Radiation's Health Effects (EM; RF; Nuclear; Mobile Tech; Etc.)

[rynner2]

Health risk of long-term mobile phone use to be studied by scientists
By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor
Sunday, 8 June 2008

Scientists have started work on a massive official study to discover whether the long-term use of mobile phones causes brain cancer, and Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases.

The study – whose launch vindicates an Independent on Sunday campaign to draw attention to potential risks of using handsets for over a decade – will initially involve 200,000 people in Britain, Denmark and Sweden, and hopes to increase its range to other European countries. The British part of it alone will cost £3.1m, provided jointly by the Government and by the mobile-phone industry.

The research – which is being led in Britain by a team from Imperial College, London, under the auspices of the Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research (MTHR) Programme – will follow 90,000 mobile-phone users in this country over the years, to see what happens to them. It is important because cancers take at least 10 years – and normally much longer – to develop, but the phones have spread so rapidly and recently that relatively few people have been using them for that long. Official assurances that the phones do not cause the disease have been of little value as they are based on research that, at best, includes few people who have been exposed to radiation from the phones long enough.

Last October, this newspaper reported that the most comprehensive study to date – a review of all the research on people exposed for more than a decade – had found that they were twice as likely to get brain cancer on the side of the head where they held the handset.

Last night, Mike Bell, chairman of the Radiation Research Trust, hailed the launch of the new study as a "breakthrough" and said it had partly come about because of the way the IoS had put the issue "into the public domain".

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 42489.html

 

[rynner2]

US cancer boss in mobiles warning

The director of a leading US cancer research institute has sent a memo to thousands of staff warning of possible higher risks from mobile phone use.

Ronald Herberman, of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, said users should not wait for definitive studies on the risk and should take action now.

He said children should use mobiles in emergencies only and adults should try to keep the phone away from the head.

No major academic study has confirmed a link to higher brain-tumour risks.

Electromagnetic fields

Dr Herberman said his warning was based on early findings from unpublished data.

"We shouldn't wait for a definitive study to come out, but err on the side of being safe rather than sorry later," he says.

"I am convinced that there are sufficient data to warrant issuing an advisory to share some precautionary advice on cell phone use," the memo says.

Dr Herberman's warning to 3,000 staff says children should be protected as their brains are still developing.

He lists tips including switching sides regularly while talking on mobiles.

A major six-year research study in the UK said last year that there were no short-term adverse effects to brain and cell function from mobile phone use.

However, the UK Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research Programme (MTHR) said there was a "hint" of a higher cancer risk in the long term and that its research would look into the effects over a 10-year period.

Programme chairman Professor Lawrie Challis said: "We can't rule out the possibility at this stage that cancer could appear in a few years' time."

Evidence 'still confused'

Prof Alan Preece, Emeritus Professor of Medical Physics at the University of Bristol, said the evidence for harmful effects was "still confused and inconclusive".

He added: "Whilst I would agree that precaution for children is an excellent idea... it is only very long term heavy use that would seem to be sensible to avoid until there is positive evidence of harm.

"In any case, modern phones cause far less exposure than their counterparts 10 or 20 years ago, and hands-free devices effectively solve the problem by removing heavy exposure to the head."

Prof Will Stewart of the University of Southampton, who is a Fellow of The Royal Academy of Engineering, said he would be intrigued to see the early research.

"One cannot refute the 'early findings from unpublished data' since we have not seen them - but there is enough published data, including the MTHR review, to make the advice sound alarmist."

Long-term effects

An earlier UK report said in 2005 that mobile phone use by children should be limited as a precaution - and that under-eights should not use them at all.

Mobile phones emit radio signals and electromagnetic fields that can penetrate the human brain, and some campaigners fear that this could seriously damage human health.

A US analysis by the University of Utah this year of thousands of brain tumour patients found no increased risk as a result of mobile use, but added that the effects from long-term use "awaits confirmation by future studies".

Research reported in 2006 by the British arm of an international project called Interphone concluded that mobile phone use did not lead to a greater risk of brain tumour.

Recent Danish and French studies also found no increased risk of cancer.

But a study of 500 Israelis found this year that heavy mobile phone use might be linked to an increased risk of cancer of the salivary gland.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7523109.stm

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

Ask not for whom the polyphonic singing frog mobile ringtone, trills, it trills for your kids.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/s...ens-risk-of-brain-cancer-fivefold-937005.html

Mobile phone use 'raises children's risk of brain cancer fivefold'

Alarming new research from Sweden on the effects of radiation raises fears that today's youngsters face an epidemic of the disease in later life

Indendent on Sunday. By Geoffrey Lean, Environment Editor. 21 September 2008

Children and teenagers are five times more likely to get brain cancer if they use mobile phones, startling new research indicates.

The study, experts say, raises fears that today's young people may suffer an "epidemic" of the disease in later life. At least nine out of 10 British 16-year-olds have their own handset, as do more than 40 per cent of primary schoolchildren.

Yet investigating dangers to the young has been omitted from a massive £3.1m British investigation of the risks of cancer from using mobile phones, launched this year, even though the official Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research (MTHR) Programme – which is conducting it – admits that the issue is of the "highest priority".

Despite recommendations of an official report that the use of mobiles by children should be "minimised", the Government has done almost nothing to discourage it.

