EWG Guide to Safer Cell Phone Use


I just discovered this handy 1-page Guide to Safer Cell Phone Use by EWG (Environmental Working Group)

Go to end of this article and click on Guide to Safer Cell Phone Use, then click on Download Our Guide.


Back in 1996, when the Federal Communications Commission set a legal maximum on cell phone radiation, Motorola was touting its tiny $2,000 StarTac, the first clamshell phone and an early adopter of — texting! Sixteen years later, cell phones — with 6 billion subscriptions worldwide and counting — have revolutionized how we communicate. The technology that powers them has changed just as dramatically. Today’s smartphones vibrate, rock out, show high-def movies, make photos and videos, issue voice commands, check email, go underwater, navigate with global positioning systems and surf the web in 3-D. They sport dual core processors and batteries that let you – or your kid — talk for close to 20 hours. (The StarTac maxed out at just 3 hours.)

Yet those 16-year-old FCC rules still stand. Are they up to the job of protecting the public from radiation coming out of those multi-tasking marvels and the networks that enable them?

We doubt it.

Studies conducted by numerous scientific teams in several nations have raised troubling questions about possible associations between heavy cell phone use and serious health dangers. The World Health Organization has declared that cell phone radiation may be linked to brain cancer. Ten studies connect cell phone radiation to diminished sperm count and sperm damage. Others raise health concerns such as altered brain metabolism, sleep disturbance and behavioral changes in children.

These studies are not definitive. Much more research is needed. But they raise serious questions that cast doubt on the adequacy of the FCC rules to safeguard public health. The FCC emissions cap allows 20 times more radiation to reach the head than the body as a whole, does not account for risks to children’s developing brains and smaller bodies and considers only short-term cell phone use, not frequent calling patterns over decades.

The FCC’s safety standards for cell phone radiation were based on studies conducted in the 1980s, These studies have long since been rendered obsolete by newer research. Yet for years the FCC refused to update or even review its standards. Instead, the federal agency simply sat on its hands while cell phones became ever more powerful and ubiquitous.

The agency is finally moving to meet the realities of the 21st century and the Information Age. On June 15, FCC chairman Julius Genachowski circulated a proposal to his four fellow commissioners calling for formal review of the 1996 regulations. To advance, his plan must be approved by a majority of the commissioners. If they agree, the FCC could take the long overdue step of modernizing its safety standards. But the pace is likely to be glacial.

Americans need new, more protective cell phone standards that reflect the current science and society’s heavy dependence on mobile communications.

Consumers need — now more than ever — real-world, relevant data on how much radiation their phones emit under various circumstances. The FCC does not require the cell phone industry to disclose these data. One important study showing that certain networks could expose consumers to 30 to 300 times more radiation than other networks was hidden from the public until the information was dated to the point of irrelevancy.

Given this appalling lack of information in the face of a cell phone market where just about anything goes,

the Environmental Working Group is suspending publication of the EWG guide to cell phones until the FCC makes the responsible decision to require cell phone makers to generate and disclose data about device and network emissions under real-world conditions. We strongly believe that as cell phones become more powerful and ubiquitous, it is critical that people have a right to know how much radiation they can expect their cell phones to generate. As things now stand, the FCC’s cell phone safety rules are as obsolete as the StarTac.

In the meantime, EWG recommends that consumers take steps to reduce their exposures to cell phone radiation by holding phones away from their bodies, using earpieces and following and other simple tips in EWG’s updated Guide to Safer Cell Phone Use.


Scientists Warn of Potential Serious Health Effects of 5G

Scientists Warn of Potential Serious Health Effects of 5G

September 13, 2017

We the undersigned, more than 180 scientists and doctors from 35 countries, recommend a moratorium on the roll-out of the fifth generation, 5G, for telecommunication until potential hazards for human health and the environment have been fully investigated by scientists independent from industry. 5G will substantially increase exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) on top of the 2G, 3G, 4G, Wi-Fi, etc. for telecommunications already in place. RF-EMF has been proven to be harmful for humans and the environment.

5G leads to massive increase of mandatory exposure to wireless radiation.

5G technology is effective only over short distance. It is poorly transmitted through solid material. Many new antennas will be required and full-scale implementation will result in antennas every 10 to 12 houses in urban areas, thus massively increasing mandatory exposure.

With ”the ever more extensive use of wireless technologies,” nobody can avoid being exposed. Because on top of the increased number of 5G-transmitters (even within housing, shops and in hospitals) according to estimates, ”10 to 20 billion connections” (to refrigerators, washing machines, surveillance cameras, self-driving cars and buses, etc.) will be parts of the Internet of Things. All these together can cause a substantial increase in the total, long term RF-EMF exposure to all EU citizens.

Harmful effects of RF-EMF exposure are already proven.

More than 230 scientists from 41 countries have expressed their “serious concerns” regarding the ubiquitous and increasing exposure to EMF generated by electric and wireless devices already before the additional 5G roll-out. They refer to the fact that ”numerous recent scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below most international and national guidelines”. Effects include increased cancer risk, cellular stress, increase in harmful free radicals, genetic damages, structural and functional changes of the reproductive system, learning and memory deficits, neurological disorders, and negative impacts on general well-being in humans. Damage goes well beyond the human race, as there is growing evidence of harmful effects to both plants and animals.

