Do Cellphones Cause Cancer? RFK Jr.'s HHS Is Suppressing FDA Data Confirming Cellphone Safety.

The Department of Health and Human Services is launching a study apparently trying to find otherwise.

The Food and Drug Administration's webpages reporting that cellphones don't cause cancer and other health hazards have been taken down. This comes as the Department of Health and Human Services, under Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., is launching a new "study" on the health effects of cellphone usage. Under Kennedy's leadership, the anti-vaccination advocacy group Children's Health Defense sued in 2022 and lost a case against the Federal Communications Commission asserting that cellphone towers caused deleterious health effects. In 2022, Kennedy tweeted that "a growing body of research that calls cellphone safety into question."

Since cellphones tend to be held close to users' heads, brain cancer is one of the main concerns for alarmists like the current HHS secretary. The vast majority of research has concluded that there is essentially no correlation between cellphone use and cancer incidence.

The National Cancer Institute has a great summary of these studies. Given what's happened to the FDA webpages, you might want to read the data while you still can.

Let's just take short statistical journey comparing U.S. cellphone usage and cancer incidence trends. In 1995, only about 33.8 million Americans used cellphones. By 2025, 98 percent of adult Americans owned a cellphone. As cellphone usage skyrocketed, the overall cancer incidence rate for Americans has fortunately marked a slow but steady decline.

What about brain cancers? A June 2025 study in Environmental Research and Public Health citing U.S. brain cancer incidence data from 2000 to 2021 reports that "mobile phone use does not appear to be associated with an increased risk of brain cancer, either malignant or benign." Another 2025 study parsing data over the same period in Neurology also found that "brain tumor incidence has shown a gradual decline since its peak in the early 2000s." (The only exception is that brain cancer incidence has slightly increased among American Indians.)

Next up: Federally funded research on the efficacy of beating dead horses?

Comments

[Don't look at me! ( Is the war over yet?)]

Microwave radiation next to your head and balls is 100% safe and effective with no downsides!

[SQRLSY]

Smell phones use radio waves snot micro-waves, PervFectly Ignernt Wonder Child!!!

[Don't look at me! ( Is the war over yet?)]

Dumbass. Gigahertz is the microwave spectrum.

[Quicktown Brix]

I use my phone to heat up my lunch. Take it out of the fridge and set it next to my phone. 3 hours later it's warmed up to room temp.

[SQRLSY]

OK then SUPREME Dumbasses, if radio waves are SOOOO toxic, we need to shut them ALL down!!! Are Ye PervFectly READY for that?!?!?! Are Ye PervHaps an agent of the Lizard People? No doubt, the Lizard People would REJOICE if we shut down all radio comms, to PROTECT us all... And set us back a few centuries, so that the Lizard People can cuntquer us pronto!!!

(They will be happy to eat us all, whether we have radio-induced cancer, or snot. Cancer infections can SNOT bypass the digestive system's tear-down of proteins unto amino acids, regardless of whether ye be human, or a Lizard Person.)

I, for one, cuntdemn radio waves, and welcome the Lizard Persons, beginning with Lizard Person Number Uno, AKA Der Dear Orange Caligula-Shitler!

[con_fuse9]

No clown,
You said cell phones use "radio waves" [s]not "microwaves"
Which is false statement.
1) Microwaves are part of the electro-magnetic spectrum - i.e. they are radio waves - just very high frequency ones.
2) Microwave ovens typically run at 2.45 GHz.
3) Cell phones now have 5GHz bands (they also use a 2.5GHz band).
Bottom line, you're wrong and your critical thinking wiring is crossed and shorted out.

[Kungpowderfinger]

Smell phones use radio waves snot micro-waves

Please understand that microwaves are high frequency radio waves. Don’t take my word for it look it up.

[Untermensch]

I don’t know which gray box made that ignorant comment, but I’m glad someone corrects such uninformed statements. My father was a microwave communications engineer for decades and almost always explained to nonspecialists that he did “radio communications” because they wouldn’t understand “microwave” in this context. But if he ever talked to anyone knowledgeable, he would specify that he worked with microwave systems because that is important for them to know what he’s working on. But it’s all radio waves.

[Rossami]

As with everything, the dose makes the toxin. In this case, the dose is a function of signal strength times duration divided by the square of the distance from the source. Despite the proximity of a phone to your body, the microwave radiation dose you get is less than the broad-spectrum dose of radiation you get from the sun every day.

So, yes, in this case the evidence so far shows that it is indeed safe and effective with no downsides.

[mad.casual]

As indicated below, if your personal phone is giving you cancer generally without regard to how you use it, then the people living within a few hundred feet of cell towers or attached to the outside of apartment buildings... getting and sending *everyone* within the cell's signals... should be getting cancer at rates *phenomenally* higher than the people living even a half mile away.

It would make Snow's elucidation of cholera from a community water pump look impossibly spurious by comparison.

