8,655 Studies Reviewed. 86.9% Found Biological Effects. The Evidence is Clear.
Shield Your Body
Cancer & Tumors490 citations

Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields

Bioeffects Seen

Authors not listed · 2011

Share:

The WHO's cancer agency classified cell phone radiation as a possible carcinogen in 2011, yet most people have never heard about it.

Plain English Summary

Summary written for general audiences

In 2011, the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) convened 31 scientists from 14 countries to evaluate the cancer risk of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. After reviewing all available evidence, they classified RF-EMF as a Group 2B possible human carcinogen, the same category as lead and DDT. This landmark decision fundamentally shifted the scientific conversation about wireless radiation safety.

Why This Matters

This IARC classification represents one of the most significant official acknowledgments of EMF health risks to date. The working group included some of the world's leading experts in radiation biology, epidemiology, and cancer research. They weren't looking at theoretical possibilities. They reviewed human studies showing increased glioma and acoustic neuroma risk in heavy cell phone users, plus extensive animal evidence of DNA damage and tumor promotion.

What this means for you is straightforward. The phones in your pockets, the wireless routers in your homes, and the cell towers in your neighborhoods emit radiation that the WHO's cancer research agency has placed in the same hazard category as chloroform, engine exhaust, and certain pesticides. The 2B classification doesn't mean the risk is small. It means the evidence of harm is substantial but not yet deemed conclusive by conservative scientific standards. Since 2011, hundreds of additional studies have strengthened this evidence base, yet most people remain completely unaware of this official classification. The wireless industry certainly hasn't publicized it.

Exposure Information

Specific exposure levels were not quantified in this study.

Cite This Study
Unknown (2011). Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields.
Show BibTeX
@article{carcinogenicity_of_radiofrequency_electromagnetic_fields_ce731,
  author = {Unknown},
  title = {Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields},
  year = {2011},
  doi = {10.1016/s1470-2045(11)70147-4},
  
}
DOI: 10.1016/s1470-2045(11)70147-4PubMed: 21845765

Quick Questions About This Study

A Group 2B classification means the IARC found limited evidence of cancer in humans and less than sufficient evidence in animals, but enough concern to warrant the designation. It's not a definitive verdict of danger, but it's a clear warning that radiofrequency radiation from wireless devices could cause cancer and deserves serious precautionary measures.
The IARC Working Group consisted of 31 scientists from 14 countries, representing expertise in epidemiology, toxicology, radiation biology, and cancer research. This international panel reviewed hundreds of studies over eight days before reaching their unanimous decision to classify radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans.
The IARC classification was primarily based on evidence showing increased risk of glioma, a malignant brain cancer, and acoustic neuroma, a non-malignant tumor of the nerve connecting the ear to the brain. These risks were observed in people with the heaviest and longest duration of cell phone use, typically 10 or more years.
The 2011 classification remains current, though IARC is scheduled to reassess RF radiation in the coming years. Since 2011, the evidence base has grown substantially, with major studies like the National Toxicology Program finding clear evidence of cancer in animals. Many scientists believe the classification should be upgraded to Group 2A or even Group 1.
The wireless industry has no legal obligation to publicize health warnings beyond buried fine print in user manuals. Like the tobacco industry before it, telecom companies have actively worked to downplay health concerns and fund research designed to find no effects. The IARC classification received minimal media coverage despite its profound public health implications.