When Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was named chair of the president’s Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission, many in the holistic health, EMF awareness, and environmental advocacy movements held their breath with cautious optimism. Here was a man who had sued the FCC, spoken passionately against the dangers of 5G, and stood firm in public health freedom circles—finally in a position to make sweeping national changes.
So when the MAHA Commission’s first report dropped in May 2025, expectations were high. This 70-page document, backed by a 14-member panel that included the heads of the NIH, HUD, Education, and Agriculture, was supposed to outline the root causes of the childhood chronic disease crisis and recommend evidence-backed paths forward.
But instead of bold reform, the report delivered a soft tap on the brakes—and for those of us looking for decisive action on wireless radiation, it was a gut punch.
MAHA Report Minimizes EMF Health Hazards
Despite decades of science, thousands of studies, and a growing wave of public concern, electromagnetic fields (EMFs) from wireless devices were reduced to a single bullet point on page 44—tucked beneath a section on chemical environmental exposures.
Even more insulting? That one bullet point had a glaring factual error. It claimed that some studies have linked EMR exposure to reduced sperm count and motility, but not quality, a contradiction to the very study it cited. Dr. Robert Brown of the Environmental Health Trust (EHT) pointed out the obvious: sperm motility is a direct component of quality. The cited paper even lists quality markers as motility, viability, morphology, and DNA fragmentation.
What makes this especially troubling is that this statement appeared in the same report that warns about corporate capture in federal agencies. Who added that phrase? Why did it downplay such significant harm? It’s hard not to question whether industry influence seeped into this supposed science-based document.
EMF Studies and Cancer Risks Ignored by Federal Health Panel
The MAHA report did include a nod to the NIH’s National Toxicology Program study, which found “clear evidence” of cancer and DNA damage in rats exposed to cellphone radiation. But that acknowledgment was immediately downplayed with a reference to a stale 2022 systematic review that excluded studies involving mobile devices—arguably the largest source of EMF exposure in children.
And even that 2022 review called for more “high-quality studies.” Which, let’s be honest, has become the industry’s favorite way of saying: “Let’s not do anything yet.”
WHO Report and EMF-Autism Link Left Out of MAHA Findings
Meanwhile, a far more current and significant review, the April 2025 World Health Organization-funded report, was left out. That report concluded with high certainty that cellphone radiation causes two types of cancer in animals.
Also excluded was the work of Dr. Martha Herbert, a pediatric neurologist who has published extensively on the connection between EMR and autism. Her insights? Absent. So were thousands of other papers from over 170 review studies documenting EMF’s impact on oxidative stress, hormonal health, fertility, neurodevelopment, and immune dysfunction.
It’s not that the data wasn’t there. It’s that someone chose to ignore it.
Learn more about the recent WHO study:
Health Effects of EMF Exposure: What the Science Shows
Let’s set the record straight. Here are some of the most well-documented effects of EMF exposure on human health:
DNA damage: Demonstrated in animal models via both NTP and WHO studies.
Cancer risk: Linked to gliomas, heart tumors, and acoustic neuromas.
Neurological effects: Brain fog, depression, anxiety, and disrupted sleep cycles.
Sperm damage: Reduced count, motility, morphology, and DNA integrity.
Blood-brain barrier breakdown: Allows toxins into brain tissue.
Endocrine disruption: Impacts thyroid, adrenal function, and melatonin levels.
Mitochondrial dysfunction: Affects cellular energy production.
Developmental concerns: Behavioral disorders, ADHD, and potential autism links.
Electrohypersensitivity (EHS): Headaches, rashes, fatigue, and more in sensitive individuals.
This is not fringe science. It’s well-documented, peer-reviewed, and affirmed by independent global health panels.
1971 U.S. Navy EMF Report Predicted Today’s Chronic Diseases
Still not convinced? In 1971, the U.S. Navy reviewed over 2,300 studies on EMF and predicted 23 of today’s chronic diseases—from Alzheimer’s to infertility. This research has been swept under the rug for over 50 years. If we had acted then, where would we be now?
The report concluded that EMFs had the potential to cause systemic damage across virtually every biological system. And this was over 50 years ago.
If these early warnings had been taken seriously, we might have seen robust guidelines, consumer protections, and safer technology designs decades ago. Instead, the data was buried, and the public was left largely unaware. Today, as history begins to catch up with science, it’s clear we’re facing the consequences of ignoring one of the earliest and most credible alerts on EMF dangers.
Telecom Industry Influence on Public Health Policy
It’s hard to ignore the revolving door between the telecommunications industry and the public health agencies tasked with regulating it. This phenomenon, often referred to as “regulatory capture,” has allowed profit-driven interests to shape safety guidelines, stifle scientific discourse, and influence policymaking for decades.
Here are just a few signs of industry interference that have become all too common:
Former telecom executives serving in advisory roles at federal health agencies
Delayed or blocked publication of government-funded research showing EMF harm
Industry-funded studies designed to minimize perceived risk or create doubt
Lobbying power used to push lenient exposure standards and override local opposition
Revolving door hires between telecom lobbyists and regulatory board
Dr. Kent Chamberlin, President of the EHT and former chair of New Hampshire’s 5G commission, said it plainly: “The only people who deny EMF harm are those with ties to telecom”. Looking at the MAHA Commission’s makeup, he wasn’t surprised the report played it safe.