[MWAocdoc]

True but that's only half of it. In this case frequency makes a difference because of differences in the material being exposed. Living tissues are much more susceptible to damage by some frequencies than they are by others.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29418010/

[SQRLSY]

Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Trump and Minions may be taking bribes from lawyers who wanna get $$$RICH$$$...

Prepare to pay out the ASS$$$$ for cell phones soon!!!!

[MollyGodiva]

There is no physical mechanism for radio waves to cause cancer.

[Don't look at me! ( Is the war over yet?)]

100% safe and effective with no downsides!

[MollyGodiva]

MAGAs are the stupidest fucks on the planet.

[Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment]

No, shitstain, you've got the dumbest of the lot beat by miles. Fuck off and die.

[SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad]

You Marxist are so dumb. When you cause the upcoming civil war it should be a simple task to exterminate you.

[con_fuse9]

You throw around words like "Marxist" without any understanding what it means.
You do understand that the federal government, under Chump, is buying a stake in companies.
When the government controls the means of production it's called what?

[SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad]

Is that what the ChiCom Party decreed?

[SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad]

Let’s test this on you by subjecting you to high doses of a wide variety of radiation. That should be fun.

[Spiritus Mundi]

I don't have any problem finding HHS data on cell phones and cancer. Your boosters must be kicking in Bailey.

https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/cellphones

Also, these studies were from 2018. So HHS has been saying cell phones could be unsafe for a while now.

[Longtobefree]

Nothing says bullshit like reporting on suppressed documents.
You damn fool, if they are suppressed, how do you know they exist, let alone what is (supposedly) in them?

[Untermensch]

Seriously? Two seconds’ thought might have answered your question for you and spared you the embarrassment of immortalizing such an ignorant question.

I guess you’ve never heard of things like archives (try the Wayback Machine), downloaded copies from the past, citations/quotations in other documents, press releases submitted and preserved elsewhere, etc., etc.… It’s not like he’s alleging that something was once under a rock that nobody ever looked under. There are lots of ways to verify what was there that is now gone.

And in this case you could have answered your own question in two clicks. The page he linked to contains the summaries of what was there, but indeed the pages the summaries linked to are gone and redirect back to the main page. So unless you assume that the pages never existed but some government flunky added summaries for the pages that never existed (to trick us into thinking there was a coverup?), you can prove it to yourself.

[Untermensch]

Bailey’s first link leads you here: https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting-products/home-business-and-entertainment-products/cell-phones

All of the links to the summarized pages go back to that page. They are indeed gone, but with no effort to conceal it.

And here’s where you can verify what existed but is now gone: https://web.archive.org/web/20250201022047/https://www.fda.gov/radiation-emitting-products/cell-phones/do-cell-phones-pose-health-hazard

That’s just one example.

See how knowing what you’re talking about helps you avoid making idiotic statements?

[Quicktown Brix]

Won't the brain worms eat the brain tumors?

[Eeyore]

What if it's ball cancer? Can I get some testicle worms to treat it?

[Sevo, 5-30-24, embarrassment]

In your case, we can hope they cause them.

[Spiritus Mundi]

They would starve

[Quicktown Brix]

This message brought to you by the magical MAGA mind that said "I don't have any problem finding HHS data on cell phones and cancer. Your boosters must be kicking in Bailey." and links to a page that confirms the information Baily claims to be removed, is indeed gone.

[SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad]

Quixy, you’re not one to be correcting others, acting like you possess superior intellect, or taking any form of moral high ground.

You’re only here to round out the numbers. Best you keep your head down, and learn to obey.

[Incunabulum]

>Do Cellphones Cause Cancer? RFK Jr.'s HHS Is Suppressing FDA Data Confirming Cellphone Safety.

WTF is still asking this question in 2025?

[SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad]

No but on rare occasions they can cause you transform into a credible hulk. Or just Bill Bixby in mild cases.

On a side note, Bixby himself died of cancer.

[Vernon Depner]

According to the FDA and FCC, if your phone doesn't actually set your hair on fire, it's safe. There's certainly enough info out there to justify further study, and to stop asserting as fact that cell phones are completely safe.

[mad.casual]

Even at that, as I indicate below, all the "6ft. of separation" and "my RF blocking screen protects other people" stuff actually makes sense regardless of diffusion.

And RFK, Jr. was all "Voluntarily!" when it was actually COVID actually killing peoples' grandmas.

[MWAocdoc]

Falling off of cliffs is completely safe! It's only the sudden stop at the bottom that kills people!

[Uomo Del Ghiaccio]

Such biased reporting.

[SQRLSY]

The Lizard People agree with PervFected Ye, Guano Del Guano-Head!!! ESPECIALLY in light of ALL the details Ye have PervFectly provided, ass to WHY the reporting and re-snorting is bi-assed!!! Maybe even tri-assed!!!

