A recent review article, Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation reached a surprising conclusion

our analysis demonstrates that low-intensity RFR [Radio Frequency Radiation] is an expressive oxidative agent for living cells with a high pathogenic potential and that the oxidative stress induced by RFR exposure should be recognized as one of the primary mechanisms of the biological activity of this kind of radiation.

They suggest the oxidative stress can cause cancer and non-cancer pathologies.

This study has received next to no media coverage. With RFR impacting so many people it makes me wonder, is this study valid? I would expect this to be front page news given the large number of studies reviewed.

Are low-intensity radio-waves carcinogenic?

  • 1
    Note: We have a number of overlapping "Is [radiation type] harmful?" questions, but this one introduces a new review study, so shouldn't be dismissed out-of-hand without appropriate re-evaluation of the evidence. – Oddthinking Jul 25 '15 at 14:26
  • This sounds more like a question for physics/biology, but the "low intensity" part of that suggests to me that the answer would almost certainly be "no" -- low intensity means (relatively) low energy levels, so arguably less of a cancer risk. – Shadur Jul 25 '15 at 18:12

Browse other questions tagged .