Authors of a study by the German Ecology Institute commissioned by cellular giants T-Mobil, have confirmed that research which they describe as being of good and consistent quality, now provides clear evidence that both cancer promoting and cancer initiating effects by cellular phones, can no longer be ignored and must be taken seriously.
The author goes on to say that although about 80% of the studies reviewed
were not really relevant to cellular phone exposures, those which were,
showed effects occurring at such small power intensities that thermal causes
could definitely be excluded. This latest news together with the Stewart
group's reference to biological effects occurring at power levels way below
national guidelines, looks to have put paid to the industry's reliance on the
safety of their product based on its compliance with safety limits set purely
to protect against thermal effects.
The study which involved a review of all available research, included a
number of new studies published since the UK Government Stewart group
reported back over a year ago and goes a step further than both the Stewart
report and its French Government counterpart published earlier this year. Its
recommendations include not only the adoption of the precautionary principle,
but also a downward revision of safety limits. These are not however based on
biological effects, as the report recognises that current technology would
not be able to get that low, so instead user's health is compromised by
setting the new standard based purely on the limitation of the cellular
equipment in use.
The study also calls for efforts to be made to reduce exposure by the use of
headsets or a shield. Press on Other Products button for more information on
this.
Studies released by the Swedish Protection Institute in Stockholm (known as
the SSI), show that dual band cellular phone can cause much higher radiation
absorption levels in a user's head when operating at one frequency than on
the other. Out of 20 different dual-band models tested, 13 showed higher
absorption rates at 1800MHZ than at 900MHz. The biggest disparity was found
in the Motorola V3688 which showed a 127% difference between the two
frequencies, whilst the Ericsson T28c was the complete opposite with double
the radiation level at 1800MHz. Only three phones on test had broadly the
same absorption rate at either frequency.
Considering microwaves have almost twice the energy deposition level at
1800MHz than at 900MHz, the results showing handsets with higher radiation
absorption rates at 1800MHz might at first sight be understandable. This is
however already compensated for by manufacturers who restrict the power level
on 1800MHz handsets to a maximum of 1Watt, compared to 2Watts for 900MHz
models. Conversely, radiation at 900MHz penetrates twice as deeply into the
user than at 900MHz, but as each nonetheless comfortably penetrate into the
brain no further corresponding compensatory adjustments are considered
necessary to output levels.
It is possible that the Ericsson T28c handset was faulty and the power did
not ramp down to 1 Watt when tested at 1800MHz, but that doesn't explain the
results for the other 12 models also showing higher readings at this
frequency. This would also not explain why the Motorola v3688 model displayed
completely the reverse behaviour.
Whilst these are important findings for consumers, they also make the choice
of purchasing a handset problematical. With the publication of SARs now
starting to appear on all phone packaging, users will be faced with the
dilemma of buying a handset that may be a low radiating model on one network,
whilst a higher radiating model on another, assuming of course that
manufacturers publish both figures. Ultimately they will probably choose the
model with the lowest SAR on the network they are likely to use most often.
and for more on absorption rates visit - http://www.sarvalues.com
Australia has joined the growing band of countries around the world including the UK and France, in calling for exposure to cellular phone radiation to be minimised provided it does not introduce other risks (see elsewhere for concerns about hands free kit use). Draft proposals by the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA) recommending new standards, also state it cannot unequivocally be said that health hazards do not exist.
The first tranche of research proposals are now being considered by a special committee set up on recommendation from last year's Stewart Group report. The PMC (Programme Management Committee) chaired once again by Sir William Stewart, is expected to award grants by the end of May 2001 for research programmes lasting up to three years in duration. The Committee is expected to call for further proposals to be submitted later this year.
In response to recently published studies which the cellular industry had been touting as proof that mobiles do not cause cancer, Dr George Carlo who headed up the six-year cellular industry sponsored WTR research program in the US has put some perspective onto the industry's claims.
In a letter to the Maryland General Assembly, Dr Carlo expressed his concerns that spin had been applied to the findings of studies, which included research carried out under the WTR banner during Carlo's tenure there.
"The vast majority of tumours studied were found in interior regions of the brain which could not possibly have been reached by cell phone radiation, thus the conclusion that there was no link with cell phone usage was hardly surprising and certainly not reassuring, as industry claimed. One study in the New England Journal of Medicine candidly noted this limitation."
He added " The study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association actually found a doubling in the risk of neuroepithelial tumours located at the side of the head and also showed a correlation between the tumour location and the side of the head where patients used cell phones. This finding was also reported in a Swedish study a year ago."
In addition Carlo said "Patients at the time the studies were conducted only used their phone for a few hours a month and had also owned their handsets for less than three years (which is hardly representative of today's average ownership period and usage). Today millions of users spend 1000 hours or more on the phone and none of the published studies address the key questions. He added that "the New England Journal of Medicine responsibly report this important limitation on the study's findings in a passage conveniently overlooked by the cellular industry."
Dr Carlo says it will be 15 or 20 years before such studies start to provide answers and until then we must rely on laboratory experiments to give us answers to help consumers make safe choices. He concludes "Repeated laboratory findings-the only verified scientific experiments to date- have shown that when human blood was exposed to cell phone radiation, it caused genetic damage. Cancer experts call this damage a diagnostic marker for determining that a person is at a high risk of developing cancer. Nothing in the three recent epidemiological studies refutes or even addresses those laboratory findings."
The French Government have published recommendations which follow the same line as that taken last year by the UK's Department of Health, where they conclude that enough scientific evidence is now available to warrant advising the public to adopt the precautionary principle regarding the use of mobile phone technology.
Dr George Carlo who headed up the six-year cellular industry sponsored WTR research program in the US, has given testimony at a hearing in front of the Maryland General Assembly giving his support to the State's initiative to impose health warning labels on all mobile phone packaging. Dr Carlo concludes by saying "The measure you have proposed is an appropriate pro-active step that will help protect the people of Maryland."
The science journal Proof recently ran an article under their "RoadTest" banner which assessed the likely overall effectiveness of 9 separate shielding devices currently available on the market, based on an appraisal of the product's tests and claims. Although the Microshield™ came out a clear winner (awarded 9 out of ten stars), the more worrying aspect was the number of devices examined which clearly had no scientific basis for working at all. No fewer than four out of the nine products were of the stick-on button variety, with all being awarded just a single star by the study's author Simon Best, editor of Electromagnetic Hazard & Therapy journal (see Newsgroups).
For the record the products under examination were the Microshield, the Aegis Guard, SafeTshield, Techno AO, AntiRad, Q-Link, Vector 100, Wave Buster and Zeropa. The article also warned about the potential dangers of using both Tetra and cordless DECT mobile handsets.
Dr George Carlo, former head of the WTR, has released a book based on his experiences during his time in charge of the six-year CTIA sponsored research program, which finished last year amid controversy. Much to the chagrin of the research paymasters, the US cellular industry, Dr Carlo unexpectedly concluded the program with the release of damning research results whose significance the industry have spent the past twelve months desperately trying to downplay.
