Download CRUCIBLEonline Do Cell Phones Cause Cancer?

Return to
stao.org
CRUCIBLE online
Do Cell Phones Cause Cancer?
««« By Stan Taylor
Stan taught Science for the Toronto Catholic District School Board for 23 years
before retiring at the end of September 2001. He has written for Metro Voice (a
newsletter for Catholic Elementary teachers in Toronto) for 20 years and served as
its editor in 1994. Mr. Taylor is currently a presenter with Scientists in School.
Curriculum Connection: Technology
I have spent the last year researching the controversial topic on whether or not cell phones cause cancer. I
have reviewed the evidence from reports provided by the
Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones (UK), the
Federal Drug Association of the United States, Cancer
Care Ontario, World Health Organization, Health Canada,
the American Academy of Neurology, the Swedish
Interphone Study and the general consensus of a
Conference held in Melbourne, 2005. I found the results to
be interesting, as there is such a diversity of opinions and
conclusions concerning whether or not cell phones cause
cancer. Learned women and men have done, we are told,
exhaustive research. I especially find the research I’ve
done interesting with regards to what researchers and
governments are NOT saying.
Teachers and students might be able to use this article as
a catalyst for discussion, or as a starting point for further
research into a variety of technology topics. For example,
perhaps you might discuss the safety of various personal
electronic devices in use by so many students today: MP3
players, camera phones, digital cameras, personal handheld devices, etc. Students might also brainstorm and
research the effects of regular and everyday use of some
of the new technologies. This could go beyond personal
safety issues, and move into a discussion of the environ-
Do Cell Phones Cause Cancer?
mental impact regarding battery usage and disposal
issues, or the social or ethical impact of using such
devices.
Further questions for discussion might include:
1. Is anyone/group currently researching or doing a
study of the effects of cell phones on children in
Canada?
2. List the various types of electromagnetic radiation
(microwave, tv) and how do they compare with cell
phones?
3. Has anyone or a group world-wide done (or currently
are doing) research or a study of the effects of cell
phone use on children (pre-teen and teenagers)?
Students in a classroom could do a class study and even a
school study on how frequently students use cell phones
per day (number of times used or number of minutes
used).
Sir William Stewart1 states that “the balance of evidence
does not suggest that mobile phone technologies put the
health of the general population of the United Kingdom at
risk. There is some preliminary evidence that outputs from
mobile phone technologies may cause, in some cases,
subtle biological effects although, importantly, these do
not necessarily mean that health is affected.” Stewart
Volume 38 • 2 November 2006
CRUCIBLE online
Return to
stao.org
believes that the widespread use of mobile phones by children for non-essential calls should be discouraged. If
there are currently unrecognised adverse health effects
from the use of mobile phones, children may be more vulnerable. This is because of their developing nervous system, the greater absorption of energy in the tissues of the
head and a longer lifetime of exposure.2
increase in risk of cancer or any other disease with use of
mobile phones. Other health risks: Scientists have reported other effects of using mobile phones, including changes
in brain activity, reaction times, and sleep patterns. These
effects are small and have no apparent health significance. More studies are in progress to try to confirm these
findings.5
According to the Federal Drug Administration in the United
States, the government in the United Kingdom distributed
leaflets containing such a recommendation in December,
2000, yet they noted that no evidence exists that using a
wireless phone causes brain tumors or other ill effects.
Their recommendation to limit wireless phone use by children was strictly precautionary; it was not based on scientific evidence that any health hazard exists.3
Epidemiological studies are sometimes difficult to carry
out in a way that can determine whether a cause-andeffect relationship exists between a single variable in a
person’s life (in this case, cell phone use) and the person’s
disease (brain cancer). Some factors that complicate
research into the asserted link between cell phones and
brain cancer include:
• Brain cancer can take years or even decades to develop, making possible long-term effects of mobile phone
use difficult to study;
• mobile phone technology is ever-evolving; and
• there are many lifestyle factors such as the precise
position in which a person holds the phone, as well as
his or her own anatomy, that can affect the extent of
radiation exposure.6
When I consulted Cancer Care Ontario’s website, I discovered a newly published article entitled: “Insight on Cancer:
Environmental Exposures and Cancer.” I observed the following from p. 26, Table 3, “Summary of environmental
exposures and cancer” (re: radio frequency fields):
“Although some studies found increased risks of brain
cancer, leukemia and lymphoma among occupational
groups, there is no evidence for the presence or absence
of risk. Cell phone studies are now underway.”4
I checked the World Health Organization’s (WHO) web site
for further data and came up with the following:
“Current scientific evidence indicates that exposure to RF
fields, such as those emitted by mobile phones and their
base stations, is unlikely to induce or promote cancers.
