Smaller Heads

Children have smaller heads than adults.  Cell phones and wireless radiation can go deeper into their brains because children have a shorter distance from their skull to their brain center. Government regulations were based on a 220-pound man’s head, not a child’s head.

Thinner Skulls

Our skulls actually slow down wireless as it moves into our brain. The thicker the skull, the more roadblocks to the wireless radiation moving forward. Since children have much thinner skulls than adults, they have less protection. Research shows that children can absorb up to ten times the radiation in the bone marrow of their skulls than adults.

Rapidly Developing Brain

During childhood the brain is rapidly developing. Children learn at a far greater pace than adults because of the incredible growth and plasticity of their brain. However, scientists who expose animal brains to even small amounts of microwaves, find damaged brain cells and more dead cells.  Disruption of brain development at an early age can cause significant neurological changes later on in life.

Higher Water

Children have a higher amount of water in their brains and bodies.  Remember that electricity travels quicker through the water. In the same way, wireless energy travels more intensely through their tissues.  So children absorb more of this radiation because of their unique physiology.

Smaller Bodies

Children have shorter arms and hold cell phones, tablets, and wireless devices closer to their faces and bodies.  When they sit at a table their face is closer to the computer, for example. Because they are smaller, when they hold a device against their body with multiple antennas like a tablet, more of their body parts are highly exposed, as compared to an adult with the same device. 

Stem Cells

Children have more active stem cells in their bodies. Research shows that stem cells are often more reactive to low levels of microwave radiation than other cells.  Stem cells are cells that differentiate into specialized cell types and make more cells. Thus, the critical cells responsible for our children’s development are the most impacted by wireless!

Brain Damage

The brain is sensitive to wireless exposure. Scientists consider the nervous system to be one of the primary systems impacted by wireless and electromagnetic radiation. 

• An NIH study made headlines in 2011 when it found cell phone radiation altered brain activity specifically in the brain regions closest to the cell phone antenna  (Volkow et al., 2011).
• A study on the brains of rats exposed to Wi-Fi found impacts to the miRNA in brain tissue.  The researchers concluded, “Long-term exposure of 2.4 GHz RF may lead to adverse effects such as neurodegenerative diseases originated from the alteration of some miRNA expression and more studies should be devoted to the effects of RF radiation on miRNA expression levels.” 
• Scientists from Afe Babalola University, Nigeria exposed rats to a WI-FI device and found the exposure increased the rats anxiety level and affected their locomotor function. When the scientists then studied the brains of the rats, they also found changes in the exposed groups.  The researchers concluded that, “these data showed that long term exposure to WiFi may lead to adverse effects such as neurodegenerative diseases as observed by a significant alteration on AChE gene expression and some neurobehavioral parameters associated with brain damage.” (Obajuluwa et al., 2017)
• Studies have found that exposure can increase permeability of the blood brain barrier, thus, allowing more toxic agents to reach the brain (Sirav and Seyhan 2011, Sirav and Seyhan, 2016, Tang et al., 2015, Poulletier de Gannes et al., 2017, Nittby 2009, Nittby 2008, Eberhardt 2008, Persson 2008, Salford 2003) 

Studies in both humans and animals have linked cell phone radiation and wireless exposure to memory damage. 

