- Professor Henry Lai and N.P. Singh in 1995 published
a paper that documented DNA damage in the brain cells of rats exposed to
radiation similar to that emitted by cell phones. In press interviews and
scientific conferences, Lai has always said there are no solid answers
regarding his research, but there is cause for concern and more work needs
to be done.
-
- But the cell phone industry said Lai's research techniques
were not commonly accepted and that ipeople have over-interpreted their
data. The industry maintains that the results have never been duplicated
(Lai and Singh disagree), and that the overwhelming scientific evidence
to date shows there is no health risk.
-
- But the European Union is funding independent research
into possible heath risks of electromagnetic radiation, including cell
phone signals. In December, preliminary results of work by 12 groups in
seven countries found that radiation at some cell phone levels damages
DNA in a laboratory setting.
-
- The effort - called REFLEX - studied radiation effects
on animal and human cells. The scientists reported a significant increase
in DNA damage. This damage could not always be repaired by the injured
cell.
-
- The REFLEX study has not been reported in U.S. media
-
- Special Report
-
- By Alasdair Philips aphilips@gn.apc.org Director, UK
Powerwatch EMC Engineer and EMF-bioeffects researcher
-
- When I was a child, back in the early 1950s, I was bought
a new pair of shoes. The manufacturer had just introduced a wonderful new
pedascope machine to check how well your shoes fitted your feet. Even
today, I clearly remember the wonder at being able to wiggle mytoes and
see them move inside my shoes. The machine used X-rays at quite a high
level to give real-time images on a simple screen. It was ten years before
Dr Alice Stewart produced research which showed that there was no safe
level of X-rays, and even then few listened. In fact she was almost outcast
from the medical establishment, and it was about another twenty years before
the real danger from medical X-rays was acknowledged. Now, in the late
1990s the U.K. National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) is trying
to persuade hospitals to minimise patient X-ray exposure, and leading Medical
Research Council researchers admit that there is no icompletely safei level
of ionising radiation. The 1998 Royal College of Radiologists guidelines
sets out the current rationale for restricting X-ray doses.
-
- Asbestos has been strictly controlled since 1970, and
the use of most dangerous types banned. Despite this, deaths from mesothelioma
(an asbestos induced cancer of the pleura/lungs) are rising consistently
and the U.K. death rate is not expected to peak until about 2020. The time
between the first exposure and death is now accepted as often being between
20 and 50 years. Most environmental cancers in adults ake longer than ten
years from initiation to detection. The eating of BSE infected meat possibly
causing CJD many years later is another example.
-
- Mobile phones
-
- Mobile phones emit microwaves. If microwave or pulsed
low frequency electromagnetic fields (EMFs) do turn out to be carcinogenic,
even if we backdate it five years, we should not be expecting to see much
in the way of induced cancers for another ten years. In the meantime we
discover that almost all the major phone manufacturers are quietly and
prudently patenting EMF reducing cases and aerials. Despite the impression
that mobile-phone companies give in their literature, little work has
been done on long term human health implications of mobile-phone use. Current
mobile-phone users are acting as involuntary, and often unsuspecting, test
subjects. Past research into microwave radiation effects on health, including
recent cell-phone studies, certainly give cause for concern. Even Dr John
Stather, the Assistant Director of the NRPB stated: "Until recently
we believed any harmful effects from microwaves were due to their heating
effects, which would be negligible at the low powers used by mobile phones.
Now there might be another effect at work and we are much less certain."
(Sunday Times 21 September 1997)
-
- Public awareness
-
- Public awareness of possible dangers was probably triggered
originally by the Reynard brain tumour case in 1992. About eight lawsuits
alleging that cellular phones caused brain tumours have been filed in the
USA. Although no cases has so far succeeded they have set the stage and
raised safety questions in many people's minds. It has raised old spectres
such as the thalidomide tragedy - the result of a product being used widely
before adequate long term research had been carried out. The first part
of a major new study of 11,000 mobile phone users was released on 14th
May 1998 [1] and although ignored by main BBC News programmes, it was
given front page banner headlines by the Daily Express on Friday 15th May.
