Are cell phone and towers making you sick?

[Guest guest]

Are cell phone towers making you sick?

 

http://www.wndu.com/news/052005/news_42086.php

 

 

 

Many residents are worried about the possible health effects from

transmission towers

 

 

 

 

Posted: 05/09/2005 08:33 pm

Last Updated: 05/10/2005 09:21 am

 

St. Joseph County, IN - Are cell phone towers making you sick? St. Joseph

County is asking an expert to look into it.

 

Many residents are worried about the possible health effects from

transmission towers.

 

Monday, an acoustic expert addressed the county council, on the topic of

low-frequency noise exposure.

 

She claims exposure can lead to health problems known as, Vibroacoustic

Disease.

 

" From what I understand, some of the complaints are similar in what is seen

in Vibroacoustic Disease patients, which are people who develop a disease

caused by low frequency noise exposure, " said biomedical engineer Mariana

Alves-Pereira.

 

It's not just cell towers. Low frequency noise can also come from things

like air conditioners and exhaust systems.

 

Vibroacoustic Disease can be mild or severe, giving a person symptoms like

mood swings, indigestion, ulcers and joint pain.

 

St. Joseph County officials have formed a committee to investigate the

problems.

 

http://www.rense.com/general65/brain.htm

Cellphones Are

Frying Your Brain

BreakForNews.com

5-18-5

 

Professor Henry Lai and N.P. Singh in 1995 published a paper that

documented DNA damage in the brain cells of rats exposed to radiation

similar to that emitted by cell phones. In press interviews and scientific

conferences, Lai has always said there are no solid answers regarding his

research, but there is cause for concern and more work needs to be done.

 

But the cell phone industry said Lai's research techniques were not

commonly accepted and that ipeople have over-interpreted their data. The

industry maintains that the results have never been duplicated (Lai and

Singh disagree), and that the overwhelming scientific evidence to date shows

there is no health risk.

 

But the European Union is funding independent research into possible

heath risks of electromagnetic radiation, including cell phone signals. In

December, preliminary results of work by 12 groups in seven countries found

that radiation at some cell phone levels damages DNA in a laboratory

setting.

 

The effort - called REFLEX - studied radiation effects on animal and

human cells. The scientists reported a significant increase in DNA damage.

This damage could not always be repaired by the injured cell.

 

The REFLEX study has not been reported in U.S. media

 

Special Report

 

By Alasdair Philips aphilips Director, UK Powerwatch EMC

Engineer and EMF-bioeffects researcher

 

When I was a child, back in the early 1950s, I was bought a new pair

of shoes. The manufacturer had just introduced a wonderful new pedascope

machine to check how well your shoes fitted your feet. Even today, I clearly

remember the wonder at being able to wiggle mytoes and see them move inside

my shoes. The machine used X-rays at quite a high level to give real-time

images on a simple screen. It was ten years before Dr Alice Stewart produced

research which showed that there was no safe level of X-rays, and even then

few listened. In fact she was almost outcast from the medical establishment,

and it was about another twenty years before the real danger from medical

X-rays was acknowledged. Now, in the late 1990s the U.K. National

Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) is trying to persuade hospitals to

minimise patient X-ray exposure, and leading Medical Research Council

researchers admit that there is no icompletely safei level of ionising

radiation. The 1998 Royal College of Radiologists guidelines sets out the

current rationale for restricting X-ray doses.

 

Asbestos has been strictly controlled since 1970, and the use of

most dangerous types banned. Despite this, deaths from mesothelioma (an

asbestos induced cancer of the pleura/lungs) are rising consistently and the

U.K. death rate is not expected to peak until about 2020. The time between

the first exposure and death is now accepted as often being between 20 and

50 years. Most environmental cancers in adults ake longer than ten years

from initiation to detection. The eating of BSE infected meat possibly

causing CJD many years later is another example.

