No scientific basis behind claims that Wi-Fi signals cause cancer

child cellphone medium idge

Last week, several media outlets including Forbes.com ran with an alarming-if-true story that equated the low frequency radiation emitted by Wi-Fi equipment and cell phones with lead, chloroform, gasoline fumes, and the pesticide DDT.

By the end of the story, readers might be misled into thinking that the scientific community or bodies such as the American Cancer Society are raising concerns about wireless devices. They aren’t. The same small group of researchers keeps trying to claim there’s a danger and the wider scientific community continues to consider it a fringe idea. The new paper doesn’t appear to have changed anything.

“This is not what I would call an academic paper,” said Otis Brawley, chief medical officer at the American Cancer Society.

Is there any harm in these kinds of health scares? Yes, said the cancer society’s Brawley, who spoke via cell phone. The problem is that it distracts from more important cancer risks such as smoking. And now an emerging long-term risk factor for kids is having parents who refuse to get them vaccinated against the class of viruses known as HPVs. These are implicated in most cases of cervical cancer as well as some head and neck cancers.

“If you overload people with health messages that don’t matter,” he said, “it dilutes reception of health messages that do matter.”

Read full, original story: Why Scientists Say Wi-Fi Signals Won’t Give Your Kids Cancer

 

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}

Related Articles

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Infographic: Global regulatory and health research agencies on whether glyphosate causes cancer

Does glyphosate—the world's most heavily-used herbicide—pose serious harm to humans? Is it carcinogenic? Those issues are of both legal and ...

Most Popular

Screenshot-2026-06-17-at-12.31.01-PM
Viewpoint: The dangerous influence of ‘woke’ post-modernism in science
marijuana-pot-in-hand-nveri-st-xpm-t-abq-fkifeos-s-rws-cmpx-
Facts & Fallacies podcast: Legalized weed drives drug addiction, psychosis?
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-4-2026-09_39_03-AM
Transgender female athletes and Title IX: Separating ‘policy’ from ‘legality’
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-25-2026-12_23_17-PM
No, Bill Gates did not secretly engineer ticks to promote veganism
ChatGPT-Image-Mar-10-2026-01_39_01-PM
Viewpoint—“Miracle molecule” debunked: Why acemannan supplements don’t work
Sampling_a_strawberry_32206461974
Viewpoint: Which is worse: Trace PFAS ‘forever chemicals’ on strawberries or the fear that scares people away from eating them?
photodune farming tractor s
Viewpoint: Glyphosate may be hazardous, but it is not dangerous as used by farmers. Critics of the Supreme Court’s Roundup ruling garble hazard with risk
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-25-2026-01_14_50-PM
Viewpoint: Disinformation grift: The wellness industry is a lucrative and mostly worthless marketplace of ‘balms, brews, and baloney’
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-30-2026-11_55_58-AM
Viewpoint—Junk science: How predatory mass tort lawyers twist facts, scare the public about phantom chemical risks, and cash in on billion-dollar settlements
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-19-2026-04_11_20-PM
Daubert for Dummies—Scientific Reliability in U.S. Courts: Daubert, Rule 702, and Made-for-Litigation Evidence
Trans-flag
Explaining the Supreme Court ruling empowering states to ban transgender female athletes from competing in women’s sports
NYPICHPDPICT000011561063
Viewpoint: From magnetizing your head to taking useless supplements, the wellness craze has morphed into an obsession of the affluent
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.