|
Home > Pressroom
Main > Press
Reports on EMF >
Press Reports on EMF
Feds to Launch $10 million for Investigation into Cell Phones
Sun Sentinel Florida, November 16, 2003
By Nancy McVicar, Health Writer
More than 10
years after the safety of cellular telephones
was called into question by the death of a Florida woman from a
brain tumor, the federal government is preparing to launch a multimillion
dollar investigation into potential cancer-causing or toxic effects
associated with the phones.
When Susan Reynard,
33, of Madeira Beach died in 1992, 10 million people in this country were
using cell phones. Today 150 million Americans, including children and
teenagers, put the phones up against their heads every day, yet no government
agency vouches they are safe.
With 1.5 billion people
using wireless phones worldwide, and more devices such as personal computers
rapidly switching to wireless technologies, getting answers to the health
questions has become crucial.
Gary Brown, an adjunct
professor in technologies at Nova Southeastern University, said people
don't realize the issue of cell phone safety has not been settled.
"The industry says
there's no problem and the public remains ignorant. Adults can do what
they want, but where the issue becomes critical, is with children," Brown
said.
The new federal research
will follow up on studies that have been going on in 15 other countries
around the world under a World Health Organization research agenda developed
since the Reynard case prompted consumer worries.
At least one of those
studies has caused concern that children and teens might be adversely
affected.
Dr. Lief Salford,
of Lund University in Sweden, who has called the evolution of wireless
phones "the largest biological experiment in the history of the world,"
reported in June that cell phone radiation damaged neurons in the brains
of young rats.
The study showed cells
in the parts of rats' brains that control sensation, memory and movement
died after being exposed to various cell phones at different levels of
radiation for two hours.
"The situation of
the growing brain might deserve special concern, since biological and
maturational processes are particularly vulnerable," Salford said.
He cautioned that
it is possible that after decades of daily use a whole generation of users
may suffer negative effects as early as middle age. The paper was published
in Environmental Health Perspectives, a U.S. National Institutes of Health
journal.
Plans for the new
federal research -- what will be studied, how the studies will be done,
what types of animals will be used, and how they will be exposed to the
radiation -- will be determined by the U.S. National Toxicology Program,
a division of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences,
part of the National Institutes of Health. The program will also get some
guidance from the FDA and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Because of time it
takes to plan such a project and seek proposals for carrying out the research,
the work is not expected to get underway until 2005 and won't be completed
for six to seven years.
Ron Melnick, a toxicologist
and director of special programs at NTP, said at least $10 million has
been earmarked for the research initiative.
The U.S. Food and
Drug Administration, which has health-related jurisdiction over the phones,
but no money for research, recommended the NTP get involved, Melnick said.
"There's also been
a fair bit of interest from the U.S. Congress about what the U.S. government
is doing and why aren't we doing more," Melnick said.
U.S. Rep. Edward Markey,
D-Mass., and Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., both requested the U.S. General
Accounting Office investigate the issue of cell phone safety. The GAO
has produced two reports, one in 1994 and another in 2001, both calling
for more research.
Wireless phones emit
radio frequency radiation as they transmit a signal that can be picked
up by a base station miles away. The radiation is called non-ionizing
and is on the same part of the radio frequency spectrum as microwave ovens
and radar. Some of the low-level radiation enters the user's head, and
the concern is that such exposures might lead to health problems.
The United Kingdom
and some other countries have issued cautions about cell phone use, particularly
warning parents to limit the amount of time a child spends talking on
the phones, because not enough is known about the effects of the radiation
on developing brains.
The FDA and the Federal
Communications Commission, agencies that both have some jurisdiction over
the phones, have a joint Web site that says: "The available scientific
evidence does not show that any health problems are associated with using
wireless phones. There is no proof, however, that wireless phones are
absolutely safe."
1993 Lawsuit
In January 1993, the
South Florida Sun-Sentinel published a story about a lawsuit filed by
David Reynard of Madeira Beach alleging that the cellular phone he bought
his wife, Susan, caused or accelerated the growth of a brain tumor that
took her life in May 1992. The story was picked up by other media, including
CNN, and worries from the public caused wireless stocks to temporarily
plummet.
The wireless industry
at first said thousands of studies had proven emissions from the phones
were safe, but when asked to produce them, said none or few had been done
at cellular phone frequency levels.
The FDA issued an
advisory recommending that people keep their calls short and saying "if
there is a risk from these devices -- and at this point we don't know
if there is -- it is probably small."
But an internal memo
written in April 1993, by two scientists in the FDA's Center for Devices
and Radiological Health shows the agency was concerned.
"There are a few reported
experiments which bear directly on the question of cancer progression
and chronic low-level exposures," said the memo co-authored by Mays Swicord,
who now works for Motorola in Plantation.
"This small and incomplete
database strongly suggests that under at least some circumstances these
exposures do indeed accelerate the development of cancer by some unknown
mechanism," said the memo obtained this year by Microwave News, a New
York-based publication that has covered the industry for two decades.
The Cellular Telecommunications
& Internet Association, the trade association that represents cell phone
manufacturers and service providers, pledged in mid-1993 to pay for the
necessary research to prove the phones cause no harm.