 

Mobile phones

 

Mobile phones emit microwaves. If microwave or pulsed low frequency

electromagnetic fields (EMFs) do turn out to be carcinogenic, even if we

backdate it five years, we should not be expecting to see much in the way of

induced cancers for another ten years. In the meantime we discover that

almost all the major phone manufacturers are quietly and prudently patenting

EMF reducing cases and aerials. Despite the impression that mobile-phone

companies give in their literature, little work has been done on long term

human health implications of mobile-phone use. Current mobile-phone users

are acting as involuntary, and often unsuspecting, test subjects. Past

research into microwave radiation effects on health, including recent

cell-phone studies, certainly give cause for concern. Even Dr John Stather,

the Assistant Director of the NRPB stated: " Until recently we believed any

harmful effects from microwaves were due to their heating effects, which

would be negligible at the low powers used by mobile phones. Now there might

be another effect at work and we are much less certain. " (Sunday Times 21

September 1997)

 

Public awareness

 

Public awareness of possible dangers was probably triggered

originally by the Reynard brain tumour case in 1992. About eight lawsuits

alleging that cellular phones caused brain tumours have been filed in the

USA. Although no cases has so far succeeded they have set the stage and

raised safety questions in many people's minds. It has raised old spectres

such as the thalidomide tragedy - the result of a product being used widely

before adequate long term research had been carried out. The first part of a

major new study of 11,000 mobile phone users was released on 14th May 1998

[1] and although ignored by main BBC News programmes, it was given front

page banner headlines by the Daily Express on Friday 15th May. This showed

little difference for heating, fatigue and headache effects between NMT

analogue and GSM digital phones, but did highlight a three to six-fold

increase in fatigue and headaches for heavy mobile handset users and up to a

48-fold increase in the sensation of heat on the user's ear, face or head.

The first of the study's more detailed findings were shown at the

Biolelectromagnetics Society (BEMS) Annual Meeting in Florida in June 1998

and showed significantly more concentration and memory loss symptoms in

regular users of the GSM digital phone handsets. Only a week earlier news

had been reported that on Tuesday 5th May the Cumbran Magistrates Court

issued a Summons under section 10 of the UK Consumer Protection Act, 1987

for Roger Coghill to bring a private criminal action against a retail

distributor of Orange and Motorola mobile phones. The Magistrate ruled that

there was enough scientific evidence (before the new " Mild " evidence

mentioned above) to issue a Summons and allow the case to go forward. His

action claims that the distributors failed to affix required labels to their

handsets warning of possible health risks to users from prolonged

conversations as is required by the 1987 CP Act as there is now reasonable

evidence of handset use causing possible adverse health effects. He has now

filed an updated claim and the pre-trial review is scheduled to be heard on

2nd September 1998. [2] A research letter published in the Lancet [3] by a

German team showed a statistically significant increase on blood pressure in

people who used a GSM phone for 30 minutes. Although the rise was only about

5% it showed an important biological effect and received national media

attention.

 

Exposure levels

 

Despite what some mobile phone companies are saying, mobile phones

do radiate microwaves similar to those used in a microwave oven to cook

food. Between 20% and 80% of the energy is absorbed by the user's head. The

percentage absorbed depends on the design of the phone, type of aerial or

antenna (the stubby ones which you can not extend are worse for pushing

energy into the user's head), and how far it is to the nearest base-station

mast.

 

Thermal exposure results in a measurable and significant rise in

body tissue temperature and is the basis for cooking food in microwave

ovens. When maximum levels were set in the 1950s, they were based on field

levels the human body could withstand without causing a 1infC rise in body

temperature. The possibility of non-thermal effects was discounted. Most

national and international bodies (including the UK National Radiological

Protection Board) set a rise of 1infC (6 minutes average for local exposure,

15 mins. for whole body) as the maximum permissible long-term temperature

rise, although some chose to set the figure lower than this, between 0.2infC

and 1infC.

 

Non-thermal exposure means that no energy is transferred which could

cause a measurable temperature rise. Athermal means that although some

heating energy is transferred, the blood etc. will transfer the heat away

from the tissue such that the overall temperature rise is limited to below

that classified for thermal exposure. Despite considerable evidence in

published scientific literature for biological effects of electro-magnetic

radiation in the RF/MW range of the spectrum at specific absorption rates

(SARs) far too low to produce a heating response, this still continues to be

the case. However, the conclusions section of the NRPB " Doll Report " , on

non-ionising radiation effects, states: " Animal studies conducted at

frequencies above about 100kHz have provided some evidence for effects on

tumour incidence... " . [4]

 

Cancer implications

 

Although brain tumour cases have been rising fairly steadily over

the last fifteen years, these are not the most likely outcome of high levels

of mobile communications handset use. In 1998 a study reported that brain

tumour incidence was rising in Western Australia and questioned whether

mobile phone use might be responsible [5]. However, if there are long term

large-scale cancer implications, then it is more likely that they will be

adult myeloid leukaemias and multiple melanomas. Back in the early 1980s Sam

Milham reported excess leukaemias among amateur radio operators, with deaths

from acute and chronic myeloid leukaemias nearly three times higher than

expected.