In his book entitled “Cell Phones, Invisible Hazards in the Wireless Age”, Dr Carlo talks of attempts by industry representatives to coerce and influence the direction of the program, including refusals to accept the results of at least two eminent scientist’s research results , returning their papers on at least two occasions to have the findings adjusted so as to show the industry in a more favourable light.
More importantly Dr Carlo in the chapter called “Piecing together the Cancer Puzzle”
he says that “There is a definite risk that the radiation plume that emanates from a cell phone antenna can cause cancer and other health problems.” This is driven by his assertion that the cancer link with mobile usage now satisfies all of the important seven Koch-Henle postulates used by scientists as a checklist to assess public health risks.
German studies published in the science journal Epidemiology, have shown a strong link between mobile phone use and the incidence of uveal melanoma (a cancer of one of the upper layers of the eye). The study of 118 subjects with uveal melanoma, revealed an odds ratio of 4.2 for mobile phone users compared to no association for non mobile users. No link was found in the study with exposure to power lines, VDU use or other electrical environments.
A mystery shopper survey carried out by a leading UK Sunday Newspaper revealed that 75% of high street stores were ignoring the government’s call to hand out safety leaflets and didn’t even carry a stock. One shop assistant questioned by the children conducting the survey said “There are health risks in using everything. Don’t worry.”
Health minister Yvette Cooper promised action against failing to display the warnings
saying “The public has a right to this information”. One Vodaphone spokesperson countered the criticism saying that it was available in all their stores, just not on display! This he claimed followed the letter of the guidelines (if not the spirit).
The news that Peter Angelos was getting involved with cell phone litigation sent shares in major cell phone companies sliding according to a front page report in the Times newspaper. US company Verizon in which Vodaphone has a 45% share, is being cited by neurologist Dr Christopher Newman, who claims his own brain tumour was caused by using his handset.
Top Baltimore lawyer Peter Angelos who has won billions of dollars in damages from the tobacco and asbestos industries, has just signed up as co-counsel acting for Dr Christopher Newman, a physician with brain cancer, who recently filed suit against the cellular industry. A member of the firm confirmed they would also be filing in no less than ten other cell phone lawsuits. Angelos stressed that he would not become involved unless he was “90% sure” he would win.
Up till now research into the effects of mobile radiation on human tissue has been conducted based on cylindrical shaped cells only, but Spanish scientists at Madrid’s University Complutense have shown that the field intensity in non-spherical cells is much more intense than previously thought and also that the angle between the cell and radiation source is crucial as electric fields are amplified across cell membranes. Professor Jose Luis Sebastian explained that in order to understand better the mechanisms underlying biological effects caused by mobile radiation, it is essential to consider the combined effects of shape and cell intereaction.
Walt Disney has announced plans to withdraw rights to use its characters to promote the sale of mobile phones, in particular to children. Disney stated that with continuing doubts over their safety, it would not be appropriate for them to be seen encouraging their use. One week later top UK children’s pop act Steps, withdrew similar plans to link up with a mobile distributor, citing exactly the same reasons.
A figure of £7m has been allocated towards the UK research program, which was recommended by the Stewart Group earlier this year. The studies should now commence in 2001. Although this is far more than has been previously allocated towards research in the UK, it still represents only half of the amount already spent by the WTR in America. With Dr George Carlo having pointed out in his new book that this was never going to be enough to find any real answers, critics have already said that no definitive findings can be expected from the UK program. This conflicts with the sponsors of the research, the cellular industry, who claim that the program should provide assurances about the safety of their product.
The UK Government changed its advice within the safety leaflet currently being circulated to mobile users. They now state that the safety of these devices is uncertain, which is in stark contrast to their previous stance that strongly recommended their use.
The issuing of safety warning leaflets with all mobile sales commenced in the UK this month. The leaflet includes advise that children especially, should restrict their mobile usage. Next year will see the UK following America in providing radiation exposure levels (SARs), on all mobile phone packaging.
According to a paper by Dr Gerald Hyland of Warwick University published in the latest edition of the Lancet, children who use mobiles risk memory loss, headaches and sleeping disorders because their skulls are much thinner and smaller and their immune systems are less robust and still developing. Dr Hyland was quoted in the UK press as saying that “If mobile phones were a type of food, they simply would not be licensed because there is so much uncertainty surrounding their safety”.
Australian studies confirmed what many in the know have suspected for some time now,which is that hands free kit users are not reducing radiation exposure. Even if there is no leakage through the earpiece (as has been suggested by Consumer Association tests), all the user is doing is redirecting the exposure to another part of the body. The tendency is to keep the phone on the belt, which not only subjects vital organs like the liver, kidneys, stomach etc to exposure, but also increases cumulative exposure as these users normally keep the phone there all day. The study found that users were absorbing double what was regarded as a safe level of radiation.
A study from Australia published in the science journal Occupational Medicine by former Chief Medical Officer of Telstra, Dr Bruce Hocking, has found evidence suggesting damage to the nerves of mobile users. The report suggests the mobile was the cause of markedly lower responsiveness in nerves around the ear. The authors postulate that “ This finding of a subtle neurological abnormality may also explain other reports of sleep disturbance, raised blood pressure and cognitive effects. People report suffering mobile phone related headaches unlike any other headaches-people who like using their phone, not cranks.”
Dr Hocking said the study represented a “significant warning” that mobiles were likely to be disturbing nerve functions and raised the question about a similar effect on brain function.
A UK study has found that using a mobile causes increases in temperature on the surface of the skin well in excess of the accepted limit where biological effects can occur. The current guidelines for exposure are set to ensure that tissue temperatures do not increase by 1degree Celsius, yet in studies carried out in London by scientists from the National Heart and Lung Institute, facial skin temperature increases of 2.3celcius were observed. All 30 users in the study were affected.
The scientists also found changes in airflow through the nostril closest to the phone, which may have accounted for many of the users experiencing a blocked nose sensation. This effect was put down to the possible dilation of blood vessels and it was conjectured that a similar dilation of vessels in the brain could account for the many reports of user headaches. One of the report’s authors called for mobile owners to restrict their exposures.
Mobile phone masts have been linked to miscarriages, deformities and tumours in cattle grazing next to base station transmitters. Hundreds of cows have now been slaughtered in Bavaria, where the study was carried out by the Ministry for Land Development. Some animals had developed cataracts, huge wart like growths and even brain cancer. In addition, calves were being born with no eyes, mouths or no legs. A vet has certified that the sicknesses were due to electromagnetic exposure from the masts.
Research conducted at the Institute of Pharmacology and Toxicology in Zurich and published in Neuroreport journal reported an increased level of brain activity and disturbance in sleep patterns following exposure to mobile phone radiation. A senior Department of Health source was reported as saying “This effectively means that people will soon have to accept that mobile phones do have a biological effect. This is a far cry from 10 years ago when the whole thing was dismissed. This is an important study by highly respected people. It cannot be ignored.”
