Bombarded: Electromagnetic Radiation of Our Own Making Fills the "Empty" Air

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

You cannot see them, but radio waves pervade your peaceful living space. They emanate from an increasingly large menagerie of electronic gadgets, appliances and satellites. FM radio and broadcast television have been around for years; more recently, cell phones and Wi-Fi routers have added their high frequencies to the mix.

Should we worry? In May the International Agency for Research on Cancer declared that long-term cell-phone use could “possibly” cause cancer; it says the same for coffee drinking. The intensity of exposure is proportional to distance, and cell phones are held close to the brain, but many studies conclude that evidence of a cancer link is nonexistent.* The sheer number of radio-frequency sources is not a concern either. Exposures “do not all add collectively at any one point in space,” says Jerrold T. Bushberg, head of health physics programs at the University of California, Davis. And average exposure is still far below safety standards, which have a large margin built in.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


*Clarification (8/17/11): In a general discussion about electromagnetic radiation, we wrote that "the intensity of exposure is proportional  to distance." We simply meant that exposure varies with distance, but should have used the generic "varies" instead of the mathematical "proportional," because as several readers pointed out, intensity is inversely proportional to the square of distance.

— Mark Fischetti

» Learn more about radiation, cell phones and electromagnetic bombardment in the August 2011 Graphic Science Web Exclusive

 

Graphic by Jude Buffum; Source: Federal Communications Commission

Mark Fischetti was a senior editor at Scientific American for nearly 20 years and covered sustainability issues, including climate, environment, energy, and more. He assigned and edited feature articles and news by journalists and scientists and also wrote in those formats. He was founding managing editor of two spin-off magazines: Scientific American Mind and Scientific American Earth 3.0. His 2001 article “Drowning New Orleans” predicted the widespread disaster that a storm like Hurricane Katrina would impose on the city. Fischetti has written as a freelancer for the New York Times, Sports Illustrated, Smithsonian and many other outlets. He co-authored the book Weaving the Web with Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, which tells the real story of how the Web was created. He also co-authored The New Killer Diseases with microbiologist Elinor Levy. Fischetti has a physics degree and has twice served as Attaway Fellow in Civic Culture at Centenary College of Louisiana, which awarded him an honorary doctorate. In 2021 he received the American Geophysical Union’s Robert C. Cowen Award for Sustained Achievement in Science Journalism. He has appeared on NBC’s Meet the Press, CNN, the History Channel, NPR News and many radio stations.

More by Mark Fischetti
Scientific American Magazine Vol 305 Issue 2This article was published with the title “Bombarded: Electromagnetic Radiation of Our Own Making Fills the 'Empty' Air” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 305 No. 2 ()
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican082011-4w7QKQrWpo6Hmh2fga3DfN

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe