-
- "...not only are many hands-free devices useless
in protecting wireless phone users from radiation that might cause tumors,
these products may actually raise the amount of radiation being directed
into the head by three times."
-
- Earthpulse Press has been following the development of
new technologies over the last ten years. Our research efforts and publications
have been focused on the impacts of new technology on both human health
and the planet's operating systems. The idea that both could be impacted
in profound ways through the introduction of new energetic factors may
well prove to be the environmental story of the 21st century. One of the
leading new factors is cell phone technology that is predicted to have
over 1.3 billion worldwide users by the year 2005. Cell phones have been
one of the fastest growing industries in modern history. The uses of electronic
communications for average people began with the introduction of personal
paging systems in the 1970's - expanding into remote telephones and cell
phones by the end of the century. Most people today have either portable
phones in the home, cell phones for away-from-home use or both. These devices
are connecting people in convenient ways as their cost continues to decline
with expanded use. The cost of cell phones will continue to drop as the
market increases in size and technologies become more capable and increasingly
cheaper to operate. Soon Internet and other connections will be added to
the remote world of the ethereal office space making us more productive,
more connected and perhaps more unhealthy. In the following article we
attempt to bring together much of the research and reporting over the last
ten years in the area of cell phone and home portable phones. Often in
the debate the portable home phone is not mentioned; however, it should
be kept in mind that many of these phones are no different in their potential
impacts on our health.
-
- The Health Effects Mount
-
- The idea of health effects from cell phones or other
devices is quickly becoming the focus of much research. The findings are
confirming for many researchers the observations made over the years of
the effects of very small energy sources on living things. It has been
discovered that small amounts of energy when delivered in the right way
can have the same effects as a massive dose of chemicals. The complexity
of living creatures is being found to be influenced by the most delicate
fields of electromagnetic energy. It has long been known that the subtle
effects of light and color when interpreted by the human eye results in
sight or when a sound wave, which is just another form of energy, is transformed
by the ear and brain into sound we can understand. Other forms of energy
are not well understood because their current form is a new addition to
our environment by mankind. The effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs)
continue to be reported worldwide. Tests were conducted in China at the
Microwave Institute of Zhejiang Medical University which demonstrated the
effects of exposure to environmental electromagnetic fields (EMFs) in 1170
subjects. Visual reaction time was prolonged and the scores of short-term
memory tests were lower in some high-intensity exposure groups. They also
found that these energy fields could affect the central nervous and immune
systems in man. Their data indicated that chronic exposure to EMFs are
associated with significant changes in some physiological parameters.1
In an American laboratory similar results have been reported. The impact
on Calcium ions, which are important in maintaining normal health functions
in brain tissues, was found in experiments. This may affect nervous system
function. Test "results confirm that amplitude-modulated radiofrequency
radiation can induce responses in cells of nervous tissue origin from widely
different animal species, including humans."2 This small effect has
significant health ramifications for people. Another area of concern is
in prenatal development in mammals. "Pregnant women have been warned
to be wary of using mobile phones after it was found radiation produced
by the devices caused defects in chicken embryos...US scientists tested
mobile phone-style radiation on more than 10,000 chicken embryos and as
a result some researchers are urging pregnant women not to use the phones
until the risks can be properly assessed. British mobile phone specialist
Roger Coghill said the findings were 'enormously worrying.'"3 "The
possible effects of radiofrequency (RF) radiation on prenatal development
has been investigated in mice. This study consisted of RF level measurements
and in vivo experiments at several places around an 'antenna park.' At
these locations RF power densities between 168 nW/cm2 and 1053 nW/cm2 were
measured. A progressive decrease in the number of newborns per dam was
observed, which ended in irreversible infertility."4 "Australian
research has found one of the strongest links between cell phones and cancer.
Over periods of 9 to 18 months, exposed mice had twice the tumor rate as
unexposed mice. The mice were exposed to cell phone radiation. As reports
linking cell phone use to adverse health conditions have been published,
attempts 'have been made by industry to hose down the findings with what
is called 'The Hockett Defense' (named after the chief Tobacco Institute
scientist) who advise his executives to repeat endlessly, 'men aren't rodents'.
As one of the scientists commented to me; 'but DNA is DNA'. At the level
of normal cell growth processes, human and animal cells act very similar."6
The body has to be seen in the context in which it operates. The body is
not a closed system but, rather, an open one which exchanges energy with
all of the forces around it. The human body seeks equilibrium or its own
balance. Energy interaction requires a corresponding action from the body.
On an energetic level this results in chemical changes, system stress and
other interactions which can be either healthy or not so healthy. The "new
techniques using low-frequency pulsed electromagnetic fields (e.g. digital
telecommunication) have raised the question of interferences with the biological
system of man. EEG-data of man sampled under the influence of these electromagnetic
fields are altered extremely in the range of alpha-activity during as well
as after exposure for some hours. This biological effect is induced by
field intensities lower than the given international limiting values. Regarding
these results there is the very important question of possible influences,
injurious to health for people exposed to pulsating electromagnetic fields,
especially by operating the new type of digital telecommunication networks
(GSM-standard)."7 In each of these kinds of observation a very limited
area is researched involving a few wave forms, frequencies and carrier
modulations in a sea of possibilities. Each of these tests represents a
look at the beach - a grain of sand at a time. Some energy fields are healthy
and are being used to create solutions to many health issues while others
are life threatening. The disconnect between technological fields of research
will dissipate over time as communication increases between research areas.
There has been a great deal of laboratory research into the biological
effects of EMFs in recent years. It has been shown that even fairly low
levels of electromagnetic radiation can change the human body's sleep rhythms,
affect the body's cancer-fighting capacity by harming the immune system,
and change the nature of the electrical and chemical signals communicating
between cells.8 The research has also shown that this energy may contribute
to Alzheimer's disease. "These results are consistent with previous
findings regarding the hypothesis that electromagnetic field exposure is
etiologically associated with the occurrence of Alzheimer's disease."9
Reports continue to amplify the same results which are being replicated
now around the world. At the same time the industry is shifting the standards,
changing cell phone designs and altering other factors which make evaluation
of the effects even more difficult. "Existing data indicate that RFR
of relatively low intensity (SAR < 2 W/kg) can affect the nervous system.
Changes in blood-brain-barrier, morphology, electrophysiology, neurotransmitter
functions, cellular metabolism, and calcium efflux, and genetic effects
have been reported in the brain of animals after exposure to RFR. These
changes can lead to functional changes in the nervous system. Behavioral
changes in animals after exposure to RFR have been reported."10, 11
New research indicates that exposure to cell phones' radiation causes red
blood cells to leak hemoglobin, the build up of which can cause heart disease
and kidney stones. Scientists exposed samples of blood to microwave radiation
and found that even at lower levels than those emitted by cell phones,
the blood cells leaked hemoglobin. "Last month, scientists at Sweden
Lund University found that two minutes of exposure to emissions from mobile
phones can disable a safety barrier in the blood causing proteins and toxins
to leak into the brain. This can cause the chances of developing diseases
such as Alzheimer's, multiple sclerosis and Parkinson's. Symptoms reported
by mobile phone users include fatigue, dizzy spells and memory loss."12
British scientists are demanding that mobile telephones carry a health
warning. "Amid an explosive growth of mobile communications, concerns
are mounting about cellular telephones' potential links to health problems
ranging from headaches to brain tumors... Mobile telephones are arguably
the most radiative appliance we have ever invented apart from the microwave
oven and people are putting them by their heads - arguably the most sensitive
part of the body," bio-electromagnetics scientist Roger Coghill said.
Cell phones emanate microwave radiation, and human brains may absorb up
to 60 percent of that energy." One engineer said he has suffered severe
loss of short-term memory. He began suffering from twitching eyes and numbness
of the head within months after using a digital mobile phone for up to
six hours per day in 1995. The National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB)
sets the standards for exposure in Britain. "Recommended radiation
limits are measured in 'specific absorption rates' - the amount of radiation
averaged over one gram of tissue." The NRPB recommends a limit of
10 milliwatts per gram, though proposed European guidelines are five times
more restrictive.13 How much evidence on the risks of mobile phones must
be shown before the industry admits to the risks? "Scientist Clas
Tegenfeld who is writing a book on biological effects of electromagnetic
fields is pessimistic: 'Already there are at least 15,000 scientific reports
on the subject. I am afraid the truth is that we don't want to know.'"14
Children may be more sensitive to microwaves than adults says an Australian
report indicating they absorb microwaves at 3.3 times the rate of adults.
