The Bio Initiative group, comprising  29 authors presents a minority view, described as a “Rationale for a Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF)”.  

This new report is still being fully reviewed, however, its predecessor, published in 2007, received widespread attention, and continues to be referred to by many activists worldwide. 

The report contains 24 sections, each by a separate author.  Authors come from the USA; India; Italy; Slovak Republic; Sweden; Denmark; Greece; Russia; Canada; Austria.

The RF Gateway Report summarises it:

This Bio Initiative Report (BIR) fundamentally reiterates, supports, and updates the conclusions and recommendations of the 2007 BIR. Key conclusions contained in the updated BIR are as follows:

The new studies examined since the 2007 version (the report states that 1800 additional studies were included) suggest the following effects of EMF exposure: “gene transcription; genotoxicity and single-and double-strand DNA damage; stress proteins because of the fractal RF-antenna like nature of DNA; chromatin condensation and loss of DNA repair capacity in human stem cells; reduction in free-radical scavengers – particularly melatonin; neurotoxicity in humans and animals, carcinogenicity in humans; serious impacts on human and animal sperm morphology and function; effects on offspring behavior; and effects on brain and cranial bone development in the offspring of animals that are exposed to cell phone radiation during pregnancy.”

EMF can cause adverse effects on fertility, behavioral problems in school, autism, brain and breast cancer, leukemia, Alzheimer’s disease, and more.

EMF has been successfully used as a beneficial agent in medical settings.

EMF can exacerbate the effects of other environmental toxins.

“Health agencies and regulatory agencies that set public safety standards for ELF-EMF and RFR should act now to adopt new, biologically-relevant safety limits that key to the lowest scientific benchmarks for harm coming from the recent studies, plus a lower safety margin.” A public exposure limit of 0.003 uW/cm2 is recommended for cumulative outdoor RF exposure. This is lower than the recommendation in the 2007 version (0.1 uW/cm2). Existing standards are not sufficient to protect public health, according to the BIR.

Strong precautionary warnings are merited for wireless devices and technologies.

More precaution is needed with regard to fetal and childhood exposures to EMF. The same is true for other “sensitive populations” such as the elderly and those with self-identified electrohypersensitivity.

“The standard of evidence for judging the scientific evidence should be based on good  public health principles rather than demanding scientific certainty before actions are taken.”

 “We have the knowledge and means to save global populations from multi-generational adverse health consequences by reducing both ELF and [RF] exposures. Proactive and immediate measures to reduce unnecessary EMF exposures will lower disease burden and rates of premature death,” the BIR states.

 The full report is available: http://www.bioinitiative.org/

 The Vodafone assessment of the Bio Initiative 2012 states:

"The self-selected “BioInitiative Working Group” has updated their 2007 report. They assert a range of health effects arising from exposure to “low-intensity electromagnetic radiation”. The report includes most of the original 2007 document with supplementary parts and some additional sections and in all it now extends to over 1300 pages split into 28 sections. The report addresses ELF (power line) and RF exposures. There is no discussion in the report on the methods used for selecting authors or the selection of studies to be considered or criteria for weighting evidence. The report does not introduce new material, rather it presents the opinions of the section authors who cite those studies in a way that would better support their opinions. A number of adverse health endpoints are attributed to EMF exposure." "...the report is not prepared under the auspices of a national or international health agency; The report appears to be highly selective in its selection of material to review so does not consider the range of evidence available from cited peer-reviewed sources covering the scope of the review; the report does not use and indeed challenges the WHO review and risk assessment approach to health based risk assessment as reflected in the guideline setting approach of ICNIRP.    The Vodafone assessment of the 2007 Bio Initiative Report concluded that "

UK Industry Association (Mobile Operators Association):

The updated report has all the limitations of the 2007 document, it remains a selective review of existing research and does not present a balanced analysis considering the relative scientific quality of different studies. It does not contain any new scientific data – but reflects individual author’s interpretations, and is consistent with the authors’ statements in various forums in the past. Criticism from scientific bodies and health agencies of the original report holds good for this update.   The position of the WHO on possible adverse health effects remains unchanged from 2011: “A large number of studies have been performed over the last two decades to assess whether mobile phones pose a potential health risk. To date, no adverse health effects have been established as being caused by mobile phone use.”   In the UK the most recent independent scientific review, published in 2012 found that although a substantial amount of research has been conducted, there is no convincing evidence that RF field exposure below internationally agreed guideline levels (which are applied in the UK) causes health effects in adults or children.

There has so far been limited activist attention, although one Indian campaigner has alerted his contacts to the publication and urged for even lower standards in India.  The Indian government moved to 1/10 ICNIRP standards in September 2012.