“I want more babies in the United States of America.”
– Vice President JD Vance, March for Life Rally, January 24, 2025
Vice President JD Vance’s energetic call at the March for Life rally resounded with many pro-family advocates: America should be a land that celebrates life and makes it easier to raise children. Yet, in the same country that hopes for a baby boom, an invisible force could be sabotaging reproductive health. Recent studies suggest that radiofrequency (RF) radiation—emitted by phones, Wi-Fi, and 5G infrastructure—may cause fertility decline, embryonic harm, and DNA damage in reproductive cells. Ironically, unconstitutional telecom laws block us from even citing health concerns, while a vital Radiation Control law from 1968 remains ignored.
So, how does America reconcile “more babies” with the potential for radiation-induced fertility issues? This article dives into the scientific evidence, the legal labyrinth, and the urgent reforms needed to keep our children’s futures viable and free from unnecessary risk.
Why “More Babies” but Fewer Births? A Hidden RF Crisis
A Fertility Drop No One Wants to Talk About
According to the CDC, birth rates in the U.S. have been on a long downward trend. Policy makers—from both sides of the aisle—are brainstorming ways to encourage higher fertility, from boosted child tax credits to more childcare support. But few address a quiet factor that might erode fertility behind the scenes: non-ionizing radiation exposure from everyday devices (Avendaño et al. 2012; Agarwal et al. 2009).
For decades, major studies (NTP, Ramazzini, REFLEX) found possible non-thermal biological effects, including DNA fragmentation and oxidative stress—implicated in reduced sperm motility (Kesari 2011; Mailankot 2009), lower sperm count (Agarwal et al. 2008; Fejes et al. 2005), and harm to embryonic development (Mahaldashtian et al. 2021). Meanwhile, pregnant women exposed to wireless devices have shown possible fetal effects: lower ovarian follicle counts in animal studies (Gul et al. 2009) and increased hyperactivity markers (Aldad et al. 2012).
Despite these alarms, Section 704 of the 1996 Telecommunications Act muzzles communities from raising health concerns about RF radiation near schools, homes, or workplaces. Couple that with the lack of enforcement of Public Law 90-602 (Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act, 1968), and we have a perfect storm: a generation facing mounting fertility challenges in the name of “progress.”
How can we welcome “more babies” when we’re ignoring a potential threat to reproductive health?
The Science: RF Radiation and Reproductive Harm
1. Male Fertility Under Siege
Sperm Damage & DNA Fragmentation
- Agarwal et al. (2008, 2009): Found men using cell phones >4 hours/day had ~42% lower sperm count and doubled DNA fragmentation compared to non-users.
- De Iuliis et al. (2009): Showed RF exposure induced reactive oxygen species in sperm, causing DNA damage and reduced motility.
- Butković et al. (2024, Theriogenology): 5G frequencies (2500 MHz and 3500 MHz) caused significant DNA fragmentation and mitochondrial damage in boar semen—a model often used to study human fertility implications.
Hormonal Disruption & Oxidative Stress
- Mokhtarah et al. (2021): Indicate that chronic exposure to devices might lower testosterone and generate oxidative stress.
- Mustafa Nazıroğlu et al. (2013): Chronic Wi-Fi/mobile phone exposure linked to oxidative stress in reproductive signaling pathways.
Real-World Impact
- Men placing phones in pockets or belt holsters significantly alter sperm viability (Fejes et al. 2005; Gutschi et al. 2011).
- The net effect: fewer healthy sperm, higher risk of infertility, and potential congenital anomalies in offspring (La Vignera et al. 2012).
2. Female Fertility and Fetal Development
Ovarian & Fetal Effects
- Gul et al. (2009): Pregnant rats exposed to cellphone radiation had female pups with fewer ovarian follicles.
- Mahaldashtian et al. (2021): Literature review suggests RF-EMR exposure might threaten embryo development in mammals, with possible links to miscarriage and embryonic abnormalities.
Neurodevelopment & Behavioral Shifts
- Aldad et al. (2012, Yale Study): Mice exposed in utero to cell phone radiation exhibited hyperactivity and memory deficits, resembling ADHD.
- Divan et al. (2008, 2012): Prenatal and postnatal cell phone exposure correlated with behavioral issues in children, suggesting potential epigenetic or hormonal mechanisms at play.