A spokesperson for Which?” magazine has confirmed they have now replicated their hands free study and stand by their original results that these kits can increase radiation exposure into the brain by over 300%.
A very large study of 140,000 electrical workers in America found suicide rates among them were 3.8 times higher than amongst the general population. It has long been believed by many scientists that electrical fields (which mobile phones give off) affect the production of the melatonin, which is not only one of the body's own most powerful anti oxidants, but is also thought to hold a vital role in controlling depression Dr Van Wijngaarden who conducted the study said that these fields may be affecting the pineal gland in the brain which is responsible for the production of this important hormone. Other published studies have already linked the suppression of melatonin production with exposure to electromagnetic radiation.
The study published in the Western Medical Journal also found that young people appeared to be more susceptible, which supports the recommendations made by the recent Stewart Group report relating to curtailing the use of mobiles by children.
Telecommunications Minister Patricia Hewitt confirmed in a communication to Microshield that kite mark testing for shielding devices, as recommended by the Stewart Group and supported by the Department of Health, are now underway.
Government Minister Patricia Hewitt added to the confusion over the use of hands-free earpieces as a means of reducing radiation exposure, when she announced that tests sponsored by the DTI had effectively given them the all clear. This flies in the face of results from the aforementioned Consumers Association tests back in May, which had shown these devices were leaking out of the earpiece itself and increasing radiation exposure into the brain by over 300%.
What the Minister failed to mention though is that the scientists carrying out the DTI tests attached two very important caveats to their findings.
The first was that when the cable leading up to the earpiece gets near the mobile's antenna, which in real life usage happens all the time, the reduction in exposure drops. This is thought to be caused by a current being induced in the cable itself and transmitting the signal out of the earpiece, thereby by-passing the skull and concentrating exposure straight into the ear canal. These findings might explain why many users who experience ear problems from using their mobile, are now reporting their condition is exacerbated by using hands free earpiece kits.
Secondly and far more important, however much the reduction in exposure to the head may be, the remaining radiation still coming out from the handset was simply being transferred to a new part of the body e.g. organs around the waist or chest area, The scientists second caveat therefore was that the handset should be kept away from the body at all times.
The fact is that in normal usage both these caveats are transgressed and Microshield contacted Patricia Hewitt to ask her how in the circumstances she could have described the tests as offering "clear and unambiguous advice" to the public about the safety of such devices. Her reply ignored our question but did say that she had mentioned the two caveats in her press statement. So why did the media choose to ignore this?
By coincidence, the laboratory used by the DTI to conduct their hands-free earpiece tests, also tested the Microshield case only last year. Their results showed radiation absorption in the head being reduced by 97%. This is significant because they are also being asked to carry out the proposed kite marks testing on shields, as recommended by the Expert Group.
In response to the recommendations from the Stewart Expert Group report, the UK Educational Secretary David Blunkett, wrote to every school in the UK urging headteachers to ban children under 16 from using mobile phones because of health fears. It is known that children absorb up to 50% more radiation because of the size of their head relative to the radiation field. It is also thought that the radiation absorbed may have more of a biological impact on the developing brain the young.
The US Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association announced that all manufacturers would be required to display radiation emission levels from the end of this year. Their UK counterparts will follow suit from next year. This will encourage users to use low radiating mobiles, the same way that smokers moved towards low tar cigarettes.
England soccer coach Kevin Keegan banned his players from using mobiles out of health concerns during their preparation for this year's European Nations Championship finals. Many users have complained of fatigue following the use of a mobile phone.
Japan have enforced strict mandatory standards relating to mobile phone emissions, in response to growing concerns about their effect on the brain. The new regulations expected to come into force by summer 2001 will force manufacturers to submit data on each new mobile to the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications, to ensure compliance with emission requirements.
Scientists have discovered that radiation such as that given off by mobile phones, can activate the mercury and release the poisonous gas. Experts believe the fumes attack the brain's central nervous system causing conditions from depression and asthma to Alzheimer's and MS.
Despite false reports in the UK press that the UK Government's Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones (IEGMP) chaired by Sir William Stewart was going to give mobiles the all clear, the published report did no such thing. The group's main conclusions were summarised as follows:
"We conclude that it is not possible at present to say that exposure to RF radiation, even at levels below national guidelines, is totally without potential adverse health effects and that gaps in knowledge are sufficient to justify a precautionary approach"
The Group which included the World Health Organisation's own expert on mobile phones Dr Michael Repacholi, also confirmed
There is now scientific evidence available that biological effects may be occurring even at levels below current UK NRPB and European ICNIRP safety guidelines
In addition to advocating the adoption of the precautionary principle, the Group also recommended that :
Additionally, the Group has called for a substantial research programme to be set up independent from any cellular industry involvement, but paid for jointly by them and public funds.
The Expert Group's report also called for the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) to adopt a more open and proactive approach to this whole issue and to consider all research and anecdotal evidence from users when proffering advice. Many employers, who have previously followed the NRPB's standard line on this issue to formulate their health & safety policy, are now reviewing their position to take into account the call to introduce precautionary measures.
Despite raising something like ten times the anticipated sum from the sale of
its new third generation mobile licenses, the UK government has refused to
allocate any towards further research into mobiles and their health effects.
This comes at a time when two separate independent groups set up specifically
by the Government to look at mobile safety, have both urged that much more
money be set aside to conduct studies into non thermal effects.
Dr George Carlo, former head of the cellular industry sponsored research
group the WTR (see below), announced at the end of April the launch of a new
USA mobile phone health study called the Radiation Protection Project, under
the non-profit making SPPI (Science and Public Policy Institute). The program
will assess a number of consumer related health problems relating to mobile
phone use. In addition to looking at the risks of developing cancers, the
program will examine birth defects and other health effects in women and
children.
Not surprisingly, initial support and funding has come from private sources
as it's highly unlikely that industry would ever fund any further Carlo work,
not after his last work for them had the temerity to produce results showing
links with genetic damage and an increased prevalence of brain tumours.
Other previous health studies undertaken by the SPPI have included silicone
breast implants, tobacco, food irradiation, ozone layer depletion and the
polio vaccination policy in the US.
Telephone on (202) 296-7000 or E-Mail - healthproblems@aol.com
The UK Consumer Association's Which? Magazine recently reported on tests
which revealed that hands free earpiece kits increased radiation exposure
into the brain by a massive 300%, compared to the mobile used just on its
own. They conjecture that this may be due to the wire leading up to the
earpiece itself acting as an antenna and transmitting from its tip, which is
of course terminated within the ear. Industry has hit back saying that the
tests must be flawed and that they have tests showing that these kits are
safe. However, when asked to produce these for examination they declined.
