Verified by 
In a gutsy move, the Maine legislature is currently considering requiring warning labels on cellphones--much like cigarette packets--about the increased risk of brain cancer from electromagnetic radiation emitted as part of the radio signaling technology of all cellphones. The mayor of San Francisco, Gavin Newsom, also wants to mandate new cellphone labelling. And a similar bill was introduced this year to the California legislature. While these initiatives raise disturbing health issues that many people would prefer not to think about, and although the media has met these developments with tepid interest, this may prove to be a watershed moment for public health advocates and the cellphone industry.
[Note: If you don't have time to read the shocking details about the potential health impact of cellphones, cut to the recommendations at the end of this blog....or go out and buy a wired earpiece for your cellphone, use the speakerphone as much as possible and learn to text if you don't already know how. In short, do everything you can to keep the cellphone away from your and your children's heads. For a list of the ten latest cellphones that emit the least radiation see the Enviornmental Working Group report on cellphone radiation.]
The health hazards posed by cell phone usage are getting increasingly hard to ignore. They include, but are not exclusive to, an increased risk of brain cancer for people who have been using the phones for more than a decade. Numerous European countries, Israel and Canada are already pursuing guidelines for safer use of cellphones. A year ago a group of surgical neurologists at the University of Pittsburgh called for access to industry data. Even the FCC is beginning to drop hints of a problem.
I was shocked to learn that this past November (following close on the heels of an epidemiological review confirming a link between long-term cellphnone use and brain cancer in the journal of Surgical Neurology) the FCC quietly issued the following statement regarding concerns about radio frequency (RF) exposure from cellphones: "Keep wireless devices away from your body when they are on. Do not attach them to belts or carry them in pockets. Use the cell phone speaker to reduce head exposure. Consider texting rather than talking." A link to this statement is now published in the fine print that accompanies a new cellphone, but any thinking citizen has to wonder, why has this crucial health information not been publicized?
Separating fact from fiction in the debate over health risks posed by cellphones has not been easy. On one hand a growing body of solid scientific evidence links long-term heavy cellphone use to an increased risk for brain cancer, especially when a person begins using a cell phone prior to age 20 (as much as 5-fold increased risk of brain cancer.) On the other hand there is a rather rabid group of nuts who excoriate cellphone usage along with most other modern conveniences even as they travel along the extraterrestrial highway spotting UFOs and little green men. These competing messages leave the average purchasing public feeling confused and ready to tune out the naysayers in favor of unbridled access to cellphones.
The debate, however, is beginning to be dominated by evidence-based science. There are several large peer reviewed analyses of data from as far back as 2007 (in the well respected Journal of Occupational Health) and as recently as September 2009 (in the gold-standard Journal of Surgical Neurology) establishing a link between heavy cell phone use of longer than 10 years and increased risk of brain tumors. While there are many telecom sponsored studies that show no correlation between short-term use of cell phones and brain cancer, there are no studies that refute the link between long term cell phone usage and brain cancer.
Vested industry interests, of course, have done their best to cast anyone raising the issue of cellphone safety with the nut-jobs. At the same time, the industry has consistently devised safety studies guaranteed to show no harm from their products (tumors take at least 10 years to develop, and the industry studies are all short term.) There's been a pattern of obfuscation of science, the latest example of which is constant delays in reporting results from the $30 million, 12 country WHO Interphone Study (heavily industry funded) that was supposed to be completed by 2005, but has yet to disclose findings after missing multiple deadlines. Several individual scientists who have participated in the studies in Sweden, France and Israel have published their own results and warned their citizens of the risks.
A cellphone is a radiation-emitting device. It has as much in common with a microwave oven as it does with a home telephone. A microwave uses electromagnetic radiation to heat food, a cellphone uses the same radiation to send and receive signals to a microwave tower miles away. We know that when a cellphone is used for a prolonged period it can heat up your brain, this is because the electromagnetic waves can pass through your skull and into your brain, where they are capable of altering your DNA. The FCC has set a standard for how much radiation (known as Specific Absorption Rate or SAR) a cellphone can emit: It is currently set at 1.6w/kg. In Germany since 2008 regulators recommend people use cellphones with SAR values of less than 0.6 w/kg--that's less than half of what's allowed in the U.S.
Children are particularly vulnerable. Research published two years ago in the journal Physics in Medicine and Biology revealed that some parts of the brains of children absorb twice as much radiation from cell phones as that of an adult. I was distressed to learn from environmental scientists, Dr. Devra Davis, that the original radiation absorption data presented by the cellphone industry to the FCC was based on research performed on a 200 pound 6 foot tall man with an 11-pound head. It's as simple as it sounds; a thick skull provides more protection to the brain. Children have thinner skulls they simply are more at risk of damaging their DNA with cellphone usage than the average adult. Some adults are more susceptible than others based on the thickness of their skulls, and their susceptibility to DNA damage. What is a safe exposure level for a large, sturdily built man is not necessarily safe for many people of varying sizes or stages of development.
Regulatory action is underway or already in place to warn consumers of cell phone radiation in many European countries, Canada, Israel, and South Korea. In most cases the first step has been to establish prominent labeling, as the Maine legislature hopes to achieve, warning consumers of the hazards of electromagnetic radiation from cellphones, especially for children.
The next step is to require the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR)--the amount of radiation emitted by a device--be prominently displayed on product packages. Our FCC issued the following statement in November: "Buy a wireless device with lower SAR." However, most of us can't find that information on our cellphone packaging. SAR labeling is part of the Maine and California initiatives, and is at the heart of Mayor Newsom's proposal. Prominently displayed SARs would at least allow consumers to make smarter choices while at the same time providing incentives for manufacturers to develop new technologies that reduce exposure levels.
One way to reduce exposure today is to use a wired (not wireless) earpiece with microphone or speakerphone in order to keep the phone away from your head. Again, the FCC says, "Note that the variation in SAR from one mobile device to the next is relatively small compared to the reduction that can be achieved by using an earpiece or headset." California is considering requiring that cellphones come with such earpieces. I recommend you buy one and use it if you talk on your cellphone a lot.
There are other strategies for reducing your exposure. Parents should instruct children to text rather than talk on the phone, unless of course there is an emergency and a brief call is necessary. It's key to recognize that radiation is highest both when the phone is seeking a connection to a call being made, and when the signal is weak (ie. when in an elevator, or in a fast moving car) and the phone is working harder to keep a connection. (For this reason it's recommended when driving to use an installed wireless device with an antenna located outside of the vehicle.) Whenever using a phone, wait until the call is connected to put it to your ear, and if the signal is weak, hang up and wait for more bars.
It is very likely that the legislation underway in Maine and California will push cellphone manufacturers in the US to make safer products. People will also begin to handle cellphones as the radiation emitting devices that they are. The author of the article in the journal Surgical Neurology, which found adequate epidemiological evidence to link prolonged cellphone usage to ipsilateral brain tumors, wrote that because of their much broader use today cellphone use "has far broader public health ramifications than asbestos and smoking." I hope this isn't true. Let's make sure it's not by using phones wisely and pushing our legislatures for more protective action.
For more information, and details on the latest scientiic research, visit environmental scientist, Devra Davis' website: www.environmentalhealthtrust.org