Scum to stink of shit...

Do you recall the awesome enchanter named “Tim”, in “Monty Python and the Search for the Holy Grail”? The one who could “summon fire without flint or tinder”? Well, you remind me of Tim… You are an enchanter who can summon persuasion without facts or logic!

So I discussed your awesome talents with some dear personal friends on the Reason staff… Accordingly…

Reason staff has asked me to convey the following message to you:

Hi Fantastically Talented Author:

Obviously, you are a silver-tongued orator, and you also know how to translate your spectacular talents to the written word! We at Reason have need for writers like you, who have near-magical persuasive powers, without having to write at great, tedious length, or resorting to boring facts and citations.

At Reason, we pay above-market-band salaries to permanent staff, or above-market-band per-word-based fees to freelancers, at your choice. To both permanent staff, and to free-lancers, we provide excellent health, dental, and vision benefits. We also provide FREE unlimited access to nubile young groupies, although we do firmly stipulate that persuasion, not coercion, MUST be applied when taking advantage of said nubile young groupies.

Please send your resume, and another sample of your writings, along with your salary or fee demands, to [e-mail] .

Thank PervFected You! -Reason Staff

[Kungpowderfinger]

Maybe this will prompt some pregnant women to eat cell phones on TikTok.

[SQRLSY]

Smell phone radiation can be VERY bad for ye, when cumbined with eating Tide Pods!!! Shit swill turn ye into PervFected Pod People!!!

[mad.casual]

Stochastic Martyrs every one.

[SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad]

I would like to find something that prompts all democrats to kill themselves.

[Eeyore]

Nobody still talks on the phone for more than a few minutes anymore, so why would it cause brain cancer? Are we debunking an irrelevant issue here?

Has anyone done a study on Bluetooth earphones?

On cellphone pocket risk and testicle cancer? Is the risk higher of you have a bad signal and use more power?

[mad.casual]

Has anyone done a study on Bluetooth earphones?

I don't have any studies, but Bluetooth is lower frequency, lower power, and lower bandwidth.

None of which conclusively proves anything but if the regular, even when you aren't necessarily using it, mile or so reach between your phone and the nearest tower isn't *clearly* giving you brain cancer, the 10 ft. between your earphones and your phone pretty much only when you are, certainly isn't.

Conversely, if the ear phones are having some effect, living 1-2 mi. away from the cell tower where everyone's signals are going would be *clearly* less risky than, e.g., living right below the cell tower on top of your apartment building. Even if your Bluetooth is giving you cancer, it would be a pretty ground-breakingly wicked IT/Biology problem as to why your in-home Wi-Fi isn't.

Edit: And now that I reread your post again, as a whole, I realize your question may be rhetorical.

[mad.casual]

Fuck you. I don't even believe it and 6 ft. of separation to slow the spread of brain cancer and my Faraday mask protects you, your Faraday mask protects me makes more sense on scientific, physics level than your "gimme amnesty for the vaccine passport idea" bullshit.

Go die of immunothrombosis in a ditch you dumb fuck.

[SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad]

Bailey has largely destroyed his credibility in recent years. I hope those kochbucks are worth it to him.

[TJJ2000]

It's only a Dead-Horse because Gov Propaganda was underfunded on the subject.

You want a list of "dead horses" that are very much kept alive?
1 - The earth has been melting over and over and over again and yet it doesn't.
2 - The Clean Air Act yielded ZERO decreases in cardiovascular/respiratory counts/correlations. In fact after the 2007 DPF standards the per-year average increased.
3 - Windmills of the 1940s are the future.
4 - Secondhand smoke has NO link to any health consequence.
5 - Organic Food is nothing but a FAD logo.
On and On and On the Psychotic Indoctrination keeps going.

And when they decide to 'fund' cellphones are BAD Gov propaganda the USA will go bankrupt on pet projects addressing NOTHING. Too many sheep. Not enough people with a brain.

[MWAocdoc]

Agent Orange, Gulf War Syndrome ...

Powerful lobbies ...

[SCOTUS gave JeffSarc a big sad]

Second hand smoke is definitely an issue. By my early thirties, I found being exposed to it while ingesting more than a small amount of alcohol would make me hungover, whereas NOT breathing second hand smoke I would have no hangover.

[Ben of Houston]

I would counter that it is not the job of the government to debunk conspiracy theories, and no one who would believe the conspiracy trusts a government statement like that in the first place.

Secondly, it's not suppression to remove something from a public website. It is not like there aren't countless authorities that can be quoted. And the research is published publicly in appropriate journals. If that was deleted, there might be a point, but it isn't.

Finally, there is some research that does contradict this, as pointed out by Spiritus Mundi. It is not the position of the government to publish an official position and quash counter-arguments.

So it's not suppression, and the statement is pointless, and it's ethically questionable for the government to make an official position like that.