An evaluation of hands free kits had previously been carried out within last
September's UK Parliamentary Science and Technology Committee's report on
mobile phones and health. This concluded that although they may well reduce
radiation reaching the head, absorption levels were simply being increased
elsewhere.
The BMA (British Medical Association) called for research into the level of
protection actually afforded by these devices, expressing their concerns that
not only was radiation being redistributed to other parts of the body, but
also that exposure into the ear canal may even be intensified. This followed
experiments published in the New Scientist earlier in 1999, showing that up
to 30% of the mobile's radiation was found to be coming out of the earpiece
itself. These new tests by Which? would appear to add credence to these
claims.
Visitors of this site will be aware that Microshield have for
some considerable time been warning that hands free earpieces were of no use
in reducing radiation. Apart from amplifying radiation to the head,
independent research has also detected higher levels in the torso if the
phone is worn on the belt.
This latest news has seen a surge of companies withdrawing these kits back
from staff, who had ironically been issued them in the first instance to
reduce radiation exposure.
The Microshield case was recently tested for the Consumer Association's
'Which' magazine with the results reporting a 70% reduction in radiation
exposure. The Association has since acknowledged that their tests were
conducted using the wrong cases, which actually make the results all the more
impressive. Microshield did offer to pay for further testing to be conducted
using the correct phones for the cases sent, but this was not taken up by
Which? because of publishing deadlines.
The results nonetheless still showed the Microshield as a clear winner out of
all the devices on test. The report concluded that stick-on discs such as the
Techno-AO and the Zeropa did nothing at all to reduce radiation levels, as
did cases such as the Aegis Guard. Another case the Radiation Rabbit showed
reductions of less than 50%, whilst hands free earpieces actually increased
radiation into the head by over 300% (see above)
Which's assessment of the Microshield included the conjecture that although
it reduced radiation by 70%, "perhaps in real life the shield could just make
the phone boost its output to compensate for the shielding effect and instead
of protecting the user from radiation, it might make it worse". Had Which's
tests bothered to verify the validity of their claim, they would no doubt
have concurred with the findings of British Telecom and the UK's National
Physical Laboratory, whose own independent tests have consistently proved
this hypothesis to be incorrect, at least insofar as it relates to the
Microshield. Their tests do however suggest this is probably a justified
observation in respect of many other shields. See below (October 1999 - NRPB
confirms criticism on shields not meant to include the Microshield)
Or so printed a leading British Sunday newspaper recently. Research by two Ukrainian scientists recently published in the peer reviewed scientific journal the Biological Behavioural Effects of Electric Magnetic Fields, showed reductions in levels of sex hormones in rats exposed to microwaves at the same power level used in mobile telephone technology. The experiments were repeated several times with each test producing similar results and the degree of decrease clearly dose dependent. Changes were also observed in stress hormones and insulin. Other studies have also shown significant changes, some lasting for weeks or even months after relatively low levels of exposure.
Russian studies have shown that mobiles can increase the temperature on the surface of the skin by up to 4.7C. All the safety standards relating to emission levels are designed to ensure that any temperature rise caused by the mobile's microwaves, is kept below 1C. Rises above this are known to cause a variety of health effects. Now a scientist has spoken of his concern that skin cells are being damaged. Scientist Professor Olle Johansson from the Nobel Prize winning Karolinska Institute in Stockholm said, "All the current concern centres on how far radiation penetrates into the brain, but it seems to have been forgotten that between the brain and the mobile is the skin." Professor Johansson added that heating damage caused to the skin could eventually lead to cancer. This follows reports in the UK press of a user who died after a cancerous growth appeared adjacent to where he held his mobile. Doctors told parents that it was possible the mobile could have been the cause.
Staff at a Sydney hospital have been warned against using mobiles because of potential health risks from radiation exposure. Doctors and nurses have been advised to either use landlines or protective devices. Hospitals have long banned the use of mobiles inside buildings due to their interference with equipment. Staff were issued with a memo telling them "to avoid possible concentration of radiation near vital or sensitive organs". Health problems are often first identified by the medical profession, who have to deal with the knock on symptoms first hand. It was reports by doctors and nurses which first highlighted the dangers associated with x-rays.
Thousands of UK civil servants have been warned by their union to stop using mobile phones on health grounds. Leaders of the Public and Commercial Services Union have said that no member should be forced to carry or use a mobile. Those who have to for emergencies should have them switched off whenever possible or if not should avoid holding them against their body i.e. clipped to the belt. Union Leader Barry Reamsbottom said "our message is don't gamble with your health".
A new book titled Healthy Parents, Better Babies by Francesca Naish and Jeanette Roberts warns couples trying for a child to avoid using mobile phones. The book says that animal research studies show that mobile phone microwave radiation emissions "affects almost every body system". This advice follows on from research published showing higher mortality rates in chick embryos exposed to mobile radiation and other studies, which have linked microwaves with infertility and even loss of libido.
The first bill is underway in the United States, which would authorise the California State Health Department to review scientific literature on the health effects of radiation at cell phone frequencies. The bill would require retailers to offer protective devices and advice whenever a handset was sold. It would also require manufacturers to provide and retailers to display warning signs at the point of sale. The first round of hearings commenced at the end of March 2000. Keep up to date with developments on this site!!
New results of studies from both Finland and Germany are the latest to demonstrate changes in brain activity following exposure to mobile phone radiation. The findings show both behavioural effects and changes to brain wave-patterns. Whilst their implication on health is uncertain, they still call into question the assumption that low non-thermal levels of microwave radiation cannot cause neurological effects. Dr Koviste of the Center for Cognitive Neuroscience at Finland's University of Turku, said in February's issue of Neuroscience "our results suggest that GSM cellular telephones may have an effect on cognitive processing".
The Australian Senate has agreed to an inquiry on EMR emissions, particularly
those from mobile phones. This starts in March 2000, with the final report
being due in October 2000. Democrats Telecommunications spokesperson, Senator
Lyn Allison, said that the inquiry was necessary because of the Federal
Government's ongoing failure to ensure that public health issues are
considered in standard setting for mobile phone emissions. She said that both
the Government and industry refuse to acknowledge what most Australians
already know intuitively, which is that it is clearly not just the heating
effect of a mobile that is a potential health risk.
Despite reassurances that mobiles comply with heating limits, a vast number
of Australians are already experiencing alarming symptoms from their handset
use, yet the Government disbanded the standards committee earlier in 1999
when it would not agree to a relaxation in standards. The CSIRO in Australia
has remained staunchly opposed to relaxing standards, arguing that research
which already indicates a link with cancer, suggests that no further
relaxation should occur.
Research carried out at the European Research Institute of Electronic Components in Bucharest has shown that exposure to low level microwave radiation causes red blood cells to leak haemoglobin. Scientists exposed samples of blood to varying degrees of exposure and found that even at lower levels the cells leaked. According to Professor Edward Tuddenham, a haematologist at the Imperial College Medical School in London, a build up of haemoglobin which carries oxygen around the body, can lead to heart disease and kidney stones.
The UK's House of Commons Science & Technology Select Committee report on
Mobile Phones and Health published in September 1999, recommended that "the
Cellular Industry and the NRPB should explore ways in which mobile design
might limit personal exposure to radiation". They also called for a 500%
reduction in the UK's NRPB safety exposure levels.
The current recommended limit stands at 10W/Kg averaged over a 10g cube of
tissue. Even the new proposal of 2W/Kg is still some way off the USA,
Canadian and Australian limits set at 1.6W/Kg averaged over the far stricter
parameter of a 1g cube of tissue. The less strict UK 10g-cube method adopted
by the NRPB is said to underestimate specific absorption rates (SARs) into
mobile users by as much as 100%.
The Department of Health has however ignored these calls, defending the
NRPB's stance on limits stating that the Government maintains its confidence
in the high quality and impartiality of the advice it receives from the NRPB.
The DOH goes on to say that it is not appropriate for either the Government
or the NRPB to be directly involved in commercial activity such as the design
of mobile handsets. Furthermore it concludes that there has already been
considerable work already undertaken by industry into the development of
antenna design, which will reduce users exposure.
Many neutral observers have asked what is the point in having an expensive
independent investigation in the first place, if all the Government does is
ignore the committee's key recommendations and sticks to what best suits its
own political and commercial objectives? Some cynics suggest the answer may
lie in the £22billion figure, which bidding for the new mobile licenses has
now reached.
Evidence that Soviet scientists knew 20 years ago mobile phone type radiation
could cause
brain damage, was revealed in a book published by author Tim Rifat earlier in
1999. Intelligence documents recently released in the US appear to have been
censored to hide the fact that Western Government scientists have long known
about the potential dangers of microwaves.
When campaigners applied for copies of the American Defence Intelligence
Agency documents to help in a battle against the citing of a mobile mast in
Northern Ireland, they were sent a sheaf of virtually blank pages. The
uncensored documents reveal that Soviet scientists have successfully used
microwaves of the type employed in mobile technology, to weaken the blood
brain barrier meant to protect the brain from harmful substances found in the
blood (see below).
American sources state that US army scientists succeeded in duplicating this
work in 1977, yet users have been told repeatedly by the industry and
Government funded bodies that there is no evidence that mobiles can cause
harmful effects. Dr Alan Frey who carried out some of the earliest research
linking microwaves with headaches, believes there is "significant evidence"
available against mobiles. Funding for his own work was withdrawn after three
of his studies confirmed effects.
Neurologists claim users could be at risk of developing Alzheimer's disease,
multiple sclerosis and Parkinson' disease because of radiation emissions from
mobiles. A study from Sweden by Professor Leif Salford at Lund University who
carried out experiments on rats using mobile phone type radiation emissions,
showed that after only two minutes the blood brain barrier opened up allowing
proteins and toxins to enter the brain.
Even at non-thermal levels when the microwaves were not strong enough to heat
up the rat's brains, the scientists detected poisonous activity deep in the
centre of the brain. Substances such as Albumen, which is naturally contained
in the blood, can harm the brain. Normally the blood brain barrier acts as an
impervious layer between the brain fluid and the blood, but this appears to
fail when exposed to even low powered microwaves.
Professor Salford said, " we need to bear in mind that diseases such as MS
and Alzheimer's are linked to proteins being found in the brain. Although
these are normally found in the blood, they can cause nerve damage or set off
diseases of the nervous system if they get into the brain".
Dr Henry Lai of the University of Washington in Seattle whose ground breaking work on DNA damage first helped put mobiles on the suspect list, has just released the latest results of memory effects on rats. 100 rats were placed in a tank of cloudy water and taught to swim to a platform. 50 of the group were then exposed to mobile phone radiation whilst the others were not. The entire exposed group forgot the way to the platform whereas the unexposed control group did not.
So claimed a report in the UK press. A research team at Nottingham University's School of Biological Sciences led by Dr David de Pomeray, has suggested that emissions from mobiles causes premature ageing, damages the skin and makes users look lined and haggard. The report discovered that mobile emissions could prevent the body's defence systems from working properly. Under normal circumstances the body would react immediately when skin cells are under attack by using its heat shock mechanism, which releases proteins to the damaged area to effect repair. The team fears that heavy mobile use does not give the skin sufficient time to recover and that released proteins "gum up " the cells, hindering repair. Dr de Pomeray said "Gradually cells don't work properly and repair becomes less efficient. If you are over stretching mechanisms that are trying to repair damage, the knock on effect is premature ageing. It's certainly possible this may be happening with mobile users". Experiments conducted on worms showed that their life span was shortened by persistent low-level radiation emissions and the scientists fear that humans could be similarly affected.
Part of the NRPB's evidence to the Science and Technology Committee stated
that shielding devices did not reduce radiation exposure as even if they did
shield, the phone would simply increase its power to compensate and the end
result would be the same as before shielding had been applied.
Having already examined in detail the various tests carried out on the
Microshield, the NRPB have subsequently confirmed that their comments had not
meant to include our product and we publish below extracts from their letter
which confirms this. N.B. The NRPB has refused us permission to use the
contents in any way which might imply endorsement and the following extract
is intended solely to distance our product from the negative reference which
they made about other shielding products.
"I would point out that Professor Clarke referred in his evidence to some
devices, he did not say all devices. The problem arises for your company
because there are some devices on the market, which we understand, do not
behave as their manufacturers claim. We accept you have taken care to design
your product properly and that its performance has been independently tested
at reputable laboratories. We also note that these results indicate
significant reductions in radiation absorption levels in users".
The BSA has made a statement to the effect that it "believes it would be sensible to minimise the risk by keeping calls as short as possible". This followed news on research that mobiles may be implicated with causing changes in blood flow within the brain.
American scientist Dr George Carlo, whose cellular industry funded research
findings (see below) caused reverberations around the mobile phone world
earlier in 1999, has been so dismayed by the lack of action from industry, he
has taken the unprecedented step of writing direct to all those who he had
originally presented his findings to earlier in February this year. What
follows is a copy of a letter he has sent, publication of which will only add
to the growing notion that industry is ignoring any research suggesting a
problem with mobiles, even to the point of including work actually sponsored
by themselves.
7 October 1999
Mr C. Michael Armstrong
Dear Mr Armstrong,
After much thought, I am writing this letter to you, personally, to ask your assistance in solving what I
believe is an emerging and serious problem concerning wireless phones. I write this letter in
the interest of the more than 80 million wireless phone users in the United States and the more than 200
million worldwide. But I also write this letter in the interest of your industry, a critical part of our
social and economic infrastructure.
Since 1993, I have headed the WTR surveillance and research program funded by the wireless industry.