"For amplitude- or pulse-modulated RF fields, there is the implication
that some form of envelope demodulation occurs in tissue recognition of
ELF modulation components, but the tissue remains essentially transparent
to the same signal as an unmodulated carrier."15 Extremely Low Frequency
(ELF) signals have been reported to stimulate physiological responses in
many experiments where in certain exposures there was an effect but in
others not manipulated in the same way there was no effect at all. It could
be compared to the dialing of a radio signal - if slightly off the signal
is not clear. Someday it will be as well understood as radio science when
dialing up the health of a person. Research is showing that the body can
be both monitored and influenced by measuring signals from the body and
conditioning signals entering the body. This area of science will also
advance. There have been reports of headaches caused by cell and portable
phone use.16 Evidence from the 1960s and 70s supports the conclusion that
cell phones cause headaches among some users. Cell phone "transmitting
frequencies fall in the most sensitive band for the microwave hearing effect.
The transmitting frequencies are also in the band that has maximal penetration
into the head. Further, when the head is shielded from the microwave energy,
the area of the head that needs to be exposed to the microwaves in order
for people to perceive the effect is in proximity to the antenna of present
day cellular telephones," Frey wrote. The most important point that
came out of his microwave research in the 1960s was that his human subjects
were reporting headaches. 30 years ago he encountered and reported headaches
from microwave energy exposure at approximately the same frequencies, modulations
and incident energies that present day cellular telephones emit.17 Dr.
Frey was involved in several research areas related to the concept of microwave
hearing or the act of creating audible signals inside the head without
a physical connection to a device. Perhaps this will one day lead to the
development of new concepts of wireless communications. These types of
communications have been researched and will likely emerge into the mix
of new technologies in the coming decades. Researchers have shown that
low intensity microwave exposure opens up the blood/brain barrier, a biological
effect which can allow the release of dangerous chemicals into the brain.
The U.S. Department of Defense stopped open funding of blood/brain barrier
experiments that used low intensity microwave energy, which is cause for
concern. Recognition of low-intensity effects would greatly limit military
exposures. Limiting the exposure of military personnel would have an impact
on many of the national defense systems. The problem is the "head
in the sand mentality." This approach to "don't know - don't
tell" has proven dangerous in the past to both civilians and military
personnel. "New Swedish research shows that the radiation from mobile
phones might make it easier for poison to penetrate into the brain. The
findings could explain the diseases that American soldiers who have participated
in high-tech warfare are suffering from. The unexplained symptoms of American
soldiers of the Kuwait war are suspected to link to the medication they
took against nerve gas. The microwaves surrounding soldiers in high-tech
warfare could have opened the blood/brain-barrier, and the medication penetrated
into the brain. The possibility is now being investigated by the US Air
Force in co-operation with the Lund scientists."18 "Data in the
literature now indicates that the dopamine/opiate system may be involved
in headaches and suggest that headaches may be due to cellular emissions...the
energy used was approximately the same in frequencies, modulations, and
incident energies as those emitted by present day cellular telephones.
These current reports of headaches may be the canary in the coal mine,
warning of biologically significant effects."19 The early research
by Dr. Frey was most revealing in that it was conducted before the advent
of the cell phone. As a result, the research was done with limited, if
any, economic impact on industry and the results were unchallenged. "German
investigators report that exposure to electromagnetic fields during mobile
phone use may increase resting blood pressure. Exposure of the right hemisphere
to a radio-frequency electromagnetic field for 35 minutes causes an increase
in sympathetic efferent activity with increases in resting blood pressure
between 5 and 10 mm Hg, most likely due to more pronounced vasoconstriction."20
"Mobile phones can cause sudden confusion and short-term memory loss,
according to worrying research by British military scientists. Signals
from the phones disrupt part of the brain which controls memory and learning,
researchers at the Defense Establishment Research Agency have discovered."
Project director Dr. Rick Hold said, "This is the first real evidence
that these sort of radio waves do have an effect on the brain." The
researchers found that the "signals made no difference in their measurements
for a short time, but then readings plunged off the graph. In a live rat,
the effect would have caused sudden memory loss and confusion."21
"Scientists from Colorado University have shown that frequent mobile
users had significantly depressed melatonin - a vital cancer-preventing
hormone. An Australian study has linked the phones to a higher rate of
brain cancer while a Swedish survey suggested that using a mobile phone
for more than 15 minutes could lead to headaches and fatigue."22 The
most difficult area of research is the complexity of interactions that
are possible. Nevertheless a great deal can be gained by looking at the
very specific sources of EMFs in determining both their effects and ways
to limit human exposure. "It is difficult to deny that RFR at low
intensity can affect the nervous system. However, data available suggest
a complex reaction of the nervous system to RFR. Exposure to RFR does produce
various effects on the central nervous system. The response is not likely
to be linear with respect to the intensity of the radiation. Other parameters
of RFR exposure, such as frequency, duration, waveform, frequency- and
amplitude-modulation, etc, are important determinants of biological responses
and affect the shape of the dose (intensity)-response relationship. In
order to understand the possible health effects of exposure to RFR from
mobile telephones, one needs first to understand the effects of these different
parameters and how they interact with each other."23 As we have increased
our exposure to both chemicals and EMFs in the last three decades we have
seen certain brain cancers increase in all age groups by 1% a year. Since
1980 those 65 and older have increased 2.5% a year. Among those over 85
the increase has been as much as 500% since 1973.24
-
-
- Remote Home Portable Phones
-
- Cell phones are not the only phones to cause concern
about health problems. "Today's high-frequency cordless phones may
emit a level of electromagnetic radiation similar to cellphones. F reasons
of health and privacy, a growing number of scientists and other experts
are dead set against cellphones. They say a cancer risk is associated with
signals that have a strong wattage and high frequency (short wavelength).
First generation cordless phones operate at about 60 megahertz and the
next ones ran at 900 megahertz - higher than 835MHz cellphones. The new
2.4 GHz is higher still and can transmit for several kilometers without
fading."25
-
- Brain Tumors?
-
- "Two new studies have shown links between mobile
phone usage and brain tumors. The studies are not absolutely conclusive
but the American and Swedish authors have urged users to ration use of
mobile phones until more is known. Dr. [Lennart] Hardel's study, as yet
unpublished, looked at brain tumor sufferers. It found a correlation between
phone use and cancer. His study showed that mobile phone use, regardless
which side of the head it was held against, increased the risk of a brain
tumor by almost two and a half times."26 Some of the leading researchers
were contracted by Motorola to carry out some experiments. Two of the world's
leading radiation experts reported to The Express that multinational companies
tried to influence the results of their research. "Professor Ross
Adey, a biologist, had his funding withdrawn by Motorola before completing
research which showed that mobiles affected the number of brain tumors
in animals. Dr. Henry Lai, who has been studying the biological effects
of electromagnetic fields for 20 years, was asked three times to change
findings on how they caused DNA breaks in rats."27 Both of these
scientists have been involved in academic, military and other research
projects throughout their lives. In fact many of their observations on
the health effects of EMFs have been used in increasing the military's
understanding of these potential weapons applications as reported in our
earlier work.28 "Jerry Phillips, who has a doctorate in biochemistry,
worked with U.C. Riverside's [Ross] Adey on Motorola-funded research beginning
in 1991." He describes a pleasant relationship with them until studies
linked exposure to changes in the incidence of brain tumors in rats. "Motorola
was adamant that Adey never mention DNA damage and RF radiation in the
same breath," Phillips said. "Motorola has been manipulative
of research that we and others have reported to them," said Adey.
"Essentially they cut us off because we were too inquisitive."