• In a Swedish study of teenagers where scientists measured the radiation dose to the brain, just one year of cell phone use was linked to memory damage (Foerster et al., 2018). 
• A study investigating the impact of Wi-Fi on working memory in human subjects found changes to neural activity after Wi-Fi exposure (Papageorgiou et al., 2011).
• Studies on animals have also found damaged memory (Chaturvedi et al., 2011; Wang et al., 2013;  Qiao et al.,  2014, Shahin et al., 2018; Tang et al., 2021)
• Supporting these studies are numerous animal experiments that have found wireless exposure damaged brain cells specifically in the brain regions critical to thinking and learning (Sonmez, et al; Odaci, Bas and Kaplan 2008; Odaci et al., 2016; Odaci et al., 2015;  Colakoglu et al., 2009; Saikhedkar et al.,  2014; Kaplan et al., 2010; Kaplan et al., 2009; Sager and Okus 2021; Meenachi et al., 2016).  As just one example, a 2022 study which found cell phone radiation damaged the hippocampus of mice concluded, “our findings suggest that 2400-MHz RF-EMR cell phone radiation affects the structural integrity of the hippocampus, which would lead to behavioral changes such as anxiety… it alerts us to the possible long-term detrimental effects of exposure to RF-EMR. (Hasan et al., 2021). 
• Yale Medicine researchers exposed pregnant mice to cell phone radiation and then studied the offspring. They found the mice who were exposed prenatally had poorer memory, hyperactivity and altered brains (Aldad et al 2012).  “This is the first experimental evidence that fetal exposure to radiofrequency radiation from cellular telephones does in fact affect adult behavior,” said senior author Dr. Hugh S. Taylor, professor and chief of the Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology & Reproductive Sciences.
• Yale’s research findings along with numerous other studies showing impacts to the brain led doctors to sign onto an  educational campaign called The BabySafe Project urging pregnant women to reduce wireless exposure to minimize risks to their babies’ brain development. 
• Research on pregnant women has linked prenatal cell phone radiation exposure to emotional/behavioral problems (Divan et al 2012, Sudan et al 2016) and hyperactivity (Birks et al., 2017) in their children. 

Scientific Evidence

 Jin-Hwa Moon, MD, PhD , “Health effects of electromagnetic fields on children”  Clin Exp Pediatr. 2020;63(11):422-428.   Published online May 26, 2020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3345/cep.2019.01494 Fernández, C., de Salles, A., Sears, M., Morris, R., & Davis, D. (2018). Absorption of wireless radiation in the child versus adult brain and eye from cell phone conversation or virtual reality. Environmental Research, 167, 694-699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2018.05.013Siervo B, Morelli MS, Landini L, Hartwig V. Numerical evaluation of human exposure to WiMax patch antenna in tablet or laptop. Bioelectromagnetics. 2018;39(5):414-422. doi:10.1002/bem.22128P. Gandhi, “Yes the Children Are More Exposed to Radiofrequency Energy From Mobile Telephones Than Adults,” in IEEE Access, vol. 3, pp. 985-988, 2015, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2015.2438782.Gandhi, O., Morgan, L., de Salles, A., Han, Y., Herberman, R., & Davis, D. (2011). Exposure Limits: The underestimation of absorbed cell phone radiation, especially in children. Electromagnetic Biology And Medicine, 31(1), 34-51. https://doi.org/10.3109/15368378.2011.622827Ferreira, J., & Almeida de Salles, A. (2015). Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) in the head of Tablet users. The 7Th IEEE Latin-American Conference On Communications (Latincom 2015), 1538, 5-9. Retrieved 3 June 2020, from http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1538/paper-02.pdf.

10. E. Fernández-Rodríguez, A. A. A. De Salles and D. L. Davis, “Dosimetric Simulations of Brain Absorption of Mobile Phone Radiation–The Relationship Between psSAR and Age,” in IEEE Access, vol. 3, pp. 2425-2430, 2015, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2015.2502900.

