2018-12-09 – Compare WHO RF limits with BioInitiative health effects

1)  Below are summaries of 20 recent studies that Dr. Moskowitz has prepared. Many have abstracts only, some have access to the full report, but in either case there is substantial evidence to counter the often repeated assertion that there is no evidence of harm from microwave radiation exposure.


In addition Dr. Joel Moskowitz has prepared a comparison to show how divergent the WHO allowable exposure limits are from the levels which scientists have shown capable of causing serious health effects.

Worldwide Radio Frequency Radiation Exposure Limits versus Health Effects

December 5, 2018

RFR Exposure Limits (Updated Dec. 7) 

“The World Health Organization’s Global Health Observatory data repository publishes radio frequency radiation (RFR) exposure limits for the general public and for workers. The repository also has exposure limits for low frequency and static electromagnetic fields. 

Radio frequency radiation includes the radiation emitted by cell phones and cordless phones, cell towers, microwave ovens, wireless baby monitors and smart meters, and Wi-Fi and Bluetooth devices including laptops, tablets, and wireless wearables.

The RFR exposure limit data for the general public in 36 nations (as of May 31, 2017) can be downloaded as a pdf document from http://bit.ly/RFlimitsXcountry . ( Unfortunately many of the countries that have much more restrictive levels, e.g. India and China, are not included on this list.) 

Health Effects

The RFR exposure limits were designed to protect the general public only from heating risks due to short-term exposure to this type of non-ionizing radiation. The limits were not designed to protect individuals from chronic exposure to low-intensity (i.e., non-thermal levels of) RFR. Yet the preponderance of peer-reviewed research on low-intensity RFR exposure finds biological effects and adverse health effects. Thus, one must carefully examine these studies to determine safe levels of RFR exposure. 

BioInitiative 2012 provides charts that summarize RFR studies which employed low-intensity exposures. These charts can be downloaded as a pdf document from https://www.bioinitiative.org/rf-color-charts/.” 

The WHO exposure limits for power density are in units of W/m2 (Watts per meter squared.  The charts showing “Reported Biological Effects” from exposure to EMR from any wireless device as reported by The Biolnitiatve Report use  uW/cm2 (microwatts per centimeter squared) as the unit for power density.  To convert W/m2 to uW/cm2 simply move the decimal point over 2 places.  For example,  Canada’s allowable limit for exposure to EMR from a transmitter using 900MHz frequency is 2.74 W/m2, which equates to 274 uW/cm2 (microwatts per centimeter squared).

The BioInitiative chart at http://www.bioinitiative.org/report/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/BioInitiativeReport-RF-Color-Charts.pdf  effects from exposure to 900MHz have been reported at power densities as low as 0.0006-0.0128 uW/cm2.

2) Jerry Flynn continues in his attempt to educate public officials and to hold them accountable. Just as all of us have found, these people will not respond, which is appallingly arrogant and negligent. When their constituents make the effort to do research and to take the time to write to their elected officials, at the very least a thoughtful, relevant response should be provided. We don’t even get form letters.  If they and their offices refuse to do even this, what will it take for them to understand the problem and to take action?



From:  X
Sent: December 7, 2018 10:05 AM
To: Office PREM:EX OfficeofthePremier <premier@gov.bc.ca>; Weaver.MLA, Andrew <andrew.weaver.mla@leg.bc.ca>
Subject: When will BC realize EMF, 5G and smart meters are a health issue?

Premier Horgan and Dr. Weaver

Many countries have taken action to protect the health of citizens from EMR, 5G, smart meters, WiFi, etc.

Even the US Senate, dominated by corporate interests, is asking questions.  BC seems to be asleep on this issue despite many warnings and calls for action from citizen activists.  Why will this government not even consider examining the issue?


Senator Demands Proof That 5G Is Safe. So Does The National Institute For Science, Law & Public Policy

“Senator Blumenthal said we “are interested in acquainting ourselves with the latest studies evaluating the health effects of high-band frequencies and modulations that would be used in 5G networks.” He noted “Most of our current regulations regarding radiofrequency safety were adopted in 1996 and have not yet been updated for next generation equipment and devices.” He also mentioned the large U.S. government funded study by the National Toxicology Program, published this year, using earlier generation technologies (2G and 3G), showed a link between radiofrequency radiation and cancer.”


U.S. Sen. Blumenthal’s and Rep. Eshoo’s letter to Commissioner of FCC re. 5G:



From: XX
Sent: December 8, 2018 4:38 PM
To: Letters@globeandmail.com
Subject: Huawei 5G Rapture (Letter to the Editor)

Dear Editor:

So far the only worries about 5G that the Globe and Mail has been willing to print are those dealing with telecommunications security issues if Huawei equipment is used for 5G, barring China’s Huawei in concordance with other countries, and the significant investments made in Chinese equipment by Canadian companies. Nowhere are there articles about the dangers associated with 5G signals. The harm to the health of Canadians from the radiation of 5G must and should be of greater concern to our government.



Sharon Noble, Director, Coalition to Stop Smart Meters

“Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.” — Aldous Huxley


Smart Meters, Cell Towers, Smart Phones, 5G and all things that radiate RF Radiation