Adey found that some frequencies of RFR lessened the incidence of tumors
in rats. Motorola was unwilling to recognize this test, not wanting to
admit any biological effects of RFR whatsoever. "Phillips, Adey, and
others said they see a strong parallel between what's happening now and
the decades of denial by the tobacco industry..." Though 40% of the
energy radiated from cell phones is absorbed by the head, the amount is
not significant enough to cause heating. Evidence points to DNA damage
as a source of the health problems associated with cell phone use. It is
suggested that RFR may hinder the ability of DNA to repair itself.29 "'For
the first time in history, we are holding a high-powered transmitter against
the head,' said Ross Adey, a professor of biochemistry at the University
of California, Riverside. When you talk on your mobile phone, your voice
is transmitted from the antenna as radio frequency radiation (RFR) between
800MHz and 1,990MHz at a range that's right in the middle of microwave
territory. Not surprisingly, it now appears that exposure to this microwave
RFR may have serious health consequences."30 The research continues
with another major study being conducted in Europe. "The biggest study
to date into suspected links between mobile phones and cancer will begin
this year. Nearly 9,000 cancer sufferers in 14 countries will be interviewed
by scientists in a study funded by the European Commission. "Researchers
want to establish once and for all if there is a link between mobile phones
and brain tumors and other cancers." Results of the study should be
available by 2004.31 "Microwaves similar to those emitted by cell
phones may effect long-term memory, according to a new study by a University
of Washington researcher. Henry Lai, a research professor in the UW's bioengineering
department, has linked diminished long-term memory and navigating skills
in rats with exposure to microwaves like those from cellular telephones."32
"Public exposure to electromagnetic radiation (radiofrequency and
microwave) is growing exponentially worldwide with the introduction and
use of cordless phones, cellular phones, pagers and antennas in communities
designed to transmit their RF signals. The virtual revolution in science
taking place now is based on a growing recognition that non-thermal or
low intensity RF exposure can be detected in living tissues and result
in well defined bioeffects. Bioeffects that are reported to result from
RF exposure include changes in cell membrane function, metabolism, cellular
signal communication, activation of proto-oncogenes, and cell death. Resulting
effects which are reported in the scientific literature include DNA breaks
and chromosome aberrations, increased free radical production, cell stress
and premature aging, changes in cell membrane function including memory
loss, learning impairment, headaches and fatigue, sleep disorders, neurodegenerative
conditions, reductions in melatonin secretion, and cancer. The United States
has a de facto policy of 'post-sales surveillance' with respect to cell
phones. That means cell phones can be sold to the public, and only after
years of use will there be studies to characterize what health consequences,
if any, have arisen as a result."33 Some scientists are even warning
that constant cell phone use causes premature aging. "Low level radiation
from the phone 'heats up' body cells, damaging skin and making the user
look lined and haggard. The study by Nottingham University's School of
Biological Sciences is the latest research to raise concerns about the
effect of mobile phones on health. Dr. David De Pomerai, who is in charge
of the research team, said: 'Gradually, cells don't work properly, so the
life process becomes less efficient.' Dr. De Pomerai said that heavy mobile
phone users were just like heavy smokers who constantly inhaled cell-damaging
toxins without allowing the body time to repair the harm."34
-
- The Effect on Children
-
- While some manufacturers target children for cell phone
sales, experts point out that "cell phone radiation penetrates the
skulls and brains of kids more deeply than adults, and that this radiation
might cause tumors or otherwise affect a developing brain. Several brands
of cell phones exceed the radiation limits specified in FCC guidelines,
ABC News show 20/20 reported. Dr. Ross Adey, a widely published RF researcher
stated that 'Children categorically should not, be encouraged or allowed
to use' cell phones. " 35 "Overall, the available data on EMF
and cancer (especially leukemia, brain and breast cancer) are too inconsistent
to establish a cause-and-effect relationship, but there is enough evidence
of association to raise concern. As a matter of fact, epidemiology has
seen a large number of examples where health hazards were initially described
with unconvincing and sometimes inadequate experiments which demonstrated
a weak association with a given environmental influence. Such associations
were found between cholera and drinking water containing fecal contaminants,
between smoking and lung cancer or between exposure to vinyl chloride and
certain forms of liver cancer. All these associations were highly questioned
in the past and are now well recognized."36
-
- Current Research on Cell Phones Confirms Earlier Studies
of Risk
-
- Though 85 million Americans now use cell phones, Europeans
began widespread use of them much earlier with many now reporting side
effects from their use. Monica Sandstrom, of the Swedish National Institute
for Working Life, unveiled data from her agency's survey of cell phone
users - 5,000 in Norway and 12,000 in Sweden. "One quarter of the
Norwegian users, she noted, feel warmth on or behind the ear when they
use their phones...20 percent also linked frequent headaches and recurring
fatigue to cell-phone use. At least one of the symptoms noted, which include
dizziness, concentration difficulties, memory loss, and a burning sensation,
showed up in 47 percent of people who reported using these wireless devices
an hour or more daily." 37 "On March 9, the China Consumers Association
(CCA) issued a 'worrisome' warning about Chinese cell phones' electromagnetic
radiation and how this might affect phone users, the March 10 Yangcheng
Wanbao reported. According to the CCA, tests have found that some cell
phones' radiation was as high as 10,000 microwatts per square centimeter
(1,550 mw per square inch)." The newspaper noted a study by China's
Northern Communications University which said that half of cell phone's
radiation is absorbed by the human body and another quarter by the brain.38
"Experts studying mobile phones are waiting to investigate new research
from Poland which reportedly establishes a link between the devices and
cancer. The Sunday Mirror newspaper said the 20-year study of servicemen
had established 'the strongest link yet', showing a high cancer death rate
among soldiers exposed to microwave radiation, 'the same as that emitted
by the phones.'"39 "Using a mobile phone could drastically reduce
your sex drive, new research shows...Researchers tested rats and mice using
microwave radiation at lower levels similar to those emitted by mobile
phones. Scientists discovered that exposed rats had far less testosterone
in their blood stream than those which remained unexposed. The higher the
dose of radiation, the less testosterone was released by the body's glands,
resulting in diminished sexual activity." The test results are being
studied in Britain, where scientists are conducting similar research.40
"Current safety guidelines for cell phones assume no harmful effects,
as long as the microwave radiation they emit does not cause heating of
body tissue. Exposure limits are intended to protect us only from excessive
temperatures caused by absorption of energy, a known danger linked to the
intensity of radiofrequency microwaves." But living cells respond
in non-thermal ways to the fields produced by cell phones, and at intensities
below the established safety threshold.41 "Ionizing radiation is a
well-established risk factor for brain tumors. During recent years, microwave
exposure from the use of cellular telephones has been discussed as a risk
factor." A case-control study was undertaken, with exposure assessed
by questionnaires. It was determined that "Exposure to ionizing radiation,
work in laboratories, and work in the chemical industry increased the risk
of brain tumors. Use of a cellular telephone was associated with an increased
risk in the anatomic area with highest exposure."42 "In addition
to extremely-low-frequency (ELF) electric power fields, many millions of
mobile phone users worldwide are now also exposed daily to radiofrequency
fields under near-field conditions. We may expect that these newly evolved
behavioral patterns will be lifelong, with intermittent exposures at the
phone user's head making yet one more contribution to an already complex
daily EMF exposure arising in an aggregate of multiple and disparate sources."43
The cell phone industry continues to down-play the risk and defer to more
research. We understand the stringent proofs required to change the foundations
of the life sciences. This will occur when the impact of low intensity
energy is understood. In the mean time waiting for the proof in after-the-fact
studies does nor reassure the public. The precautionary principle is a
good one for an age in which technology is doubling every few months and
the impact of that technology may not be known for years after. We need
to open the doors in this area and in the mean time, find ways to reduce
risk and exposures for EMFs - particularly those created by home remote
and cell phones.
-
- Independent Research Funded by Industry Dr. Carlo
-
- "Dr. George Carlo is Chairman of the Carlo Institute.
He is a Fellow of the American College of Epidemiology, and is a specialist
in assessing and managing risks to public health. His work has included
studies addressing risks from the environment and consumer products, as
well as the safety and efficacy of pharmaceuticals and medical devices.