Facing Reality: The scientific consensus is not monolithic, but enough robust, peer-reviewed data indicates that non-ionizing radiation could undermine fertility and embryonic development, especially if individuals are exposed at higher frequencies (like 5G) or over longer durations.
Laws That Gag Health Concerns and Ignore Existing Mandates
Section 704: A Federal Gag Order
Passed in 1996 under President Bill Clinton, Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act bars localities from rejecting cell towers “on the basis of environmental effects of radiofrequency emission,” effectively silencing concerns about:
- Fertility harm near schools, daycares, or neighborhoods with pregnant women.
- Any non-thermal biological effects, since the law defers to the FCC’s archaic guidelines that ignore them.
By stifling public discourse, the law violates:
- First Amendment: People cannot openly contest cell towers based on health science.
- Tenth Amendment: States and municipalities are stripped of their traditional powers to protect public welfare, including reproductive health.
Public Law 90-602: The Law We Ignore
Enacted in 1968, Public Law 90-602 (Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act) directs the FDA to:
- Conduct ongoing research on non-ionizing radiation, including reproductive impact.
- Update the public about new findings.
- Revise safety guidelines based on emerging science (e.g., sperm damage, embryonic risks).
Yet this law sits dormant, while the FCC clings to 1990s thermal-only models. The National Toxicology Program (NTP)—which found “clear evidence” of cancer at cellphone-level exposures—was defunded, leaving fertility-related research under-explored. The result? No meaningful updates to protect a new generation of “phone-in-pocket” expectant parents and adolescents.
JD Vance’s Rallying Cry: “I Want More Babies”
A Paradox in Policy
Vice President JD Vance, inaugurated this January, wants to “Make America Fertile Again” with incentives like bigger child tax credits, echoing conservative and pro-life sentiments. He told March for Life attendees that America’s future depends on robust family formation. But ignoring reproductive hazards from ubiquitous RF radiation directly contradicts these goals.
If sperm quality is dropping, miscarriages are rising, or fetal development is compromised by microwaves emanating from every phone and Wi-Fi router, all the baby bonuses in the world won’t reverse a potential biologically-driven fertility decline.
Why This Matters to Vance’s Agenda
- Long-Term Childbearing Slump: Even if couples conceive, unborn children face possible higher miscarriage rates or birth defects tied to RF exposure.
- Healthcare Costs: Increased fertility problems mean more IVF treatments, special needs education, and potential neonatal complications—draining resources from other pro-family initiatives.
- Moral & Ethical Consistency: Advocating for more births while ignoring laws that suppress reproductive health data is contradictory, if not hypocritical.
Science-Backed Policies: Making America “Hospitable for Life”
1. Repeal Section 704
Restoring Freedoms and Accountability
- Let localities voice health concerns about wireless infrastructure near schools, daycares, and neighborhoods with pregnant women or families.
- Force the telecom industry to adapt to real science, not outdated engineer-driven guidelines.
Constitutional Rationale
- Free speech (First Amendment) and state/local power (Tenth Amendment) need reinstatement for genuine democracy and health protection.
2. Enforce Public Law 90-602
Honor a 55-Year-Old Congressional Mandate
- Demand the FDA, CDC, and NIH rigorously study reproductive impacts of emerging 5G and Wi-Fi technologies.
- Publicly report findings, as required, updating guidelines to reflect non-thermal reproductive risks.
3. Update FCC Standards for Non-Thermal Biological Impacts
Move Beyond “Thermal-Only”
- Acknowledge oxidative stress, DNA fragmentation, hormonal disruption, and epigenetic effects.
- Base Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) limits or new metrics on actual fertility data, not 1990s thermal thresholds.
4. Encourage Safer Tech Development
Space-Based or Wired Alternatives
- Minimize the density of ground-level cell antennas—especially near homes, schools, workplaces—to reduce direct exposure to reproductive organs.
- Pursue satellite-based connectivity or robust fiber networks as safer long-term solutions.
5. Educate the Public
Practical Precautions
- Avoid carrying phones in pants pockets or bras—especially for those trying to conceive.
- Use speakerphone or air-tube headsets to reduce gonadal exposure.
- Turn off Wi-Fi at night or use wired connections in bedrooms.
Rally for Research
- Support independent studies replicating the NTP’s approach to fertility.
