Cell Phones, be aware

The risk was confined to the side of the head where the phone was usually held and there were no indications of increased risk for those who have used their mobile for less than 10 years, the Karolinska Institute said in a statement.

The institute, one of Europe’s largest medical universities and a clinical and biomedical research center, awards the Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine.

“At the time when the study was conducted only analogue mobile phones had been in use for more than 10 years and therefore we cannot determine if there results are confined to use of analogue phones or if the results would be similar also after long-term use of digital (GSM) phones,” it said.

The mobile phone market is now dominated by GSM phones, which replaced the bulkier and less advanced analogue phones in many markets the mid- and late-1990s.

The mobile phone industry has said there is no scientific evidence of negative health effects from use of mobile phones.

The Karolinska Institute said 150 people with acoustic neuroma and 600 healthy people participated in the study.

“The risk of acoustic neuroma was almost doubled for persons who started to use their mobile at least 10 years prior to diagnosis,” the institute said.

“When the side of the head on which the phone was usually held was taken into consideration, we found that the risk of acoustic neuroma was almost four times higher on the same side as the phone was held and virtually normal on the other side.”

Finland’s Nokia is the world’s biggest mobile phone maker.

Other large producers include Motorola of the United States, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics, Germany’s Siemens and Swedish-Japanese joint venture Sony Ericsson.

Global mobile phone sales have been booming as thousands of new users sign up every day and existing subscribers replace their old handsets with new ones, capable of taking pictures or playing music.

Cell Phones and Brain Cancer

Cell phones produce electromagnetic radiation of a frequency somewhere between what comes out of a television and what comes out of a leaky microwave oven. This radiation penetrates the brain, a short distance from the phone’s antenna, and could theoretically cause damage by heating up the brain’s cells.

The heating is slight, however, as the electromagnetic radiation from cell phones is different from the ionizing radiation, found in X-rays, which damages DNA and is linked to cancer.

According to researchers, studies have shown that the radiation from cell phones does not cause cancer.

Cell Phones Interfering With Hospital Equipment

The chances of your cell phone causing a major problem in a hospital are slight, according to one study.

The study examined the affects of cell phones on heart and lung monitoring devices used in hospitals. While the phones did cause interference, the interference was not enough to cause concern.

However, the tests were conducted on devices that were not being used on patients. Researchers say that more tests need to be done to determine the extent of cell phone interference on these devices when patients are actually connected to them.

Cell Phones and Airplanes

NASA’s Aviation Safety Reporting System’s “Passenger Electronic Devises Database Report Set” contains several reports of incidents “personal electronic devices” seemed to create disturbances in aircrafts’ electronic systems.

Controlled tests have also shown that cell phones can, indeed, interfere with avionics equipment on airliners. In the tests, the exact position of the cell phone on the aircraft made a big difference, as levels of interference varied significantly as cell phones were moved throughout the fuselages of test aircraft.

Another fear is that cell phones may interfere with navigation and other aircraft systems.

Aside from interference to airplanes, the Federal Communication Commission bans the use of cell phones on airplanes because they could interfere with cell phone systems on the ground.

Cell phones were designed for use on the ground, where the nearest node will pick up the call’s signal. From the air, moving at several hundred miles an hour, your cell phone’s signal could reach miles and hit many nodes at the same time, causing a disruption.

Cell Phones and Driving

One state, and many cities, requires that drivers use a hands-free headset if they want to use a cell phone while driving. However, although the devices leave hands free, the driver may still be distracted.

According to research, having a telephone conversation while driving hinders driving ability. One study found that using a cell phone while driving increases the risk of crashing by four times, and a hands-free device didn’t change the risk.

Another study, which evaluated the driving abilities of college students while talking on cell phones, found they students missed traffic signals and reacted more slowly to events when they were using either a cell phone or a hands-free device. Comparatively, when the students only listened to the radio or an audio book, there driving was less affected.

CNN Money January 30, 2003

Study: Cell phones damaged rat brain cells

Published 2/4/2003 6:21 PM
LUND, Sweden, Feb. 4 (UPI) — Brain cells in rats died when exposed to the radio signals from cell phones, a new study released Tuesday reports.

Cells in three areas of the brain — the cortex, which plays a role in high-level mental function; the hippocampus, which is important in learning; and the basal ganglia, which plays a role in the experience of sensation — were affected, said Leif Salford, lead author and a researcher at the University of Lund.

The neurons appear to be affected selectively, however.

“They’re spread between totally normal neurons, so in the different parts of the brain they are surrounded by cells that are looking fine,” Salford told United Press International. The reason for the difference is unclear, as is the mechanism behind the death of the neurons, he said.

In research reported online in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, three groups of eight animals were exposed for two hours of different intensity radio frequency electromagnetic fields. Animals that received more intense fields showed more dead and damaged neurons.

“There has been little evidence that with this low level of (radio frequency) could interfere with brain functioning,” said Jo-Anne Basile, vice president in charge of external relations at the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association in Washington, D.C., a trade group of cell phone makers and carriers.