Dr. Carlo serves on the faculty of The George Washington University School
of Medicine. Dr. Carlo has served in diverse scientific advisory capacities,
including membership on the U.S. Congress Office of Technology Assessment
Agent Orange Advisory Panel, the chairmanship of Wireless Technology Research,
LLC, and director of the Breast Implant Public Health Project, LLC."44
This would be the person behind one of the most important cell phone studies
of the last century and the precursor to the storm. The industry has been
involved in attempting to influence the research and has been required
to pay for independent research. The companies involved have attempted
to control the data flow to the public as information has become available.
As far back as 1996 the issues began to surface with the following report.
"Motorola Inc. planned two years ago how to collaborate with the Cellular
Telecommunications Industry Association and Wireless Technology Research
L.L.C. to downplay potentially damaging scientific findings on possible
health risks from portable telephones, according to a Dec. 1994 internal
Motorola memo."45 The company the industry sought to collaborate
with was the firm which eventually used over $27,000,000 industry dollars
to research the risks of cell phones. In the body of that research several
issues emerged creating additional studies. The industry has continued
to place a premium on information and continues to monitor what is developing
in public debate with an eye to framing the debate. "The U.S. wireless
industry, responding to the global proliferation of media coverage of mobile
phone health concerns and to Internet-savvy activists, is leading an effort
to create a worldwide information-sharing network to counter negative publicity.
The Wireless Industry Global Information Network, or WIN, held its first
meeting Dec. 10 [1998] in London."46 This organization was set up
interestingly enough in advance of the initial report of findings. The
public relations plans began to unfold through a coordinated industry effort.
The story began to break. The head of the industry sponsored research issued
his report of findings. Dr. Carlo took a conservative approach in his findings
but his concerns were clear - precaution might be required. There may be
a correlation between cell phone use and cancer, according to the director
of the program. "The data, while 'important' only suggest that more
research is necessary,' said George Carlo, chairman of the industry-funded
Wireless Technology Research group. 'We're now in a gray area that we've
never been in before with this. When we're in a gray area, the best thing
to do is let the public know about the findings so that they can make their
own judgment," he said. WTR was formed by industry in 1993 and funded
with $25 million to conduct independent studies. The studies put animal
cells through 46 tests for cancer-inducing genetic damage. The research
was conducted at Stanford University and Integrated Laboratory Systems
in Research Triangle Park.47 "The close of the six-year, $27 million
Wireless Technology Research L.L.C. program has re-energized a public debate
about whether mobile telephones cause cancer or pose other health problems
to the nation's 70 million wireless subscribers. Indeed, WTR Chairman George
Carlo claims new studies suggest a possible mobile phone-cancer link. While
saying the results do not rise to the level of a public-health problem,
Carlo insists the findings demand serious attention of the federal government
and wireless industry."48 "The cellular phone industry probably
didn't pay researchers US$27 million dollars hoping they'd produce bad
news about the health effects of cell phones. Nonetheless, an industry-funded
study has done just that. While the findings are far from conclusive, they
are the first from an organization like the industry-supported Wireless
Technology Research. 'You would come to the [possible] conclusion that
RF [radio frequencies] causes genetic damage,' [Chairman George] Carlo
said. 'that is a huge surprise.' 'The findings represent a need for coordinated
public health action while there is more investigation into the hazards,'
he added. 'When you have 200 million people who are being exposed to cell
phones, you can't wait around for the slow scientific process to work.'"49
Dr. Carlo's initial reports were framed in the standard conservative approach
at finding the facts which science demonstrates. His research indicated
serious concerns based on the evidence but was not conclusive. He felt
that industry should pay attention and pursue the research. "In an
astonishing attack on the industry for which he once acted as a spokesman,
he accused firms of not taking safety seriously. 'The companies are now
spending millions trying to discredit me because, basically, they didn't
like what I told them', he revealed to The Express last night. 'I feel
angry and let down.' After presenting its results to the phone companies
in February, he claims they failed to take 'the appropriate steps to protect
consumers'. Dr. Carlo, a leading public health scientist based in Washington,
said: 'They have shown total disregard for mobile phone users.'"50
The project director did get the information to the right people in the
hope that the public could be protected by the application of precaution
for the consumer. "Dr. George Carlo, in his capacity as director of
Wireless Technology Research wrote a letter to the CEO of AT&T which
has serious legal implications for mobile phone manufacturers who have
claimed that there is no evidence for adverse health effects from mobile
phone use. With the letter widely circulated in the industry, making that
claim now could possibly expose them to litigation in much the same way
as what happened to the tobacco industry, where it was shown that industry
assurances of no evidence of hazards from smoking was a complete fabrication."51
Quoting from "Dr. George Carlo's letter to Mr. C. Michael Armstrong,
Chairman of AT&T Corporation the potential risks were presented:
-
- '* The rate of death from brain cancer among handheld
phone users was higher than the rate of brain cancer death among those
who used non-handheld phones that were away from their head; * The risk
of acoustic neuroma, a benign tumor of the auditory nerve that is well
in the range of the radiation coming from a phone's antenna, was fifty
percent higher in people who reported using cell phones for six years or
more, moreover, that relationship between the amount of cell phone use
and this tumor appeared to follow a dose-response curve; * The risk of
rare neuro epithelial tumors on the outside of the brain was more than
doubled, a statistically significant risk increase, in cell phone users
as compared to people who did not use cell phones; * There appeared to
be some correlation between brain tumors occurring on the right side of
the head and the use of the phone on the right side of the head; * Laboratory
studies looking at the ability of radiation from a phone's antenna to cause
functional genetic damage were definitely positive, and were following
a dose-response relationship.
-
- I also indicated that while our overall study of brain
cancer occurrence did not show a correlation with cell phone use, the vast
majority of the tumors that were studied, were well out of range of the
radiation that one would expect from a cell phone's antenna. Because of
that distance, the finding of no effect was questionable. Today I sit here
extremely frustrated and concerned that appropriate steps have not been
taken by the wireless industry to protect consumers during this time of
uncertainty about safety. I am concerned that the wireless industry is
missing a valuable opportunity by dealing with these public health concerns
through politics, creating illusions that more research over the next several
years helps consumers today, and false claims that regulatory compliance
means safety. The better choice by the wireless industry would be to implement
measured steps aimed at true consumer protection. The most important measures
of consumer protection are missing: complete and honest factual information
to allow informed judgment by consumers about assumption of risk; the direct
tracking and monitoring of what happens to consumers who use wireless phones;
and, the monitoring of changes in the technology that could impact health."52
On the program ABC 20/20 Dr. Carlo continued expressing his concern and
dismay in the way he was handled by the industry. "You can not guarantee
that cell phones are safe. That's absolutely true, but that has always
been true. [Brian] Ross: ...The cell phone transmits a microwave signal
from an antenna to a base station or tower, often miles away. The farther
from the tower, or if the phone is inside a building or a car, the more
power this phone is told by the tower to send out to make or keep the connection.
Depending on how close the cell phone antenna is, as much as 60 percent
of the microwave radiation is absorbed by and actually penetrates the area
around the head, some reaching an inch to an and a half into the brain."53
On the same day Dr. Carlo was quoted by ABC News as saying, "'The
industry had come out and said that there were thousands of studies that
proved that wireless phones are safe, and the fact was that there were
no studies that were directly relevant, says Dr. George Carlo. 'We've moved
into an area where we now have some direct evidence of possible harm from
cellular phones.' The $200-billion-a-year cell phone industry maintains
the devices are safe."54 The FDA as a result of this research and
others finally announced a study of their own. "Federal safety regulators
are investigating whether microwave radiation from cell phones causes cancer
or other diseases. The investigation was triggered by two industry-sponsored
studies that the Food and Drug Administration said require additional research.
