US Health Department Launches Major Cellphone Radiation Study After FDA Removes Safety Webpages

Federal Government Reverses Position on Mobile Phone Safety Amid Growing Health Concerns

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced Thursday that it will launch a comprehensive study examining the potential health effects of cellphone radiation, marking a dramatic reversal in the federal government's longstanding position that mobile devices pose no significant health risks to users. The announcement came alongside the Food and Drug Administration's quiet removal of webpages that had previously assured the public that scientific evidence showed no connection between cellphone use and health problems.

The research initiative follows months of public statements by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. linking electromagnetic radiation from cellphones to neurological damage, cancer, and other serious health conditions. Kennedy, a controversial figure known for questioning mainstream medical consensus on various health issues, has made cellphone safety a central component of his "Make America Healthy Again" initiative since taking office under President Donald Trump's second administration.

The decision to remove long-standing FDA safety information and launch new research has sparked intense debate among scientists, public health experts, and consumer advocates about the strength of existing evidence regarding cellphone safety and whether government messaging should change based on uncertain or contested science.

FDA Quietly Removes Decades of Safety Assurances

The Food and Drug Administration deleted multiple webpages from its official site that had for years stated definitively that cellphones do not cause health problems in users and that scientific evidence does not support concerns about radiofrequency radiation from mobile devices. These pages had cited extensive research and reviews by major health organizations concluding that current evidence does not establish causal links between cellphone use and cancer, neurological disorders, or other serious illnesses.

HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon explained the deletions by characterizing the removed content as containing "old conclusions" that required updating. He stated that the FDA removed the webpages while HHS undertakes electromagnetic radiation and health research "to identify gaps in knowledge, including on new technologies, to ensure safety and efficacy." Nixon emphasized that the new study was specifically directed by President Trump's MAHA Commission in its strategic report.

The webpage removals occurred without public announcement or explanation, with users who had bookmarked or linked to the FDA safety information finding the pages no longer accessible. Critics characterized the deletions as an attempt to erase inconvenient scientific consensus before introducing research designed to reach predetermined conclusions aligned with Kennedy's pre-existing beliefs about cellphone dangers.

Public health experts expressed alarm that the government was removing established safety information based on extensive research in favor of reopening questions that mainstream science considers largely settled. They noted that the removal could sow unnecessary fear and confusion among the hundreds of millions of Americans who use cellphones daily, potentially causing anxiety without clear evidence of actual health risks.

Kennedy's Long History of Cellphone Health Concerns

Secretary Kennedy has advocated for years about what he characterizes as serious health risks from electromagnetic radiation emitted by cellphones, WiFi routers, cell towers, and other wireless technologies. In an exclusive interview with USA TODAY as part of their "Extremely Normal" series, Kennedy described electromagnetic radiation as "a major health concern" and claimed that "more than 10,000 studies" document ill effects including cancer, tumor growth, and DNA damage from such exposure.

"EMFs are bad depending on the pulse rates and the wavelengths," Kennedy stated in the interview. "Some of them are very bad." He specifically raised concerns about 5G cellular technology, citing studies he claims show links to cancer and tumor growth, though he did not provide specific citations for these purported studies or explain how they account for confounding factors in epidemiological research.

Kennedy's advocacy on cellphone radiation predates his government role. As an environmental attorney and activist, he has repeatedly raised concerns about wireless technology health effects, positioning himself as a voice for precautionary approaches against what he describes as inadequate industry safety testing and regulatory capture by telecommunications companies.

However, Kennedy's claims about thousands of studies showing cellphone dangers do not align with comprehensive reviews conducted by major scientific and public health organizations. The World Health Organization commissioned experts from nine countries to analyze 63 studies on cellphones and cancer dating from 1994 through 2022, with results published in the scientific journal Environmental International in September 2024. That review found no connection between cellphone use and brain cancer or other cancers.

