RF Safe criticizes Media Bias/Fact Check (MBFC) for rating it “medium credibility,” arguing MBFC relied on an FDA webpage that was later changed/redirected and on a Harvard T.H. Chan School commentary. The post claims the FDA removed categorical reassurance language about cell phone safety and frames this as undermining MBFC’s critique. It also asserts that non-thermal mechanisms and animal findings support RF Safe’s precautionary stance, while characterizing MBFC’s sources as “opinion” rather than data.

RF Safe promotes an education-first, zero-paid-ad marketing approach for its EMF safety products, positioning itself against what it describes as a market full of overhyped or misleading “anti-radiation” gadgets. The article highlights RF Safe’s resources (e.g., a large study library and SAR tools) and argues its products (notably the QuantaCase) align with “physics” and avoid deceptive claims. It also repeats the founder’s personal story linking a family tragedy to prenatal EMF exposure and references various external claims (e.g., WHO animal findings, court criticism of FCC limits) without providing primary documentation in the text.

RF Safe publishes a corrigendum and theoretical extension to a prior article proposing a “unified mechanism” for non-thermal RF/ELF biological effects. The author argues the original forced-ion-oscillation interaction near voltage-gated ion channels (VGICs) remains central but is incomplete, and adds multiple additional pathways (e.g., non-mitochondrial ROS sources, radical-pair/spin chemistry, barrier effects, epigenetics, circadian gating). The piece presents a broadened, multi-mechanistic framework and states it yields falsifiable predictions, but it is presented as a theoretical synthesis rather than new experimental results in the provided text.

This narrative review discusses proposed non-thermal mechanisms by which chronic, low-intensity RF-EMR from ubiquitous wireless sources may affect male reproductive health. It highlights oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction, impaired testosterone synthesis/steroidogenesis, and declines in sperm quality as reported outcomes. The authors argue that current SAR/thermal-based guidelines may not capture these endpoints and call for updated standards and precautionary measures.

This 2025 review summarizes historical and modern literature on how bacteria may adapt to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields from common sources such as mobile phones and Wi-Fi. It argues that RF-EMF exposure can influence bacterial survival mechanisms and could potentially compromise therapeutic interventions by promoting increased resistance. The authors frame these possibilities as a public health concern and call for continued research and precaution.

This cross-sectional observational study assessed sperm motility after one hour of in vitro exposure of semen samples to EMFs from different laboratory sources in an IVF setting. It reports a statistically significant reduction in progressive sperm motility after exposure to mobile phones and Wi-Fi repeaters, while other EMF-emitting equipment showed no significant effect. The authors interpret the findings as indicating a potential negative impact of specific RF sources and call for further research, alongside practical mitigation suggestions in IVF laboratories.

This mini-review discusses indoor radiation sources that may affect companion animals, including radon, radionuclides in feed, radiofrequency sources (phones, Wi-Fi, pet tracking devices), solar radiation, and extremely low frequency radiation. It reports that indoor radiation may negatively impact companion animal health and well-being. The authors conclude that preventive and precautionary measures are necessary to protect companion animals from indoor radiation exposure.

This narrative review summarizes human and animal research on radiofrequency (RF) radiation exposure (e.g., mobile phones, Wi‑Fi, occupational sources) and male reproductive outcomes. It reports that the literature links RF exposure with reduced sperm quality and increased DNA damage, often alongside oxidative stress and other proposed biological changes. Although inconsistencies are acknowledged, the authors conclude the overall evidence suggests harmful associations and call for standardized, long-term studies and reconsideration of guidelines.

This policy brief focuses on how RF-EMF exposure should be quantified in health research, emphasizing the role of near-field sources and proposing cumulative dose (J/kg/day) as a health-relevant metric. It reports mean cumulative dose estimates of 0.29 J/kg/day for the whole body and 0.81 J/kg/day for the brain. The brief notes established RF-EMF effects (heating, microwave hearing under highly pulsed radiation, and stimulation) and discusses indications of biological effects below thermal thresholds, while stating that improved metrics do not by themselves confirm harm.