The question of cell phone safety recently led Metrocall of Alexandria,
Va., the nation's third-largest pager company and a major seller of AT&T
cellular phones to warn its sales staff that parents buying for a child
or young adult should consider a pager instead of a cell phone 'due to
potential health risks. '"55
-
- Liability and Possible Claims
-
- In the initial days of the controversy regarding cell
phones the industry developed a huge public relations effort in the face
of lawsuits and adverse press reports impacting the industry. Paul Staiano,
President of Motorola General Systems stated, "Forty years of research
and more than ten thousand studies have proved that cellular phones are
safe."56 This quote, from the industry, was an incredible exaggeration
of the research as it related to cell phone risks. "Since then, however,
the industry has largely put forth studies that looked at the effects of
radio waves outside the cellular frequency, or at exposure levels that
are different from those experienced by cellular phone users." "'The
industry hasn't told the public the full story about how there has been
very little research on biological effects at low level exposures, similar
to those of handheld phones,' says Louis Slesin, editor of Microwave News,
a New York newsletter and a frequent critic of the industry's handling
of the safety issue."57 Very limited information has been available
to the public about the risks of cell phones or various electromagnetic
fields outside of some obscure research and academic circles. The fact
is that increasing evidence has been mounting and the true risks of these
energy fields are becoming well known. The possibility of another tobacco-type
of health scandal was perhaps in the offing when a closed Congressional
hearing was held to develop regulations and recommend further studies of
electromagnetic field (EMF) health effects. They suggested moderation in
phone use until more is known while an FDA paper, dated Feb. 4, 1992, suggested:
"those who spend long periods of time on their hand-held cellular
phones could consider holding lengthy conversations on conventional phones
and reserving the hand-held cellular models for shorter conversations..."58
Many studies have been sponsored by industry, academic institutions, government
laboratories and by military research organizations into the effects of
low levels of electromagnetic radiation. The constant problem in the debate
of risks is the limited knowledge about the fact that very specific fields
interacting with our bodies can in fact have significant effects on our
health. These effects vary throughout populations with some effected to
a greater degree than others. This is related to our physical and biochemical
differences. The research which is being conducted by the industry is ignoring
much of what has already appeared in the literature regarding risk factors.
The FDA concluded in a February 8, 2000 report that; "There is currently
insufficient scientific basis for concluding that wireless communication
technologies are safe or that they pose a risk to millions of users. A
significant research effort, including well-planned animal experiments,
is needed to provide the basis to assess the risk to human health of wireless
communications devices."59 The FDA has begun a three to five year
study to look at some of these effects. This comes at the conclusion of
the industry sponsored Carlo study which, together with other recent studies,
show increasing risk to human health related to cell phone emissions. Congress
passed the Telecommunications Act of 1996, P.L. 101-104, 110 Stat. 56(1996).
"Section 704 of the act amends the Communications Act by providing
federal preemption of state and local regulation of personal wireless service
facilities on the basis of RF environmental effects."60 In other words
states and local communities may not adopt more stringent protections if
the federal regulatory authorities fail to protect the public. This limitation
on the rights of states or local governments essentially leaves any risk
assessment and solution to the federal level regulatory authorities. The
FDA approach and the reluctance of the United States government to move
on this issue is directly related to lobby efforts, public relations gimmicks
and the manipulation of the facts behind what is a major concern to many.
At present the evidence is causing some to follow the "precautionary
principle "in dealing with the potential adverse health consequences
of cell phones and other sources of radio frequency radiation. Other governments
were taking a different approach. "The [Australian] Senate late yesterday
agreed to a Senate inquiry into electromagnetic emissions (EME), particularly
from mobile phones. Senator Allison said the inquiry is necessary because
of the Federal Government's ongoing failure to ensure that public health
issues are properly considered in standard setting for mobile phone emissions.
The Minister for Communications and the industry refuse to acknowledge
what most Australians know intuitively; that it is not just the heat from
mobile phones that is a potential health risk."61 Studies to determine
if there is a cancer-cell phone radio frequency (RF) EMF link are ongoing
and others are planned. "A study funded by McCaw Cellular Communications
will determine the amount of RF EMF given off by cellular phones and its
pattern of absorption in the human head and brain."62 This study was
eventually completed leading to an additional study totaling about $27,000,000.
The Carlo study, as an industry sponsored research effort, indicated serious
concerns for the industry. The risks associated with cell phones are being
considered too risky even by the biggest risk takers in the insurance industry.
"Concern about the safety of mobile phones has prompted a leading
Lloyd's underwriter to refuse to insure phone manufacturers against the
risk of damage to users' health...fears that mobile phones will be linked
to illnesses such as cancer and Alzheimer's have prompted John Fenn, of
underwriting group Stirling, to refuse to cover manufacturers against the
risk of being sued if mobiles turn out to cause long-term damage."63
Risk management and the kinds of legal concerns arising out of the tobacco
lawsuit has turned insurers of product liability claims on their heads.
Insurance underwriters investigate risk through the review of information
available to them. The level of evidence they need to move in the direction
of safety is less perhaps than is needed for a scientist to say "aha,
this is a scientific fact." But who is right and when is the public's
risk placed ahead of insurance risks? "Should it become clear that
the digital pulsed modulation signal does have adverse effects - which
may act as triggers to adverse health conditions, - then manufacturers
could face massive legal claims for failing to provide any or adequate
health warnings to mobile phone users. Lloyds of London has I understand
refused to issue product liability cover for manufacturers and sellers
on mobiles..."64 Employers may also be liable according to legal opinions.
"Employers are usually required to provide a safe system of work.
A number of employers expect their employees to carry out their duties
and responsibilities using mobile phones for hours at a time. It could
well turn out to be a non-safe system of work for which substantial damages
may be awarded as a result of adverse health conditions. A number of cases
have already been settled out of Court but again subject to confidentiality
clauses."65 Companies recognizing potential third party litigation
have also been attempting to reduce their risk. Reasonable technological
advances which could decrease risk are being put forward by employers who
require cell phone use in the course of employee work. The risk of future
litigation increases if the precaution is not taken to provide a safe workplace.
"Europe's third-largest manufacturer of electrical appliances, Merloni
Elettrodomestici SpA, has decided to supply its employees with dual-band
cell phones capable of operating with a microphone and headphones for safety
reasons. The decision follows a major press campaign in Italy on the dangers
of electromagnetic waves. [CEO Francesco] Caio is very sensitive to the
problems of health and the environment and some of our employees had begun
to express doubts and worries."66 The other concern is that perhaps
other risks are created in the solutions. As is described in the research
the removal of the cell phone from the head is helpful to reducing exposure
to the head but it can still expose the body to the effects of its radiation.
Safety issues are an increasing concern but information has become fragmented
and often quickly obsolete. The issues of safety precautions are discussed
in more detail later. Base-stations or cell phone towers may also pose
risks. "The installation of base stations for mobile telephone systems
has been delayed or has met opposition from the public because of concerns
that the RF emissions from these base stations might cause cancer in children.
In the United States, for example, 85% of the total number of base stations
needed have yet to be constructed.67 The significant increase in these
systems and their interactions with other energy fields in our homes, cars
and work places may in fact be significantly increasing health risks. International
organizations are also looking at the risks because of increasing public
concern, scientific evidence and industry concerns. "In May 1996,
in response to growing public health concerns in many member states over
possible health effects from exposure to an ever-increasing number and
diversity of EMF sources, the World Health Organization (WHO) launched
an international project to assess health and environmental effects of
exposure to electric and magnetic fields, which became known as the International
EMF Project."68 Other studies are already producing the evidence of
biological effects. "Finally there was recently a study funded by
the Bavarian State Government in Germany following reported adverse health
effects in dairy cattle only after a Telecoms Mast had been erected. It
was discovered after a period of time that the cause of the significant
drop in the yield of that herd of cattle and Extraordinary Behavior Disorders
in some of the cows related to the microwave transmissions from that mast.
When the cattle were moved away from its vicinity after a period the milk
yield and the behavior of that herd was restored to normal."69 The
research continues and the health effects mount. With over 1.3 billion
people projected to be using these devices in the year 2005 the risks must
be understood and addressed. Perhaps we will see the litigation of the
21st century overtake the incredible tobacco settlements as the record
holder for "damage by industry when its' head's in the sand."