This showed little difference for heating, fatigue and headache effects
between NMT analogue and GSM digital phones, but did highlight a three
to six-fold increase in fatigue and headaches for heavy mobile handset
users and up to a 48-fold increase in the sensation of heat on the user's
ear, face or head. The first of the study's more detailed findings were
shown at the Biolelectromagnetics Society (BEMS) Annual Meeting in Florida
in June 1998 and showed significantly more concentration and memory loss
symptoms in regular users of the GSM digital phone handsets. Only a week
earlier news had been reported that on Tuesday 5th May the Cumbran Magistrates
Court issued a Summons under section 10 of the UK Consumer Protection Act,
1987 for Roger Coghill to bring a private criminal action against a retail
distributor of Orange and Motorola mobile phones. The Magistrate ruled
that there was enough scientific evidence (before the new "Mild"
evidence mentioned above) to issue a Summons and allow the case to go forward.
His action claims that the distributors failed to affix required labels
to their handsets warning of possible health risks to users from prolonged
conversations as is required by the 1987 CP Act as there is now reasonable
evidence of handset use causing possible adverse health effects. He has
now filed an updated claim and the pre-trial review is scheduled to be
heard on 2nd September 1998. [2] A research letter published in the Lancet
[3] by a German team showed a statistically significant increase on blood
pressure in people who used a GSM phone for 30 minutes. Although the rise
was only about 5% it showed an important biological effect and received
national media attention.
-
- Exposure levels
-
- Despite what some mobile phone companies are saying,
mobile phones do radiate microwaves similar to those used in a microwave
oven to cook food. Between 20% and 80% of the energy is absorbed by the
user's head. The percentage absorbed depends on the design of the phone,
type of aerial or antenna (the stubby ones which you can not extend are
worse for pushing energy into the user's head), and how far it is to the
nearest base-station mast.
-
- Thermal exposure results in a measurable and significant
rise in body tissue temperature and is the basis for cooking food in microwave
ovens. When maximum levels were set in the 1950s, they were based on field
levels the human body could withstand without causing a 1infC rise in body
temperature. The possibility of non-thermal effects was discounted. Most
national and international bodies (including the UK National Radiological
Protection Board) set a rise of 1infC (6 minutes average for local exposure,
15 mins. for whole body) as the maximum permissible long-term temperature
rise, although some chose to set the figure lower than this, between 0.2infC
and 1infC.
-
- Non-thermal exposure means that no energy is transferred
which could cause a measurable temperature rise. Athermal means that although
some heating energy is transferred, the blood etc. will transfer the heat
away from the tissue such that the overall temperature rise is limited
to below that classified for thermal exposure. Despite considerable evidence
in published scientific literature for biological effects of electro-magnetic
radiation in the RF/MW range of the spectrum at specific absorption rates
(SARs) far too low to produce a heating response, this still continues
to be the case. However, the conclusions section of the NRPB "Doll
Report", on non-ionising radiation effects, states: "Animal studies
conducted at frequencies above about 100kHz have provided some evidence
for effects on tumour incidence...". [4]
-
- Cancer implications
-
- Although brain tumour cases have been rising fairly steadily
over the last fifteen years, these are not the most likely outcome of high
levels of mobile communications handset use. In 1998 a study reported that
brain tumour incidence was rising in Western Australia and questioned whether
mobile phone use might be responsible [5]. However, if there are long
term large-scale cancer implications, then it is more likely that they
will be adult myeloid leukaemias and multiple melanomas. Back in the early
1980s Sam Milham reported excess leukaemias among amateur radio operators,
with deaths from acute and chronic myeloid leukaemias nearly three times
higher than expected.
-
- We do know of a number of digital (GSM) phone users who
have developed Hodgkin's Disease in the lymph glands in their neck on the
side where they normally used their phones for a couple of hours each day
[6]. In 1980, Dr John Holt had a letter published [7]. This showed that
between 1951-59, 50% of patients with CML in Queensland survived for 55
months following diagnosis. In 1960 and 1961 three large TV broadcast stations
were commissioned in the area. In the period 1963-67, 50% of patients with
CML only survived for 21 months. This dramatic change could not be explained
by any medical personnel, protocol or therapy changes. In the mid-1980s
Stanislaw Szmigielski reported that Polish military personnel exposed to
RF energy showed elevated leukaemia levels. He has just published a 1996
update [8]. This is a study of all Polish military personnel for 15 years
(1971-85), approximately 128,000 people each year. Of these about 3700
(3%) were considered to be occupationally exposed to radio-frequency and
/ or microwave radiation. The largest increases were found for chronic
myelocytic leukaemia (CML), with an astounding increase (Odds Ratio) of
13.9 (95% CI 6.72-22.12, p<0.001), acute myeloblastic leukaemia (AML)
with an OR of 8.62 (95% CI 3.54-13.67, p<0.001), and non-Hodgkin's lymphomas
with an OR of 5.82 (95% CI 3.54-13.67, p<0.001).
