As time goes by, we are discovering more and more cases of institutionalized and organized deception within public systems, health, environment, science, and governments around the world. One well-known example is the deception regarding the harms of smoking. During this period, tobacco companies established research bodies that claimed smoking and tobacco consumption were beneficial, influenced scientists and doctors, shaped public opinion, and affected regulations.
There are many more such examples, including from recent years.
This time (in fact, I’ve been saying this for several years, but this is the first time I’m summarizing everything in one page), I would like to argue that a similar deception has existed for decades in the field of non-ionizing radiation. It involves scientific bodies, standard-setting organizations, the World Health Organization, government ministries around the world, scientists, doctors, engineers, and even the consumers themselves.
In my view, each stage of this deception is not driven by malice. Rather, it is fueled by many economic and other interests, incorrect assumptions, partial knowledge, limited understanding, a desire to promote industry and the economy, a space for denial, limited influence, heavy industry funding, and a genuine intent by many people involved to do their best within the “rules of the game” without harming the industry. All of this allows people to participate in the deception without being bad themselves (most of them).
The many stages of deception and fraud in EMF
- Research that fails to find harmful effects of non-ionizing radiation (some of which are flawed, and some of which were never designed to find such effects) is generated and gathered.
- In Europe, a committee is established—funded by industry and the German Ministry of Communications—called ICNIRP.
- ICNIRP sets a high, non-health-protective exposure limit, based on the assumption that non-ionizing radiation has no health effects (In contrast to, for example, in the case of radiofrequency radiation, the BioInitiative Report 2012 indicates that significant biological and health effects occur at just 0.003 μW/cm², whereas the ICNIRP standard allows 1,000 μW/cm² or more, depending on the frequency).
- In the US, the exposure limits are set directly by the FCC (which represents the industry’s interests), and they are even more permissive than ICNIRP’s.
- These standards cover radiation from antennas (RF radiation), from mobile phones (SAR), and from power installations (low-frequency magnetic fields)—collectively referred to as “the standards
- The standards dictate not only the so-called “safe” exposure levels, but also how measurements should be taken, how radiation meters should operate (e.g., 6-minute averaging for RF from antennas), and how they should be calibrated (against a fixed-signal frequency 100% duty cycle radiation source).
- These standards are recommended by ICNIRP to international health organizations.
- The World Health Organization (WHO) establishes a body for research on non-ionizing radiation (the WHO EMF Project). For a period of time, this body is led by the same individual who chaired the committee that set the exposure standards (ICNIRP), and later by an engineer who is considered to be influenced by industry interests.
- The World Health Organization (WHO) adopts the ICNIRP standards and recommendations, and promotes them globally as the official position on non-ionizing radiation.
- Governments around the world, including health ministries and environmental protection agencies, rely on the WHO and ICNIRP and adopt these exposure limits as if they are health-based, although in practice they are based solely on thermal (in very high levels of RF) and mussel (in high levels of ELF Magnetic field) effects (i.e., heating) and ignore non-thermal biological effects.
- In Israel (where we are at), for example, the ICNIRP/WHO standard in RF is adopted with the recommendation to keep the RF levels lower than 10% or ICNIRP/WHO levels in places where people stay. For ELF Magnetic field, the ICNIRP/WHO standards are also accepted, with the recommendation to keep a 24-hour average of ELF Magnetic level lower than 4 (allowing exposure of 10mG for 8 hours).
- So-called “health and safety educational and research” bodies and organisations push the WHO/ICNIRP standards as “reasonable” and “fully protective from all known effects”.
- Engineers, radiation inspectors, and regulators are trained to measure radiation only according to these official standards, using slow-response meters and averaging methods that miss fast and intense radiation peaks—exactly those that are most likely to affect biological systems.
- Doctors and scientists who rely on this body of knowledge often repeat the same claims: “radiation is within the standard,” “there is no proven harm,” and “no need to worry”—even though many of them are unaware of the limitations, assumptions, and flaws in the data, measurements, and interpretation
- Consumers, hearing all this from so many “credible” and “official” sources, are left with the impression that non-ionizing radiation is safe and that there’s no cause for concern, continuing to use wireless technologies, without realizing the potential risks.
Academic Deception – Doctors, Scientists, and Engineers argue that Radiation is Safe
The prevailing view in academia today is that non-ionizing radiation is not strong enough (regardless of its intensity) to remove an electron from its orbit around an atom (ionization), nor strong enough to break molecular bonds (e.g., in DNA), and therefore cannot be dangerous. This is what is explained and taught in medical, engineering, and science schools. It is considered the only “correct” opinion, and anyone who holds a different view is silenced, dismissed, marginalized, or labeled as “misleading,” “extreme,” or a “charlatan.” This is despite the fact that several indirect mechanisms of harm from non-ionizing radiation have been repeatedly demonstrated in research.
Academic pressure continues beyond the study phase. Research that concludes no harm or biological effects from radiation is welcomed, its authors are promoted, and they receive grants to continue producing similar findings. These studies are often funded by industry in one form or another, even when they suffer from methodological flaws. In contrast, studies that do find effects, health impacts, or harm from non-ionizing radiation are scrutinized, rejected by major journals, pushed aside, and excluded from consideration in policy reviews or standard-setting. As a result, there is a clear preference for researchers and studies that do not find risk or harm. Nevertheless, the body of scientific evidence showing adverse effects continues to grow.