-
- Choosing on the Side of Safety
-
- "On October 31st, 1996, the US National Academy
of Sciences, National Research Council (NAS/NRC) issued a review of the
EMF literature: Possible Health Effects of Exposure to Residential Electric
and Magnetic Fields. The conclusions of this report are that 'there is
no conclusive and consistent evidence showing that exposure to residential
electric and magnetic fields produces cancer, adverse neurobehavioral effects,
or reproductive and developmental defects'. Of significant importance are
the words, 'conclusive and consistent'. Like the more familiar phrase in
law, 'beyond reasonable doubt', 'conclusive and consistent' implies a certain
standard of evidence that warrants more serious action. Using that type
of reasoning, the NRC Committee concluded that research results do not
show that EMF exposure at a residential environmental level causes adverse
health effects."70 "The FDA advises persons concerned about exposure
to cell phone radiation to take some simple steps to avoid exposure. Those
persons who spend long periods of time on their hand-held mobile phones
could consider holding lengthy conversations on conventional phones and
reserving the hand-held models for shorter conversations. People who must
conduct extended conversations in their cars every day could switch to
a type of mobile phone that places more distance between their bodies and
the source of RF, since the exposure level drops off dramatically with
distance."71 How cell phones might effect our health is compelling
people to take heed of the warnings and find ways to reduce exposure without
giving up the device. Some have resorted to earpieces and belt level phones.
This may in fact prove to be even worse than head exposure because of the
way in which the phone then operates. More power is required and exposure
to softer tissue allows more energy to transfer into the body. A European
report reads as follows: "The 'precautionary principle' is recognized
by European Governments in the Maastricht Treaty and forms the basis of
both EU and UK regulation in this area. Under a strict application, it
would not be possible to balance the risks of harm with the benefits of
technological advances, since even a small degree of uncertainty or a suspicion
of possible harm, no matter how ill-judged, would be enough to prohibit
the introduction of a new technology. This interpretation is not, however,
sustainable; it would preclude the application of almost any significant
development as almost all innovations may have hidden or unknown risks.
In practice, therefore, applying the precautionary principle means measures
must be taken to minimize known risks and alertness to the emergence of
unknown risks must be maintained." 72 The report continues in discussing
the use of cell phone use in vehicles. "Cars and other vehicles screen
the microwave emissions from the mobile phone when in use and so act as
a Faraday cage. GSM phones compensate for this by increasing the power
output resulting in greater microwave absorption in the user." 73
-
- Hands-free kits.
-
- Hands-free kits are also discussed, revealing the hidden
risks. "Currently, the cellular industry are encouraging the use of
hands-free kits, but cite their only advantage as being to offer greater
freedom of use to the user, nothing else. The fact is they know the real
reason users are buying them is because they think these kits protect them
from radiation exposure. Recent tests have shown that whilst exposure to
the head is reduced by around 70 percent, all that is happening is the
radiation is being transferred to another part of the body which is potentially
more vulnerable because it does not have the thickness of the skull to
protect itself eg the waist or chest areas."74 "Commenting on
the news in the British consumer magazine Which?, "theoretical physicist
Dr. Zvi Weinberg said it's probable that earpieces serve as antennae that
direct more electromagnetic radiation into the ears. However, he said,
phone models may differ in the degree to which their internal wires conduct
electricity, and said he planned to calculate the various mechanisms involved
during the next two weeks."75 "It turns out that 'hands-free'
cell phones may not save you from the Grim Reaper after all. Alarming claims
surfaced last week in a research publication in the U.K. that not only
are many hands-free devices useless in protecting wireless phone users
from radiation that might cause tumors, these products may actually raise
the amount of radiation being directed into the head by three times."
The report, by Antonia Chitty, appeared in Which? magazine, a 700,000-subscriber
consumer report which does not accept advertising. The test results of
the study, according to Which?, showed that the earplugs in the hands-free
kit acted as aerials and channeled more radiation into the ear model than
standard cell phones did. The earphones channel three times the dose of
radiation into the ear that a regular cellular phone does.76 Using a mobile
phone clipped to your waist results in a hotspot of radiation being pumped
into the liver and kidneys. "There is concern that they may intensify
radiation exposure to the ear canal. Using a hands-free kit and making
a call with a mobile phone clipped to your belt also means the phone will
generally be working at a higher power level. That's because it is generally
harder to transmit from waist-height than head height. But there's a lot
of body tissue in that area which has good conductivity and absorbs radiation
more quickly than the head." People think hands-free kits are safer,
so tend to spend more time on the phone. The phone works harder to pick
up a signal if it is down by the waist, where more radiation is absorbed
than by the head."77
-
- Non-thermal verses thermal effects.
-
- Non-thermal verses thermal effects are also being considered
by the Europeans in trying to establish increased margins of safety. "The
NRPB and industry's position that mobiles are safe, is based on the facts
that all handsets comply with current recommended limits, which are based
on thermal considerations only. As you had already probably already been
made aware, the literature is full of published papers showing damage and
biological effects at power levels which were set deliberately well below
thermal thresholds and therefore by definition could not have been caused
by thermal damage. Even if we assume the thermal only argument to be correct,
there are circumstances which the group should be aware of, where exposure
exceeds even the thermal limits. Mobile users who wear metal rimmed glasses
are intensifying the exposure to their eyes by 20 per cent and into the
head by 6.3 per cent. Using a mobile in a vehicle can accelerate radiation
levels by up to 10-fold due to resonance effect."78 These risks associated
with remote telephone use can not be ignored. The maintenance of the official
position that we are waiting "for the scientific proof" can not
continue without corresponding increases in safety considerations rather
than the current direction of increasing exposures and a lack of protection.
"Intelligence documents show that Western governments have know about
Soviet experiments using mobile phone-type radiation to cause brain damage
for more than 20 years. 'The uncensored documents reveal that Soviet military
scientists had successfully used microwaves of the type used by mobile
phones to weaken the blood brain barrier. According to Dr. Louis Slesin...US
Army scientists had succeeded in duplicating the Soviet experiments by
1977 - eight years before mobile phones became generally available in Britain.'"79
This work was done as a result of microwave bombardments of the United
States Embassy in Moscow as well as reports about research by the Soviets.
There was also the fact that at this particular time the safety standards
for exposure to radio frequency radiation in the Soviet Union was significantly
more stringent than United States standards by almost 1000 times. Russian
and other East European countries' exposure standards for radio frequency
and microwave radiation are much stricter that in the U.S or Western Europe.
"An attempt was made to resolve these differences at the 2nd International
Conference on Problems of Electromagnetic Safety of the Human Being, held
in Moscow in late 1999. Despite extensive discussions during this conference,
the attempt to 'harmonize' RF/MW standards was unsuccessful with little
chance of compromise in the near future. Western standard setting organizations
have emphasized protection from RF/MW thermal effects...while Russia's
more restrictive standard also reflects a concern over non thermal effects
and subjective symptoms."80 "Biological studies of enzymes and
human cells exposed in vitro to radiofrequency/microwave fields have shown
a number of effects which cannot be explained simply by the heating effects
of radiation on which our current standards are based. These include changes
in cell membrane permeability to potassium, sodium and calcium; changes
in the composition or behavior of blood-forming and immunological cells;
alteration of calcium ion exchange in nerve tissue; changes in the firing
patterns of neurons; and changes in levels of cancer related enzymes.
A study in Belgium determined that 'very close range exposure to microwaves
from a cellular phone base station increased the effect of a chemical mutagen
on human blood cells, leading to increased chromosomal aberrations.'"81
"High-frequency radiation such as that emitted by ultra-violet and
x-rays can break molecular bonds and damage DNA. These are called ionizing
radiation. Microwave radiation such as that emitted by cell phones doesn't
ionize, but can heat objects in its path."82 The heat generated causes
the body to begin to expend energy to cool the area and otherwise return
to its state of equilibrium before it was irradiated by the device. Europeans
have again moved forward in this area ahead of the United States, where
the greatest increase in usage is now taking place. "There is now
some preliminary scientific evidence that exposures to radiofrequency (RF)
radiation may cause subtle effects on biological functions, including those
of the brain. This does not necessarily mean that health is affected but
it is not possible to say that exposure to RF radiation, even at levels
below national guidelines, is totally without potential adverse health
effects. The Expert Group has recommended that a precautionary approach
to the use of mobile phone technologies be adopted until more detailed
and scientifically robust information becomes available."83 The standards
for exposure are being developed along the lines of the precautionary approach
which include the following sections:
-
- "Standards. 1.27 We recommend that, as a precautionary
approach, the ICNIRP guidelines for public exposure be adopted for use
in the UK rather than the NRPB guidelines. 1.29 It would be sensible, in
line with the precautionary approach, to set in place a long-term follow-up
of workers who are occupationally exposed to RF radiation at relatively
high levels. We recommend that a register of occupationally exposed workers
be established and that cancer risks and mortality be examined to determine
whether there are any harmful effects." "Advice To Industry.
