Cell phone radiation study doesn’t prove cancer link

The GLP aggregated and excerpted this blog/article to reflect the diversity of news, opinion and analysis.

Recently the National Toxicology Program (NTP) published “partial findings” from a study in which experimental rats were exposed to two types of radiofrequency (RF) radiation used in telecommunications for up to two years, and the development of two types of tumor was compared to the occurrence in control rats.

These results have already been jumped on by several publications as “game-changing” and offering important evidence that cell phone radiation may, after all, be causing brain cancer in humans.

So it was good to see a careful assessment of the study by Andrew Pollack in the New York Times, in which he points out the major questions and caveats raised by the new study.

These include the fact that elevated brain cancers were seen in male but not female rats–which casts doubt on the results–and the fact that control rats (who were not exposed to RF) had zero tumors, when it is known that this type of rat develops brain tumors spontaneously at a low rate.

Read full, original post: The New Rat Study Of Cell Phone Radiation Is No Smoking Gun

{{ 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 2026-05-26 at 10.15
Viewpoint: Double standard—Why does the wellness industry get a free pass while Big Healthcare is treated as morally suspect?
global warming
‘Implausible’: Top climate scientists reject worst-case scenario—soaring temperatures and fast-rising sea levels
Screenshot-2026-06-03-at-3.33.44-PM
Viewpoint: Vaccine deniers are attacking a life-saving Vitamin K shot for newborns that isn’t even a vaccine
Screenshot-2026-06-05-at-1.44.09-PM
Viewpoint: Scientists have scrapped the worst-case climate scenario. Is that proof that climate change is a hoax, as Trump claims?
Screenshot-2026-06-08-at-1.35.30-PM
Viewpoint: Social media and fake natural health propaganda fuel surge in use of mostly useless supplements
px extra strength tylenol and tylenol pm
Why ‘null-findings’ on Tylenol’s safety for pregnant women barely move the needle on countering misinformation
Screenshot 2025-08-25 203032
Mazzenga’s 20-year old muscles: How a still-going-strong 92-year old sprinter wins every race she enters
Screenshot-2026-06-08-at-10.19.30-AM
‘Natural’ wellness supplements linked to liver injury
ChatGPT-Image-Jun-10-2026-12_57_24-PM
Viewpoint: Why gene-editing babies is moral and certain to happen
ChatGPT-Image-May-28-2026-12_56_54-PM
Viewpoint: Vaccines' non-specific effects? The ‘shoddy’ Danish couple whose 'research’ inspires RFK, Jr.’s health delusion
Credit: ACSH
Viewpoint: Who and what’s to blame for the surge in vaccine-preventable diseases?
Screen Shot at AM
Facts & Fallacies Podcast: Right-wing politics bad for your health? Separating speculation from science
glp menu logo outlined

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