The goal of WTR has always been to identify and solve any problems concerning consumers' health
that could arise from the use of these phones. This past February, at the annual convention of the
CTIA, I met with the full board of that organization to brief them on some surprising findings from our
work. I do not recall if you were there personally, but my understanding is that all segments of the
industry were represented.
At that briefing, I explained that the well-conducted scientific studies that WTR was overseeing
indicated that the question of wireless phone safety had become confused.
Specifically, I reported to you that:
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 tumour of the auditory nerve that is well in 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 tumour appeared to follow a dose-response curve;
The risk of rare neuro epithelial rumours 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 tumours 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 tumours 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. Such mis-classification of radiation exposure would tend to dilute any real
effect that may have been present. In addition, I reported to you that the genetic damage studies we
conducted to look at the ability of radiation from the phones to break DNA were negative, but that the
positive finding of functional DNA damage could be more important, perhaps indicating a problem that
is not dependent on DNA breakage, and that these inconsistencies needed to be clarified. I reported
that while none of the findings alone were evidence of a definitive health hazard from wireless
phones, the pattern of potential health effects evidenced by different types of studies, from different
laboratories, and by different investigators raised serious questions.
Following my presentation, I heard by voice vote of those present, a pledge to "do the right thing in
following up these findings" and a commitment of the necessary funds.
When I took on the responsibility of doing this work for you, I pledged five years. I was asked to
continue on through the end of a sixth year, and agreed. My tenure is now completed. My presentation
to you and the CTIA board in February was not an effort to lengthen my tenure at WTR, nor to
lengthen the tenure of the WTR itself. I was simply doing my job of letting you know what we found and
what needed to be done following from our findings. I made this expressly clear during my
presentation to you and in many subsequent conversation with members of your industry and the
media.
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. The steps I am
referring to specifically followed from the WTR program and have been recommended repeatedly in
public and private for and by me and other experts from around the world. As I prepare to move away
from the wireless phone issue and into a different public health direction, 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.
Alarmingly, indications are that some segments of the industry have ignored the scientific findings
suggesting potential health effects, have repeatedly and falsely claimed that wireless phones are safe
for all consumers including children, and have created an illusion of responsible follow up by calling
for and supporting more research. The most important measures of consumer protection are missing:
complete and honest factual information to allow informed judgement 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.
I am especially concerned about what appear to be actions by a segment of the industry to conscript the
FCC, the FDA and The World Health Organization with them in following a non-effectual course that
will likely result in a regulatory and consumer backlash.
As an industry, you will have to deal with the fallout from all of your choices, good and bad, in the
long term. But short term, I would like your help in effectuating an important public health
intervention today.
The question of wireless phone safety is unclear. Therefore, from a public health perspective, it is
critical for consumers to have the information they need to make an informed judgement about how
much of this unknown risk they wish to assume in their use of wireless phones. Informing consumers
openly and honestly about what is known and not-known about health risks is not liability laden - it is
evidence that your industry is being responsible, and doing all it can to assure safe use of its products.
The current popular backlash we are witnessing in the United States today against the tobacco industry
is derived in large part from perceived dishonesty on the part of that industry in not being forthright
about health effects. I urge you to help your industry not repeat that mistake.
As we close out the business of the WTR, I would like to openly ask for your help in distributing the
summary findings we have compiled of our work. This last action is what always has been anticipated
and forecast in the WTR's research agenda. I have asked another organization with which I am
affiliated, The Health Risk Management Group (HRMG) , to help us with this public health
intervention step, and to put together a consumer information package for widespread distribution.
Because neither WTR nor HRMG have the means to effectuate this intervention, I am asking you to
help us do the right thing.
I would be happy to talk to you personally about this.
Sincerely yours
George L. Carlo Ph.D, M.S., J.D.
Dr Carlo's story was finally aired to the American public on national TV for the first time on the 20/20 program. His appearance, which included news of his research findings and also accusations of what he believes to be an industry cover-up, finally appears to have prompted Government action. The Food and Drug Administration Agency has responded by announcing a new joint research initiative with the cellular industry and also calls for "the industry to design mobile phones in a way that minimises any RF exposure to the user, that is not necessary for device function". Dr Carlo has responded by saying that just announcing yet more research is not enough and that at this stage of the proceedings what is needed is action to advise users how they can reduce their exposure.
The British Medical Association (BMA) has called for "consumers to be provided with information on radiation shields when purchasing mobile phones" adding that "While scientific evidence remains inconclusive, we should take precautionary measures to minimise exposure".
Tests showing up to 98% of a mobile's radiation could be absorbed into the
users head which causes a mismatch with the antenna.
Tests show reproductive organs affected by mobile radiation as well as a
reduction in libido
Microshield Ind PLC was asked in 1999 by a leading international conference
company to help put together what turned out to be certainly the most
balanced and also possibly the most authoritative event ever held on the
subject.
Leading handset manufacturers and cellular operators were invited to
talk and offered the usual total freedom of choice over subject content, but
all disappointingly declined to attend. Most however were represented
amongst the delegates. Some pro industry scientists were however present
providing talks together with other leading scientists from all over the
world, including Dr Henry Lai and also representatives from the UK's NRPB and
George Carlo's WTR offices in America. Recent events surrounding the WTR and
George Carlo are dealt with elsewhere in this section, but some of the other
key issues which came out of the conference were as follows:
Dr David de Pomeray's latest work at Nottingham University confirmed heat
shock protein (HSPs) damage in nematode worms. These latest experiments which
followed his earlier work televised on BBC2's Money Program, were conducted
at mobile phone power and frequency levels, unlike his previously published
work. Significantly no temperature rise was recorded in the worms, yet the
effect on them was equivalent to what might be expected from a thermal raise
of at least 3 degrees C. What was observed therefore, could only have been a
non thermal effect, something which both industry and the NRPB have
consistently refused to acknowledge is possible. Dr John Stather Deputy
Director of the NRPB has in fact repeatedly said in interviews that if there
is no rise in temperature, there will be no effect.
Since the conference, Dr de Pomeray has released initial findings from
further work he is doing, which suggests mobiles may cause damage to the skin
as a result of the effect from HSP activity (see below for further reports on
skin damage).
Prof, Szmigielski from Poland reported an increased risk of dsyregulation of
autonomic control in cardiac function in 38 workers occupationally exposed to
ELF. Digital mobile signals are currently modulated with ELF frequencies.
Dr Mild from Sweden whose epidemiological studies released last year saw a
significant correlation between mobile usage and symptoms such as headaches
etc. revealed that follow up studies had shown that of those surveyed who had
reported headaches, 43% had decided to reduce talk time, of which 80% had now
experienced relief.
Dr Sienkiewicz of the NRPB in trying to reproduce Dr Lai's previous memory
loss findings on rats, found evidence of a possible increase in stress with a
marked increase in the animals tendency to urinate / defecate. When asked why
he had not followed Dr Lai's protocol more closely e.g. different power
levels, the conference was informed that the NRPB could not afford the
equipment which was necessary to do this.