Last week the European Parliament voted by 522 to 16 to urge ministers across Europe to bring in stricter limits for exposure to radiation from mobile and cordless phones, Wi-fi and other devices, partly because children are especially vulnerable to them. They are more at risk because their brains and nervous systems are still developing and because – since their heads are smaller and their skulls are thinner – the radiation penetrates deeper into their brains.

The Swedish research was reported this month at the first international conference on mobile phones and health.

It sprung from a further analysis of data from one of the biggest studies carried out into the risk that the radiation causes cancer, headed by Professor Lennart Hardell of the University Hospital in Orebro, Sweden. Professor Hardell told the conference – held at the Royal Society by the Radiation Research Trust – that "people who started mobile phone use before the age of 20" had more than five-fold increase in glioma", a cancer of the glial cells that support the central nervous system. The extra risk to young people of contracting the disease from using the cordless phone found in many homes was almost as great, at more than four times higher.

Those who started using mobiles young, he added, were also five times more likely to get acoustic neuromas, benign but often disabling tumours of the auditory nerve, which usually cause deafness.

By contrast, people who were in their twenties before using handsets were only 50 per cent more likely to contract gliomas and just twice as likely to get acoustic neuromas.

Professor Hardell told the IoS: "This is a warning sign. It is very worrying. We should be taking precautions." He believes that children under 12 should not use mobiles except in emergencies and that teenagers should use hands-free devices or headsets and concentrate on texting. At 20 the danger diminishes because then the brain is fully developed. Indeed, he admits, the hazard to children and teenagers may be greater even than his results suggest, because the results of his study do not show the effects of their using the phones for many years. Most cancers take decades to develop, longer than mobile phones have been on the market.

The research has shown that adults who have used the handsets for more than 10 years are much more likely to get gliomas and acoustic neuromas, but he said that there was not enough data to show how such relatively long-term use would increase the risk for those who had started young.

He wants more research to be done, but the risks to children will not be studied in the MTHR study, which will follow 90,000 people in Britain. Professor David Coggon, the chairman of the programmes management committee, said they had not been included because other research was being done on young people by a study at Sweden's Kariolinska Institute.

He said: "It looks frightening to see a five-fold increase in cancer among people who started use in childhood," but he said he "would be extremely surprised" if the risk was shown to be so high once all the evidence was in.

But David Carpenter, dean of the School of Public Health at the State University of NewYork – who also attended the conference – said: "Children are spending significant time on mobile phones. We may be facing a public health crisis in an epidemic of brain cancers as a result of mobile phone use."

In 2000 and 2005, two official inquiries under Sir William Stewart, a former government chief scientist, recommended the use of mobile phones by children should be "discouraged" and "minimised".

But almost nothing has been done, and their use by the young has more than doubled since the turn of the millennium.

 

[rynner2]

Hi-tech health concerns meet New Age Paranoia!

Alternative health capital turns its 'negative energy' on pioneering wi-fi system
It is regarded as an oasis of calm and tranquility, and the nation's capital for alternative health therapies and spiritual healing remedies.

By Andrew Alderson and Simon Trump
Last Updated: 9:46PM GMT 27 Dec 2008

But now the residents of Glastonbury, which has long been a favoured destination for pilgrims, are at the centre of a bitter row in which many blame the town's new wireless computer network - known as wi-fi - for a spate of health problems.

Some healers even hold that electro-magnetic fields (EMFs) generated by the wi-fi system are responsible for upsetting positive energy fields of the body, which are known as chakras, and positive energy fields of the earth, which are known as ley lines.

There are now calls for the project, the first of its kind in Britain, to be "unplugged" and for wi-fi masts in the centre of the Somerset market town to be removed just seven months into its experimental run.

Meanwhile soothsayers, astrologers and other opponents of the wi-fi system have resorted to an alternative technology - known as "orgone" - to combat the alleged negative effects of the high-tech system.

In May, Glastonbury - which has a population of 9,000 and which lends its name to the country's largest rock festival, staged on a farm six miles outside the town - became the first place in the country to have a free wi-fi network installed in its town centre. The £34,000 project is financed by county council and regional development agency funding,

At a public meeting to discuss alleged health problems in the Somerset town, residents complained of numerous symptoms including headaches, dizziness, rashes and even pneumonia.

Protesters claim that radiation associated with the wi-fi network suppresses the production of melatonin, a hormone which helps to control sleep patterns, regulates the body's metabolic rate and boosts the immune system.

One of those who claims to have been affected is Natalie Fee, a former yoga teacher, who has now moved home - from inside to outside the wi-fi zone - so that she can protect her son Elliot, five, from what she sees as the harmful effects of wi-fi.

"I would like to see the masts removed," she said. "Perhaps one day that will happen and hopefully it won't be too late.

"I had a radiation expert come round to take measurements at our old home which was within sight of one of the masts. The highest reading was in Elliot's room.

"I thought Glastonbury was a rural town. I don't want my son exposed to risk 24 hours a day, including at his primary school which is within the wi-fi zone. I would be failing in my duty as a parent if I did."

Matt Todd, who campaigns against EMFs, said that residents had complained that chakras and ley lines are being disrupted. "They believe positive energy flows are being disturbed," he said.

Mr Todd has started building small generators which he believes can neutralise the allegedly-harmful radiation using the principles of orgone science. The pyramid-like machines use quartz crystals, selenite (a clear form of the mineral gypsum), semi-precious lapis lazuli stones, gold leaf and copper coil to absorb and recycle the supposedly-negative energy.

"I have given a number of generators to shops in the High Street and hidden others in bushes in the immediate vicinity of the antennae. That way you can bring back the balance," said Mr Todd.

