A new review article¹, published by Lennart Hardell and Mona Nilsson on February 19, 2025, shows that a WHO-commissioned review of the research on cancer risks from mobile phone radiation, which dismisses the cancer risks, is flawed and does not reflect the state of knowledge. The review shows that the authors of the WHO article made several serious scientific errors – among other things, they overlooked increased risks of cancer observed in the most exposed groups.

In September 2024, an evaluation of research on cancer risks from mobile phone radiation, commissioned by the WHO, was published, which claimed that mobile phone use does not increase the risk of cancer². The same assessment was made regarding exposure from base stations or radio/TV masts and the risk of childhood leukaemia.

THE WHO COMPILATION is seriously flawed on several points

For example:

01. Studies showing an increased risk of brain cancer in the most exposed user groups, corresponding to use for more than 30 minutes a day for more than ten years, have been overlooked, as well as results showing an increased risk of cancer on the same side of the head as the mobile phone was used during calls. Instead, the authors have focused on results from studies with low total use.

02. Studies with serious methodological flaws that do not show increased risks have been given great importance for the results and, conversely, high-quality studies that show increased risks have been given little importance.

03. Conclusions regarding exposure to radiation from base stations or radio/TV masts are based on contradictory and few results and one study that says nothing about risks for cancer given today’s normal exposure levels. Studies that show increased cancer risks have been ignored.

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

ICNIRP: The WHO’s compilation was carried out by people with conflicts of interest: three of the authors are, for example, members of ICNIRP. This is the organization that recommended the limit values ​​that apply to mobile radiation and that only protect against immediate warming effects of short-term exposure to very intense radiation. It therefore lacks protection against cancer risks.

Since there are very large financial interests built into the limit value on the part of telecom companies, it involves a serious conflict of interest to act as a reviewer for WHO of research in the field and at the same time support ICNIRP’s heavily criticized limit values. ICNIRP is considered an industry-friendly organization.

NEW REVIEW OF THE WHO ARTICLE BY LENNART HARDELL AND MONA NILSSON

The new review of the WHO article has been done in collaboration between Dr. Lennart Hardell, a cancer specialist and former chief physician, and Mona Nilsson at the Swedish Radiation Protection Foundation. Lennart Hardell is a leading international expert in the field of cancer risks from mobile radiation. Together with colleagues, he has published scientific studies in the field for more than 20 years.

Lennart Hardell – According to Lennart Hardell, the WHO article has clear scientific shortcomings and does not correspond to the state of knowledge. It is a threat to public health, because it underestimates the risks, and should never have been published.

Mona Nilsson – Mona Nilsson emphasizes that the authors cannot be ignorant of the serious inherent errors of a Danish cohort study that lead to the risks being underestimated. Yet they have given the study great importance. Nor can they be unaware that their conclusions about mobile base stations and radio/TV masts are contradicted by studies they excluded (radio/TV masts) and by one of only two studies on base stations that they included. Furthermore, the study on base stations that did not show risks concerns exposure in 1996-2001, exposure during the foetal period, and a very low maximum exposure level, significantly lower than what has become common today after the 5G expansion. It therefore says nothing about the risk of childhood cancer as a result of base stations today.

CONCLUSION: THE WHO ARTICLE SHOULD BE WITHDRAWN

Previously, the WHO article has also been criticized by a group of independent world-leading experts from ICBE-EMF³, an international radiation protection commission that was formed in 2022. In a letter, the organization stated that the WHO article contains such serious errors that it should be withdrawn. The same conclusion is drawn in the new article published by Lennart Hardell and Mona Nilsson.

Source: Strålskyddsstiftelsen, Sweden / Published in their newsletter of April 9, 2025

REFERENCES

1. Lennart Hardell, Mona Nilsson. A Critical Analysis of the World Health Organization (WHO) Systematic Review 2024 on Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure and Cancer Risks. Journal of Cancer Science and Clinical Therapeutics. 9 (2025): 09-26. ↩︎
2. Science Direct – The effect of exposure to radiofrequency fields on cancer risk in the general and working population: A systematic review of human observational studies – Part I: Most researched outcomes. Karipidis et al. ↩︎
3. ICBE-EMF letter to the Editor ↩︎

SHARE THIS:

• Bluesky