 

We do know of a number of digital (GSM) phone users who have

developed Hodgkin's Disease in the lymph glands in their neck on the side

where they normally used their phones for a couple of hours each day [6]. In

1980, Dr John Holt had a letter published [7]. This showed that between

1951-59, 50% of patients with CML in Queensland survived for 55 months

following diagnosis. In 1960 and 1961 three large TV broadcast stations were

commissioned in the area. In the period 1963-67, 50% of patients with CML

only survived for 21 months. This dramatic change could not be explained by

any medical personnel, protocol or therapy changes. In the mid-1980s

Stanislaw Szmigielski reported that Polish military personnel exposed to RF

energy showed elevated leukaemia levels. He has just published a 1996 update

[8]. This is a study of all Polish military personnel for 15 years

(1971-85), approximately 128,000 people each year. Of these about 3700 (3%)

were considered to be occupationally exposed to radio-frequency and / or

microwave radiation. The largest increases were found for chronic myelocytic

leukaemia (CML), with an astounding increase (Odds Ratio) of 13.9 (95% CI

6.72-22.12, p<0.001), acute myeloblastic leukaemia (AML) with an OR of 8.62

(95% CI 3.54-13.67, p<0.001), and non-Hodgkin's lymphomas with an OR of 5.82

(95% CI 3.54-13.67, p<0.001).

 

In 1996 Lai & Singh showed single and double DNA strand breaks in

brain cells of rats exposed to 2.45GHz SARs of 1.2 W/Kg (comparable with

levels in the heads of mobile phone users), giving rise to real concerns.

[9] If someone is completely healthy, and has a strong immune system, then

mobile-phone use may well not give them long-term health problems. Some

people can smoke twenty cigarettes per day for fifty years and not develop

lung cancer, and yet the dangers of smoking are now generally accepted, even

by the manufacturers. It has been repeatedly shown that a few minutes

exposure to cell phone type radiation can transform a 5% active cancer into

a 95% active cancer for the duration of the exposure and for a short time

afterwards. [10]

 

A team of scientists funded by the Australian communications giant,

Telstra, to investigate claimed links between cellular phones and cancer has

turned up probably the most significant finding of adverse health effects

yet. The study looked at 200 mice, half exposed and half not, to pulsed

digital phone radiation. The work was conducted at the Royal Adelaide

Hospital by Dr Michael Repacholi, Professor Tony Basten, Dr Alan Harris and

statistician Val Gebski, and it revealed a highly-significant doubling of

cancer rates in the exposed group. [11] The mice were subject to GSM-type

pulsed microwaves at a power-density roughly equal to a cell-phone

transmitting for two thirty minute periods each day; this was a pulsed

transmission as from a digital cell-phone handset.

 

Using NRPB figures most GSM digital cell-phones will be putting

between 10 and 30 times more radiation into the user's head than the

Repacholi mice were subject to! [12] If there are cancer connections with

the use of mobile phones, they are most likely to be expressed in adult

leukaemias which typically take between 10 and 30 years to appear and be

diagnosed. It is therefore unlikely that the trend will start to be seen for

at least another five years, although the harm is being done now. Short term

exposure of rats is no answer. Cancer is being increasingly recognised as an

organisational systems problem, and no short term speeded up animal

experiments are likely to give the same results as extended period chronic

exposure to the human bio-system.

 

Initial (shorter term) problems with very important health and work

efficiency implications We now receive frequent calls from regular

mobile-phone users reporting headaches, loss of concentration, skin tingling

or burning or twitching, eye iticsi, very poor short-term memory, buzzing in

their head at night, and other less common effects. Headaches often come

first and/or skin effects. Then concentration and short-term memory tends to

deteriorate. At first it can be missing the turning off a motorway that you

intended to take. Then it is forgetting appointments. It usually firstly

affects learning or remembering NEW facts, similar to early signs of

dementia. Things you learnt long ago are still usually there, but new things

just donit seem to go in to your memory any more. Users also report

excessive tiredness.