Gultekin, D., & Moeller, L. (2012). NMR imaging of cell phone radiation absorption in brain tissue. Proceedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences, 110(1), 58-63. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1205598109Cabot E, Christ A, Bühlmann B, et al. Quantification of RF-exposure of the fetus using anatomical CAD-models in three different gestational stages. Health Phys. 2014;107(5):369-381. doi:10.1097/HP.0000000000000129Gadi Lissak. “Adverse physiological and psychological effects of screen time on children and adolescents: Literature review and case study.” Environmental Research, Volume 164, 2018, Pages 149-157, ISSN 0013-9351.Byun, Y., Ha, M., Kwon, H., Hong, Y., Leem, J., & Sakong, J. et al. (2013). Mobile Phone Use, Blood Lead Levels, and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Symptoms in Children: A Longitudinal Study. Plos ONE, 8(3), e59742. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0059742 Foerster, M., Thielens, A., Joseph, W., Eeftens, M., & Röösli, M. (2018). A Prospective Cohort Study of Adolescents’ Memory Performance and Individual Brain Dose of Microwave Radiation from Wireless Communication. Environmental Health Perspectives, 126(7), 077007. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp2427Mohammed B, Jin J, Abbosh A, Bialkowski K, Manoufali M, Crozier S. Evaluation of children exposure to electromagnetic fields of mobile phones using age-specific head models with age-dependent dielectric properties. IEEE Access. PP(99). 2017Sangün Ö, Dündar B, Çömlekçi S, Büyükgebiz A. The effects of electromagnetic field on the endocrine system in children and adolescents. Pediatr Endocrinol Rev. 2015 Dec;13(2):531-45.Aldad, T., Gan, G., Gao, X., & Taylor, H. (2012). Fetal Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure From 800-1900 Mhz-Rated Cellular Telephones Affects Neurodevelopment and Behavior in Mice. Scientific Reports, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/srep00312Li, D., Chen, H., Ferber, J., Hirst, A., & Odouli, R. (2020). Association between maternal exposure to magnetic field nonionizing radiation during pregnancy and risk of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in offspring in a longitudinal birth cohort. JAMA Network Open, 3(3), e201417. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.1417Miller, A., Sears, M., Morgan, L., Davis, D., Hardell, L., Oremus, M., & Soskolne, C. (2019). Risks to health and well-being from radio-frequency radiation emitted by cell phones and other wireless devices. Frontiers In Public Health, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2019.00223Hardell, L. (2017). Effects of mobile phones on children’s and adolescents’ health: A commentary. Child Development, 89(1), 137-140. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12831Clegg, F., Sears, M., Friesen, M., Scarato, T., Metzinger, R., & Russell, C. et al. (2020). Building science and radiofrequency radiation: What makes smart and healthy buildings. Building And Environment, 176, 106324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106324Zarei, S., S., Mortazavi, S., Mehdizadeh, A., Jalalipour, M., Borzou, S., & Taeb, S. et al. (2015). A Challenging Issue in the Etiology of Speech Problems: The Effect of Maternal Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields on Speech Problems in the Offspring. Journal Of Biomedical Physics & Engineering, 5(3), 151-154. Retrieved 2 June 2020, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4576876/.Markovà, E., Malmgren, L., & Belyaev, I. (2010). Microwaves from mobile phones inhibit 53bp1 focus formation in human stem cells more strongly than in differentiated cells: Possible mechanistic link to cancer risk. Environmental Health Perspectives, 118(3), 394-399. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.0900781Sudan, M., Birks, L., Aurrekoetxea, J., Ferrero, A., Gallastegi, M., & Guxens, M. et al. (2018). Maternal cell phone use during pregnancy and child cognition at age 5 years in 3 birth cohorts. Environment International, 120, 155-162. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.07.043Roda, C., & Perry, S. (2014). Mobile phone infrastructure regulation in Europe: Scientific challenges and human rights protection. Environmental Science & Policy, 37, 204-214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2013.09.009Divan HA, Kheifets L, Obel C, Olsen J. Cell phone use and behavioural problems in young children. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2012;66(6):524-529. doi:10.1136/jech.2010.115402Papageorgio, C.C., et al. “Effects of Wi-Fi signals on the p300 component of event-related potentials during an auditory hayling task.” Journal of Integrative Neuroscience, vol. 10, no. 2, 2011, pp. 189-202.IARC Monographs on the evaluation of carcinogenic risks to humans. Non-ionizing radiation, Part 2: Radiofrequency Electromagnetic fields. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer, vol. 102, 2013.