Several studies of animals exposed to RF fields similar to
those emitted by mobile phones found no evidence that RF
causes or promotes brain cancer. While one 1997 study
found that RF fields increased the rate at which genetically
engineered mice developed lymphoma, the health implications of this result is unclear. Several studies are underway to confirm this finding and determine any relevance of
these results to cancer in human beings. Three recent epidemiological studies found no convincing evidence of
Do Cell Phones Cause Cancer? – Page 2
I asked the following question of Health Canada:
“Is any research being done to determine a correlation
between cancer and frequent use of cell phones by
pre-teen and teenagers in Canada (and other countries)?”
Their reply:
“To our knowledge, there is no research being carried
out specifically with respect to children on the topic of
cancer and frequent use of cell phones.
While there is limited science conducted on children,
there have been studies carried out on immature animals. No effect was observed.
Health Canada has been assessing the ability of
radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (such as those
emitted by cell phones) to cause DNA damage and
Volume 38 • 2 November 2006
CRUCIBLE online
Return to
stao.org
affect gene expression in human derived brain cell
cultures.
in Safety Code 6 do not cause adverse health effects such
as cancer.” 7
There is to date no convincing evidence of increased
risk of disease from exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields from cell phones, provided the
exposures are below international safety limits. Also,
there is no evidence that children are more at risk
than adults.
You may have read of some studies that make a case for
cell phones causing cancer, but I would urge you to check
the research and ask, “How many studies were done? How
long did the study last? Were all the variables controlled?”
For your information, cell phones in Canada are regulated by Industry Canada. This federal department
oversees the licensing of all broadcasting and radio
communication stations and apparatus, the process of
which includes the enforcement of the compliance of
these devices with a safety standard. The safety standard used by Industry Canada is “Health Canada’s
Safety Code 6 – Limits of Human Exposure to
Radiofrequency. Electromagnetic Fields in the
Frequency Range from 3 kHz to 300 GHz are available
on the Health Canada website (www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewhsemt/pubs/radiation/99ehd-dhm237/index_e.html)”.
The exposure limits recommended in Safety Code 6 are
based on preventing any adverse health effects (established effects). In the microwave range (used for cell
phones and base stations), the predominant adverse effect
is tissue heating, as no other established effects are
known to occur at exposure levels below these limits. At
frequencies below 10 MHz nerve and muscle stimulation
(which are non-thermal effects) are known to occur, and
Safety Code 6 limits exposure in this frequency range to
prevent these non-thermal effects.
There are guidelines that are more stringent than Health
Canada’s recommendations. However, these guidelines
are based on social and political developments and not on
science.
In summary, it is the position of Health Canada that
radiofrequency fields from radio communication devices
(e.g. cell phones) operating within the guidelines specified
Do Cell Phones Cause Cancer? – Page 3
For more information and a technical treatment of how
research should be conducted, see “COST Action 281 –
Recommendation on an Internationally Co-ordinated
Research on Genotoxic Effects of Electromagnetic
Radiation from Mobile Communication Systems.”8 (COST is
the acronym for “European Cooperation in the Field of
Scientific and Technical Research”).
The International EMF Project conducted by the Swedish
Interphone Study Group found no link between cell phones
use and brain tumors.9
Children and Mobile Phones: Clarification
statement
Some recent media reports suggest that WHO’s
International EMF Project has changed its recommendation regarding precautionary measures for children using
mobile phones. This followed a meeting in Ottawa, Canada
in July 2005 to discuss the use of precautionary measures
in areas of public health where there is scientific
uncertainty.
To date, all expert reviews on the health effects of
exposure to RF fields have reached the same conclusion:
There have been no adverse health consequences established from exposure to RF fields at levels below the international guidelines on exposure limits published by the
International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation
Protection (ICNIRP, 1998).”10
The World Health Organization had a conference in
Australia on 17-18 November, 2005 on radio frequency
fields. The general consensus was that “evidence so far
suggests that mobile phones aren’t harmful, but long-
Volume 38 • 2 November 2006
Return to
stao.org
CRUCIBLE online
term risks and consequences are yet to be clarified. If you
are concerned, you can reduce your exposure to RF radiation in the following ways:
• Choose a mobile phone model that has a low specific
absorption rate (SAR), which refers to the amount of
RF radiation absorbed by body tissues.
