This prospective cohort study followed 105 neonates/infants for one year and measured household RF-EMF using a selective radiation meter, categorizing exposure into tertiles. Higher household RF-EMF exposure was associated with lower ASQ-3 neurodevelopmental scores, particularly in motor and problem-solving domains, and higher odds of monitor/refer classifications for fine motor and problem-solving. The abstract notes these associations persisted after adjustment for low birth weight, though exposure was measured at a single time point and key confounders (e.g., prenatal phone use, parental interaction) were not assessed.

This scoping review and evidence map (PRISMA-ScR) summarizes over 500 studies on RF-EMF exposure and genotoxicity across in vitro, in vivo, and epidemiological research. The authors report a higher proportion of significant DNA damage findings in in vivo and epidemiological studies than in vitro studies, with DNA base damage commonly reported under real-world/pulsed/GSM talk-mode conditions and longer exposures. They conclude that DNA damage has been observed at exposure levels below ICNIRP limits and recommend precautionary measures and updates to guidelines to address potential non-thermal effects.

This standards-focused paper evaluates ICNIRP and IEEE (C95.1-2019) exposure limits for brief, high-intensity pulsed RF-EMF between 6 and 300 GHz, particularly when exposures vary within the 6-minute averaging window. Using numerical and analytical modeling with a one-dimensional thermal tissue model, it reports differences in protection against transient skin heating, with IEEE described as more conservative than ICNIRP. The authors propose an adjustment to pulse fluence limits to improve consistency of protection and note that nonthermal and thermoacoustic effects were not analyzed.

This blinded, two-year study examined whether RF-EMF exposure at 2.4 and 5.8 GHz affects pollinator visitation to Salvia and Lavandula. The authors report no significant effect on honey bee visitation rates. They report a significant reduction in bumble bee visits per observation period under RF-EMF exposure, which they frame as a potential risk warranting further long-term research.

This cross-sectional study compared 183 higher-exposed residents with 126 matched reference residents and assessed symptoms via questionnaire alongside in-home RF-EMF power density measurements from mobile phone base stations. Higher exposure (including proximity within 50 m and power densities of 5–8 mW/m2) was reported to be associated with increased symptom prevalence across mood-energy, cognitive-sensory, inflammatory, and anatomical categories. The authors conclude that current public exposure limits may be inadequate for long-term, non-thermal biological impacts and call for precautionary policy updates.

This randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled study tested whether CACNA1C rs7304986 genotype modifies sleep EEG responses to 5G RF-EMF exposure. The authors report a genotype-by-exposure interaction, with 3.6 GHz exposure in T/C carriers associated with a faster NREM sleep spindle center frequency versus sham. The abstract also notes longer sleep latency in T/C compared with T/T carriers, and concludes that genetically susceptible groups may show differential physiological responses to 5G RF-EMF.

This paper proposes a new methodology to better assess indoor RF-EMF exposure in buildings near telecommunication base station antennas by refining measurement-point selection. Implemented in four multi-storey buildings in Natal, Brazil, indoor electric field peaks and averages were reported to be substantially higher than ground-level measurements. Although the highest indoor levels remained below ICNIRP recommended limits, the authors argue current regulatory evaluation methods may underestimate indoor exposure in certain building locations.

This exposure-assessment study uses FDTD simulations to evaluate auto-induced downlink RF-EMF exposure at 3.5 GHz when downlink energy is focused toward user equipment near the head. Exposure varied substantially by device position (ear, eyes, nose) and by the precoding technique used. The authors report that the choice of normalization strategy can produce cases where ICNIRP basic restrictions are exceeded even when reference levels appear compliant, motivating a precautionary framing for compliance assessment.

This narrative review discusses low-intensity RF-EMF exposure, primarily from mobile phones, with a focus on thermoregulation and energy homeostasis. It reports that many rodent studies at 900 MHz describe cold-like thermoregulatory and behavioral responses and molecular findings suggestive of WAT browning, while BAT transcriptional changes typical of cold exposure were not observed. The authors indicate short-term adaptations may not disrupt homeostasis, but emphasize uncertainty about long-term consequences and call for further research, including at 5G-relevant frequencies.

This animal study measured core body temperature in free-moving male and female Sprague Dawley rats during and after 3-hour exposure to 1.95 GHz RF-EMF at multiple whole-body average SAR levels. A measurable thermal response was reported at 4 W/kg, while lower SAR conditions showed smaller or no significant temperature increases. The authors note that temperature dropped quickly after exposure ended, implying post-exposure measurements may underestimate peak heating.

This laboratory study examined whether a 900 MHz radiofrequency electromagnetic field (RF-EMF) influences the behavior of newly emerged honey bee workers. Compared with controls, the exposed groups showed behavioral changes, with some parameters showing statistically significant differences seven days after exposure. The authors frame RF-EMF as a potential environmental stressor and call for further research, including gene expression analyses.

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.