Orgone science was developed by the Austro-Hungarian psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich, who claimed all living matter contains a biological energy. Mr Todd added: "The science hasn't really got into the mainstream because the Government won't make decisions which will affect big business, even if it concerns everyone's health.

"I think wi-fi has tipped things over the edge because a lot of people can feel it. It seems to have introduced this large blast of energy into the environment and that's what people are picking up on."

Jane Saunders, who runs the Glastonbury natural health clinic, felt so strongly she founded the Why Wi-Fi? protest campaign. "I am not a Luddite and I recognise there are benefits to new technology," she said.

"Initially wi-fi was a development I welcomed with open arms, especially with teenage children who need to be on-line almost all the time.

"But I had to take it out and go back to a conventional broadband cable network because it was affecting my health. I show symptoms when it's switched on that I don't when the network is off."

David Heathcoat Amory, the local Conservative MP, said: "I have detected no public support for this project and I have received many letters and emails from concerned residents who believe the siting of the emitting masts are causing health problems."

A spokesman for Powerwatch, an independent EMF pressure group, said: "Someone using a wi-fi laptop will be exposed to approximately twice the level of radiation as someone living 70 yards from a mobile phone mast. Unlike the food and drink industry whose products have to go through extensive pre-market trials and testing, there is no safety net for wireless devices."

However, Dr Eric de Silva, a physicist at Imperial College, London, disagreed. He said: "All the studies which have so far concluded show there is no evidence of a connection between exposure to wi-fi and ill health."

A Somerset County Council spokesman said: "The project was established to support the local economy and encourage tourist and business visitors to stay longer and use local services.

"It has the potential to be a real asset. It conforms to all UK and EU telecommunications health and safety standards, but we do take public concerns very seriously and a review of the system is due to be completed in the New Year."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstop ... ystem.html

 

[rynner2]

France cracks down on children's mobile phone use, but Britain still ignoring warnings
By Peter Allen and Fiona Macrae
Last updated at 9:06 PM on 11th January 2009

France has begun a crackdown on children having mobile phones after research linked their use to brain cancer.

Advertising mobiles to children under 12 is to be prohibited under the legislation announced by the environment minister Jean-Louis Borloo.

He will also take steps to ban the sale of phones designed for those aged under six.

Campaigners in Britain say the drive contrasts with the stance of the Labour Government, which is accused of ignoring an official report which recommended in 2000 that under-16s should be discouraged from using mobiles.

Since 2000 mobile use among children has doubled, with ninety per cent of the country’s 16-year-olds now owning a handset.

Graham Philips, a spokesman for safety lobby group Powerwatch, said: 'Most people in the UK have no idea that Government advice is that under-16s don't use their phones. Public information is sorely lacking.
'It is almost as if they are saying 'We think there might be a problem but we don't want it to be public because it will upset everyone.'
The French government will also set new limits for radiation from handsets and make it compulsory for them to be sold with earphones.

It is thought to be the most comprehensive action taken by any government-worldwide.

Swedish research indicates that children and teenagers are five times more likely to get brain cancer if they use mobiles, leading to warnings of an 'epidemic' among users in later life.

The French ministry warned that youngsters may be 'more sensitive (to radiation from phones) because their bodies are still developing'. Children's heads are smaller and their skulls thinner.

Many British parents see a mobile as an essential tool to keep in touch with their children, especially when they are going out alone.

In contrast, France sees them as an absolute danger, with advertisements being put up in major cities including Lyon this week reading: ‘Let’s keep them healthy, away from mobile phones!'

The legislation is the latest evidence of alarm among officials at the hazards of mobile phone use.

In September, the European Parliament voted to urge ministers across Europe to bring in stricter radiation limits. In Canada health officials warn teenagers to keep calls shorter than ten minutes, and Russia advises under-18s to avoid using phones.

Last night the Department of Health said it 'strongly advised' that children were encouraged to use mobile phones in emergencies only and to keep calls short.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/artic ... nings.html

 

[rynner2]

Teacher switches off class wi-fi

Another primary school in Northern Ireland has decided not to use wireless technology after a parent cited health fears, it has emerged.

Ballycarrickmaddy Primary removed its wi-fi system last year.

The Department of Education said there was no evidence of any health risk and only one other school in NI has decided not to use it, using on cables instead.

The other school is Ballinderry PS in County Antrim, where the principal Ian Thompson, took the decision.

He said: "We don't really know the biological end of this, which is the thing which really concerns us," he said.

"It's all right saying there's no heat from it, we accept that, but we don't know what's going on inside.

"I would like more reassurance really."

The Department of Education uses Classroom 2000, or C2K, to administer computers and their networks in schools.

Along with the Public Health Agency in Northern Ireland, they have pointed to a study by the Health Protection Agency in England, where preliminary results indicated there was no physical health risk from using wi-fi.

The World Health Organization has also said there is "no convincing scientific evidence" that the weak radiofrequency (RF) signals from wireless networks cause adverse health effects.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/8274180.stm

 

[amester]

Some people really need to get a life :?

 

[rynner2]

Would you notice this unicycling clown if he rode by? Three out of four people using a mobile phone didn't
By Fiona Macrae
Last updated at 8:08 AM on 21st October 2009

The garish clothes, outsize shoes and bright red nose are enough to catch the eye. And when the clown in question is riding a unicycle, surely the sight is impossible to miss.

