Wireless radiation sickness has a new and more universally acceptable name: Electromagnetic Radiation Syndrome, or EMR Syndrome, according to a press release issued by the OneName Project.

(Article by Suzanne Burdick republished from ChildrensHealthDefense.org)

EMR Syndrome is a “new unifying name for a 21st-century health crisis,” the press release said.

Millions of people experience physical symptoms — including headaches, insomnia, heart palpitations and more — when exposed to electromagnetic radiation (EMR), according to the press release.

But until now, it’s been difficult for these individuals to advocate for themselves and educate others because there’s been no single, easily understandable term for the condition.

Instead, there were multiple names, including electromagnetic sensitivity, electrohypersensitivity, microwave syndrome, Havana syndrome and others.

Some of these names stigmatized the people by labeling them as “sensitive,” instead of placing the blame on the radiation that was causing their illness. Other names confused the public — such as microwave and Havana syndrome — because they sounded like references to microwave ovens and the capital of Cuba, rather than wireless radiation from cellphones, Wi-Fi routers and smart devices.

That’s why the “OneName Project” was created.

The project brought together people living with EMR-related disabilities, leading wireless radiation experts, safe technology advocates and medical professionals to choose one term — a simple, non-stigmatizing term — to label illness from exposure to wireless radiation and electromagnetic fields.

“This decision was the result of a truly collaborative process,” said organizing committee member Kent Chamberlin, Ph.D. “We’ve not only created a unified identity for this condition but also a renewed sense of hope for those living with it.”

Chamberlin is past chair and professor emeritus of Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of New Hampshire. He served on the New Hampshire Commission to Study The Environmental and Health Effects of Evolving 5G Technology, a team of independent experts convened by the state to answer questions about the impacts and safety of cell towers and wireless radiation. He is now president of the Environmental Health Trust (EHT).

People who have EMR Syndrome and their allies are now working to ensure that EMR Syndrome is formally recognized by global organizations, such as the World Health Organization, according to the press release.

Accommodation cards that explain the term for people with EMR Syndrome to carry and distribute for educational purposes will soon be available on the EMR Syndrome website.

‘People need one name they can recognize and remember’

Organizing committee member Ruth F. Moss, who directs SafeTech Westchester in New York and has EMR Syndrome, said her first question after being diagnosed with EMR-related illness in 2015 was “What do you call this?”

“Over several months, I got five different answers,” Moss said. She had worked for years in marketing, so she knew that having five different terms for EMR-related illness was a problem in building public awareness.

“I assumed someone in the movement must be trying to coalesce the names,” she recalled. But over the next year, she realized that wasn’t the case. She also realized there weren’t just five names for EMR-related illness, but “10 names, 15 names.”

It was clear that she and others with EMR-related illness needed one term as they advocated for themselves and safe technology, rather than diluting their efforts with multiple terms.

“No one is going to remember a health condition if it’s called 10 different things. People need one name that they can recognize and remember,” Moss said. “It’s the way our brains work.”

Project was ‘thorough, independent and not swayed by bias’

It was a daunting task to decide on one name for electrosensitivity, members of the project’s organizing committee said.

“We took many months thinking through the best way to do this,” said Andrew Molnar, who helped lead the organizing committee. Molnar directs Ithacans for Responsible Technology and has EMR Syndrome.

Moss agreed. “No decision was made swiftly,” she said. “Team members were willing to talk everything through to its fairest conclusion.”

Chamberlin said it was important to the committee members that the process of selecting a name was “thorough, independent and not swayed by bias.”

The organizing committee developed a series of steps they committed to follow using a transparent process, he said, beginning with an online public forum that ran for four months.

The forum elicited input from people who have EMR Syndrome, safe tech advocates and the general public about what criteria were important to them in selecting a new name. It also collected ideas for the new name.

Initially, the organizing committee members thought that consensus on a new name might emerge from the public forum. But although the criteria for a new name became clear, no one term rose to the surface as everyone’s first choice.

“As time went on,” Molnar said, “we realized we needed to pull together a group of experts to look at the data.”

So the organizing committee convened a decision-making committee of 11 international medical professionals, research scientists and leading advocates for those with EMR Syndrome who had name recognition in the EMR and safe technology field.

Their participation boosted the credibility of OneName Project’s process, Chamberlin said. The organizing committee handed over the public comments to the decision-making committee members, along with a list of suggested criteria derived from the comments.

