5G – Concerns Grow Over Wireless Safety Guidelines and Worker Exposure

TOPICS:

Posted By: admin 23/07/2025

Dear Workers of England Union,

Thank you for raising your concerns about the health implications of 5G and wireless infrastructure deployment. We became aware of your interest through a recent post on X, in which the Workers of England Union reflected on attending a 5G conference in Birmingham several years ago. You expressed concern about the issues raised at that time and indicated a willingness to receive and share information from organisations campaigning on this important matter. The EM Radiation Research Trust are encouraged to hear that you would consider publishing such information on your website as part of your commitment to prioritising the welfare of people in England. The EM Radiation Research Trust welcomes your openness and commitment to keeping your members informed about these critical public health issues.

Concerns Grow Over Wireless Safety Guidelines and Worker Exposure

Across the UK, local councils are permitting new 4G and 5G infrastructure under permitted development rights, relying on exposure guidelines issued by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). However, these guidelines are designed only to protect against short-term thermal effects that is, heating of tissue over a 6-to-30-minute period. In contrast, the public and workers are now exposed to a continuous and complex combination of pulsed radiofrequency (RF) signals over the long term not just for minutes at a time.

Many doctors and scientists have raised serious concerns that these outdated guidelines fail to account for non-thermal and long-term biological effects, which are well documented in thousands of peer-reviewed studies. This situation may place workers particularly those with medical implants, weakened immune systems, pregnant women, individuals with cancer or those recovering from cancer, genetic vulnerabilities, or people with electromagnetic sensitivity at unavoidable risk under current planning and occupational health frameworks.

One of the world’s largest reinsurance agencies, Swiss Re, warned in 2019 that 5G was “off the leash,” citing potential risks such as:

Unclear Exclusion Zones for AIMD Wearers Leave Public Safety Gaps

The UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) recognises that wearers of Active Implantable Medical Devices (AIMDs) must avoid exclusion zones near RF-emitting equipment. Yet these zones are not clearly identified or disclosed during the planning process, leaving vulnerable individuals without the information needed to assess or avoid localised risk.

Limitations of ICNIRP Guidance for Vulnerable Groups

ICNIRP compliance, often cited by telecom applicants, does not necessarily guarantee that interference with medical implants will be prevented. However, this places the onus entirely on manufacturers without providing site-specific safety data to them, local authorities, or the public.

The EM Radiation Research Trust has raised these concerns with Sefton Council. Most recently, our public questions were excluded from the 10 July 2025 council meeting, despite being submitted on time and in accordance with the official procedure. Read more:   https://radiationresearch.org/statement-from-eileen-oconnor-sefton-council-public-meeting-10th-july-2025-5g-questions-silenced-meeting-descends-into-chaos/

Legal Ruling: Thomas v Cheltenham Borough Council (2025)

In this case, the Court of Appeal found that the council had erred by failing to consider the potential impact of a telecom mast on people with medical implants:

“The Planning Officer approached the matter on the mistaken assumption that his discretion … was fettered by a combination of paragraph 118 of the then applicable NPPF and the self-certification by the applicant that the proposed equipment … was fully compliant with the requirements of the International Commission on Non-Ionising Radiation Protection.”


Court of Appeal, 2025 – Full Judgment and Commentary:

The Court clarified that planning authorities must exercise independent judgment based on the facts and evidence presented. Therefore, potential health effects may be a material consideration depending on the circumstances, and ICNIRP certification does not remove this responsibility.

Legal Precedent: Yasmin Skelt v First Secretary of State (2003)

In this earlier case, the High Court ruled that ICNIRP certification cannot be used to dismiss public health objections. The planning inspector was found to have acted unlawfully by relying solely on PPG8 paragraph 30 and failing to give proper consideration to legitimate health concerns. This case was referenced during a Westminster Hall debate on 28 January 2004, reinforcing the principle that credible health-based objections must be properly considered even when ICNIRP compliance is cited. https://radiationresearch.org/old-legal-section/

Recognition of Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS) in UK Disability Law

Several recent landmark legal cases have recognised electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) as a disabling condition, resulting in compensation, pension awards, and low-EMF workplace accommodations for affected individuals. Notable examples include:

  • A tribunal ruling awarding disability pension for EHS, acknowledging the condition’s impact on daily life and work capability.
  • Successful compensation claims for workplace discrimination based on EHS-related health effects.
  • Court orders requiring reasonable adjustments in occupational settings, such as low-EMF environments and exclusion zones.

PHIRE has documented these important legal victories. This highlights the growing recognition of EHS in UK disability law and reinforces the need for planning and occupational frameworks to accommodate vulnerable individuals. https://phiremedical.org/news/

Scientific Evidence of Harm

WHO Confirms RF Radiation Causes Cancer in Animals

In 2025, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) published a landmark systematic review confirming that radiofrequency (RF) radiation causes cancer in laboratory animals:
Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic field exposure on cancer in laboratory animal studies: a systematic review – Environmental Research, 2025
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412025002338

I repeat, to emphasise the critical importance of this finding: this comprehensive and rigorously conducted review clearly shows that RF radiation causes cancer in animal studies. These conclusions align with earlier research, including the U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) studies and the Ramazzini Institute investigations, both of which also found clear evidence of carcinogenic effects from RF exposure in animals.

This strong and converging evidence significantly reinforces IARC’s original 2011 classification of RF radiation as a Group 2B “possible human carcinogen.”

In light of this new and compelling body of evidence, many leading doctors and scientists are now calling for RF radiation to be reclassified as a Group 1 “known human carcinogen.” This urgently calls into question the adequacy of existing public exposure limits and demands the application of the Precautionary Principle in all relevant policy, regulatory, and planning decisions especially to ensure the protection of the public and workers who often must take these risks daily in order to earn a living to pay their bills, and support themselves and their families.  

A substantial and rapidly expanding body of scientific research reveals clear biological harm from radiofrequency (RF) exposure at levels well below current ICNIRP safety limits. For detailed evidence and expert consensus, download the 2020 Consensus Statement of UK and International Medical and Scientific Experts and Practitioners on the Health Effects of Non-Ionising Radiation (NIR). This landmark statement is endorsed by organizations representing over 3,500 medical doctors worldwide: https://phiremedical.org/2020-nir-consensus-statement-signatorieshttps://phiremedical.org/2020-nir-consensus-statement-signatories/

Key scientific resources:

Research links EMF exposure to cancer, neurological damage, fertility issues, and electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) a condition increasingly recognised in UK disability law. This evidence underscores the urgent need for protective, precautionary measures.

We respectfully urge the Workers of England Union to:

  1. Support a moratorium on further wireless installations near workplaces, schools, and public spaces until full health impact assessments are completed.
  2. Advocate for updated safety standards that reflect independent science and protect against both thermal and non-thermal effects.
  3. Demand transparency, including emissions disclosures, real-time monitoring, and clearly defined exclusion zones.
  4. Protect vulnerable workers, including AIMD users and those with electromagnetic sensitivity, by promoting reasonable accommodations and safer workplace policies.
  5. Provide accessible information for workers about the potential risks associated with wireless technologies, enabling informed decisions and fostering a culture of precaution.

Thank you for standing up for workers’ rights, health, and informed choice.

Eileen O’Connor
Co-founder & Charity Director
EM Radiation Research Trust  www.radiationresearch.org

Contact address: Brian Stein CBE, Radiation Research Trust, Chetwode House. Leicester Road, Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire LE13 1GA