 

 

Many reports are from engineers who used their phone extensively and

were very sceptical of EMF adverse health effects until they started to

experience them. The symptoms bear a close resemblance to those in a study

of a Latvian pulsed radio location station which emits 24 short VHF pulses

of 154 - 162MHz each second. In a study of 966 children aged 9-18 years old,

motor function, memory and attention were significantly worse in the exposed

group. Children living in front of the station had less developed memory and

attention, their reaction time was slower and their neuromuscular endurance

was decreased. The RMS field levels at their houses were low, typically only

1V/m, and a maximum level of 6V/m or 10mW/cm2. [13] In a study near the

Latvian radio station, differences in micronucleii levels in peripheral

erythrocytes were found to be statistically significant in the exposed and

control groups. This is possible evidence of genetic changes caused by

non-thermal levels of pulsed radio-frequency radiation.[14] Reports linking

RF energy with asthenias had been reported by Charlotte Silverman back in

1973, and again in 1980, as what she called iradio wave sicknessi. [15]

 

Maximum exposure levels

 

At cellular telephone frequency bands of 900MHz and 1.8GHz, the

current U.K. NRPB investigation levels raised the U.K. permitted levels to

10 Watts per Kg in the head. The 1991 USA ANSI/IEEE C95.1 guidelines set the

SAR at 1.6 W/Kg, and the CENELEC pre-standard states 2 W/Kg for the public.

GSM Cellular-phones can deliver well over 2 W/Kg into head tissue during

their output pulses, but they are said to comply because the average power

is only about one-eighth of the pulse power (GSM & PCN digital phones), as

up to eight calls share one channel using Time Division Multiple Access

(TDMA) with each handset pulsing in one of eight time slots. Unlike the

earlier analogue phones, the digital GSM ones emit a series of short pulses

at a basic repetition rate of 217Hz. Pulsed microwaves have been shown to be

more biologically active than continuous radiation of the same frequency and

power level.

 

Take an operating digital GSM mobile-phone near an ordinary medium

wave radio and you will hear a buzzing noise.These pulses are also picked up

and detected by the cells inside the useris and other nearby people's heads.

In fact, up to 80% of the transmitted power can be absorbed by the user's

head, which means that their brain cells are being " hit " by these radiation

pulses two hundred and seventeen times every second. In addition, GSM

digital phones and the new DECT cordless phones also both put high levels

(several microtesla) of low frequency magnetic fields into the user's head.

These may be more responsible for the dementia (memory) effects than the

pulsed microwaves. The newer American Code Domain Multiple Access (CDMA)

system works differently and doesn't emit the sharp-edged low frequency

magnetic pulses. The digital RF signal more resembles a noisy analogue

signal and is also likely to be less bio-active.There is increasing pressure

for Europe to replace the TDMA GSM system with a " third generation " CDMA

system within the next ten years.

 

The NRPB, and others, average the power from a digital phone over 1

second, and so divide the pulse power by eight. They correctly argue that

the tissue has time to cool down between pulses, and then go on to deduce

that no damage will therefore take place. This is similar to saying that

placing a hammer on a icelli (an egg, for example) exerting a small steady

force, will produce the same effect as hitting the egg, using eight times

the force briefly once a second. As most practical engineers know, when

trying to loosen a stuck nut and bolt, the effect of constant pressure on

the spanner is FAR LESS than when tapping the spanner with a hammer.

 

In 1993, as the NRPB raised its permitted microwave levels, two

military research bases in the USA reduced their permitted levels of radio

frequency exposure (30 MHz to 100 GHz) from 100 W/m2 (10 mW//cm2) down to 1

W/m2 (0.1 mW/cm2 or 100 microW/cm2 ). This is because they acknowledged that

there is now an overwhelming body of published evidence for the existence of

non-thermal biological effects of high-frequency radiation. [16]

 

Some non-thermal effects

 

Important non-thermal biological effects have been demonstrated

which could account for the development of cancer, asthma and the lowering

of male fertility. Cell membranes carry charge and surface receptors

(usually proteins) are highly charged. Signals are transduced into the cell

interior where growth, development and cell division are regulated by

processes which involve ions. These features have been shown to alter their

behaviour in the presence of imposed external electromagnetic fields.

Documented changes include alteration of the permeability of the cell

membrane, alteration of the signal transduction processes which regulate

cell behaviour and involve calcium ions, ornithine decarboxylase, protein

kinase C and cAMP. One study has indicated that microwaves can alter DNA

synthesis, enzyme activity, ion transport, cell proliferation and the cell

cycle [17].

