology's high-impact role in electroecology needs to commence. Long-term chronic low-level EMF exposure standards should be set for wildlife, including redesign of wireless devices and infrastructure to reduce ambient levels.

Cite This Study
Unknown (2021). B. Blake Levitt, Henry C. Lai, Albert M. Manville. Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, Part 3. Exposure standards, public policy, laws, and future directions. Rev Environ Health. 2021 Sep 27. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2021-0083.
Show BibTeX
@article{b_blake_levitt_henry_c_lai_albert_m_manville_effects_of_non_ionizing_electromagnetic_fields_on_flora_and_fauna_part_3_exposure_standards_public_policy_laws_and_future_directions_rev_environ_health_202_ce4906,
  author = {Unknown},
  title = {B. Blake Levitt, Henry C. Lai, Albert M. Manville. Effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic fields on flora and fauna, Part 3. Exposure standards, public policy, laws, and future directions. Rev Environ Health. 2021 Sep 27. doi: 10.1515/reveh-2021-0083},
  year = {2021},
  doi = {10.1515/reveh-2021-0083},
  
}
DOI: 10.1515/reveh-2021-0083PubMed: 34563106

Quick Questions About This Study

No current standards take wildlife into consideration, and radiofrequency radiation standards warrant more stringent controls given 5G signaling characteristics.
Numerous studies indicate adverse effects on orientation, migration, food finding, reproduction, mating, nest and den building, territorial maintenance, defense, vitality, longevity, and survivorship, and cyto- and geno-toxic effects have long been observed.
The review recommends recognizing ambient EMF as a novel pollutant and designating air as habitat so EMF can be regulated like other pollutants, and strengthening existing environmental laws such as the National Environmental Policy Act and the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. It also recommends writing new laws for increasing EMF exposures and setting long-term chronic low-level exposure standards for wildlife, including redesign of wireless devices and infrastructure to reduce ambient levels.
Many species of flora and fauna have distinctive physiologies that make them sensitive to exogenous EMF in ways that surpass human reactivity.
Rising ambient EMF levels from wireless technologies have become a ubiquitous biologically active environmental pollutant requiring a new vision for regulating exposures to non-human species at the ecosystem level.