Researchers found that upon exposure to high levels of RFR, there was "clear evidence" of tumors in the hearts of male mice, "some evidence" of tumors in the brains of male mice, and "some evidence" of tumors in the adrenal glands of male mice.
Scientists who reviewed the NTP study are calling for the Federal communications Commission to warn the public, but the FDA's response suggests the findings are over-hyped as it tries to quell consumer's fears.
Furthermore, NTP also found evidence of low birth weight among newborn rats and their mothers when exposed to high levels of RFR during pregnancy and lactation.
"In our studies, rats and mice received radio frequency radiation (RFR) across their whole bodies".
What does this mean for us?"In addition, the exposure levels and durations in our studies were greater than what people experience", added Bucher. By contrast, people are mostly exposed in specific local tissues close to where they hold the phone.
The study saw its rats subjected to the lowest exposure level that is equal to the maximum local tissue exposure now allowed for cell phone users.
Study: Cell phone radiation may affect memory What about Wi-Fi and 5G? During the tests, animals were housed in chambers specially designed for the studies and RFR exposure began for rats when they were five-weeks-old, while mice were exposed from six-weeks-old.
"5G is an emerging technology that hasn't really been defined yet", lead toxicologist Michael Wyde said in the statement.
"Animal studies like this one contribute to our discussions on this topic, but we must remember the study was not created to test the safety of cellphone use in humans, so we can not draw conclusions about the risks of cellphone use from it", Dr. Jeffrey Shuren, director of the Food and Drug Administration's Center for Devices and Radiological Health, who was not involved with the study, said in a statement.
It's a debate that has raged for many years around the world. And the highest radiation level used in the study was four times higher than the maximum level allowed in people.
But the FDA has already taken issue with the findings.
The lowest exposure level used for the study was equal to the maximum local tissue exposure now allowed for cellphone users, the report states. The tests for the study were done on rodents at levels much higher than humans are now exposed to.
"The results of these studies remain relevant to current exposures, although the power levels of the exposures were much higher than typical patterns of human use".
In the studies, the rats were exposed to RFR starting from when they were in the womb.
Bucher was clear: "We believe that the link between radiofrequency radiation and tumors in male rats is real, and the external experts agreed". Any concerns arising from the study thus would seem to apply mainly to early adopters who used those bygone devices, not to users of current models.
"If scientists can better understand biological changes in animals, they will know more about what to look for in humans", the NTP said in its fact sheet on the study.
'These findings should not be applied to human cell phone usage, ' it said.