• Use a landline phone if one is available.
• Keep your mobile phone calls short.
• Use a hands-free kit.
• Don’t carry your mobile phone close to your body
when it is switched on.
• In your car, choose the type of mobile phone that has
its antenna mounted on the roof of the vehicle.
• Be wary of claims that protective devices or ‘shields’
can reduce your exposure to RF radiation - there is no
evidence to suggest these devices work. In fact, they
can increase RF radiation because the phone will
automatically increase its RF output to combat the
effects of the shield and to ensure optimal communication.” 11
Bernard Veyret writes that there have been only 10 years
of research on mobile phones. He further contends that
‘mobile telephones, as base stations, are most unlikely to
cause any health effect.” 12
Further results from the Swedish study are expected later
in 2006. Studies are, therefore, ongoing. Despite the
research and findings thus far, further research will be
and is being conducted. I would be interested in a study
conducted on pre-teens regarding the frequency of use of
cell phones before we can say conclusively that cell
phones do not cause cancer.
Addendum
How does Safety Code 6 compare with the standards in
other countries?
The exposure limits set by Safety Code 6 are similar to
other national and international standards. All countries
use the same biomedical data and the same general
approach to setting safety guidelines. Differences in interpreting the biological effects under certain exposure con-
Do Cell Phones Cause Cancer? – Page 4
ditions sometimes result in small differences in the exposure limits that are recommended. These minor differences will not affect a person’s health. Canada’s exposure
limits are among the safest guidelines in the world.
Why do we need Safety Code 6?
Safety Code 6 was developed to protect the health and
safety of Canadians. Studies have shown that exposure to
excessive levels of radiofrequency energy over prolonged
periods of time may cause adverse health effects. What
kind of health effects, and how serious they are, depends
on a number of factors. These factors include the strength
of the field, how often a person is exposed, the length of
each exposure, the number of cycles per second of the
field, the distance from the source, and the orientation of
the radiofrequency field. Safety Code 6 helps to limit the
amount of radiofrequency energy people are exposed to at
work and at home. (Reference: “SAFETY OF EXPOSURE TO
RADIOFREQUENCY FIELDS - FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS - COMPILED BY HEALTH CANADA.” Health
Environment and Consumer Safety. November 22, 2002).
Footnotes
1
Sir William Stewart, FRS, FRSE, was the Chairman of the
Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones (IEGMP), set up in 1999
and reported in May 2000.
2
Department of Health (UK). Government Announces New Research
Programme Into The Health Effects Of Mobile Phones Published:
11/5/2000 Reference number: 2000/0270).
3
“Cell Phone Facts: Consumer Information on Wireless Phones.” U.S.
Food and Drug Association (FDA). Updated July 29, 2003
4
Cancer Care Ontario: Insight on Cancer. Environmental Exposures and
Cancer. Toronto: Canadian Cancer Society (Ontario Division), 2005
5. World Health Organization, Fact Sheet # 193, Revised June, 2000
6. op. cit. FDA
7. Electromagnetics Division, Consumer and Clinical Radiation
Protection Bureau, Health Canada, May 2006
8. www.cost281.org
9. American Academy of Neurology.
www.aan.com/press/index.cfm?fuseaction=release.view&release=
272 and Swedish Interphone Study:
www.mmfai.org/public/docs/eng/MMF%5FViewpoint%5FInterphone
%2Epdf
http://www.who.int/peh-emf/meetings/archive/interphone_iac2005.pdf
10. Workshop on Guiding Public Health Policy in Areas of Scientific
Uncertainty 11-13 July 2005, Ottawa, Canada
11. http://www.betterhealth.vic.gov.au/bhcv2/bhcarticles.nsf/pages/
Mobile_phones_and_your_health?open The Better Health Channel,
Victorian Government’s Department of Human Services. Melbourne
Vic AUS, 2005
12. Bernard Veyret, “Are Mobile Phones or Their Base Stations
Dangerous?” Melbourne, November, 2005
Volume 38 • 2 November 2006