This paper presents a methodological discussion about how to interpret exposure-response patterns and synthesize evidence in low-intensity RF-EMF research, focusing on animal cancer bioassays. It references an exchange around a systematic review on RF-EMF and cancer in experimental animals and critiques/considers approaches to statistical inference and evidence synthesis. The authors emphasize that methodological choices can materially influence carcinogenic hazard identification and argue for rigorous, evidence-based analysis in risk assessment.

This review examined experimental literature on whether RF-EMF exposures within ICNIRP (2020) limits affect IARC key characteristics of human carcinogens. It identified 159 articles and found that 38% of in vitro/in vivo measurements reported statistically significant effects, but higher study quality was associated with fewer reported effects and there was no consistent exposure-response pattern. The authors state that study diversity and generally poor quality prevent high-confidence conclusions for most key characteristics, while recommending replication of the few higher-quality positive findings under stringent standards.