Not, it seems, if you are talking on a mobile phone.
Three out of four men and women making calls failed to notice a clown riding past them on his one-wheeled bike, a study found.

They were so engrossed in their conversations that they were oblivious to what was going on around them.
The finding may seem unsurprising to anyone who has had to dodge mobile phone users on pavements and in supermarkets.
But it will also raise fresh questions about the wisdom of chatting on the phone while driving - even with a hands-free kit.

For the study, researchers asked a clown to ride a unicycle around a university campus square and then questioned 151 passers-by on whether they had noticed him.
Some of the pedestrians were alone, listening to music or talking on mobile phones, and others were in pairs.
Given the novelty of a unicycling clown, the researchers from Western Washington University in the U.S. expected him to grab the attention of most.

As they put it: 'Unicyclists are very rare on campus pathways and none of the authors have ever observed a unicycling clown on campus.'
Around half of those not using mobiles, including those plugged into their iPods, spotted the clown.

Those walking in twos were the most observant, with 81 per cent mentioning the clown when questioned.
In contrast, only 25 per cent of the mobile phone users had noticed the distraction, the journal Applied Cognitive Psychology reports.

The high scores obtained by those listening to music show that electronic gadgetry in itself is not a distraction.
The success of those walking in pairs also proves it is not having a conversation itself that is a problem - rather, it is how you do it.
A variety of factors, including poor reception and an inability to judge the other person's body language, mean talking on the telephone takes more effort than chatting to someone at your side.

A second experiment revealed that the phone users weren't even able to talk and walk in a straight line.

Pedestrians using phones walked more slowly, changed direction more often and were less likely to nod or wave at acquaintances.

Professor Ira Hyman said the experiments made it clear that chatting on a mobile can make even the simplest of tasks more difficult.
The effects could be magnified when carrying out more complex activities such as driving.
The professor said: 'Cell phone use causes people to be oblivious to their surroundings while engaged in even a simple task such as walking.
'If people experience so much difficulty performing the task of walking when they're on a cell phone, just think what this means when put into the context of driving safety.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/ ... z0UYTUXaRZ

 

[Moooksta]

Maybe the 4 men calls were

Man 1 - "Mr. Smith your tests are back and its bad news...."

Man 2 - "Darling I want a divorce."

Man 3 - "I'm afraid your bankrupt."

Man 4 - "Can you pick up milk?" "What's that dear, soory I was distracted. A clown just uni-cycled past!"

mooks out

 

[rynner2]

Long-term use of mobile phones 'may be linked to cancer'
Long-term use of mobile phones may be linked to some cancers, a landmark international study will conclude later this year.
By Martin Beckford and Robert Winnett
Published: 8:00AM BST 24 Oct 2009

A £20million, decade-long investigation overseen by the World Health Organisation (WHO) will publish evidence that heavy users face a higher risk of developing brain tumours later in life, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

The conclusion, while not definitive, will undermine assurances from the government that the devices are safe and is expected to put ministers under pressure to issue stronger guidance.

A preliminary breakdown of the results found a “significantly increased risk” of some brain tumours “related to use of mobile phones for a period of 10 years or more” in some studies.

The head of the Interphone investigation said that the report would include a “public health message”.

Britain’s Department of Health has not updated its guidance for more than four years. It says that “the current balance of evidence does not show health problems caused by using mobile phones”, and suggests only that children be “discouraged” from making “non-essential” calls while adults should “keep calls short”.

In contrast, several other countries, notably France, have begun strengthening warnings and American politicians are urgently investigating the risks.

The Interphone inquiry has been investigating whether exposure to mobile phones is linked to three types of brain tumour and a tumour of the salivary gland.

Its head, Dr Elisabeth Cardis, backed new warnings.

“In the absence of definitive results and in the light of a number of studies which, though limited, suggest a possible effect of radiofrequency radiation, precautions are important,” she said.

“I am therefore globally in agreement with the idea of restricting the use by children, though I would not go as far as banning mobile phones as they can be a very important tool, not only in emergencies, but also maintaining contact between children and their parents and thus playing a reassurance role.

“Means to reduce our exposure (use of hands-free kits and moderating our use of phones) are also interesting.”

The project conducted studies in 13 countries, interviewing tumour sufferers and people in good health to see whether their mobile phone use differed. It questioned about 12,800 people between 2000 and 2004.

etc...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/m ... ancer.html

 

[KarlD]

I wish people would learn the difference between non-ionising electromagnetic radiation which is what you get from radio masts and doesn't kill you and ionisning radiation which you get from neuclear decay and does kill you.

 

[rynner2]

...non-ionising electromagnetic radiation which is what you get from radio masts and doesn't kill you..

The statistics now seem to show that there is a danger to those who hold radio transmitters up against their head.

Admittedly radiation from radio-active decay can kill you quicker, but that's no reason to ignore the lesser danger.

 

[Pietro_Mercurios]

I wish people would learn the difference between non-ionising electromagnetic radiation which is what you get from radio masts and doesn't kill you and ionisning radiation which you get from neuclear decay and does kill you.

I think this is a Thread for the discussion of, 'low level, microwave radiation', as used in the communications industry, the electromagnetic fields generated round high tension power-lines and the sort of electromagnetic pollution which occasionally opens the doors on the bullet train as it speeds through Tokyo.