Jo-Anne Basile, vice
president of the CTIA, said she could not provide a list of the studies
paid for with the CTIA's $25 million or their findings.
"It was completed
in 1999, and there was some frustration in the fact that a number of the
studies did not get published. The projects ended and they were never
submitted for publication," Basile said.
Instead, she pointed
to reviews of hundreds of studies done by scientists in other countries.
"To date they've found
nothing to suggest there was any adverse health effects with cellular
phones," Basile said, "but some said more research is needed before we
can be definitive about this."
Critics say the CTIA's
research agenda was ill conceived.
"[The industry] never
funded the real work -- the blood-brain barrier work, the sleep work,
the DNA breaks -- the things people were concerned about," said Louis
Slesin, publisher of Microwave News.
"We still don't really
know much. You can't say they're safe; you can't say they're not safe,
but what we've learned certainly doesn't allow us to discount the risk,
" Slesin said.
Dr. George Carlo,
an epidemiologist at The George Washington University, who was in charge
of the industry's $25 million research program, announced in 1999 at the
conclusion of his contract that two studies showed a possible cancer risk
and that more research should be done.
The industry agreed
to pay for the follow-up studies, but that work, which is being monitored
by the FDA, is not yet complete. Carlo could not be reached for comment.
Scientists in 1993
At the time of the
Reynard case, many scientists dismissed any health risks by saying the
phone emissions were not strong enough to heat tissue, and that heating
was necessary to cause damage.
W. Ross Adey, distinguished
professor of physiology at Loma Linda University School of Medicine in
Loma Linda, Calif., said that attitude is changing, even among military
researchers who are working on non-lethal microwave weapons that could
alter consciousness by interfering with brain activity or be used to stun.
"In a report in 2002,
they point out that old notions that we knew everything about microwave
interactions with tissue based solely on heating is worthless, and we
have to deal now with non-thermal effects," he said. "It involves a whole
new area of science," said Adey, who has done research in the field for
40 years.
"Tissue has its own
communication system, and that communication system allows cells to whisper
together with a faint and private language that has not been realized
until very recently," Adey said.
Cell phone radiation
may interfere with that communication, he said.
Some animal and test-tube
studies have found no ill effects from radio frequency radiation, but
others have found evidence of breakage in DNA strands, sleep and memory
problems, brain cell death or damage, leakage through the blood-brain
barrier (nature's way of protecting brain tissue from toxins), and other
problems.
Mays Swicord, now
director of electromagnetic energy research at Motorola, one of the world's
largest manufacturers of wireless products, who wrote the FDA memo in
1993 about possible dangers, says now there is no reason for concern.
"In the last 10 years,
the world has spent $200 million on this research," Swicord said.
To be considered
valid, scientific studies must show the same or similar results when repeated
by other researchers, and that has not happened, he said.
Dr. Henry Lai, research
professor of bioengineering at the University of Washington, who found
DNA breaks in animals exposed to RF radiation, has done his own review
of the research findings from around the world and has a different view.
"There are 172 studies
up to today that I can find, and quite a lot of them, about half, found
some kind of effects," Lai said.
"Some came up with
very interesting data, including a series of studies by [Lennart] Hardell,
of Sweden. He published several papers and found depending on which side
you use the phone, there tends to be a higher rate of cancer on that side
of the head," Lai said. "But some people think it's still too soon to
see any cancer effects, because usually, brain tumors take many years."
Some brain tumors
have a latency period of 10 to 20 years before they become large enough
to cause symptoms.
Hardell published
some of his findings in the International Journal of Oncology in February.
He found a 30 percent greater risk of developing a brain tumor among people
who had used cell phones, compared with a similar population of people
who did not.
Studies looking for
an increased incidence of cancers among cell phone users in this country
found none, however. The studies were published in late 2000 and early
2001 in two prestigious medical journals, the New England Journal of Medicine
and JAMA. The researchers said, however, that the studies did not answer
questions about long-term use of the phones.
Reynard's lawsuit
eventually was dismissed for lack of scientific evidence, and many similar
cases during the past decade have met the same fate. To present scientific
evidence in court requires that it be widely accepted in the scientific
community, and so far there is no consensus.
Robert Kane, a former
engineer with Motorola and author of a book called Cellular Telephone
Russian Roulette, sued his employer after developing a brain tumor.
He alleged the tumor was caused by exposures from a prototype phone
he tested. His case also was dismissed.
"The issue really
is what happens to a cell phone user 10 years from now. There are more
than a billion people using these phones, and a fairly strong body of
literature that says there could be a problem," Kane said.
"More testing has
been done that indicates biological damage than with other products that
have been removed from the marketplace," Kane said, "but this is an economy-driven
society, and the device is not going to be taken out of the hands of the
public."
-------------
|
Your
Personal EMF & Stress Protection 24/7

Try any of our QLink products
for 3 months, absolutely RISK-FREE.
If you do not feel Q-Link® improves your focus,
energy, or well-being, simply return it for a full
refund.
QLink Pendant
|
EMF
Protection for the Entire Home

Do you live near phone masts or hi-tension power lines?
Concerned about the EMF effects from your home's electrical
grid?
Try
EarthCalm® Home Protection System for 90 days
risk-free
|
|