Clean bill of health for cell phones: European researchers debunk claims of cancer-causing handsets

America's Network, April 1, 2004 by Robert Clark

Despite popular suspicions that EMF emissions from cellphones cause brain cancers, the weight of research evidence is increasingly coming down in favor of the phone.

Some tests over the years have hinted at possible health damage from EMF signals from cellphones, but results have been inconclusive or unduplicated. Two high-profile U.S, lawsuits in the past decade, including one from a Maryland neurologist, have both been thrown out for lack of evidence.

Now the initial findings of the highly-credible Interphone study have given a qualified clean bill of health for the much-maligned cellular handset.

DANISH STUDY

A survey by the Danish Institute of Cancer Epidemiology, carried out under the worldwide Interphone project, says there is no short-term danger of developing brain tumors. In what Michael Clark, of the U.K.'s National Radiological Protection Board, described as "an authoritative study," the Danish team found that over a two-year period, mobile phones had no impact on a rare type of brain tumor.

In the study, researchers tracked down almost every Dane with the rare tumor, known as acoustic neuroma. Because it occurs between the brain and the inner ear, it was seen as highly indicative of any effects of mobile phone use. The study identified 106 people with the tumor and compared their phone usage and medical records with 212 other people (matched for age, sex and socio-economic status). No difference between the two groups was found in their mobile phone use, nor of which side of the head the phone was used, nor between analog or digital.

The findings, issued early this year, were the first in a series of surveys of mobile phone health impacts in 13 countries, conducted under the aegis of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). The results of investigations into 6,500 other brain tumor cases will be published in the next 18 months. The survey was part of a wave of positive news about mobile phone radiation over the past few months.

LINGERING POSSIBILITIES

The UK Advisory Group on Non-Ionizing Radiation (AGNIR) announced in January it too could see "no biological evidence for mutation or tumor causation." The AGNIR had reviewed all research into mobile phone radiation carried out since the publication of the British government's major study, the Stewart report, in March 2000.

"The biological and epidemiological evidence does not suggest cancer causation, in particular from mobile phone use, nor any other adverse health effect from radiofrequency exposures at levels below guidelines," the AGNIR said, though it admitted to a "possibility" of health effects and called for further research.

Finland's Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) found that most cellphones emit radiation below accepted limits, and the study of 12 different handsets--made by Nokia, Motorola, Samsung and others--recorded a specific absorption rate (SAR) in each case below the European agreed limit of two watts per kilogram.

The survey did not look at the potential harm from the radiation.

STUK will begin studying 3G phones later this year.

Other bodies, such as the New England Journal of Medicine and the Journal of the American Medical Association, have also ruled out short-term use of a mobile phone as a source of brain cancer. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and the World Health Organization have said no evidence exists that cellphone use is harmful or beneficial to a user's health.

However, while it seems the mobile phone has been all but cleared of harming human health over the short-term, the jury is still out on the long-term impacts, at least, in relation to first- and second-generation cellular.

It is also far too early to determine the potential health effects of high-powered 3G phones. A Dutch research team last year reported that exposure to signals from 3G base stations caused headaches and nausea. That's a conclusion that surprised even some of the researchers themselves, according to the New Scientist magazine.