Both Prof. Dr James Lin and Dr Alan Preece from Univs. of Illinois and
Bristol respectively, believed that mobile phone standards were too high and
needed re-examining, although both admitted that any new level would be
arbitrary until more research had been done.
Dr Preece has since announced that he and his team at Bristol are to look at
the relationship between mobile use and strokes, as they believe they may
affect the way blood flows through the brain. This follows cellular industry
sponsored research in Germany which showed a clear and reproducible effect on
raising blood pressure in young healthy volunteers. The British Stroke
Association responded by saying it would be sensible in the meantime to
minimise the risk by reducing exposure.
Prof. Johansson from the Karolinska Institute reported on skin damage on
the surface and epidermis. He noted that SAR's were calculated in either 1g
or 10g cubes and measurements on the surface were likely to be significantly
higher. He needed more funding for further work to continue on this.
Research published in August 1999 was presented by Prof. Om Gandhi which
showed that radiation absorption (SAR's) were being understated by existing
measurement systems employed by the cellular industry, due to the lack of the
use of a "lossy" ear. Their current method employs an inert spacer to
replicate the ear. The peer reviewed published paper shows that 4 out of the
5 current popular mobile models tested, comfortably exceeded US safety
guidelines. Prof. Gandhi has pointed this out to the cellular industry, but
they have refused to change their methodology.
Other published research by Prof. Gandhi et al showed an understatement of
radiation absorption rates (SAR's) in children's heads by 50% in the head of
a 5 year old and 20% in a 10 year old. These tests were not done using Prof.
Gandhi's "lossy" ear method which would compound the situation further.
Parents should be made aware of this information before embarking on a
purchase for their child and the industry should stop pitching the children's
market just because they're running out of adults to sell to. If the problem
is long term and cumulative by nature, then starting exposure at an early age
is the worse thing you could do and certainly does not sit well with the
basic tenets of the precautionary principle.
Prof. Gandhi also confirmed that using 1g rather than 10g cubes of tissue
for SAR calculation purposes would produce values of approx. double the 10g
method. So the 10g method employed by most of the EU, would allow phones to
emit twice as much radiation as those tested using the American 1g method,
before failing the standard.
A May'99 edition of the BBC's Panorama programme included news from the WTR
cellular industry sponsored research programme run by Dr George Carlo. The
WTR was supposedly a wholly independent body who would carry out $25million
worth of research into the relationship between cellular phones and diseases
such as cancer and tumours. The broadcast showed Dr Carlo announcing that his
six-year program had finished and had revealed:
* Chromosome damage to human cells caused by mobile radiation
* A study linking mobile use with a 300% increased incidence in a rare form
of brain tumour
* Epidemiological data suggesting a correlation between the side of the head
mobiles were held against and the location of brain tumours in users.
In announcing the research, Dr Carlo confirmed that they had now entered a
grey area and that it was no longer appropriate for the cellular industry to
continue making unqualified statements as to the safety of their product.
This is the most significant piece of news yet to emerge from the USA, coming
from the very scientist who for four and half years of the six year program
had been heavily criticised by many for carrying out no meaningful research
and being nothing more than an extension of the cellular industry itself.
The same edition of the aforementioned BBC Panorama programme also featured new research from Sweden by cancer specialist Dr Lennart Hardell, showing results of a study on brain tumours in mobile users, which revealed a correlation between the location of the tumour and the side of the head the victim held their mobile. Dr Hardell said, "There is a biological indication there is a problem. Until we have the definitive results of much larger studies, we need to minimise exposure"
The UK's Defence Evaluation Research Agency DERA at Porton Down finally published details of there mobile research which had been previewed by the press earlier in 1999 (see further on). Their research reveals that for the first time they have found clear and reproducible effects on the hippocampus of rats brain cells at non thermal power levels using mobile frequencies. This part of the brain deals with memory. Dr Henry Lai in the US has also found long term memory loss in rats in separate experiments.
The results of a May '99 Mori poll have shown that 43% of regular mobile users are worried about health effects and the concern was so great, that 62% of them would buy a shielding product. This follows on from a 1998 cellular industry sponsored survey which revealed that almost one in five mobile owners had reduced their usage over health fears.
May'99 saw the release of the second part of Dr Mild's cellular industry sponsored studies from Sweden which confirmed once again
Microshield's own findings that mobile use was associated with symptoms ranging from headaches, fatigue, dizzy spells, memory
loss, burning skin, and ear problems.
Press reports on the studies show that:
Over half of the 11,000 users surveyed, suffered unpleasant experiences and even those with less than 2 minutes usage a day
complained of discomfort and side effects. Those using the phone for 30 minutes a day were twice as likely to complain of memory
loss, than those using it for less than two minutes. Users making four or more calls a day were 3.6 times more likely to suffer
headaches than those using it less than twice, as well as being 2.3 times more likely to report dizziness and 2.4 times as likely to have
concentration lapses. Of most concern, was that young people appeared to be most at risk with the under-30s three to four times more
likely to experience side effects.
May '98 had seen the first set of results released in the studies, sponsored by the Scandinavian cellular industry and the Swedish and
Norwegian governments, which confirmed a significant correlation between the length and number of phone calls made by users and
the incidence of symptoms such as headaches, burning sensations, fatigue, etc. Nearly 4000 out of 11000 returning questionnaires
reported health problems. During John Simpson's talk to the industry, he noted that these Scandinavian victims, together with the
users who had registered health problems with Microshield all had one thing in common, which was that their symptoms were totally
ignored by regulatory bodies such as the NRPB, for the purposes of risk assessment and dismissed as anecdotal evidence. Simpson
added that it wasn't just the numbers, but the similarity of symptoms reported which made their evidence so compelling.
An April edition of the Observer reported a leading Lloyds underwriter as having refused to offer product liability cover to mobile
manufacturers for damage to user's health. The firm cited the striking resemblance between the development of the asbestos and
tobacco health issues and the current mobile phone problem, both of which will end up costing insurers a fortune.
Recently the giant Insurance group Swiss Re stated in their publication Electro-Smog A Phantom Risk, that on the basis of today's
present knowledge alone it must be expected that a EMF claim would succeed. This view has been supported by the recent exit from
the re-insurance market of Scandinavia's biggest insurance group, Skandia. They cite reducing exposure (sic.) to potential EMF claims
as being one of the reasons.
In this regard, corporate providers should guard against complacency in relying on present day government advice to protect
themselves against any future potential liabilities. The experiences of the asbestos industry is a sobering reminder of this. Although a
manufacturer will always be ultimately liable for it's product, it is inconceivable that an employer insistent upon it's work force using
mobiles, would be totally exempt from involvement in any actions for damages by employees.