The two most important criteria for the new name were that it would be easily understandable by the public, and wouldn’t stigmatize or blame those with the condition.

The decision-making committee’s job was to select a name, based on their analysis and discussion of the data.

The handover posed a challenge for some members of the organizing committee. “We knew a name could be chosen that we didn’t like,” Moss said, “but this was bigger than personal preferences.”

The decision-making committee met twice in September 2024. Molnar moderated their discussions.

They decided on “EMR Syndrome” because it achieved the delicate balance between what was medically and scientifically credible, and what the public said they wanted in a new name.

“This balance was paramount to the process,” said organizing committee member Pam Wallace, who directs SafeTech Forward in Michigan and has EMR Syndrome. “It’s the reason we had professionals from the medical, scientific, legal and educational communities on the Decision-Making Committee.”

Dr. Sharon Goldberg, an integrative and functional medicine doctor with experience treating patients with EMR Syndrome, was on the decision-making committee. She shared reasons why the committee chose “EMR Syndrome.”

“The previous names — like electrohypersensitivity — were a problem when the person went to the doctor,” she said. Such terms labeled the person as too sensitive. “That needed to change.”

EMR Syndrome’s etiology is clear. It focuses on EMR as the cause of the person’s symptoms without stigmatizing the person reporting the symptoms, Goldberg said. Also, people are used to hearing the word “syndrome” to describe medical conditions. Sometimes the pharmaceutical industry uses the word in marketing new drugs.

The term also works well in scientific publications and litigation because it’s broad enough to cover all forms of illness caused by radiation along the EMR spectrum.

‘People are getting it’

Moss said she has already begun using “EMR Syndrome” in conversation. “People are getting it,” she said.

The name is also an effective teaching tool. If people say, “What’s EMR?” you can answer that, Moss said.

Members of both committees acknowledged that public acceptance of the new name may take time — and that some countries may prefer to stick with an old name.

For instance, the U.K. has used electrohypersensitivity for a long time, said organizing committee member Nicholas Martin, chairs a U.K. organization focused on EMR-disability.

Molnar agreed. “There are a number of medical systems — especially in Europe where electrohypersensitivity is the technical term — that might still choose to keep that as their technical term, and that’s fine.”

It’s common for a condition to have both a technical term and a vernacular term. “For example, conjunctivitis is the technical scientific term for pink eye,” Molnar said.

The U.S. Access Board uses the term “electromagnetic sensitivity” for EMR-related disability.

Molnar said:

“Though it would be ideal, we may not ultimately convince every single scientific or governmental entity to change its official name. That’s not what we’re trying to do here. We’re trying to get one name for the public that really helps focus our efforts and starts getting the public to rally around us.”

Are FCC wireless radiation limits good enough?

The new name comes at a time of growing doubt that the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) exposure limits for wireless radiation adequately protect people’s health. The limits haven’t been updated since 1996.

In 2021, Children’s Health Defense, EHT and other groups won a lawsuit challenging the FCC’s exposure limits.

The groups filed 11,000 pages of evidence of harm from 5G and wireless technology, which they alleged the FCC ignored when it decided to keep its 1996 guidelines. The pages included evidence of widespread sickness due to wireless radiation exposure.

The FCC has yet to comply with a court-ordered mandate to explain how the agency determined that its current guidelines adequately protect humans and the environment against the harmful effects of exposure to wireless radiation.

Meanwhile, scientists and safe tech advocates say there are things the telecom industry can do to mitigate people’s wireless radiation exposure. A Swiss telecom company also acknowledged this in a 2003 patent application.

For instance, Chamberlin and other scientists with the International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields in 2023 published a peer-reviewed report on how the industry could make “simple engineering fixes” to reduce cellphone radiation.

There’s also patented technology for undergarments that reduce the wearer’s exposure to EMR.

Local communities can do things, too.

Cities can pass ordinances that require cell towers to be at least 1,640 feet from homes, businesses and schools. That’s the setback distance the New Hampshire commission recommended to adequately protect human health.

Public awareness of EMR Syndrome can boost these efforts — and help people live healthier lives, Goldberg said. “Awareness of wireless radiation can be applied as lifestyle medicine,” she explained, “provided that patients are motivated and willing to reduce their in-home exposure.”

For instance, studies show that reducing one’s exposure to wireless radiation can help lower blood sugar levels and improve sleep.

Wallace agreed. “This is about pointing the way to more awareness and safer practices that can be used to live safer and healthier lives.”

Read more at: ChildrensHealthDefense.org