Some of the claims for the damaging effects of these sources of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation may still be the subject of hot debate, however, microwaves most certainly do have the potential to kill, as well as to boil soup and heat up a Pot Noodle. The evidence for the long term effects of exposure to low levels of microwave radiation is still coming in. Unfortunately, it appears to be us and especially our children, who appear to be the test subjects.

 

[KarlD]

While there is some evidence that low levels of EM radiation can be harmful if the exposure is prolonged and frequent, news papers seem in no hurry to clear up any confusion that people may have between EM radiation and nuclear, its all one and the same thing in the public inagination.
People are usualy surprised to learn the light is a form of EM radiation.

 

[stu neville]

People are usualy surprised to learn the light is a form of EM radiation.

Generalising again - you'll probably find that most people aren't surprised to learn that light is on the EM spectrum, particularly if they did science at any time they were in school.

 

[CarlosTheDJ]

What constitutes a "heavy user" of mobile phones?

I'm not setting-up an obesity joke, I really want to know!

I send a receive a few texts a day, and maybe talk on my mobile once in three or four days.....surely my hand is more at risk than my brain?

And what about people who use mobiles like they do on TV (specifically The Apprentice) where they have it on speakerphone and shout into it from two feet away?

 

[Timble2]

....
And what about people who use mobiles like they do on TV (specifically The Apprentice) where they have it on speakerphone and shout into it from two feet away?

Unfortunately it won't be the deserving ones who have their brains cooked...

 

[KarlD]

What constitutes a "heavy user" of mobile phones?

I'm not setting-up an obesity joke, I really want to know!

I send a receive a few texts a day, and maybe talk on my mobile once in three or four days.....surely my hand is more at risk than my brain?

And what about people who use mobiles like they do on TV (specifically The Apprentice) where they have it on speakerphone and shout into it from two feet away?

seriously I would be more concerned about keeping your phone in your pocket, your phone every hour or so does send messages to the network when its in idle mode so exery time that happens you are exposing yourself to microwave radiation, I don't keep my phone in my front pocket for that very reason.

 

[CarlosTheDJ]

For some reason I get no signal in my pocket, so I'm ok there.

 

[ramonmercado]

For some reason I get no signal in my pocket, so I'm ok there.

Probably your lead jockstrap blocking the signal.

 

[Ringo]

Or his balls of steel.

 

[rynner2]

Is your mobile phone bad for you?
Some overseas studies have rekindled fears of a link to brain tumours. Peter Knight asks if we should worry

With its 12.1-megapixel camera and sleek touchscreen, the Sony Ericsson Satio is one of the most desirable mobile phones you could buy this Christmas. You may recognise it from its high-profile advertising campaign: carefree twentysomethings bouncing on colourful spacehoppers. But one thing the advert fails to tell the viewer is that the Satio is one of the highest emitters of low-level radio waves on the mobile phone market.

Different models record different levels of radiation, and some experts want radio wave readings advertised as prominently as are the salt and fat content on food labelling. Professor Denis Henshaw, head of radiation research at the University of Bristol, says: “While we don’t have an advanced state of knowledge about the harmful effects of mobile phones, a number attached to a phone is at least a start in giving the consumer an informed choice.”

The reading is recorded as a specific absorption rate (SAR): the rate at which head tissue absorbs the phone’s radiation. The higher the reading, the more radiation is emitted. Nine years ago Henshaw advised the Stewart Report, the UK’s first committee to tackle the issue in depth. It failed to find concrete evidence of adverse effects, but it did recommend that radiation readings be displayed on the back of mobile phone boxes and as a menu option. (The Mobile Manufacturers Forum claims that it is “impractical” to put these figures on packaging, but they can usually be seen on the manufacturers’ websites.) The European guideline for maximum radiation exposure is 2W/kg in 10g of body tissue. The Satio’s reading is 1.58W/kg. The LG Crystal’s is 1.47W/kg. Samsung phones record consistently low SAR values, while the Apple iPhone 3GS is between the two extremes with 1.1W/kg. All these models fall safely within the guidelines, so should you worry about SAR? Perhaps yes, if the preliminary findings of the Interphone study, the biggest of its kind, are to be believed. It is conducted under the auspices of the World Health Organisation (WHO) and its conclusions will be drawn from research by scientists in 13 countries.

Some of the evidence from the 12 countries that have published their reports seems to suggest that there is “significantly increased risk” of developing some types of brain tumour if you use a phone for a decade or more. But this conflicts with the findings from other countries taking part in the study, including the UK; the WHO is expected to compile a definitive conclusion in the coming weeks. However, a US-Korean study in the Journal of Clinical Oncology last month concluded that there is possible evidence linking mobile phones to the risk of brain tumours.

Manufacturers do not appear to be ruffled by this. “Mobiles use radio frequency that has been studied extensively for 40 or 50 years,” says Michael Milligan, of the Mobile Manufacturers Forum. “There has been no research that has conclusively proved a link between guideline-level mobile phone use and brain tumours. SAR values are also not an indication of safety. They are the highest recordings in laboratory tests, but in reality your phone uses far less energy, particularly in an urban area with a good signal.”

Many experts also remain unconvinced. Professor Alan Preece, also of Bristol University, has studied radio frequency waves on human beings for the past ten years. He says: “Research is hindered by a lack of lifetime human case studies. Instead, theories have to be proven in laboratory animals, the evidence from which has so far been conflicting and confusing.” He says there is no biological reason why low-level radio waves should be carcinogenic. They have a heating effect that vibrates molecules but, unlike ionising radiation (such as X-rays), the structure of a molecule remains intact. Of course, the effect of low-level exposure over a lifetime has yet to be observed.