May'99 saw results of tests from the National Physical Laboratory using a seven material phantom human head, showing that mobile
users who wear glasses, could be intensifying exposure to their eyes by up to 20% and into the head by 6.3%. According to the UK's
Sunday Mirror, around 60% of people in the UK wear glasses. This phenomena is thought to be caused by the metal rims and is
connected with research results announced by scientist Dr C K Chou at a mobile phone health conference in 1997, which showed that
the presence of a metal object in the near field of a mobile, could increase specific absorption rate readings by a factor of up to 50.
Microshield have had numerous reports from users of eye problems.
Obviously the glasses in question would have been a few centimetres away from the user's eyes, but it would be interesting to have
the experiments repeated taking measurements from amalgam dental fillings which are actually in the body. Many mobile users report
burning sensations and toothache in teeth with fillings and also an unpleasant metallic taste in their mouth. There have also been
anecdotal reports from UK National Health staff of a marked increase in the incidence of jaw cancer, which won't show up in official
statistics for several years yet.
The same NPL tests looking at the effects on wearers of glasses also included results on seven different shielding products, showing only the Microshield as offering any significant reduction in absorption by the head, with five of the products registering no reduction at all. The Microshield was shown to be absorbing 90% of the radiation which would otherwise have gone straight into the user's head. Readers of this site will be familiar with Microshield's views on these copy products which have flowed onto the market in the past 18 months or so, giving users a false sense of security which might actually lead them to increasing their mobile usage under the misapprehension that they were now safe. Microshield General Manager John Simpson said We've been telling people for ages that these products don't reduce exposure, but obviously many take our advise with a pinch of salt on the basis that we would say that wouldn't we ? We're just pleased that finally our observations have been confirmed by such a highly regarded organisation as the NPL.
London's Metropolitan Police were reported in an early June '99 edition of the Daily Mail, to be seriously looking at providing radiation protection for all staff who use mobiles, following disturbing evidence linking mobile phones with cancerous brain tumours. In the meantime, officers in Britain's biggest police force have been advised to restrict all calls to less than 5 minutes.
The Sunday Telegraph 30th May '99, reported the UK's Government Defence Evaluation Agency, DERA, as having purchased Microshield cases for its staff several weeks after announcing research from Porton Down which had shown an effect on short term memory and spatial awareness in rats, but had down played their significance by stating that health implications for humans were unclear.
Sales of hands free kits are said to have increased fourfold recently, due to fears over health and the
perception (perpetuated by mobile dealers) that such devices reduce the risks. The NPL tests carried out for BBC's Healthcheck and
also the New Scientist, confirmed that these kits, which are issued by many employers to staff, are not totally reducing exposure to the
head as many users think and that up to 30% is leaking out of the earpiece itself, thereby concentrating exposure into the ear canal.
This would explain why many users who experience ear problems, report a worsening of their condition when they use these
devices.
Far more importantly though, unless the phone is placed some distance away from the user, the remaining radiation still coming off
the handset, is merely being redirected to another part of the body e.g. organs around the waist area, which ironically may not be as
able to defend itself as well as the brain, which is of course given some protection by the skull.
More recent tests by Microwave Consultants Ltd (MCL), manufacturers of phantom heads and bodies for the cellular industry, have
just revealed that the absorption which hands free users subject their body to, is significantly higher than that to the head when used
without a hands free kit. The results are due to be published soon.
Some have commented that at least the exposure is being taken away from the head (apart from the leakage to the ear) and that this
must reduce the risk of brain tumours. The main concerns by users may indeed be of brain tumours, but scientist's concerns are not
specifically about brain tumours per se, but rather the biological effects at cellular levels which cause tumours in general i.e. wherever
the phone is held.
In normal usage of course the concerns would centre around the head, because that's where the phone is held, but if changes in usage
determined that other areas were being exposed, then concerns about tumours would shift accordingly to the new area of
exposure.
For some time Microshield have had reports from users complaining that their phone has left a mark on the skin, in the form of a red,
inflamed, raised area of flesh which hardens over a period of time and which is exactly the same size and shape as the mobile itself,
including the antenna. These reports are from users who keep their phone held against or near to their bodies for long periods of time
e.g. attached to their belt or under their armpit in holster type arrangements.
At present though, these users are actually only subjecting themselves to relatively low levels of exposure, as the mobile operates at
considerably reduced power levels for most of the time when in standby mode and they hold the handset against the head to make a
call. When used in conjunction with a hands free kit however, they will keep the phone in that area when the phone is in talk mode
and consequently operating at dramatically higher power levels. Thus overall cumulative exposure will increase quite dramatically.
Microshield has details of one user who has developed a tumour on his spine exactly where he used to keep his phone and is
considering legal action. In South Africa we are receiving anecdotal reports of an increase in a rare form of hip cancer.
By letting users continue to believe that hands free kits make mobile use "safer", the cellular industry is in the enviable position of
being able to placate user's concerns, without having to change their stance that mobiles do not represent a health risk. Pushing the
sale of health shields however, which after all have only one use, would be a different proposition and might therefore compromise
their stance that mobiles are safe. Whilst this strategy may help the cellular industry cover their position, Microshield believes it
morally wrong, as some users may now even have increased usage as a result of their new found confidence in the safety of the
product.
December 20th's Sunday Times made further damning accusations of cover up by the cellular industry, when it
ran a major article featuring claims by Dr Henry Lai that research he had conducted under contract for the industry, had been returned
to him twice for alteration of the data. The article quoted Dr Lai as saying "Our work has shown that there is an increase of 50% in
damage to DNA when it is exposed to mobile phone radiation, but they are asking me to change my whole interpretation of the
findings in a way which would make them more favourable to the mobile phone industry. This is what happened in the tobacco
industry . They had the data in their hands but when it was not favourable, they did not want to disclose it."
Two previous studies by Dr Lai and his University of Washington colleague Dr Singh, have already been published showing both
single and double DNA strand breakage's in rat's brain cells. DNA breakage's have been associated with slow onset diseases such as
Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and cancer.
The same Sunday Times article also saw highly respected researcher Dr Ross Adey claim that Motorola had not been happy with studies carried out by him under contract which showed non thermal effects being caused by mobile phone radiation. Dr Adey said "Motorola were not happy that there were any health effects (thermal or non thermal), their line is that there are no health effects." Currently all international recommended limits for mobile emmissions are set on the assumption that the only damage that could be caused, is from the well known heating effects of microwaves. Research is now starting to show effects at levels way below the thermal thresholds.
A major UK Daily reported in late December the first mobile phone company anywhere in the world to offer it's staff radiation protection shields for use with their mobiles. Large numbers of staff at South Africa's Transtel asked for Microshield cases after executives carried out a survey of 6000 staff to find out if they had suffered symptoms linked to the use of their mobile. Chief Operating Officer Nisha Jones said " I don't want people coming up to me in two or three years saying I knew about the risks and did nothing about it. The scientific evidence available so far isn't conclusive, but while there are concerns about exposure to radiation, we should take precautionary measures."
|