-
- In 1996 Lai & Singh showed single and double DNA
strand breaks in brain cells of rats exposed to 2.45GHz SARs of 1.2 W/Kg
(comparable with levels in the heads of mobile phone users), giving rise
to real concerns. [9] If someone is completely healthy, and has a strong
immune system, then mobile-phone use may well not give them long-term health
problems. Some people can smoke twenty cigarettes per day for fifty years
and not develop lung cancer, and yet the dangers of smoking are now generally
accepted, even by the manufacturers. It has been repeatedly shown that
a few minutes exposure to cell phone type radiation can transform a 5%
active cancer into a 95% active cancer for the duration of the exposure
and for a short time afterwards. [10]
-
- A team of scientists funded by the Australian communications
giant, Telstra, to investigate claimed links between cellular phones and
cancer has turned up probably the most significant finding of adverse health
effects yet. The study looked at 200 mice, half exposed and half not, to
pulsed digital phone radiation. The work was conducted at the Royal Adelaide
Hospital by Dr Michael Repacholi, Professor Tony Basten, Dr Alan Harris
and statistician Val Gebski, and it revealed a highly-significant doubling
of cancer rates in the exposed group. [11] The mice were subject to GSM-type
pulsed microwaves at a power-density roughly equal to a cell-phone transmitting
for two thirty minute periods each day; this was a pulsed transmission
as from a digital cell-phone handset.
-
- Using NRPB figures most GSM digital cell-phones will
be putting between 10 and 30 times more radiation into the user's head
than the Repacholi mice were subject to! [12] If there are cancer connections
with the use of mobile phones, they are most likely to be expressed in
adult leukaemias which typically take between 10 and 30 years to appear
and be diagnosed. It is therefore unlikely that the trend will start to
be seen for at least another five years, although the harm is being done
now. Short term exposure of rats is no answer. Cancer is being increasingly
recognised as an organisational systems problem, and no short term speeded
up animal experiments are likely to give the same results as extended period
chronic exposure to the human bio-system.
-
- Initial (shorter term) problems with very important health
and work efficiency implications We now receive frequent calls from regular
mobile-phone users reporting headaches, loss of concentration, skin tingling
or burning or twitching, eye iticsi, very poor short-term memory, buzzing
in their head at night, and other less common effects. Headaches often
come first and/or skin effects. Then concentration and short-term memory
tends to deteriorate. At first it can be missing the turning off a motorway
that you intended to take. Then it is forgetting appointments. It usually
firstly affects learning or remembering NEW facts, similar to early signs
of dementia. Things you learnt long ago are still usually there, but new
things just donit seem to go in to your memory any more. Users also report
excessive tiredness.
-
-
- Many reports are from engineers who used their phone
extensively and were very sceptical of EMF adverse health effects until
they started to experience them. The symptoms bear a close resemblance
to those in a study of a Latvian pulsed radio location station which emits
24 short VHF pulses of 154 - 162MHz each second. In a study of 966 children
aged 9-18 years old, motor function, memory and attention were significantly
worse in the exposed group. Children living in front of the station had
less developed memory and attention, their reaction time was slower and
their neuromuscular endurance was decreased. The RMS field levels at their
houses were low, typically only 1V/m, and a maximum level of 6V/m or 10mW/cm2.