- Demand transparency: let doctors and scientists lead safety guideline revisions, not telecom engineers.
The Cost of Doing Nothing
If Americans ignore the fertility risks posed by microwave radiation, we may see:
- Continued Decline in Birth Rates: Infertility or subfertility climbs, despite financial incentives and cultural campaigns for childbearing.
- Rise in Developmental Issues: Increased cases of congenital defects, neurodevelopmental problems, and possibly epigenetic harm carrying into future generations.
- Greater Healthcare Burdens: Spiraling costs for fertility treatments, higher-risk pregnancies, and interventions for children affected by prenatal RF exposure.
No national policy can effectively boost births if it fails to first ensure that the environment is “hospitable for life”
More Babies or More Barriers?
America stands at a crossroads. Vice President JD Vance is championing a surge in birth rates to secure our nation’s future, yet laws like Section 704 silence legitimate concerns about reproductive threats from constant RF exposure. Meanwhile, Public Law 90-602—designed to protect Americans from radiation hazards—remains unenforced. All the while, science accumulates, pointing to non-thermal reproductive harm at everyday exposure levels.
If we’re serious about supporting families, we must:
- Repeal Section 704, restoring free speech on RF health.
- Enforce Public Law 90-602, ensuring real research on fertility.
- Modernize FCC standards, accounting for the abundant data on sperm DNA fragmentation, miscarriage, and embryonic harm.
In short, we can’t cheer “Let’s have more babies!” while ignoring the invisible radiation possibly undermining those very ambitions. It’s time for Congress, the FDA, and the FCC to do their jobs—for the sake of every family yearning for a healthy child and every unborn life we claim to value.
References & Further Reading
Key Research on RF Exposure and Reproductive Risks
- Agarwal A, Deepinder F, Sharma RK, Ranga G, Li J. (2008) Effect of cell phone usage on semen analysis in men attending infertility clinic. Fertil Steril 89(1):124-8.
- Avendaño C, Mata A, Sanchez Sarmiento CA, Doncel GF. (2012) Use of laptop computers connected to internet through Wi-Fi decreases human sperm motility and increases sperm DNA fragmentation. Fertil Steril 97(1):39-45.
- Butković I et al. (2024) Effects of 5G Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation on Indicators of Vitality and DNA Integrity of In Vitro Exposed Boar Semen. Theriogenology.
- De Iuliis GN, Newey RJ, King BV, Aitken RJ. (2009) Mobile phone radiation induces reactive oxygen species production and DNA damage in human spermatozoa in vitro. PLoS One 4(7): e6446.
- Divan HA, Kheifets L, Obel C, Olsen J. (2012) Cell phone use and behavioral problems in young children. J Epidemiol Community Health 66(6):524-9.
- Gul A, Celebi H, Ugras S. (2009) The effects of microwave emitted by cellular phones on ovarian follicles in rats. Arch Gynecol Obstet 280(5):729-33.
- Mahaldashtian M, Khalili MA, Anbari F, Seify M, Belli M. (2021) Challenges on the effect of cell phone radiation on mammalian embryos and fetuses: a review of the literature. Zygote.
- Mokhtarah MS, Osman K, Jaffar FHF, Ibrahim SF. (2021) Effect of Radiation Emitted by Wireless Devices on Male Reproductive Hormones: A Systematic Review. Front Physiol 12:732420.
Legal & Policy Context
- Section 704, 1996 Telecommunications Act
- Public Law 90-602, Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act of 1968
Organizations & Reports
- Environmental Health Trust (EHT)
- National Toxicology Program (NTP)
- BioInitiative Report
- RF Safe: Focuses on reducing RF exposure through technology solutions and advocacy.
Action Steps for Readers
- Contact Elected Officials: Demand repeal of Section 704 and full enforcement of Public Law 90-602. Mention the fertility crisis and non-thermal dangers documented in recent studies.
- Adopt Precautionary Habits: Keep phones away from reproductive organs, minimize Wi-Fi usage, and turn devices off when not needed.
- Share Information: Forward this article to friends, family, community leaders—especially those backing pro-family policies or concerned about health freedom.
- Stay Informed: Follow independent research hubs like Environmental Health Trust and RF Safe for updates on wireless safety breakthroughs.
Because if we truly want “more babies” in America, we owe it to future families to ensure the environment is not only economically but biologically fit for new life.
