RFK Jr.’s HHS Deletes Pages Claiming Cellphones Are Safe
In a surprising shift that’s attracting widespread attention, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) quietly removed key webpages from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) website that previously stated cellphones aren’t dangerous to human health. These changes mark a notable turn in federal messaging and have sparked fresh debate about cellphone radiation, health risks, scientific consensus, and government policy. This article explains what happened, why it matters, what the science says, and what experts think — all in clear, searchable language.
What the Health Department Did Recently, the Food and Drug Administration, which operates under HHS, removed or altered webpages that used to explain that the scientific evidence does not show that cellphone use causes health risks such as cancer. According to HHS, the pages contained “old conclusions” and were taken down while the department undertakes a new review and study on cellphone radiation and its effects on human health. This move wasn’t publicly announced with fanfare. It happened quietly online, but it signals a shift from simply saying “phones are safe” to exploring whether more research is needed.
Background: Who Is Robert F. Kennedy Jr.? Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is the current U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services — a senior federal role overseeing agencies like the FDA, CDC, and NIH. He took this position in early 2025. Kennedy has a long record of questioning mainstream science on public health topics. He previously became well-known for his controversial views on vaccines and for leading legal challenges against federal agencies. His leadership at HHS has already introduced several policy changes that attracted public debate.
Why Pages on Cellphone Safety Were Removed
According to an HHS spokesperson, the webpages were removed because they reflected outdated conclusions about cellphone radiation safety. The reasoning is that science evolves, and federal health agencies should not present conclusions that might be based on older data while a new review is underway. Instead of directly saying “cellphones are safe,” the FDA is now pointing users to broader information about electronic product radiation and regulatory duties. This change shifts the tone from assertive safety claims to ongoing inquiry and scientific review.
The New Study on Cellphone Radiation Alongside removing the old safety webpages, HHS announced a new study to examine the health effects of cellphone radiation. This review will look specifically at radiofrequency radiation (RFR) emitted by mobile phones. This research is meant to “identify gaps in knowledge” and assess whether long-term exposure to cellphone radiation could affect biological systems. Details like the exact timeline, funding, and scope of the study have not been publicly released yet.
What Current Scientific Evidence Says Understanding what scientists currently think is key to this story. What Major Health Agencies Say Before the pages were removed, agencies like the FDA and the National Cancer Institute (NCI) stated that studies to date do not show a clear link between cellphone use and cancer or other serious health issues. International organizations, including the World Health Organization (WHO), have also reviewed the evidence. In a large review, WHO-linked researchers found no clear connection between cellphone use and brain cancer. These conclusions were based on decades of research and population studies. Why Some Think More Research Is Needed Some scientists and public health advocates argue that more long-term data are needed, especially given modern changes in cellphone technology, 5G signals, and increased daily use. Even if radiation doesn’t cause cancer, researchers want to understand other health effects such as neurological changes or effects on children who use phones heavily over many years.
RFK Jr.’s Concerns About Cellphones and Health Kennedy has publicly shared concerns about electromagnetic radiation from cellphones and 5G technology, sometimes suggesting links to brain damage or DNA harm. These views are much more alert than the broader scientific consensus. His supporters believe that government health agencies must take a precautionary approach to public health risks — even when evidence is not yet conclusive.
Critics’ Point of View
Many scientists and health policy experts are skeptical of this shift for several reasons: They point out that existing studies haven’t found convincing evidence linking cellphone radiation to cancer. Some critics argue the move is political or symbolic, not based on new science. Others worry that removing safety messages could confuse the public about well-established evidence.
In scientific terms, cellphone radiation is non-ionizing, meaning it doesn’t break chemical bonds or directly damage DNA like X-rays or UV light do. Critics cite this to argue that known mechanisms for causing cancer are not present at typical cellphone exposure levels.
Why This Matters for Public Health Cellphones are a part of everyday life for billions of people worldwide, including children. Any shift in federal health messaging is significant because: People rely on public health agencies for clear safety information. Messaging influences regulation, research funding, and consumer behavior. Miscommunication can lead to public confusion and fear.
This is why the removal of safety pages and the new study announcement has drawn attention from media, scientists, and the public alike.
What Happens Next? At this point: 1. HHS will conduct the new study on cellphone radiation effects.
2. The FDA may update its website with new information or conclusions as research evolves.
3. Scientists outside the government will continue studying cellphone radiation.
4. Public debate will likely continue over how health agencies should talk about phone radiation safety. Experts say any change in public guidance should be based on clear evidence, not early assumptions.
Conclusion The decision by RFK Jr.’s Department of Health and Human Services to remove webpages saying cellphones aren’t dangerous represents a notable shift in how federal health agencies talk about cellphone radiation. Whether this change leads to new
safety guidelines, updated research
findings, or more public debate, it highlights the complex balance between public policy, science communication, and ongoing research. People who use cellphones every day may wonder what this means for their own health. The best approach is to stay informed as new studies are published and to understand that science often evolves — sometimes slowly — as new data arrive.
EmoticonEmoticon