After the scientists’ appeal was written in 2015, additional research has convincingly confirmed serious health risks from RF-EMF fields from wireless technology. The world’s largest study (25 million US dollar) National Toxicology Program (NTP), shows statistically significant increase in the incidence of brain and heart cancer in animals exposed to EMF below the ICNIRP guidelines followed by most countries. These results support results in human epidemiological studies on RF radiation and brain tumour risk. A large number of peer-reviewed scientific reports demonstrate harm to human health from EMFs.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the cancer agency of the World Health Organization (WHO), in 2011 concluded that EMFs of frequencies 30 KHz – 300 GHz are possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B). However, new studies like the NTP study mentioned above and several epidemiological investigations including the latest studies on mobile phone use and brain cancer risks confirm that RF-EMF radiation is carcinogenic to humans.

The EUROPA EM-EMF Guideline 2016 states that ”there is strong evidence that long-term exposure to certain EMFs is a risk factor for diseases such as certain cancers, Alzheimer’s disease, and male infertility…Common EHS (electromagnetic hypersensitivity) symptoms include headaches, concentration difficulties, sleep problems, depression, lack of energy, fatigue, and flu-like symptoms.

An increasing part of the European population is affected by ill health symptoms that have for many years been linked to exposure to EMF and wireless radiation in the scientific literature. The International Scientific Declaration on EHS & multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS), Brussels 2015, declares that: “In view of our present scientific knowledge, we thereby stress all national and international bodies and institutions…to recognize EHS and MCS as true medical conditions which acting as sentinel diseases may create a major public health concern in years to come worldwide i.e. in all the countries implementing unrestricted use of electromagnetic field-based wireless technologies and marketed chemical substances… Inaction is a cost to society and is not an option anymore… we unanimously acknowledge this serious hazard to public health…that major primary prevention measures are adopted and prioritized, to face this worldwide pan-epidemic in perspective.”

The Precautionary Principle (UNESCO) was adopted by EU 2005:  “When human activities may lead to morally unacceptable harm that is scientifically plausible but uncertain, actions shall be taken to avoid or diminish that harm.

Resolution 1815 (Council of Europe, 2011): ”Take all reasonable measures to reduce exposure to electromagnetic fields, especially to radio frequencies from mobile phones, and particularly the exposure to children and young people who seem to be most at risk from head tumours…Assembly strongly recommends that the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle is applied, covering both the so-called thermal effects and the athermic [non-thermal] or biological effects of electromagnetic emissions or radiation” and to ”improve risk-assessment standards and quality”.

The Nuremberg code (1949) applies to all experiments on humans, thus including the roll-out of 5G with new, higher RF-EMF exposure. All such experiments: “should be based on previous knowledge (e.g., an expectation derived from animal experiments) that justifies the experiment.  No experiment should be conducted, where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.” (Nuremberg code pts 3-5).  Already published scientific studies show that there is “a priori reason to believe” in real health hazards.

The European Environment Agency (EEA) is warning for ”Radiation risk from everyday devices” in spite of the radiation being below the WHO/ICNIRP standards. EEA also concludes: ”There are many examples of the failure to use the precautionary principle in the past, which have resulted in serious and often irreversible damage to health and environments…harmful exposures can be widespread before there is both ‘convincing’ evidence of harm from long-term exposures, and biological understanding of how that harm is caused.”



Jolie Jones – My EMF Story

It’s been another good week for environmental sensitivities in the media.  Jolie Jones, daughter of Quincy Jones, was interviewed by Lloyd Burrell of ElectricSense about her struggle with electromagnetic (EMF) sensitivities.  Kudos to Ms. Jones for speaking out about this often misunderstood condition and for having the courage to share her own story. Celebrity spokespeople are invaluable in helping to bring awareness and credibility to environmental illnesses like chemical and EMF sensitivities. 

Jolie Jones – My EMF Story

Posted by Lloyd Burrell on February 20, 2018 under Podcasts & Teleseminars

ElectricSense, www.electricsense.com/13519/emf-jolie-jones

 “It started kind of out of nowhere”.  Not exactly overnight but over the course of a few weeks or so.

She began to have these sensations behind her head like a vibration going from the bottom of her skull to the top.

Then there were the feelings of cloudiness, fogginess, like a big cloud was coming in the side of her temples pushing down on her brain.

She couldn’t think. She was in a permanent fog. She was also getting a lot of joint pain. There were different reactions to different exposures. Sometimes she would get heart palpitations. Sometimes she would get these pains in her joints and headaches, and a foggy kind of pressure on her brain. “It was like I became this little old lady”.

She admits to being impossible to be around. She didn’t even want to be herself. She’d have moments where she was fine but when she was around other people and someone had a cell phone on she would crumble into the nervous, anxious little old lady. “Where is it coming from? How do I get away from it? Can you turn it off?”

These were the questions she was continually asking herself and asking to other people. It was really debilitating.

For 4 years she couldn’t use a cell phone and she couldn’t be in a car with a cell phone. She had to literally take the battery out – yes, she could even feel it when it was turned off. She could point to someone’s pocket and tell them where the waves were coming from. People would say, “oh no, I turned my phone off.” She would say, “no, it’s still on. I promise you.” She’d point to where it was and they’d look in their pocket and then they’d look at her like she was a witch because the phone would be on.

She’d be driving on the road and all of a sudden she’d feel this vibration on the side of her head. She’d look for where it was coming from and she’d look up and discover that she was driving parallel to a row of power lines or something.…..

Healing was a major struggle, “it was like moving the Titanic” she says. Thankfully she did heal. She has now recovered her health and is able to function normally again.



Receive blog post updates

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner