EU orders phone radiation tests against the body after years of exposure concerns

A new EU standard will require mobile phones to be assessed in direct contact with the body, while research highlights potentially higher radiofrequency absorption in children.

The European Commission has moved to tighten how mobile phones are assessed for radiofrequency exposure, adopting a standard that requires testing while a handset is in direct contact with the body rather than at a small distance from it. The change is intended to reflect ordinary use more closely, since many people carry phones in pockets or hold them against the skin, and it follows years of criticism that earlier compliance tests did not match real-world conditions.

According to Phonegate Alert, the revised approach was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 7 September, but manufacturers have until 7 March 2028 to adapt. Marc Arazi, the group’s founder and president, described the decision to The Defender as a significant win for consumer protection, though he criticised the long transition period. He also said France’s formal objection in 2020 helped trigger the process that led to the new rule.

The issue matters because laboratory distance can materially affect measured specific absorption rate, or SAR, the metric used to gauge how much radiofrequency energy the body absorbs. Phonegate Alert says French market surveillance data showed that 76% of mobile phones on the European market exceeded the EU limit when tested in contact with the body, while several models also failed tests at the old 5mm separation distance. The French National Frequency Agency has repeatedly found non-compliant devices, including the iPhone 12, which France temporarily banned in 2023 over excessive emissions.

Supporters of the change argue that it should force a more honest assessment of consumer exposure, but campaigners say the reform still leaves too much room for delay. The Defender reported that Arazi questioned why manufacturers were being given additional time despite the problem having been known for years. The broader debate is now shifting beyond Europe, with advocates pressing the United States Federal Communications Commission to stop allowing manufacturers to choose testing distances that may understate exposure in everyday use.

The timing of the commission’s decision has also sharpened concern about children’s exposure to wireless radiation. A study published in Physics in Medicine & Biology used 550 computer simulations to compare child and adult body models across 15 radiofrequency frequencies associated with 5G and anticipated 6G systems. The researchers found that, below 6GHz, child models absorbed whole-body radiation at rates 1.5 to 1.9 times higher than adult models, while at higher frequencies they absorbed more in the brain. The study also found that beamforming, a feature of 5G that concentrates signals into narrow paths, could create hotspots that exceeded absorption limits even where radiation at the skin stayed within regulatory thresholds.

Those findings are consistent with earlier research cited by The Defender, including studies suggesting that children’s smaller bodies, thinner skulls and tissue properties can make them more vulnerable to radiofrequency absorption than adults. Environmental Health Sciences said the new paper reinforces the need to reassess exposure standards as networks move towards higher frequencies and more advanced forms of beam steering. For campaigners, the immediate question is whether regulators will treat the European move as a template or merely as a belated correction to an outdated testing method.

In the United States, the debate remains open. The Department of Health and Human Services is accepting public comment until 21 October on possible harmful effects of radiofrequency radiation on human health and the environment, while the FCC has opened its own consultation until 22 October as it responds to a 2021 court order requiring it to address evidence on wireless radiation risks and explain its testing procedures. Advocates say those reviews are an opportunity to close the gap between regulatory practice and actual phone use, before a new generation of devices and networks makes the current standards even less relevant.