Nevertheless, many do worry. Alasdair Philips, of Powerwatch, a pressure group that researches the health effects of all electromagnetic waves, says: “SAR values are not the be-all and end-all. If you hold a phone loosely to your ear, the SAR will fall tenfold than if pressed tight to the ear.” Using hands-free headsets is even better, but Philips says: “I wouldn’t choose the highest-SAR phones. Given today’s technology, any reading above 1W/kg is unnecessary,” he says.

Meanwhile, Preece is so confident of phone safety that he has bought his ten-year-old granddaughter her first mobile phone. “I chose it by colour rather than by the SAR value,” he says. “It has thousands of times more value for a girl’s security and safety than it has deleterious effects.”

Highest radio wave levels

Sony Ericsson Satio (2009) 1.58W/kg LG Crystal GD900 (2009) 1.47W/kg Nokia 1661 (type RH-122) (2008) 1.38W/kg BlackBerry Bold 9700 (type RCM71UW) (2009) 1.36W/kg HTC Tattoo (2009) 1.25W/kg

Medium radio wave levels

Apple iPhone 3G S (2009) 1.1W/kg Nokia 6303 Classic (2009) 1.15W/kgLG Cookie KP500 (2008) 1.02W/kg Nokia 5800 XpressMusic (2009) 0.97W/kg Samsung Genio Touch (2009) 0.75W/kg Samsung Tocco Lite (2009) 0.54W/kg Samsung Jet (2009) 0.522W/kg

Lowest radio wave levels

Motorola Aura R1 (2008) 0.32W/kg BlackBerry 8700g (2006) 0.24W/kg Samsung SGH-F210 (2007) 0.2W/kg Samsung SGH-G800 (2007) 0.19W/kg Samsung SGH-X830 (2007) 0.119W/kg

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_a ... 915772.ece

 

[rynner2]

Well, here's a novelty - mobiles may be good for you! (Wonder who sponsored the research... 8) )

Mobile phone radiation 'protects' against Alzheimer's

After all the concern over possible damage to health from using mobile phones, scientists have found a potential benefit from radiation.

Their work has been carried out on mice, but it suggests mobiles might protect against Alzheimer's.

Florida scientists found that phone radiation actually protected the memories of mice programmed to get Alzheimer's disease.

They are now testing more frequencies to see if they can get better results.

The study by the Florida Alzheimer's Disease Research Centre is published in the Journal of Alzheimer's Disease.

It involved 96 mice, most of which had been genetically altered to develop beta-amyloid plaques in their brains, which are a marker of Alzheimer's disease, as they aged.

The rest of the mice were non-demented.

All the mice were exposed to the electro-magnetic field generated by a standard phone for two one-hour periods each day for seven to nine months.

Their cages were arranged at the same distance around a centrally located antenna generating the phone signal.

The researchers, led by Professor Gary Arendash, said that if the phone exposure was started when the Alzheimer's mice were young adults, before signs of memory impairment were apparent, their cognitive ability was protected.

In fact, the Alzheimer's mice performed as well on tests measuring memory and thinking skills as aged mice without dementia.

If older Alzheimer's mice already showing memory problems were exposed to the electro-magnetic waves, their memory impairment disappeared.

Professor Arendash was the author of a previous study that said coffee could protect against Alzheimer's.

He said: "It will take some time to determine the exact mechanisms involved in these beneficial memory effects.

"One thing is clear, however - the cognitive benefits of long-term electro-magnetic exposure are real, because we saw them in both protection and treatment-based experiments involving Alzheimer's mice, as well as in normal mice."

The memory benefits of phone exposure took months to show up, suggesting that a similar effect in humans would take years.

The researchers conclude that electro-magnetic field exposure could be an effective, non-invasive and drug-free way to prevent and treat Alzheimer's disease in humans.

They are currently testing whether different sets of frequencies and strengths might produce a more rapid and greater cognitive benefit.

Chuanhai Cao, another author of the study, said: "Since production and aggregation of beta-amyloid occurs in traumatic brain injury, particularly in soldiers during war, the therapeutic impact of our findings may extend beyond Alzheimer's disease."

The authors say previous studies have linked a possible increased risk of Alzheimer's with "low-frequency" electro-magnetic exposure like the energy waves generated by power and telephone lines.

They say mobile phones emit "high frequency" electro-magnetic waves that are very different because they can have beneficial effects on brain function, such as increasing brain cell activity.

They did carry out autopsies on the mice and found no evidence of abnormal growth in the brains of the Alzheimer's mice following months of exposure to the electro-magnetic waves.

They also found all the major peripheral organs, such as the liver and lungs, were normal.

Rebecca Wood, chief executive of the Alzheimer's Research Trust, said: "This research has been carried out in mice that mimic some of the symptoms of Alzheimer's in people, so we don't know if any similar effects will be seen in humans.

"Although the researchers hope their findings will translate to people, much more research is needed to find out if there could be any beneficial effects of long-term exposure to electro-magnetism, and to guarantee its safety.

"We don't recommend spending 24 hours a day on a mobile phone - we don't know the long-term effects, and bills could go through the roof."

Dr Susanne Sorensen, head of research at the Alzheimer's Society, said the results were "exciting and quite convincing".