 

Low frequencies (generated by the pulsed nature of GSM cell-phone

signals - 217, 32 & 2 Hz) have been previously shown to lower lymphocytes

ability to imarki cancer cells and to depress the ability of other

lymphocytes to destroy the 'marked' aberrant cells. Low level microwaves

have also been shown to alter both the immune response [18] and EEG activity

[19] in rabbits. Microwaves at only 1 mW/cm2 (one-tenth of the NRPB Guidance

level) have been shown to affect cAMP-independent kinase activity [20], and

calcium ion (Ca2+) efflux from chick cerebral hemispheres [21]. Continuous

digital GSM phone operation near fertilised chicken eggs kill most of the

embryos [22]. Cancerous tissue has increased conductivity compared with

normal tissue.

 

In 1974, Dr. John Holt, the first Medical Director of the Institute

of Radiotherapy and Oncology of Western Australia, and Dr. Nelson were able

to show that the specific effect of RF energy on cancer was to

radio-sensitise a malignancy. Some cancers could have their

radio-sensitivity increased by a factor exceeding 100 times. As

non-electrical heating of cancer cells to 41.8infC increased

radio-sensitivity by a factor of 2 to 3 and 434 MHz increased sensitivity by

100 to 150 times at less than 38infC, this is a non thermal effect. Every

cancer demonstrated an increase in sensitivity; those normally treated with

radiotherapy showed a maximum; those not usually treatable by X-ray therapy

were minimal. [23]

 

Dr Peter French of the Centre for Immunology, St Vincent's Hospital,

Sydney, Australia, has been carrying out experiments on a range of human and

animal cell lines using 835 MHz exposure at 4.9 mW/cm2, 3 times per day for

7 days. He has shown effects on cell growth, shape, secretion of histamine

and gene transcription. Dr French is the immediate past President of the

Australia and New Zealand Society for Cell Biology. [24]

 

Microshield Industries launched a new EMF shielding mobile phone

case range in 1996. Even " Industry " tests show that it does typically reduce

the power absorbed by the user's head by around 20 dBm (i.e. by a factor of

around 99%). Many purchasers of these Microshield cases are now expressing

delight at having found a way of using their phones without apparently

experiencing short and medium term adverse side effects. There are now other

firms (eg Nett Ltd) manufacturing shielding devices and even some

manufacturers (eg Hagenuk) producing " low leakage " phones. Telephone

numbers: Microshield: 0181 363 3333,

 

Almost all the major manufacturers have now patented and produced

" low radiation into the user's head " models!

 

Base station masts

 

There is currently growing public concern about the number of base

station masts that are being erected, and the effect these may have on both

health and on property values. The field strengths from masts is low and is

unlikely to be more of a problem than any other form of RF data

communications., however increasing worries are surfacing about all levels

of RF energy, especially when digital signal bursts are transmitted. When

one looks at what few epidemiological studies that have been done to date on

RF/MW(radio frequency electromagnetic energy) human exposure, there is ample

evidence of adverse health effects to warrant concern.

 

The UK NRPB regularly uses the words " substantiated " , " firm " , and

" proven " evidence regarding the results of epidemiological (i.e. of

populations of people) studies. Epidemiological studies on human populations

do not, and generally can not, look for " proof " or " substantiation " but

increases in incidence of a disease, or relative risk ratios.

 

Epidemiological studies on tobacco and asbestos did not " prove " that

these carcinogens cause cancer; they do show, however, a significantly

increased risk of developing cancer from exposure. This is not

" substantiation " , but that did not prevent the health authorities from

taking corrective action. It is unfortunate that with electromagnetic

radiation, however, industry and its supporters insist an absolute cause -

effect relationship must be proven before corrective action be taken. The

following recent studies do not isubstantiatei anything in relation to

exposure to RF/MW; they are dealing with the increase in incidence of

adverse health effects such as cancer. They are, however, relevant and

should be taken into account when formulating policy:

 

a) A preliminary study by Dr Bruce Hocking compared cancer rates in

three municipalities within a 4 km radius of Sydney TV towers with rates in

adjacent areas further away. The study found children living within the 4 km

radius had a relative risk of 1.6 for leukaemia, compared with the control

group. The RR for mortality was higher at 2.3, and highest at 2.8 for

lymphoblastic leukaemia. [25] The calculated power levels were around 0.02

to 8 mW/cm2.