1.53 If there are currently unrecognized adverse health effects from the
use of mobile phones, children may be more vulnerable because of their
developing nervous system, the greater absorption of energy in the tissues
of the head, and a longer lifetime of exposure. In line with our precautionary
approach, at this time, we believe that the widespread use of mobile phones
by children for non-essential calls should be discouraged. We also recommend
that the mobile phone industry should refrain from promoting the use of
mobile phones by children."84
-
- The FDA is investigating whether mobile phones can cause
cancer, based on two unpublished studies which show a link between cell
phone use and cancer. "One study, by the American Health Foundation,
in New York, found that mobile phone users had double the risk of developing
a certain type of brain tumor than people who did not use them. The second
study...found that DNA in human blood cells broke down when exposed to
large doses of mobile-phone radiation, possibly laying the genetic groundwork
for cancer. 'We are not sure what this means,' said Dr. George Carlo, an
epidemiologist who headed the research project from 1993 until last year.
'This could be a colossal coincidence or the tip of the iceberg.'"85
The World Health Organization has identified research needs associated
with exposure to RF radiation and makes some interesting observations,
again with a great deal of care in implicating risks beyond those already
acknowledged by industry:
-
- "Most studies have examined the results of short-term,
whole body exposure to RF fields at levels far higher than those normally
associated with wireless communications. With the advent of such devices
as walkie-talkies and mobile phones, it has become apparent that few studies
address the consequences of localized exposures to RF fields to the head.
-
- Cancer: Current scientific evidence indicates that exposure
to RF fields, such as those emitted by mobile phones and their base stations,
is unlikely to induce or promote cancers.
-
- Other health risks: Scientists have reported other effects
of using mobile phones including changes in brain activity, reaction times,
and sleep patterns.
-
- Electromagnetic interference: When mobile phones are
used close to some medical devices (including pacemakers, implantable defibrillators,
and certain hearing aids) there is a possibility of causing interference.
There is also the potential of interference between mobile phones and aircraft
electronics."86
-
- It is interesting to note that interference with electronic
circuits is acknowledged but discussion of the effects on the more sensitive
instrument - the human body - is fought vigorously by many.
-
- Reducing the Risk
-
- "'As the EMF/EMR health effects issue becomes more
widely known, especially in relation to mobile phone use, there is a corresponding
increasing number of so called EMF protective devices being advertised
in health and alternative magazines as 'cure-alls' which apparently claim
to provide complete protection from exposure to all forms of man made electromagnetic
fields (EMF).' There is a wide range of devices being offered that make
all kinds of unsubstantiated claims."87 Earthpulse researched the
devices being offered and other solutions to the problems related to cell
and home portable phone use. It is not realistic to assume that use can
be or should be eliminated as these devices have revolutionized communication
and will continue to contribute to change. However, reducing power and
radio frequency emissions can also be achieved. Significant effort should
be made to determine which emissions are harmful and which can be used
to perhaps promote health. There may be carriers and better ways to move
the mountains of communications and information now creating much of our
trade and commerce. Some suggestions are as follows:
-
- 1. Reducing use is universally regarded as the best step.
Use by children should be eliminated. Indoor use increases exposure significantly
because the signal strength require to create a connection from inside
a car or building is much greater. Home portable phones should be replaced
with the old style hard wired phones and cell phone use significantly reduced.
-
- 2. If still using a cell phone or portable home phone
keep the phone away from the body when in standby mode. When in use hold
the phone as far away from the head as possible. Even three or four inches
can significantly reduce the exposure because the energy density drops
very rapidly with distance from the body. Keep the antenna away from the
head and pointing away from the body.88 "Radiation from all sources
obeys the inverse square law. That is, the further you are from the source
the less intense your exposure to the radiation. In fact, it drops off
with the square of your distance from the source. If you are twice as far
from a fire you feel one-quarter of the radiant heat, but if you move four
times as far away you only feel one-sixteenth of the heat."89
-
- 3. Most of the devices on the market do not have any
science behind them. None of the devices claiming to eliminate all emissions
had any science behind them. We were able to find two systems which are
supported by science and United States Patents. One of these devices is
being marketed under Cell/Wave Guard. We found that up to 61% of radio
frequency emissions could be prevented from entering the body. While this
represents a significant reduction it is not known if it is enough to guard
against all potential effects. However, it is the best technology easily
available today.
-
- Cell/Wave Guard are available from Earthpulse Press Incorporated
in cooperation with the Earthpulse Research Institute,
-
- Earthpulse Press Incorporated
- P. O. Box 201393
- Anchorage, Alaska, USA, 99520
- Phone: 1-907-249-9111 or 1-888-690-1277
- Fax: 1-907-696-1277
- www.earthpulse.com
- Footnotes
-
- 1. Chiang et al. "Health Effects Of Environmental
Electromagnetic Fields."
- Journal of Bioelectricity. 8(1), 127-131 (1989). EPI2064
- 2. Dutta et al. "Radiofrequency Radiation-Induced
Calcium Ion Efflux
- Enhancement From Human and Other Neuroblastoma Cells
in Culture."
- Bioelectromagnetics, 10: 197-202 (1989). EPI1864
- 3. AAP General News. "FED: Pregnant Women Warned
To Be Wary Of Using Mobile
- Phones." May 1, 1999. EPI1880
- 4. Dutta et al. "Radiofrequency Radiation-Induced
Calcium Ion Efflux
- Enhancement From Human and Other Neuroblastoma Cells
in Culture."
- Bioelectromagnetics, 10: 197-202 (1989). EPI1864
- 5. Veyret et al. "Antibody Responses of Mice Exposed
to Low-Power
- Microwaves Under Combined, Pulse-and-Amplitude Modulation."
- Bioelectromagnetics, 12:47-56 (1991). EPI1855
- 6. Fist, Stewart. "Cell Phones And Cancer."
The Australian Newspaper, May
- 5, 1997. EPI1884
- 7. Klitzing, L. von. "Low-Frequency pulsed electromagnetic
fields influence
- EEG of man." Physica medica, April 28, 1995. EPI1863
- 8. ARRL Handbook for Radio Amateurs. "RF Radiation
and Electromagnetic
- Field Safety." 1996. EPI1980
- 9. Sobel et al. "Electromagnetic Field Exposure
and Alzheimer's Disease."
- Neurology, Dec. 1996. EPI1800
- 10. Lai, Henry. "Neurological Effects of Radiofrequency
Electromagnetic
- Radiation Relating to Wireless Communication Technology."
- Bioelectromagnetics Research Laboratory, Department of
Engineering,
- University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. Paper
presented at the
- IBC-UK Conference: Mobile Phones - Is there a Health
Risk? Sept. 16-17,
- 1997 in Brussels, Belgium. EPI1815
- 11. Phillips et al. "DNA damage in Molt-4 T-lymphoblastoid
cells exposed to
- cellular telephone radiofrequency fields in vitro."
Bioelectrochemistry and
- Bioenergetics, Jan. 9, 1998. EPI1854
- 12. Harris, Sarah. "Now Mobiles Give You Kidney
Damage." Daily Mail, Dec.
- 13, 1999. EPI1812
- 13. Ridley, Kirstin. "British Scientists Demand
Cell Phone Warnings."
- Reuters, Jan. 1, 1998. EPI1788
- 14. Frey, Allan H. "Headaches from Cellular Telephones:
Are They Real and
- What Are the Implications?" Environmental Health
Perspectives, March 1998.