"However, this research in mice is at an early stage and a lot more work is needed before we can say anything about the possible preventative or treatment effects of this type of radiation on people with Alzheimer's disease."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8443541.stm

 

[AMPHIARAUS]

I'm sure people realise that mobiles run on very different frequencies depending on the country and operator used, and that the phone throttles back the power to the lowest usable level to conserve the battery, dont they?

For example the same phone could output 0.2W at 900MHz or 2W at 1.9GHz depending on how close it is the a mast or the SIM fitted. Very different figures which IMO make the fixed figures in the Times piece very misleading as it focuses on the variation between models.

Would I want to have something that is potentially outputting 2W of RF strapped to my head? No, but Peter Knight slapping numbers into an article without explanations in order to give his writing a patina of authority sucks.

 

[rynner2]

Mobile phone study to check effect on health over 30 years
Home Staff

The biggest study of mobile phones and their effect on health ever undertaken was launched yesterday, with British scientists playing a leading role.

Cosmos (Cohort Study on Mobile Communications) will monitor the health of at least 250,000 mobile phone users for 20 to 30 years.

Experts hope that the multimillion-pound investigation will help to settle once and for all whether mobile phones are safe.

Unlike earlier studies that relied on people who develop illnesses recalling their mobile phone usage, Cosmos will pick up diseases and symptoms as they arise.

That will provide far more accurate results, free of “recall bias” — the tendency, for instance, to remember holding a handset on the side of the head where there is a tumour.

Changes in people’s health will be compared with their usage of mobile phones, taking into account both the number and duration of calls and the positioning of handsets.

Those taking part in the study will be aged 18 to 69 and recruited through co-operating network operators.

Between 90,000 and 100,000 people are expected to participate in the UK, with others joining from Finland, the Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark.

The total cost of the study for the first five years is estimated at £5 million to £7 million. The UK arm alone will cost £3.1 million, jointly funded by the Government and industry.

Mireille Toledano, one of the principal investigators from the School of Public Health at Imperial College London, said: “This is the largest study to date worldwide on mobile phones and health and will be monitoring a large number of mobile phone users over a long time.

etc...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_a ... 105783.ece

 

[rynner2]

Mobile phone users face ‘brain tumour pandemic’, say campaigners
Mobile phone users face a “brain tumour pandemic” according to campaigners who say that the health risks of using handsets have been under-estimated.
By Martin Beckford
Published: 7:00AM BST 15 Jun 2010

A study warns that the danger of heavy mobile use is 25 per cent greater than was suggested in a recently published landmark investigation.

The new report claims that the £15million, decade-long Interphone study was so flawed that all of the risk levels it produced must be increased significantly.

It says that the world’s 4billion mobile phone users should keep handsets away from their heads and bodies to lower the increased risk of developing cancer, and that governments should strengthen their public health warnings on the topic. However cancer charities said the new claims were “overblown”.

Lloyd Morgan, a member of America’s Environmental Health Trust lobby group, said: “What we have discovered indicates there is going to be one hell of a brain tumour pandemic unless people are warned and encouraged to change current cell phone use behaviours.

“Governments should not soft-peddle this critical public health issue but instead rapidly educate citizens on the risks.

“People should hear the message clearly that cell phones should be kept away from one’s head and body at all times.”

Interphone, the long-delayed study into the potential health risks of mobile phone use set up by an agency of the UN’s World Health Organisation and carried out in 13 countries, concluded last month that making calls for more than half an hour a day could increase users’ risk of developing brain cancer by as much as 40 per cent.

But the researchers admitted the results were not conclusive and could have been affected by statistical error or bias.

Now Mr Morgan, an electronic engineer, has re-assessed Interphone’s findings to take into account its flaws.

He believes its main problem was “selection bias”. Many of the healthy subjects chosen for comparison with tumour sufferers were likely to be mobile phone users themselves, while others whose experience would have been useful to the study were either too ill to take part or refused to do so.

Mr Morgan believes the “systemic underestimation of risk” in Interphone means that the true risk of developing brain tumours for mobile phone users is at least 25 per cent higher than previously thought.

One of the Interphone studies found a 24 per cent increased risk of glioma - the most common type of brain tumour - from "regular" use on the same side of the head as the handset was held.

But this rose to 55 per cent under Mr Morgan’s analysis, and after 10 years or more the risk doubled for those who use mobiles just at least once a week.

However Ed Yong, head of health information for Cancer Research UK, said: "The warnings of a ‘brain tumour pandemic’ are overblown.

“The majority of studies in people have found no link between mobile phones and cancer, national brain cancer rates have not increased in proportion to skyrocketing phone use and there are still no good consistent explanations for how mobile phones could cause cancer.

“Even after the minor adjustments reported in this new analysis, the results from the overall Interphone study are still either not statistically significant, or right on the borderline.

“This means that any link between mobile phones and cancer that the conference presentation quotes could well be down to chance or anomalies in the data they collected.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healt ... gners.html

 

[Timble2]

It's probably pointless to note that this group appears to have already decided that phones are harmful, and will claim that any evidence to the contrary is wrong....

 

[ramonmercado]

Experts: Vatican Radio transmitters 'pose cancer risk'

Experts: Vatican Radio transmitters 'pose cancer risk'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-10634977
By David Willey BBC News, Rome

Pope Benedict in a studio of Vatican Radio in Rome (file photo from March 2006) From its studios in Vatican City, Vatican Radio broadcasts around the world

There is a "coherent and significant connection" between radiation from Vatican Radio aerials and childhood cancer, researchers have said.

