EMF Research File — The Landmark Studies

IARC 2011: Why the WHO’s Cancer Agency Classified Cell Phone Radiation as a Possible Carcinogen

International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), 2011 — IARC Monograph Volume 102

“The Working Group classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B).” — IARC Monograph 102, 2011

Review: IARC Monograph Volume 102 — Non-ionizing Radiation, Part 2: Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields
Institution: International Agency for Research on Cancer (WHO body)
Working Group: 31 scientists from 14 countries
Classification: RF-EMF classified as Group 2B — possibly carcinogenic to humans
Primary evidence basis: Hardell group brain tumor studies; Interphone study glioma data; Yakymenko animal/cell data

What the IARC Classification Means

The IARC’s classification system is the global reference standard for carcinogen assessment. Group 2B — “possibly carcinogenic to humans” — means that the available evidence in humans and/or animals is judged sufficient to raise the possibility of carcinogenicity, but not sufficient to establish it definitively. It is not a finding of safety. It is not a finding of definitive harm. It is a formal acknowledgment that the evidence warrants concern.

Group 2B: The same category as lead, DDT, and styrene. The Group 2B list includes recognized environmental hazards that have been regulated and restricted based on this classification level. The placement of RF-EMF in this category means it is subject to the same risk communication expectations: acknowledgment of the evidence, precautionary guidance where applicable, and continued monitoring.

The evidence basis for the 2011 classification. The IARC Working Group based the 2B classification primarily on elevated glioma risk in the Hardell group’s long-term epidemiological studies, limited evidence from the Interphone study, and some animal and mechanistic evidence. This was before the NTP (2018) and Ramazzini (2018) carcinogenicity studies — which are now in IARC’s queue for a formal re-evaluation.

The 2B classification may be upgraded. In 2024, IARC began a new review (Working Group 131) specifically to reassess RF-EMF in light of the NTP, Ramazzini, Hardell cumulative data, and the mechanistic evidence from Pall 2016, Panagopoulos 2021, and Yakymenko 2016. The outcome of this review could elevate RF-EMF from Group 2B (possible) to Group 2A (probable) or Group 1 (established). Why NTP makes the upgrade likely →

What Group 2B does NOT mean: The classification does not mean RF-EMF is “safe below safety limits.” Those limits are set by ICNIRP and FCC based on thermal thresholds established in the 1990s and have never been updated to reflect the carcinogenicity evidence. The Group 2B classification predates the NTP and Ramazzini findings and is, if anything, now understating the current evidence base.

The IARC Classification in the Context of Aires

IARC Group 2B means RF-EMF is officially acknowledged as a possible carcinogen by the world’s leading cancer research authority. This is the regulatory context in which Aires technology exists: not as a response to fringe health fears, but as a precautionary approach to an officially classified possible carcinogen. The structural field modulation approach — targeting field coherence properties rather than reducing signal strength — is designed for use in a world where the device must remain functional even though its emissions carry regulatory classification as a possible carcinogen. Explore the Aires research corpus →

The WHO’s cancer agency classified your phone’s radiation as a possible carcinogen in 2011. The NTP study since then has only strengthened the case.

Shop Aires Products →

Frequently Asked Questions

What does it mean that the WHO classified cell phone radiation as a Group 2B carcinogen?

Group 2B means “possibly carcinogenic to humans.” It is based on evidence in humans and/or animals that the IARC Working Group judged sufficient to warrant concern but not sufficient to establish definitive causation. It is not a safety clearance. It is not a finding of definitive harm. It is a formal classification that requires continued monitoring and risk communication — the same classification given to lead, DDT, and styrene.

Is the IARC Group 2B classification likely to change?

IARC began a new formal review (Working Group 131) in 2024, specifically to assess RF-EMF in light of substantial new evidence since 2011, including the NTP carcinogenicity study, the Ramazzini replication, and mechanistic research on VGCC activation and oxidative stress. Many researchers expect the classification to be upgraded to Group 2A (probable) or higher based on the convergent evidence.

What does the IARC classification mean for existing safety guidelines?

The IARC classification does not change exposure limits, which are set by ICNIRP and the FCC. Those limits are based exclusively on thermal effects and have not been updated since the 1990s. The disconnect between the 2B classification and the unchanged thermal-only safety guidelines is a major source of debate in the EMF research community.

Why did IARC classify RF-EMF as 2B rather than 2A or Group 1?

In 2011, the evidence included epidemiological associations (Hardell studies, Interphone) and some animal data, but no large controlled carcinogenicity studies comparable to NTP/Ramazzini. The NTP “clear evidence” finding and the Ramazzini replication were not available. With those studies now in the record, many scientists argue that Group 2B is no longer adequate to reflect the current state of evidence.

The EMF Landmark Research Series

→ Full series overview: The EMF Research You Need to Know

IARC 2011: Why the WHO's Cancer Agency Classified Cell Phone Radiation as a Possible Carcinogen