[13] In a study near the Latvian radio station, differences in micronucleii
levels in peripheral erythrocytes were found to be statistically significant
in the exposed and control groups. This is possible evidence of genetic
changes caused by non-thermal levels of pulsed radio-frequency radiation.[14]
Reports linking RF energy with asthenias had been reported by Charlotte
Silverman back in 1973, and again in 1980, as what she called iradio wave
sicknessi. [15]
-
- Maximum exposure levels
-
- At cellular telephone frequency bands of 900MHz and 1.8GHz,
the current U.K. NRPB investigation levels raised the U.K. permitted levels
to 10 Watts per Kg in the head. The 1991 USA ANSI/IEEE C95.1 guidelines
set the SAR at 1.6 W/Kg, and the CENELEC pre-standard states 2 W/Kg for
the public. GSM Cellular-phones can deliver well over 2 W/Kg into head
tissue during their output pulses, but they are said to comply because
the average power is only about one-eighth of the pulse power (GSM &
PCN digital phones), as up to eight calls share one channel using Time
Division Multiple Access (TDMA) with each handset pulsing in one of eight
time slots. Unlike the earlier analogue phones, the digital GSM ones emit
a series of short pulses at a basic repetition rate of 217Hz. Pulsed microwaves
have been shown to be more biologically active than continuous radiation
of the same frequency and power level.
-
- Take an operating digital GSM mobile-phone near an ordinary
medium wave radio and you will hear a buzzing noise.These pulses are also
picked up and detected by the cells inside the useris and other nearby
people's heads. In fact, up to 80% of the transmitted power can be absorbed
by the user's head, which means that their brain cells are being "hit"
by these radiation pulses two hundred and seventeen times every second.
In addition, GSM digital phones and the new DECT cordless phones also both
put high levels (several microtesla) of low frequency magnetic fields
into the user's head. These may be more responsible for the dementia (memory)
effects than the pulsed microwaves. The newer American Code Domain Multiple
Access (CDMA) system works differently and doesn't emit the sharp-edged
low frequency magnetic pulses. The digital RF signal more resembles a noisy
analogue signal and is also likely to be less bio-active.There is increasing
pressure for Europe to replace the TDMA GSM system with a "third generation"
CDMA system within the next ten years.
-
- The NRPB, and others, average the power from a digital
phone over 1 second, and so divide the pulse power by eight. They correctly
argue that the tissue has time to cool down between pulses, and then go
on to deduce that no damage will therefore take place. This is similar
to saying that placing a hammer on a icelli (an egg, for example) exerting
a small steady force, will produce the same effect as hitting the egg,
using eight times the force briefly once a second. As most practical engineers
know, when trying to loosen a stuck nut and bolt, the effect of constant
pressure on the spanner is FAR LESS than when tapping the spanner with
a hammer.
-
- In 1993, as the NRPB raised its permitted microwave levels,
two military research bases in the USA reduced their permitted levels of
radio frequency exposure (30 MHz to 100 GHz) from 100 W/m2 (10 mW//cm2)
down to 1 W/m2 (0.1 mW/cm2 or 100 microW/cm2 ). This is because they acknowledged
that there is now an overwhelming body of published evidence for the existence
of non-thermal biological effects of high-frequency radiation. [16]
-
- Some non-thermal effects
-
- Important non-thermal biological effects have been demonstrated
which could account for the development of cancer, asthma and the lowering
of male fertility. Cell membranes carry charge and surface receptors (usually
proteins) are highly charged. Signals are transduced into the cell interior
where growth, development and cell division are regulated by processes
which involve ions. These features have been shown to alter their behaviour
in the presence of imposed external electromagnetic fields. Documented
changes include alteration of the permeability of the cell membrane, alteration
of the signal transduction processes which regulate cell behaviour and
involve calcium ions, ornithine decarboxylase, protein kinase C and cAMP.
One study has indicated that microwaves can alter DNA synthesis, enzyme
activity, ion transport, cell proliferation and the cell cycle [17].
-
- Low frequencies (generated by the pulsed nature of GSM
cell-phone signals - 217, 32 & 2 Hz) have been previously shown to
lower lymphocytes ability to imarki cancer cells and to depress the ability
of other lymphocytes to destroy the 'marked' aberrant cells. Low level
microwaves have also been shown to alter both the immune response [18]
and EEG activity [19] in rabbits. Microwaves at only 1 mW/cm2 (one-tenth
of the NRPB Guidance level) have been shown to affect cAMP-independent
kinase activity [20], and calcium ion (Ca2+) efflux from chick cerebral
hemispheres [21]. Continuous digital GSM phone operation near fertilised
chicken eggs kill most of the embryos [22]. Cancerous tissue has increased
conductivity compared with normal tissue.
