IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i24p16942-d1005896.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Controversy in Electromagnetic Safety

Author

Listed:
  • Chung-Kwang Chou

    (C.-K. Chou Consulting, 4615 Rimini Ct., Dublin, CA 94568, USA)

Abstract

The dramatic increase in electromagnetic fields (EMFs) in the environment has led to public health concerns around the world. Based on over 70 years of research in this field, the World Health Organization (WHO) has concluded that scientific knowledge in this area is now more extensive than for most chemicals and that current evidence does not confirm the existence of any health consequences from exposure to low-level electromagnetic fields. However, controversy on electromagnetic safety continues. Two international groups, the International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, have been addressing this issue for decades. While the goal of both groups is to provide human exposure limits that protect against established or substantiated adverse health effects, there are groups that advocate more stringent exposure limits, based on possible biological effects. Both biological and engineering complexities make the validity of many EMF studies questionable. Controversies in research, publication, standards, regulations and risk communication concerning electromagnetic safety will be addressed in this article. The WHO is conducting systematic reviews on the RF biological effects literature. If scientists would discuss the safety issues of EMFs based on validated scientific facts and not on unreproducible possible effects and opinions, the controversy would be minimized or resolved.

Suggested Citation

  • Chung-Kwang Chou, 2022. "Controversy in Electromagnetic Safety," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(24), pages 1-15, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:24:p:16942-:d:1005896
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/24/16942/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/24/16942/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:24:p:16942-:d:1005896. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.