Scientific Community Remains Divided on Evidence

While mainstream scientific consensus holds that current evidence does not establish health risks from cellphones at typical exposure levels, a vocal minority of researchers have raised concerns about potential long-term effects that may not yet be fully understood. The scientific debate centers on radiofrequency (RF) radiation emitted by mobile devices and whether exposure at levels experienced by typical users could cause biological effects leading to disease.

In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), part of the World Health Organization, classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as "possibly carcinogenic to humans" based on limited evidence from human studies and animal research. This classification places RF radiation in the same category as hundreds of other exposures ranging from coffee to certain vegetables, indicating that carcinogenic potential cannot be completely ruled out but has not been established with sufficient evidence.

The National Toxicology Program conducted extensive studies on rats and mice exposed to RF radiation similar to that emitted by 2G and 3G cell phones. Published findings showed clear evidence of tumors in the hearts of male rats exposed to high levels of RF radiation, along with some evidence of brain tumors in male rats. The NTP also found RF exposure associated with DNA damage in certain tissues of the exposed animals.

However, scientists have debated the relevance of these animal findings to human health. The rats were exposed to RF radiation levels significantly higher than humans typically experience from cellphone use, for longer daily durations, across their entire bodies rather than localized near the head as occurs with phone calls. Additionally, human epidemiological studies have not consistently shown the increases in brain tumors or other cancers that would be expected if cellphones posed major cancer risks given how widespread their use has become over the past three decades.

Twenty-Two States Implement School Cellphone Restrictions

The Health and Human Services Department noted that 22 states have now enacted restrictions on cellphone use in schools as part of the "Make America Healthy Again" movement. These policies aim to improve children's mental and physical health by limiting mobile device access during instructional time, though the primary drivers have been concerns about mental health, academic performance, cyberbullying, and social media addiction rather than electromagnetic radiation exposure.

Secretary Kennedy has praised these school cellphone bans, listing various health hazards he attributes to phone use among children and teenagers. Some of the concerns he raised—such as links between heavy social media use and depression, anxiety, and academic struggles—have strong support from peer-reviewed research. Other claims Kennedy has made about neurological damage from electromagnetic radiation and cellular harm potentially causing cancer are far less substantiated by current evidence.

Michigan recently passed House Bill 4141, which would require all of the state's public and charter schools to adopt policies forbidding students from using cellphones during instructional time. The bill's sponsor stated that "every parent knows that phones are addictive devices" and emphasized giving children their childhood back. California implemented a similar ban in July 2024 that prohibits cellphone use during class time and blocks social media access on school WiFi, while also requiring digital literacy education starting in sixth grade.

These state-level restrictions reflect widespread concerns among parents, educators, and policymakers about smartphone impacts on child development, mental health, and learning, though the specific rationales vary considerably. The incorporation of these policies into Kennedy's broader MAHA initiative suggests an attempt to link multiple distinct concerns about technology and youth health under a common framework, even when the underlying evidence bases for different concerns vary dramatically in strength and scientific acceptance.

Critics Warn Against Undermining Public Health Messaging

Public health experts and communication specialists have expressed serious concerns about the government removing established safety information and launching research that appears predetermined to find problems with cellphone use. They argue that the approach undermines evidence-based public health messaging and could erode public trust in federal health agencies whose credibility depends on following scientific evidence rather than political or ideological preferences.

The removals and new research initiative have drawn comparisons to Kennedy's controversial positions on vaccines, where he has long promoted claims about vaccine dangers that scientific consensus has thoroughly debunked. Critics worry that the cellphone radiation study represents a pattern of elevating fringe scientific views and questioning mainstream expert consensus based on ideological commitments rather than proportionate responses to emerging evidence.

Some scientists noted that electromagnetic radiation research continues and that remaining questions about potential long-term effects at population levels deserve ongoing study. However, they emphasized that such research should build on existing evidence systematically rather than dismissing decades of prior work because findings don't align with preferred conclusions. They argued that responsible research and communication would acknowledge the current state of knowledge, including both what studies have and have not found, while investigating specific remaining uncertainties.

