A critical appraisal of the WHO 2024 systematic review of the effects of RF-EMF exposure on tinnitus, migraine/headache, and non-specific symptoms

Excerpt from "conclusions":  "We... call for a retraction of the SR by Röösli et al., and an impartial international investigation, by unconflicted experts, of both the currently available evidence base on these issues, as well as related research priorities for the future."

A critical appraisal of the WHO 2024 systematic review of the effects of RF-EMF exposure on tinnitus, migraine/headache, and non-specific symptoms

John W. Frank , Ronald L. Melnick and Joel M. Moskowitz 

From the journal Reviews on Environmental Health, published online by De Gruyter July 15, 2024
https://doi.org/10.1515/reveh-2024-0069

Abstract

The World Health Organization (WHO) in 2012 initiated an expert consultation about research on the health effects of radio-frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) for a WHO monograph that was last updated in 1993. The project was abandoned over concerns about the quality of the commissioned review papers. The WHO restarted the project in 2019 by commissioning 10 systematic reviews (SRs) of the research on RF-EMF exposure and adverse biological and health outcomes in laboratory animals, cell cultures, and human populations. The second of these SRs, published in 2024, addresses human observational studies of RF-EMF exposure and non-specific symptoms, including tinnitus, migraine/headache, and sleep disturbance. The present commentary is a critical appraisal of the scientific quality of this SR (SR7) employing criteria developed by the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Based upon our review, we call for a retraction of SR7 and an impartial investigation by unconflicted experts of the currently available evidence and future research priorities.

--

Conclusions

To summarize, the way in which any epidemiologically unsophisticated reader is likely to be misled by this SR is clear. It appears to conclude unequivocally that the body of scientific evidence reviewed supports the safety of current (e.g. ICNIRP-based) population exposure limits for RF-EMF [10]. We reiterate that, on the contrary, this body of evidence is not adequate to either support or refute the safety of current exposure limits – largely due to the very small number and low methodological quality of the relevant primary studies to date, and the fundamental inappropriateness of meta-analysis for the handful of very heterogeneous primary studies identified by Röösli et al. [3] for each of the exposure/outcome combinations analysed.

We therefore call for a retraction of the SR by Röösli et al., and an impartial international investigation, by unconflicted experts, of both the currently available evidence base on these issues, as well as related research priorities for the future. That investigation should particularly address, above and beyond the topic of priority health outcomes to be researched (which was already assessed in the international expert consultation by WHO in 2018) [2] the need for improved methods of accurately measuring RF-EMF exposures, suitable for large human observational studies in the general population – the Achilles heel of the current literature.

https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/reveh-2024-0069/html