This systematic review synthesizes animal studies on low frequency magnetic field exposure in relation to neurodegenerative diseases. It reports no support for a causal induction of Alzheimer’s-type neuropathology in naive animals, while noting that evidence is too limited to draw strong conclusions for motor neuron disease, multiple sclerosis, and Parkinson’s disease regarding induced neuropathology. In models with pre-existing neurodegenerative disease, the review describes possible therapeutic effects on behavioral and neuroanatomical outcomes for dementia-related conditions, and no apparent effect on motor neuron disease progression.

This paper is a commentary reviewing how Bradford Hill’s epidemiological criteria can be applied to multidisciplinary evidence on RF-EMF exposure and adverse health effects. It reports that systematic reviews and meta-analyses in this area often reach substantially different conclusions, and argues that key weaknesses in primary studies—especially exposure measurement error and insufficient time for long-latency tumors—help explain the divergence. The author suggests these limitations may cause underestimation of potential causation if the associations are truly causal, and calls for independent guidelines to improve future epidemiological research quality.

This systematic review evaluated RF EMF exposure and cancer outcomes in experimental animals, including chronic cancer bioassays and tumor-promotion designs. Across 52 included studies, the authors report high certainty of evidence for increased malignant heart schwannomas and gliomas in male rats, and moderate certainty for increased risks of several other tumor types. Many other organ systems showed no or minimal evidence of carcinogenic effects, and the authors note challenges in translating animal findings to human risk assessment due to exposure and mechanistic uncertainties.

This letter critiques the WHO-sponsored systematic review by Karipidis et al. (2024) on RF-EMF exposure and cancer risk. The authors argue the review has serious methodological and interpretative flaws, including issues with study selection and data analysis. They contend that the review’s conclusion of "no clear evidence" may be misleading and should not be used as a basis for health policy or safety guidelines.

Moon et al. (2024) report a systematic review and meta-analysis on cellular phone RF-EMR and brain tumor risk. The abstract summary states elevated risks for three brain tumor types in analyses considering ipsilateral (same-side) phone use and reports increased risk with heavy and long-term use. The text also highlights disagreement with the 2024 WHO review and raises methodological concerns about WHO conclusions.

This systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis synthesizes human observational studies on radiofrequency EMF exposure and male fertility outcomes. It reports evidence of an association between RF exposure and poorer sperm parameters, including reduced quality, motility, and viability. The authors frame the findings as consistent with potential reproductive health risks and call for continued risk assessment and guideline development.