About 4 billion people are now using cell phones around the world, despite the fact that their safety is being increasingly called into question. In fact, there are no safety standards for testing cell phones before they are released to the market.
Meanwhile, government agencies, similar to their stance on tobacco before the evidence became overwhelming, have essentially ignored all the danger warnings.
Just like smoking tobacco, they fail to realize that it can take anywhere from 10 to 30 years for brain tumors to develop from cell phone exposure, so we are just now beginning to see some of the tragic effects of heavy cell phone use. The truth is, we are on the verge of a brain cancer epidemic. It could grow to 500,000 cases worldwide in 2010, and there may be over a million cases in the U.S. alone by 2015.
Sadly, children and teens are at an even higher risk, as their thinner skull bones allow for greater penetration of cell phone radiation. The radiation can enter all the way into their midbrain, where tumors are more deadly. In addition, children’s cells reproduce more quickly, so they’re more susceptible to aggressive cell growth. Their immune systems are also not as well developed as adults. Lastly, children face a far greater lifetime exposure.
Professor Lennart Hardell of Sweden has found that those who begin using cell phones heavily as teenagers have 4 to 5 times more brain cancer as young adults!
Increasing evidence is pouring in that cell phones are not only a risk factor for brain tumors, but also salivary gland tumors, eye damage, Alzheimer’s disease and more.
Your Safety is Now Riding on a Severely Flawed $30-Million Cell Phone Study
You may be wondering why, if there is so much data showing the risks of cell phone use, no warnings are being made. First, the telecommunication industry is even BIGGER than drug industry, and they have far more influence in Washington.
This is compounded by the fact that a large percentage of retirement funds from several powerful lobbying organizations are invested in telecommunications.
Second, institutions like the World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Commission have cautioned that conclusions about possible cancer risks from cell phones cannot be drawn until the INTERPHONE study is published.
The INTERPHONE Project — a massive 13-country epidemiological study of tumors among users of mobile phones — is already lagging years behind its scheduled completion date.
Part of the delay in putting together the final report now appears to be internal strife, as scientists are reported to differ in their interpretation of the results.
The GSM Association, a global trade organization of mobile operators, and the forum, which includes Nokia and about a dozen other manufacturers, contributed more than $3.5 million to the $30-plus million project. The European Commission also helped fund it with contributions passed through the International Union Against Cancer in an effort to create a barrier between the mobile phone industry and the scientists.
Further, a team of international EMF activists — the International EMF Collaborative — has released a report detailing 11 serious design flaws of the INTERPHONE study. They say a ‘systemic-skew’ in the study is greatly underestimating brain tumor risk, and they pointed out the following flaws, among others:
- Categorizing subjects who used portable phones (which emit the same microwave radiation as cell phones) as ‘unexposed’
- Excluding many types of brain tumors
- Excluding people who had died, or were too ill to be interviewed as a consequence of their brain tumor
- Excluding children and young adults, who are more vulnerable
You can read the full report Cellphones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern, Science, Spin and the Truth Behind Interphone here.
If the wrong conclusions are drawn from the Interphone studies, the resulting lack of public warnings could have disastrous consequences for the generations to come. And this is why I urge you to take action NOW. Do not wait for the results of more studies to come in or for the final conclusions of this meta-analysis, and please do not be swayed by cell phone safety spin.
As Lloyd Morgan, lead author of the report and member of the Bioelectromagnetics Society says:
“Exposure to cell phone radiation is the largest human health experiment ever undertaken, without informed consent, and has some 4 billion participants enrolled.
Science has shown increased risk of brain tumors from use of cell phones, as well as increased risk of eye cancer, salivary gland tumors, testicular cancer, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and leukemia.
The public must be informed."
Are There “Safe” Cell Phones on the Market?
As the dangers of cell phones slowly trickle out to the mainstream media, there have been some reports of “safer” cell phones, and the Environmental Working Group (EWG) even released a new database for consumers ranking over 1,000 cell phones by the Specific Absorption Rate, known as the SAR value.
The SAR value is a measure of the power of the cell phone and its potential for heating tissues.
Within days of the EWG launching the new SAR value database, almost 500,000 people had accessed the database, indicating very encouraging new interest by consumers in cell phone safety.
But simply choosing a phone with a lower SAR value does not at all mean the phone is safe. Camilla Rees, founder of www.Electromagnetichealth.org and co-author with Magda Havas, PhD of “Public Health SOS: The Shadow Side of the Wireless Revolution,” explains:
“It is important consumers realize that the SAR value, while providing information for comparison purposes between phones, is very limited in its usefulness as a measure of ‘safety.’ We are greatly concerned that people may be turning to the EWG database in droves not understanding just how limited a measure the SAR value is.”
Why is the SAR value not an accurate measure of safety?
- The SAR value is only comparing the isolated heating effect of different phones and does not give an indication that a cell phone is ‘safe.’
- The power, or heating effect, of the phone is only one of many possible factors impacting cell phone ‘safety.’ Exposures to the radiation from the cell phone at non-heating levels have been linked to many serious biological effects, and the SAR value is not capturing anything about these harmful non-thermal exposures.
- SAR values are reported to the FCC by the manufacturer and have been known to vary from the reported number by a factor of two across models of the same phone.
- The SAR value varies with the source of exposure and the person using the phone. For example, if you are in a rural area or in an elevator or a car, where the cell phone uses more power, your brain will get a greater exposure from the higher power required in these instances. Under certain conditions, the SAR value can be 10-100 times higher than reported.
- Holding the phone in a slightly different way can actually render the worst SAR value phone better than the best SAR value phone.
- SAR values have been created based on simulations of exposure in a plexiglass head filled with fluid, not a human head, and many scientists consider them to be inaccurate and irrelevant at determining actual biological effects.
One of the worst deficiencies of the SAR value is that it only considers the thermal impact of cell phone usage, and it is very likely that the non-thermal effects of chronic cell phone exposure are more biologically damaging.
As Rees points out, and I wholeheartedly agree:
I would also add to Rees’ statement — do not use a cell phone within an enclosed area, such as a car, train or plane, or within three feet of small children.
Remember, the damage from cell phone exposure can take many years to surface. There are rarely any initial symptoms, just like smoking and lung cancer. Are you really willing to risk the chance of developing brain cancer because you don’t want to sacrifice the minor inconvenience of using your cell’s speaker phone, or using a safe headset?
This should be of particular concern if you have children, since, just like smoking, WI-FI does not discriminate between user and bystander.
I have written more in-depth about how to reduce your cell phone risks before, and as a refresher, I strongly urge you to The following two tabs change content below. New York Times bestselling author Dr. Mercola graduated from the Chicago College of Osteopathic Medicine in 1982. And while osteopaths or D.O.s are licensed to prescribe medication and perform surgery just like medical doctors (M.D.s), they bring something extra to the practice of medicine. Osteopathic physicians practice a "whole person" approach to medicine, treating the entire person — rather than just the symptoms. Focusing on preventive health care, D.O.s help patients develop attitudes and lifestyles that don't just fight illness, but help prevent it too. Dr. Mercola is passionate about natural medicine and strongly believes that the current medical system is largely manipulated and controlled by large corporations whose primary focus is profit. His website, Mercola.com, which started as a small hobby interest in 1997, has now grown to today’s number one natural health website educating and empowering millions to take back the control over their own health. 
Latest posts by Dr. Joseph Mercola (see all)