Consumer technology advocates worried that stigmatizing cellphones based on unsubstantiated health claims could deprive people of beneficial technologies that enable communication, access to information, emergency assistance, and countless other valuable functions. They noted that risk-benefit analyses must consider both potential harms and actual benefits, and that precautionary approaches that eliminate useful technologies based on speculative risks could themselves cause harm by preventing access to tools that improve health, safety, and wellbeing.

International Health Organizations Maintain Safety Positions

Major international health organizations have not changed their positions on cellphone safety in response to the U.S. government's new initiative. The World Health Organization, which coordinates global health research and guidance, continues to state that no adverse health effects have been causally linked with mobile phone use based on current evidence, while acknowledging that research into potential long-term effects continues.

The WHO notes that radiofrequency field exposure from mobile phones has increased dramatically over recent decades as phone use has become nearly universal in developed countries, yet population-level increases in brain tumors or other cancers that might be expected if phones posed significant cancer risks have not materialized. This population-level evidence provides reassurance that if cellphones do increase disease risks, such effects must be small enough that they don't appear clearly in cancer registry data spanning the decades since mobile phones became widespread.

European health agencies have generally taken more precautionary approaches than their American counterparts, with some recommending that parents limit children's cellphone use and that users employ hands-free options to reduce head exposure to RF fields. However, these recommendations typically frame such precautions as prudent measures in the face of scientific uncertainty rather than responses to established health risks, and European agencies continue to conclude that current evidence does not demonstrate cellphone use causes health problems at typical exposure levels.

Implications for Future Technology Regulation

The cellphone radiation study and accompanying policy changes could influence how federal agencies approach regulation of emerging wireless technologies, including 5G networks, WiFi 6E, and future communications systems. Kennedy has specifically questioned 5G safety, calling it "a major concern" despite industry assertions that 5G equipment operates at radiofrequency levels similar to earlier technologies and well below exposure limits established by the Federal Communications Commission.

Telecommunications industry representatives have expressed concern that government messaging questioning cellphone safety could undermine public confidence in wireless technologies and potentially complicate deployment of next-generation networks that require denser infrastructure. They emphasized that current exposure limits established by the FCC include substantial safety margins and that devices must demonstrate compliance with these limits before receiving authorization for sale in the United States.

The debate over cellphone radiation illustrates broader tensions in how government should handle scientific uncertainty and communicate about potential risks when expert consensus finds no clear evidence of harm but acknowledges that absolute proof of safety is impossible. Critics of Kennedy's approach argue that elevating speculative concerns without proportionate evidence sets dangerous precedents for technology regulation and public health communication.

What Americans Should Know About Cell Phone Use

Despite the new government study and changing federal messaging, mainstream scientific organizations continue to conclude that current evidence does not establish cellphone health risks at typical exposure levels. Americans who are concerned about potential risks can take simple precautions that reduce radiofrequency exposure without requiring abandonment of useful technologies.

Using hands-free options such as speakerphone, wired headsets, or Bluetooth earpieces keeps the phone itself away from the head, reducing RF exposure to the brain if such exposure proves harmful. Texting instead of calling similarly limits time the phone spends next to the head. For those who prefer holding phones while talking, shorter calls reduce total exposure time.

Parents concerned about children's cellphone use can limit time spent on devices, encourage use of hands-free options, and ensure phones are not kept immediately next to the body during sleep. However, experts emphasize that well-established concerns about children's phone use—such as impacts on sleep, mental health from social media, cyberbullying, and reduced physical activity—have far stronger evidence bases than speculative concerns about radiation exposure.

The HHS study is expected to take months or potentially years to complete, with findings unlikely to provide definitive answers to questions about very long-term or low-level exposure effects. As research continues, Americans can make informed choices about technology use based on individual circumstances and risk tolerance, while recognizing that current scientific evidence does not support major health concerns from typical cellphone use.