-
- In 1974, Dr. John Holt, the first Medical Director of
the Institute of Radiotherapy and Oncology of Western Australia, and Dr.
Nelson were able to show that the specific effect of RF energy on cancer
was to radio-sensitise a malignancy. Some cancers could have their radio-sensitivity
increased by a factor exceeding 100 times. As non-electrical heating of
cancer cells to 41.8infC increased radio-sensitivity by a factor of 2 to
3 and 434 MHz increased sensitivity by 100 to 150 times at less than 38infC,
this is a non thermal effect. Every cancer demonstrated an increase in
sensitivity; those normally treated with radiotherapy showed a maximum;
those not usually treatable by X-ray therapy were minimal. [23]
-
- Dr Peter French of the Centre for Immunology, St Vincent's
Hospital, Sydney, Australia, has been carrying out experiments on a range
of human and animal cell lines using 835 MHz exposure at 4.9 mW/cm2, 3
times per day for 7 days. He has shown effects on cell growth, shape, secretion
of histamine and gene transcription. Dr French is the immediate past President
of the Australia and New Zealand Society for Cell Biology. [24]
-
- Microshield Industries launched a new EMF shielding mobile
phone case range in 1996. Even "Industry" tests show that it
does typically reduce the power absorbed by the user's head by around 20
dBm (i.e. by a factor of around 99%). Many purchasers of these Microshield
cases are now expressing delight at having found a way of using their phones
without apparently experiencing short and medium term adverse side effects.
There are now other firms (eg Nett Ltd) manufacturing shielding devices
and even some manufacturers (eg Hagenuk) producing "low leakage"
phones. Telephone numbers: Microshield: 0181 363 3333,
-
- Almost all the major manufacturers have now patented
and produced "low radiation into the user's head" models!
-
- Base station masts
-
- There is currently growing public concern about the number
of base station masts that are being erected, and the effect these may
have on both health and on property values. The field strengths from masts
is low and is unlikely to be more of a problem than any other form of RF
data communications., however increasing worries are surfacing about all
levels of RF energy, especially when digital signal bursts are transmitted.
When one looks at what few epidemiological studies that have been done
to date on RF/MW(radio frequency electromagnetic energy) human exposure,
there is ample evidence of adverse health effects to warrant concern.
-
- The UK NRPB regularly uses the words "substantiated",
"firm", and "proven" evidence regarding the results
of epidemiological (i.e. of populations of people) studies. Epidemiological
studies on human populations do not, and generally can not, look for "proof"
or "substantiation" but increases in incidence of a disease,
or relative risk ratios.
-
- Epidemiological studies on tobacco and asbestos did not
"prove" that these carcinogens cause cancer; they do show, however,
a significantly increased risk of developing cancer from exposure. This
is not "substantiation", but that did not prevent the health
authorities from taking corrective action. It is unfortunate that with
electromagnetic radiation, however, industry and its supporters insist
an absolute cause - effect relationship must be proven before corrective
action be taken. The following recent studies do not isubstantiatei anything
in relation to exposure to RF/MW; they are dealing with the increase in
incidence of adverse health effects such as cancer. They are, however,
relevant and should be taken into account when formulating policy:
-
- a) A preliminary study by Dr Bruce Hocking compared cancer
rates in three municipalities within a 4 km radius of Sydney TV towers
with rates in adjacent areas further away. The study found children living
within the 4 km radius had a relative risk of 1.6 for leukaemia, compared
with the control group. The RR for mortality was higher at 2.3, and highest
at 2.8 for lymphoblastic leukaemia. [25] The calculated power levels were
around 0.02 to 8 mW/cm2.
-
- b) In 1987, a similar study identified higher rates of
cancer among those living near the TV and radio broadcast towers in Hawaii.
Drs. Anderson and Henderson of the Hawaii Department of Health found in
residential areas with 12 communication towers, a relative risk for cancer,
including leukaemia, of 1.375 (37.5% increase). [26]
-
- c) A study of cancers around the BBC Sutton Coldfield
transmitter mast (Dolk, et al, 1997) found a statistically significant
doubling of adult leukaemia within 2 km, and a significant decline in risk
with distance up to 10 km from the mast was also found for skin cancer.