- EPI1803
- 15. Adey, Dr. W. Ross. "Cell And Molecular Biology
Associated With
- Radiation Fields Of Mobile Telephones." Dept. of
Biochemistry, University
- of California, Riverside. EPI1857
- 16. Frey, Allan H. "Headaches From Cell Phones:
Are They Real?" E-mail
- published on microwavenews.com. EPI1856
- 17. Frey, Allan H. "Headaches from Cellular Telephones:
Are They Real and
- What Are the Implications?" Environmental Health
Perspectives, March 1998.
- EPI1803
- 18. Svenska Dagbladet. "Microwaves open up the Blood
Brain Barrier." Sept.
- 15, 1999. EPI1829
- 19. Frey, Allan H. "Headaches from Cellular Telephones:
Are They Real and
- What Are the Implications?" Environmental Health
Perspectives, March 1998.
- EPI1803
- 20. Lancet. "Mobile Phone Electromagnetic Fields
Increase Resting Blood
- Pressure." June 20, 1998. EPI1823
- 21. Pryer, Nick. "Mobile Phones Can Affect Memory."
Associated Newspapers
- Ltd., July 16, 1998. EPI1882
- 22. Coghill, Roger. "Why I believe That All These
Items Should Carry A
- Health Warning." Daily Mail, July 17, 1998. EPI1890
- 23. "Neurological Effects of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic
Radiation."
- Bioelectromagnetics Research Laboratory, Dept. of Bioengineering,
School of
- Medicine and College of Engineering, University of Washington,
Seattle,
- Washington. Paper presented to the Workshop on possible
biological and
- health effects of RF electromagnetic fields. Mobile Phones
and Health,
- Symposium, Oct. 25-28, 1998, University of Vienna, Austria.
EPI1794
- 24. Burcum, Jill. "A Medical Enigma - A Rise in
Brain Tumors Sets Off
- Search For A Reason." Minneapolis Star Tribune,
Jan. 6, 1999. EPI1889
- 25. Ebden, Theresa. "Do convenient, Little phones
Pose Risk?" Toronto Star,
- Jan. 28, 1999. EPI1877
- 26. Uhlig, Robert. "New studies link brain tumors
to mobile phones."
- Electronic Telegraph, May 24, 1999. EPI1824
- 27. Fleming et al. "Cover-up claims over mobile
phone danger." Express
- Newspapers, May 24, 1999. EPI1825
- 28. Earth Rising - The Revolution: Toward a Thousand
Years of Peace. by Dr.
- Nick Begich and James Roderick, January 2000, Earthpulse
Press
- Incorporated, ISBN 1-890693-43-X.
- 29. Bass, Gordon. "Is Your Cell Phone Killing You?"
zdnet.com, Dec. 1999.
- EPI1792
- 30. Bass, Gordon. "Is your cell phone killing you.?"
PC Computing Magazine,
- Nov. 30, 1999. EPI1813
- 31. Sunday Mirror. "World's Biggest Probe into Mobile
Phones And Cancer."
- Oct. 24. 1999. EPI2061
- 32. University of Washington. "Rats exposed to cell
phone microwaves suffer
- long-term memory loss, according to new study by a University
of Washington
- researcher. "Press Release, Nov. 30, 1999. EPI1795
- 33. Sage, Cindy. Sage Associates, Santa Barbara, CA.
Letter to the Clerk of
- the Transport and the Environment Committee, The Scottish
Parliament.
- EPI1837
- 34. Daily Mail. "Using a mobile phone makes you
age faster." Oct. 18, 1999.
- EPI1814
- 35. Whittelsey, Frances. "Cell Phones and Kids:
A Bad Call?" vote.com,
- 1999. EPI1791
- 36. Verschaeve, L. "Can non ionizing radiation induce
cancer?" The Cancer
- Journal, Vol. 8, No. 5. EPI1797
- 37. Raloff, J. "Researchers Probe Cell-Phone Effects."
Science News, Feb.
- 12, 2000. EPI1872
- 38. Consumidor. "Consumer Group Says China Cell
Radiation Levels Unsafe."
- March 16, 2000. EPI1873
- 39. Reuters. "Mobile Phones Report Claims 'Strongest
Link Yet' To Cancer."
- March 27, 2000. EPI1870
- 40. Sunday Mirror. "Beware - Using A Mobile Can
Ruin Your Sex Life." April
- 16, 2000. EPI1871
- 41. MacArthur, John. "The Cell Phone Chronicles."
brain.com, April 25,
- 2000. EPI1845
- 42. Hardell et al. "Case-Control Study on Radiology
Work, Medical X-ray
- Investigations, and Use of Cellular Telephones as Risk
factors for Brain
- Tumors."medscape.com, May 4, 2000. EPI1893
- 43. Adey, Dr. W. Ross. "Cell And Molecular Biology
Associated With
- Radiation Fields Of Mobile Telephones." Department
of Biochemistry,
- University of California. EPI1799
- 44. electric-words.com. "Dr. George L Carlo et al.
and the fiasco called
- Wireless Technology Research." EPI1858
- 45. Silva, Jeffrey. "Motorola Memo Raises Questions
About WTR Research."
- RCR, March 3, 1997. EPI1820
- 46. Silva, Jeffrey. "Industry launches global effort
to counter cancer
- claims." RCR News, Jan. 25, 1999. EPI1822
- 47. Schwartz, John. "Cell Phones May Have Cancer
Link." Washington Post,
- May 22, 1999. EPI1785
- 48. Silva, Jeffrey. "Controversy follows WTR to
the end." June 4, 1999.
- EPI1821
- 49. Oakes, Chris. "Cell Study: Hazards Are Real."
Wired Magazine, June 21,
- 1999. EPI1805
- 50. Gallagher, Ian et al. "Mobile Phones Cover-Up."
The Express (UK), Oct.
- 16, 1999. EPI1808
- 51. Maisch, Don. "A Letter Bomb For The Mobile Phone
Industry?" EMFacts
- Consultancy, Oct. 19, 1999. EPI1806
- 52. Carlo, George L. Letter to Mr. C. Michael Armstrong,
Chairman and Chief
- Executive Officer, AT & T Corporation. EPI1807
- 53. 20/20 ABC TV. "Worried About Your Wireless?"
Oct. 20, 1999. Unedited
- transcript. EPI1828
- 54. Ross, Brian. "Wireless Worries?" abcnews.com,
Oct. 20, 1999. EPI1790
- 55. Rosenberg et al. "Cell-phone health risks need
to be studied, FDA
- says." Seattle Post-Intelligencer. April 1, 2000.
EPI1827
- 56. Goldberg, Robert B. "The Cellular Phone Controversy:
Real or
- Contrived?" EMF Health Report, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1993.
EPI1793
- 57. Keller, John J. "Are They Safe?" Wall Street
Journal, Feb. 11, 1994.
- EPI1878
- 58. Goldberg, Robert B. "The Cellular Phone Controversy:
Real or
- Contrived?" EMF Health Report, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1993.
EPI1793
- 59. "Nominations from FDA's Center from Device and
Radiological Health:
- Radio Frequency Radiation Emissions of Wireless Communication
Devices
- (CDRH). Feb. 8, 2000. EPI1874
- 60. Federal Communications Commission. "Radiofrequency
FAQs Page." Office
- of Engineering and Technology. June 1, 1998. EPI2062
- 61. Allison, Senator Lyn. "Democrats Deliver Senate
Inquiry On Mobile
- Phones." Australian Democrats Spokeperson on Telecommunications,
Dec. 9,
- 1999. EPI1885
- 62. Goldberg, Robert B. "The Cellular Phone Controversy:
Real or
- Contrived?" EMF Health Report, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1993.
EPI1793
- 63. Ryle, Sarah. "Insurers balk at risks of phones."
The London Observer,
- April 11, 1999. EPI1796
- 64. Meyer, Alan. Senior partner: Halsey Meyer Higgins,
Solicitors, London.
- "Mobile Phones and Mobile Networks: Potential Litigation
Or Law Suits."
- EPI1850
- 65. Meyer, Alan. Senior partner: Halsey Meyer Higgins,
Solicitors, London.
- "Mobile Phones and Mobile Networks: Potential Litigation
Or Law Suits."
- EPI1850
- 66. Willan, Philip. "Cell-phone safety at issue
in Italy." IDG News
- Service, May 20, 1999. EPI1798
|