 

b) In 1987, a similar study identified higher rates of cancer among

those living near the TV and radio broadcast towers in Hawaii. Drs. Anderson

and Henderson of the Hawaii Department of Health found in residential areas

with 12 communication towers, a relative risk for cancer, including

leukaemia, of 1.375 (37.5% increase). [26]

 

c) A study of cancers around the BBC Sutton Coldfield transmitter

mast (Dolk, et al, 1997) found a statistically significant doubling of adult

leukaemia within 2 km, and a significant decline in risk with distance up to

10 km from the mast was also found for skin cancer. The decline with

distance was also observed at 20 other high power masts, but no significant

increase in overall incidence was found. [27]

 

d) An earlier study in 1982, conducted by Dr Morton of the

University of Oregonis Health Science Centre found parallel trends in his

study of cancer and broadcast radiation in Portland. [28]

 

e) Dr. Stanislaw Szmigielski, a leading epidemiologist with the

Centre for Radiobiology and Radiation Safety at the Military Institute of

Hygiene and Epidemiology, Warsaw, Poland has been the team leader for an

on-going study of the health effects of RF/MW exposure of military personnel

in Poland for the whole military population. His research found that young

military personnel exposed to RF/MW radiation had more than eight times the

expected rate of leukaemia and lymphoma. Careful surveys of exposure

revealed that 80 - 85% of the personnel were exposed to an average of less

than 42 microwatts/sq. cm., with a median point near 7 microwatts/sq. cm.

[8]

 

f) Quellet-Hellstrom and Stewart (1993) found a statistically

significant 3.3 fold increase of miscarriage amongst U.S. physiotherapists

using microwave diathermy compared to a non-exposed control group. The

incidence increased with the number of monthly treatments, which could

suggest a cumulative effect. With about 10 treatments per month, the

exposure was about 0.04 to 0.56 microwatts/sq. cm. [29]

 

g) Shandala et. al. (1979) found that calcium ion efflux varies in

living animal cells at 10 micro watts/sq.cm. and this level also produces

brain activity changes. [30]

 

h) Prof. von Klitzing (1995) found changes to human brain EEG with a

signal of 217 Hz modulation on a 150 megahertz (MHz) carrier with an

external exposure of about 2.5 microwatts/sq.cm. [31]

 

i) Professor John Goldsmith, at Ben Gurion University of the Negev,

Israel, has collected evidence of several exposures to microwaves which

produced elevated risks of a wide range of cancers, including childhood

leukaemia in children of staff, and cancers in the staff and partners at the

U.S. Embassy in Moscow and other eastern European U.S. embassies. These

cancers were associated with a reported maximum exposure of between 5 and 15

microwatts/sq.cm. and mean exposures between 1 and 2.4 mW/cm2, recorded near

the outside walls of the embassy. Personnel exposures inside the building

were estimated between 0.2 and 0.5 mW/cm2. [32]

 

j) To quote from Dr. Neil Cherry's (New Zealand) recent book: [33]

" With these and dozens of other epidemiological studies of large populations

and large numbers of workers occupationally exposed to RF/MW radiation,

showing statistically significant increases of a wide spectrum of cancers,

there can be little or no doubt that chronic low level exposure to RF/MW

radiation produces increased cancer risk. "

 

k) The Latvian pulsed radar station study mentioned earlier in this

talk. [13]

 

Who can the public turn to for advice?

 

Part of my remit was to answer the question whether the public

should be suspicious of soothing statements from people responsible for

advice on these matters.

 

Dr. Alastair McKinlay, of the UK NRPB, is the vice-Chair of the

" Expert Group " set up by the European Commission. He is quoted as stating:

What is now required is a lot more research in the microwave frequency part

of the electromagnetic spectrum, where mobile phones operate. This is not

because there is concern about health effects, but that such research makes

sense to quell any public concern. [34] The E.C. Committee has recommended a

24 million ECU (about Pound20m) funding programme for research into mobile

phone safety.

 

Dr. John Stather, Asst. Director of the NRPB was recently quoted in

several press articles [35] as admitting: " Until recently, we believed any

harmful effects from microwaves were due to their heating effects, which

would be negligible at the low powers used by mobile phones. Now their might

be another effect at work and we are much less certain. "

 

Conclusions

 

Powerwatch believes that, although much more research needs doing,

regular mobile-phone use is likely to have adverse health consequences in

many people who use them. The newer, digital, ones are likely to have more

biological effects than the older, analogue, ones. Although existing

evidence does not yet conclusively prove that there are any long-term

adverse health implications, we feel that we need to advise people to use

them as little as possible.

 

http://www.powerwatch.org

 

Alasdair Philips (aphilips) Director, UK Powerwatch, EMC

Engineer and EMF-bioeffects researcher