The HPA state "The report finds that although a substantial amount of research has been conducted, there is no convincing evidence that radiofrequency field exposure below internationally agreed guideline levels (which are applied in the UK) causes health effects in adults or children".  However, the chairman of the AGNIR is responsible for setting the existing guidelines (part of ICNIRP), introducing a potential conflict of interest. 

The report lists many studies finding damaging biological and health effects from radiofrequency electromagnetic fields below current guidelines, but manages to dismiss them for various reasons.  Some studies had been omitted.

No mention was made of the decision by the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) to classify radiofrequency radiation as possibly carcinogenic to humans, based on scientific evidence (May 2011). 

Professor Dariusz Leszczynski from the Finnish Radiation Protection Agency has commented that he considers the UK HPA report to be biased and misleading.  "Unlike the claims on HPA website the UK HPA AGNIR Report 2012 is not a comprehensive review but it is a biased review." "It is obvious that the AGNIR's members do not agree with the outcome of IARC evaluation. However, complete omission of it feels like rewriting of history and omitting inconvenient facts. In my opinion it shows a very biased attitude of AGNIR members towards the IARC classification. After all, in cancer research the IARC evaluations are a "gold standard"."

We illustrate the misleading nature of the report with an example here:

Male Fertility

The report has separated out studies into different sections making it harder to view all of the evidence for fertility together.  But we have brought together all of the male fertility studies mentioned in the report.  A list of male fertility studies included in the report, those omitted, plus those published since the report are listed in 'A need for accurate information, Appendix 2'.