The Italian experts looked at high numbers of tumours and leukaemia in children who live close to Vatican Radio transmitters.

The 60 antennas stand in villages and towns near Rome.

The Vatican said it was astonished and would present contrary views to a court in Rome.

Italian courts have been investigating for 10 years whether of an abnormally high number of deaths from cancer among families living near the aerials just north of the Italian capital can be attributed to electromagnetic radiation.

The 300-page report, ordered by the courts and carried out by Italy's most prestigious cancer research hospital, now concludes that there is a connection between radiation and the cancer incidents.
Obsolete

Some 60 huge steel aerials were erected on farmland owned by the Vatican during the last century.

They transmit Vatican Radio programmes around the world on medium and short wave.

However, the technology is now largely obsolete, as Catholic radio stations in many countries rebroadcast Vatican Radio shows after picking them up on the Internet.

In one court case against the Vatican the statute of limitations ran out, but another case is still pending.

The Vatican says it intends to defend its position and claims there is no threat to public health through its transmissions.

People living near the aerials say the radio waves affect TV reception and interfere with many household electronic appliances.

 

[Felicity]

Non ionising radiation

There is considerable peer reviewed evidence of Electromagnetic fields and the increase in cancers clusters.
In a joint USSR and US study - Ref Dr Ross Adey it was found, while not directly causing mutations there was an increase in the rate of proliferation of cancer cells and also of resistance to treatment - plus a suppressive effect on the immune system.
Unfortunately the references will have to be sourced on line as it is from my senior's affected memory.
The problem also is associated with the impact on melatonin production, for example with computer exposure after 4 pm, which drops melatonin levels in less that an hour to levels appropriate to waking rather than those which induce sleep.
So a good idea is to perhaps look at supplementing on Melatonin if you are exposed to fields after this time.
The other with high voltage power lines and field associate with computers is the corona affect, which ionises and concentrates free radicals and toxic substances which are then more easily assimilated into the body.
Leukemia in children is associated with a field between 2-10 mGu, particularly when sleeping, from memory and I am glad if anyone can correct me on this.

Felicity

 

[rynner2]

Hidden health risk in mobiles: Phone giants accused of burying warnings in small print
By Sean Poulter
Last updated at 1:46 AM on 9th October 2010

Mobile phone firms have been accused of concealing warnings about the health risks of using their handsets.

A warning that Apple’s popular iPhone should be kept at least 15mm away from the body is buried deep inside the manual.

BlackBerry goes even further, saying customers should use their devices hands-free or keep them an inch from the body ‘including the abdomen of pregnant women and the lower abdomen of teenagers’. Again, this advice is hidden in the instruction booklet.

All other manufacturers, including Nokia and HTC, carry similar small-print warnings despite insisting that holding mobiles against the ear and head is harmless.

Health campaigners and politicians on both sides of the Atlantic are calling for clear warnings to be put on handset boxes.
They are also demanding a public education campaign, starting in schools, to advise on the safe use of the devices.
Alasdair Philips, of Powerwatch, an independent group which investigates the safety of mobile phones, said: ‘Most people have no idea about these warnings.
‘The safety advice should be included on the boxes and far more prominently in the “getting started” section of user guides and not just in the detail at the back that hardly anyone reads.
‘This should be only part of a much wider public education campaign that begins in the schools.’

The safety advice in manuals is designed to limit so-called Radio Frequency exposure. This is said to heat body tissue and some – inconclusive – research suggests it is linked to tumours in the brain.

Most RF exposure comes from the antenna and it can increase when a phone is kept in a pocket because phones increase their power output when a network signal weakens.

Men who carry handsets on their belt or in their pockets with the keypad facing outward will suffer higher exposure because the antenna, which is always at the back, is close to the body.

SAR – Specific Absorption Rate – is the standard industry measurement for the amount of RF energy the body absorbs.
Mr Philips said: ‘When a phone has to power up, it sends high SAR power into the trunk and towards the kidneys and liver. It can be the testicles if in a trouser pocket.

‘Some girls carry them in chest bags which hang just below their breasts. Breasts, eyes and testicles absorb external RF energy the most. Blood-rich organs, such as the liver, kidneys and heart are among the top energy absorbers.

‘The ovaries and foetus are relatively well protected by the trunk, but it obviously makes sense to keep the handset away from those areas, especially the foetus in the first six months. Many later-life causes of ill health are increasingly being recognised as having their roots in foetal exposure to chemicals, hormones, radiation of various sorts.’
He said most handsets also put out pulsed ELF magnetic fields which travel further into the body than RF signals. These are associated with childhood leukaemia and some adult cancers.

Caroline Lucas, Green Party leader and MP, said: ‘Greens have never said don’t use mobile phones, but we have always said that as with any other technology, we need to make people aware of any potential risks and give clear guidance regarding the safest possible use, so we can get the maximum benefit from the technology with the least possible risk.’
Mobile phone firms are legally required to advise customers on how to minimise RF exposure and use their manuals to do so.

Michael Milligan of the Mobile Manufacturers Forum said: ‘A mobile phone can always be used up against the head without the need for this separation, because phones are designed to have the antenna far enough away from the head when making a call.

‘Every mobile phone model is tested to make sure they meet national and international exposure limits for exposure to Radio Frequency emissions, before they can be sold in the UK or elsewhere.’

However, many new phones are so slim, antennas will be closer to the head than distances recommended by many manufacturers.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z11qmEGBza