No malicious intent
In my view, at each stage of this deception, there is no deliberate malicious intent. What does exist are many economic and other interests, several incorrect assumptions, partial knowledge, limited understanding, a desire to promote technology, industry and the economy, a space for denial, limited influence, heavy industry funding, and a sincere wish by many of those involved to do the best they can within the “rules of the game” — without harming the industry. Sometimes this is even done out of a belief in a “necessary evil” — that we simply can’t live without (cellular, electricity, wireless, radiation).
All of this combined enables people to act as part of the deception without being inherently bad (most of them) and without malicious intent — yet still promote harm, illness, and neglect of the affected public.
The public buys the lie – and keeps buying radiation-based products
The public, for its part, doesn’t understand the nuances, isn’t familiar with the research, isn’t aware of the harm, and tends to accept the “expert opinion” and government positions claiming that radiation exposure is harmless and that the use is safe.
At the same time, people keep purchasing more and more wireless and cellular devices, using them without concern or understanding of the potential risks.
A situation is created in which most of the public wants to believe in the safety standards and that everything is fine — after all, the government is here to protect them and wouldn’t knowingly allow harm, right? It just doesn’t seem possible that they could be harming themselves, right?
In every protest or debate against radiation sources, part of the public argues that “everything is fine” and “this is for the best.” In this way, the majority of the public adopts the standards and the official government stance: “Everything has been checked, everything is safe.”
Meanwhile, people become addicted to mobile and wireless technology. Even when harm does occur, many find it hard to stop using it or go back to non-radiating, wired alternatives.
And so, the public becomes a partner in the deception. Every time you buy a wireless or cellular device, you help fuel the fraud (it’s worth noting that in most cases, radiation-free wired alternatives do exist).
The Results: Usually “Everything is Fine” and “Radiation is Within Standards”
When cellular antennas are installed (in Israel), the process typically includes a preliminary radiation survey (a theoretical calculation) and, after installation, on-site radiation measurements. In the vast majority of cases, these tests show levels “below the standard” — and are therefore considered “safe.”.
When you complain to the authorities or to the Ministry of Environmental Protection (whom you might still believe at that point are on your side and there to protect you) about an antenna being installed across from your home, they show you the radiation test report (done according ot ICNIRP’s test procedure and standard) and tell you, “It was checked, everything is fine, there’s no risk.” That’s when you begin to realize the authorities aren’t protecting you — they and the standards protect the polluters, not the public. With time you might become sick and weak because of the radiation exposure, but the ministry will keep saying “all is fine” , the deception is complete.
When you buy a cellphone, it is supposedly tested for radiation safety, and you can even receive the results of the SAR (Specific Absorption Rate) tests that were conducted. However, in reality, the phone can emit different levels of radiation (depending on usage and reception conditions), including levels that can cause headaches during use, and other health effects.
When you buy wireless equipment for your home, it is also supposedly tested (again, according to SAR standards), but it is entirely possible that you may develop symptoms when near it, or after chronic exposure.
When an electrical infrastructure is built or already exists—for example, a 220V power line or a high-voltage transmission line—you may call a certified radiation inspector. They may measure an instantaneous level of 8 milligauss, but then follow the recommendations of the Israeli Ministry of Environmental Protection and assess or measure how many hours a day that level exists. If the 24-hour average is below 4 milligauss, they will conclude that “everything is fine” and “radiation is within the standards,” even if you are exposed to 10mG for 8 hours a day.
It’s also worth noting that the official standard allows for up to 2000 milligauss for instantaneous exposure, so even from that perspective, you’re still far below the ICNIRP’s maximum limit for magnetic field exposure.
Additional result: When you start suffering, you are alone.
Neither doctors (who are taught that non-ionizing radiation cannot directly damage DNA and therefore is harmless), nor engineers (also taught that radiation isn’t strong enough to knock electrons off atoms or break molecular bonds and thus isn’t dangerous, despite known indirect damage mechanisms they are not taught), nor most certified radiation inspectors (only a few are exceptions and are aware of EHS), nor the Ministry of Environmental Protection, the Ministry of Health, the electricity company, or cellular companies and polluters will believe you, or support you.
When you become sensitive to radiation (EHS), very few people or officials will believe you, because of their pre-existing beliefs and the ongoing deception. You are on your own.
What can you do? Take responsibility!
You are on your own in learning and understanding the risk, in measuring (buy a fast home radiation meter like the ENV RD100 I use and start measuring), in reducing exposure and shielding, and in coping with radiation sensitivity.
First thing – Stop using and reduce exposure
For most people and those affected who come to me, the vast majority of exposure is from their smartphone, followed by home wireless equipment. Only after that comes exposure from antennas and electrical infrastructure. Therefore, before you start fighting against cell towers or spend thousands on shielding, it’s important to reduce and stop using (at least at home) wireless and cellular devices. See a quick and easy initial guide to reducing exposure.
Break away and distance yourself from the fraud
By stopping the use of RF-emitting devices and going back to wired technologies, then learning about EMF & EHS, measuring EMF yourself, reducing exposure, and using protection when needed, you break away and distance yourself from the Institutionalized and Organized Deception (Also) in the Field of Non-Ionizing Radiation.