Even RFK Jr., who had previously slammed the U.S. for allowing EMF exposure levels illegal in many countries, seemed to have had his voice drowned out in the final draft.
This kind of industry influence doesn’t just delay progress—it prevents honest science from shaping public health policy. And until that dynamic changes, true EMF reform at the federal level will remain out of reach.
Wireless Radiation and Children’s Health: Overlooked and At Risk
The most heartbreaking part? Kids are paying the price. They’re the first generation growing up entirely surrounded by wireless tech—sleeping with tablets, studying near WiFi routers, and wearing Bluetooth devices.
And they’re biologically more vulnerable. Thinner skulls, developing brains, higher absorption rates. The link between childhood chronic disease and EMF is too strong to ignore. Yet the MAHA report gave it less space than it gave to screen light and melatonin.
Here are a few reasons children face even greater EMF-related risks:
Thinner cranial bones allow for deeper radiation penetration
Higher water content in young tissues amplifies absorption of radiation
Longer lifetime exposure due to early and ongoing device use
Proximity to sources such as iPads in laps, phones held to heads, and Wi-Fi routers in bedrooms
Cumulative biological impact during critical stages of growth and development
Despite this well-documented vulnerability, the MAHA report gave EMF’s role in childhood chronic disease less attention than screen light and melatonin disruption. That kind of imbalance in priority is more than disappointing—it’s negligent.
As we continue to hand our kids more screens, more wearables, and more connected devices, it’s imperative that policymakers treat wireless radiation as more than a passing mention. Children deserve better than bullet-point acknowledgments buried in federal reports.
“More Research” Delay Tactics Maintain EMF Status Quo
Experts like Dr. Brown say it clearly: calls for “more research” are how industries maintain profit while dodging responsibility. Tobacco did it. Big Oil did it. And now the wireless industry is playing the same game.
Here’s how the strategy works:
Cast doubt on existing studies, even those with strong evidence
Delay policy changes under the guise of needing more data
Fund biased research to muddy the scientific waters
Repeat the phrase “not enough evidence” in media and regulatory settings
Deflect blame onto individual behavior or genetics instead of environmental causes
RFK Jr.’s appointment gave people hope that someone would finally stop this cycle. With his past advocacy and legal actions against the FCC, many believed EMF reform would finally find its footing at the federal level.
Grassroots Advocacy Pushes Back Against EMF Denial
Thankfully, the public is waking up. More Americans are beginning to question the safety of our wireless infrastructure and demand greater accountability from lawmakers and industry leaders alike. What the federal government fails to address, grassroots organizations are now taking into their own hands.
Here are a few examples of advocacy efforts gaining momentum:
704 No More: A nationwide coalition challenging Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act, which restricts local governments from blocking cell tower installations due to health concerns
Environmental Health Trust (EHT): Leading litigation, education, and scientific research to raise awareness about wireless radiation hazards
Children’s Health Defense: Under RFK Jr.’s initial leadership, this non-profit group continues to file lawsuits and organize campaigns against unsafe tech deployment in schools and communities
Local zoning resistance: Community groups across the U.S. are mobilizing to stop the installation of 5G towers near homes, schools, and hospitals
State-level commissions: Inspired by New Hampshire’s 5G Commission, more states are exploring independent investigations into EMF safety
These efforts are not just reactive—they’re proactive. They’re built on a growing body of science, a shared frustration with federal inaction, and a desire to protect future generations from invisible threats.
Real reform rarely begins at the top. It almost always starts with concerned citizens refusing to accept business as usual. And right now, those citizens are stepping up where agencies and advisory boards have failed.
Aires Tech EMR Protection: A Practical Solution for Families
Until policy catches up, it’s on us to protect ourselves.
That’s where Aires steps in. Backed by years of innovation and peer-reviewed science, Aires has created the most researched and patented EMF protection technology on the market. Their devices restructure chaotic EMFs into biologically harmonious frequencies, making your daily digital exposure more manageable for your body.
22 Patented Technologies: Aires Tech holds 22 global patents that reflect their groundbreaking approach to neutralizing EMF radiation.
$20 Million in R&D: With over $20M invested into research and development, Aires Tech leads the industry in cutting-edge, science-backed EMF solutions.
25+ Clinical and Scientific Trials: Their technology has been validated in more than 25 trials showing meaningful reductions in the harmful biological effects of EMFs.
9 Peer-Reviewed Studies: Aires devices are supported by independent, peer-reviewed studies that demonstrate their effectiveness in reducing EMF-related stress on the human body.
From portable protection like the Lifetune Go to full-home EMF modulation with the Zone Max, Aires Tech makes it possible to take proactive steps in today’s high-radiation world.
Athletes, families, biohackers, and holistic health experts alike rely on Aires—not because it’s trendy, but because it’s effective, backed by science, and designed for the modern EMF landscape.
Final Thoughts: Will RFK Jr. Act on EMF in Future Reports?
This doesn’t have to be the end of the story. Maybe RFK Jr. was blocked. Maybe he’ll respond to the backlash and make EMFs a top priority in the Commission’s next steps.
But we can’t afford to wait for “maybe.”
We need policy changes, but we also need people power. That means education and action. It means refusing to be silenced or pacified by vague bullet points and empty promises.
Our children are watching.
And this time, we owe them more than another report that plays it safe.
