Scientists Accuse WHO of Covering Up Cancer Epidemic Caused by Cell Phones
A consortium of the world’s top scientists has released a shocking report revealing how the World Health Organization (WHO) covered up the fact that mobile phone exposure is leading to a sharp rise in brain cancer diagnoses.
The International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields (ICBE-EMF) says methodological flaws and potential industry bias have compromised the WHO’s assessment of brain cancer risks from mobile phone exposure, potentially misleading the public and regulators about the true risks of wireless devices, writes Sean Adl-Tabatabai .
Naturalnews.com reports:
The controversy revolves around a series of twelve systematic reviews commissioned by the WHO. These reviews are intended to serve as the basis for a forthcoming WHO monograph on environmental health criteria, a document that governments worldwide will use to establish safety standards and regulations for radiofrequency (RF) radiation. This type of non-ionizing radiation is emitted by mobile phones, Wi-Fi routers, cell towers, and other wireless infrastructure. Unlike the powerful ionizing radiation of X-rays or nuclear materials, which can directly damage DNA, RF radiation has long been considered harmless at low levels, capable of heating tissue only at very high exposures. The ICBE-EMF report, published in the journal Environmental Health , argues that this outdated assumption is at the heart of the problem.
The main criticism of the ICBE-EMF concerns the methodology used in eleven of the twelve WHO reviews.
The scientists argue that the authors relied heavily on a process called meta-analysis, which mathematically combines the results of many different studies to reach a single, overarching conclusion. While this is a powerful tool when used correctly, the ICBE-EMF found that the WHO evaluations applied this technique inappropriately, lumping together studies with widely varying exposure conditions and quality levels. They argue that this approach can obscure important findings and weaken the evidence of harm.
Leading experts from organizations like the Cochrane Collaboration, a globally respected arbiter of health research quality, generally caution against the use of meta-analyses when the included studies are too few or too diverse. In such cases, a narrative summary is preferable. The ICBE-EMF points out that only one of the twelve WHO reviews followed this best practice recommendation. These methodological concerns are further compounded by questions about bias. The ICBE-EMF published a supplementary document describing what it considers the significant ties between many of the WHO review authors and the wireless industry, as well as their ties to the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), a body whose safety limits have been adopted worldwide.
Evidence of damage ignored
Despite the identified shortcomings, the ICBE-EMF report notes that the WHO’s own assessments still revealed troubling evidence. A systematic review, which rightly avoided a flawed meta-analysis, concluded with high certainty that exposure to cell phone radiation causes two types of cancer in animals: malignant gliomas in the brain and malignant schwannomas in the heart. The review explicitly noted that both types of tumors had been found in previous human studies. Another WHO-supported study found that RF radiation exposure was associated with reduced fertility in men.
“The study links mothers’ use of mobile phones during pregnancy to an increased risk of behavioral problems in children,” says Enoch of BrightU.AI . “Furthermore, the electromagnetic radiation from mobile phones has been compared to microwave radiation and linked to an increased risk of cancer.”
Geoengineering, “chemtrails” and more: Over 300 weather manipulation patents revealed
ICBE-EMF scientists argue that these findings are being obscured in the WHO’s own data. Rather than highlighting these potential risks, the general thrust of the WHO’s efforts has been to downplay the concerns, a stance ICBE-EMF attributes to the deeply ingrained “thermal paradigm.” This decades-old doctrine, which forms the basis for the current safety standards of the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC), assumes that RF radiation is harmless unless it provides sufficient energy to heat body tissue.
A growing number of peer-reviewed scientific publications, including a 2022 ICBE-EMF paper, refutes this, showing that biological damage can occur at much lower, non-thermal levels.
A call for responsibility and caution
The ICBE-EMF demands that the WHO re-conduct the assessments, requiring the authors to follow established best practices and fully disclose any potential conflicts of interest. They urge regulators worldwide to consider the current WHO-recommended safe exposure limits as potentially too high to fully protect the public. They particularly call for better protection of vulnerable populations, including pregnant women, children, and individuals with electromagnetic hypersensitivity.
The scientists argue that a precautionary approach is not only sensible but also necessary until a thorough and independent review of the evidence is completed. They emphasize that the burden of proof must shift: instead of the public having to prove that wireless radiation is dangerous, the industry must demonstrate conclusively that it is safe.