The decline with distance was also observed at 20 other high power masts,
but no significant increase in overall incidence was found. [27]
-
- d) An earlier study in 1982, conducted by Dr Morton of
the University of Oregonis Health Science Centre found parallel trends
in his study of cancer and broadcast radiation in Portland. [28]
-
- e) Dr. Stanislaw Szmigielski, a leading epidemiologist
with the Centre for Radiobiology and Radiation Safety at the Military Institute
of Hygiene and Epidemiology, Warsaw, Poland has been the team leader for
an on-going study of the health effects of RF/MW exposure of military personnel
in Poland for the whole military population. His research found that young
military personnel exposed to RF/MW radiation had more than eight times
the expected rate of leukaemia and lymphoma. Careful surveys of exposure
revealed that 80 - 85% of the personnel were exposed to an average of less
than 42 microwatts/sq. cm., with a median point near 7 microwatts/sq. cm.
[8]
-
- f) Quellet-Hellstrom and Stewart (1993) found a statistically
significant 3.3 fold increase of miscarriage amongst U.S. physiotherapists
using microwave diathermy compared to a non-exposed control group. The
incidence increased with the number of monthly treatments, which could
suggest a cumulative effect. With about 10 treatments per month, the exposure
was about 0.04 to 0.56 microwatts/sq. cm. [29]
-
- g) Shandala et. al. (1979) found that calcium ion efflux
varies in living animal cells at 10 micro watts/sq.cm. and this level also
produces brain activity changes. [30]
-
- h) Prof. von Klitzing (1995) found changes to human brain
EEG with a signal of 217 Hz modulation on a 150 megahertz (MHz) carrier
with an external exposure of about 2.5 microwatts/sq.cm. [31]
-
- i) Professor John Goldsmith, at Ben Gurion University
of the Negev, Israel, has collected evidence of several exposures to microwaves
which produced elevated risks of a wide range of cancers, including childhood
leukaemia in children of staff, and cancers in the staff and partners at
the U.S. Embassy in Moscow and other eastern European U.S. embassies. These
cancers were associated with a reported maximum exposure of between 5 and
15 microwatts/sq.cm. and mean exposures between 1 and 2.4 mW/cm2, recorded
near the outside walls of the embassy. Personnel exposures inside the building
were estimated between 0.2 and 0.5 mW/cm2. [32]
-
- j) To quote from Dr. Neil Cherry's (New Zealand) recent
book: [33] "With these and dozens of other epidemiological studies
of large populations and large numbers of workers occupationally exposed
to RF/MW radiation, showing statistically significant increases of a wide
spectrum of cancers, there can be little or no doubt that chronic low level
exposure to RF/MW radiation produces increased cancer risk."
-
- k) The Latvian pulsed radar station study mentioned earlier
in this talk. [13]
-
- Who can the public turn to for advice?
-
- Part of my remit was to answer the question whether the
public should be suspicious of soothing statements from people responsible
for advice on these matters.
-
- Dr. Alastair McKinlay, of the UK NRPB, is the vice-Chair
of the "Expert Group" set up by the European Commission. He is
quoted as stating: What is now required is a lot more research in the microwave
frequency part of the electromagnetic spectrum, where mobile phones operate.
This is not because there is concern about health effects, but that such
research makes sense to quell any public concern. [34] The E.C. Committee
has recommended a 24 million ECU (about Pound20m) funding programme for
research into mobile phone safety.
-
- Dr. John Stather, Asst. Director of the NRPB was recently
quoted in several press articles [35] as admitting: "Until recently,
we believed any harmful effects from microwaves were due to their heating
effects, which would be negligible at the low powers used by mobile phones.
Now their might be another effect at work and we are much less certain."
-
- Conclusions
-
- Powerwatch believes that, although much more research
needs doing, regular mobile-phone use is likely to have adverse health
consequences in many people who use them. The newer, digital, ones are
likely to have more biological effects than the older, analogue, ones.
Although existing evidence does not yet conclusively prove that there are
any long-term adverse health implications, we feel that we need to advise
people to use them as little as possible.
-
- http://www.powerwatch.org
-
- Alasdair Philips (aphilips@gn.apc.org) Director, UK Powerwatch,
EMC Engineer and EMF-bioeffects researcher
|
