In March 2020, ICNIRP (the International Commission for Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection) published a set of guidelines for limiting exposure to electromagnetic fields (100 kHz to 300 GHz). ICNIRP claims this publication\'s view on EMF and health, a view usually termed \"the thermal-only paradigm\", is consistent with current scientific understanding. We investigated the literature referenced in ICNIRP 2020 to assess if the variation in authors and research groups behind it meets the fundamental requirement of constituting a broad scientific base and thus a view consistent with current scientific understanding, a requirement that such an important set of guidelines is expected to satisfy. To assess if this requirement has been met, we investigated the span of authors and research groups of the referenced literature of the ICNIRP 2020 Guidelines and annexes. Our analysis shows that ICNIRP 2020 itself, and in practice all its referenced supporting literature stem from a network of co-authors with just 17 researchers at its core, most of them affiliated with ICNIRP and/or the IEEE, and some of them being ICNIRP 2020 authors themselves. Moreover, literature reviews presented by ICNIRP 2020 as being from independent committees, are in fact products of this same informal network of collaborating authors, all committees having ICNIRP 2020 authors as members. This shows that the ICNIRP 2020 Guidelines fail to meet fundamental scientific quality requirements and are therefore not suited as the basis on which to set RF EMF exposure limits for the protection of human health. With its thermal-only view, ICNIRP contrasts with the majority of research findings, and would therefore need a particularly solid scientific foundation. Our analysis demonstrates the contrary to be the case. Hence, the ICNIRP 2020 Guidelines cannot offer a basis for good governance.

Clinical research aiming at objectively identifying and characterizing diseases via clinical observations and biological and radiological findings is a critical initial research step when establishing objective diagnostic criteria and treatments. Failure to first define such diagnostic criteria may lead research on pathogenesis and etiology to serious confounding biases and erroneous medical interpretations. This is particularly the case for electrohypersensitivity (EHS) and more particularly for the so-called \"provocation tests\", which do not investigate the causal origin of EHS but rather the EHS-associated particular environmental intolerance state with hypersensitivity to man-made electromagnetic fields (EMF). However, because those tests depend on multiple EMF-associated physical and biological parameters and have been conducted in patients without having first defined EHS objectively and/or endpoints adequately, they cannot presently be considered to be valid pathogenesis research methodologies. Consequently, the negative results obtained by these tests do not preclude a role of EMF exposure as a symptomatic trigger in EHS patients. Moreover, there is no proof that EHS symptoms or EHS itself are caused by psychosomatic or nocebo effects. This international consensus report pleads for the acknowledgement of EHS as a distinct neuropathological disorder and for its inclusion in the WHO International Classification of Diseases.

Major approaches of the Russian Federation in setting of exposure guidelines to electromagnetic fields (EMF) in occupational and public environments are discussed in this paper. EMF exposure guidelines in Russia are based on the results of hygienic, clinical, physiological, epidemiological and experimental studies and are frequency-dependent. The concept of a threshold principle of occupational and environmental factors due to hazardous exposure effects has been used to set permissible exposure levels of different EMF frequency ranges. The data of experimental studies showed hazardous threshold levels of EMF effects. The main criteria of EMF hazardous exposure evaluated in the experimental study concerned both estimation of threshold levels of chronic (long-term) and acute exposure. Also, this paper contains some recent experimental study data on correlation of long-term radiofrequency and power-frequency EMF exposure effects with regard to time duration, the so-called time-dependence approach. It enables identification of the value of permissible EMF exposure levels depending on exposure duration. This approach is used in occupational exposure guideline setting and requires the introduction of \"power exposition\" (PE) and \"maximal permissible level\" (MPL). In general, EMF exposure guidelines are established with regard to possible duration of exposure per day.