“Our position on this is that you can’t draw any conclusions from a single study,” she told UPI. The study needs to be replicated in other labs, she said, and Salford agreed. Salford’s research also involved a very small number of test subjects.

He said although the research does not demonstrate cell phone use is harmful to people, “we do say the repeated use in the growing brain for decades might reduce the capacity of the brain to withstand aging.”

The rats in the study were between 12 and 26 weeks of age, “comparable to human mobile phone-addicted teenagers with respect to age,” according to the study.

Although the animals were not tested to see whether they displayed any abnormal behavior following their cell damage, no such behavior was observed, Salford said.

Regarding cell phone use, Salford recommended employing hands-free cell phones as often as possible and keeping the phone as far from the brain as possible.

“The more we can reduce the energy that goes into the brain, the better,” he commented, adding that the use of cell phones is a “huge biological experiment.”

Although insisting that “all of the studies to date continue to suggest there is no harm from cell phones,” Basile agreed that if people are concerned about the use of cell phones, using hands-free devices would be a viable alternative.

Copyright © 2001-2004 United Press International

The three affected areas were the cortex, which plays a role in high-level mental function; the hippocampus, which is important in learning; and the basal ganglia, which plays a role in the experience of sensation.

Researchers exposed three groups of rats to different intensity radio frequency electromagnetic fields for a period of two hours. Rats that received more intense exposure had more dead and damaged neurons.

Damage to neurons appear to be selective, however, as damaged cells were often surrounded by normal cells. The reasons for the selectivity, along with the mechanism causing the neuron death, are not known.

Researchers say that the study does not demonstrate cell phone use is harmful to people, but recommend the use of a hands-free device to keep the cell phone as far from the brain as possible, adding that the use of cell phones is a “huge biological experiment.”

Cell Biologist Fiorenzo Marinelli and his team at the National Research Council in Bologna, Italy, decided to investigate whether radio waves had any effect on leukemia cells after previous studies indicated that the disease might be more common among mobile phone users. The life cycle of leukemia cells is well understood, making it relatively easy to spot changes in behavior.

The team exposed leukemia cells in the lab to 900-megahertz radio waves at a power level of 1 milliwatt and then looked at the activity of a gene that triggers cell suicide. Many European mobile networks operate at 900 megahertz, and maximum power outputs are typically 2 watts, although they regularly use only one-tenth of this power.

After 24 hours of continuous exposure to the radio waves, the suicide genes were turned on in far more leukemia cells than in a control population that had not been exposed. What is more, 20 percent more exposed cells had died than in the controls.

But after 48 hours exposure, the apparently lethal effect of the radiation went into reverse. Rather than more cells dying, Marinelli found that a survival mechanism kicked in. Three genes that trigger cells to multiply were turned on in a high proportion of the surviving cells, making them replicate ferociously. The cancer, although briefly beaten back, had become more aggressive.

DNA damage?

Marinelli presented his results this month at the International Workshop on Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields on the Greek island of Rhodes. While the results do not show a direct health threat from mobile phones, they provide fresh evidence that radiation from such devices could play an important role in activating genes that might help cancer cells thrive.

“We don’t know what the effects would be on healthy human cells,” says Marinelli, “but in leukemia cells the response is always the same.” Marinelli suspects the radiation may initially damage DNA, and that this interferes with the cells’ biochemical signals in a way that ultimately triggers a defensive mechanism.

Many scientists believe that because radiation from cell phones does not have enough energy to break chemical bonds, it cannot damage cells. The only way damage could occur, they say, is if the radio waves heated tissues up.

But British research earlier in 2002, by Molecular Toxicologist David de Pomerai at the University of Nottingham, showed that radio waves can cause biological effects that are not due to heating. He found that nematode worms exposed to radio waves showed an increase in fertility-the opposite effect from what would be expected from heating.

“Confused field”

Marinelli’s study is intriguing, says de Pomerai. “But I’m far from convinced that these authors are looking at any reproducible and real phenomena,” he says. Other studies have shown mobile phone radiation to have no effect on cell death, de Pomerai adds.

An inquiry in April 2000 by the British government found no evidence of any health risks from mobile phones. But it still recommended that people take a precautionary approach until further evidence emerged. In particular, it suggested children, whose brains are still developing, should not use mobile phones excessively.

“It’s a very confused field,” admits Colin Blakemore, a physiologist at the University of Oxford and a member of the British National Radiological Protection Board’s advisory group on non-ionizing radiation. People should place more reliance on animal studies than lab-based experiments on cells, he says.

But de Pomerai insists that a consensus is emerging that non-ionizing radiation can indirectly damage DNA by affecting its repair system. If the DNA repair mechanism does not work as well as it should, mutations in cells could accumulate with disastrous consequences. “Cells with unrepaired DNA damage are likely to be far more aggressively cancerous,” he says.