Experts say cellphones are 'possibly carcinogenic'
May 31, 2011 By MARIA CHENG , AP Medical Writer
A man uses a cell phone in New York. The use of cell phones and other wireless communication devices are "possibly carcinogenic to humans", the World Health Organisation's cancer research agency said Tuesday.
(AP) -- A respected international panel of scientists says cellphones are possible cancer-causing agents, putting them in the same category as the pesticide DDT, gasoline engine exhaust and coffee.
The classification was issued Tuesday in Lyon, France, by the International Agency for Research on Cancer after a review of dozens of published studies. The agency is an arm of the World Health Organization and its assessment now goes to WHO and national health agencies for possible guidance on cellphone use.
Classifying agents as "possibly carcinogenic" doesn't mean they automatically cause cancer and some experts said the ruling shouldn't change people's cellphone habits.
"Anything is a possible carcinogen," said Donald Berry, a professor of biostatistics at the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center at the University of Texas. He was not involved in the WHO cancer group's assessment. "This is not something I worry about and it will not in any way change how I use my cellphone," he said - speaking from his cellphone.
The same cancer research agency lists alcoholic drinks as a known carcinogen and night shift work as a probable carcinogen. Anyone's risk for cancer depends on many factors, from genetic makeup to the amount and length of time of an exposure.
After a weeklong meeting on the type of electromagnetic radiation found in cellphones, microwaves and radar, the expert panel said there was limited evidence cellphone use was linked to two types of brain tumors and inadequate evidence to draw conclusions for other cancers.
"We found some threads of evidence telling us how cancers might occur, but there were acknowledged gaps and uncertainties," said Jonathan Samet of the University of Southern California, the panel's chairman.
"The WHO's verdict means there is some evidence linking mobile phones to cancer but it is too weak to draw strong conclusions from," said Ed Yong, head of health information at Cancer Research U.K. "If such a link exists, it is unlikely to be a large one."
Last year, results of a large study found no clear link between cellphones and cancer. But some advocacy groups contend the study raised serious concerns because it showed a hint of a possible connection between very heavy phone use and glioma, a rare but often deadly form of brain tumor. However, the numbers in that subgroup weren't sufficient to make the case.
The study was controversial because it began with people who already had cancer and asked them to recall how often they used their cellphones more than a decade ago.
In about 30 other studies done in Europe, New Zealand and the U.S., patients with brain tumors have not reported using their cellphones more often than unaffected people.
Because cellphones are so popular, it may be impossible for experts to compare cellphone users who develop brain tumors with people who don't use the devices. According to a survey last year, the number of cellphone subscribers worldwide has hit 5 billion, or nearly three-quarters of the global population.
People's cellphone habits have also changed dramatically since the first studies began years ago and it's unclear if the results of previous research would still apply today.
Since many cancerous tumors take decades to develop, experts say it's impossible to conclude cellphones have no long-term health risks. The studies conducted so far haven't tracked people for longer than about a decade.
Cellphones send signals to nearby towers via radio frequency waves, a form of energy similar to FM radio waves and microwaves. But the radiation produced by cellphones cannot directly damage DNA and is different from stronger types of radiation like X-rays or ultraviolet light. At very high levels, radio frequency waves from cellphones can heat up body tissue, but that is not believed to damage human cells.
Some experts recommended people use a headset or earpiece if they are worried about the possible health dangers of cellphones. "If there is a risk, most of it goes away with a wireless earpiece," said Otis Brawley, chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society.
Brawley said people should focus on the real health hazards of cellphones. "Cellphones may cause brain tumors but they kill far more people through automobile accidents," he said. Brawley added it was also reasonable to limit children's use of cellphones since their brains are still developing.
Earlier this year, a U.S. National Institutes of Health study found that cellphone use can speed up brain activity, but it is unknown whether that has any dangerous health effects.
The cellphone industry trade group, CTIA-The Wireless Association, pointed to two U.S. agencies that have found no evidence cellphones are linked to cancer - the Food and Drug Administration and the Federal Communications Commission.
The WHO's cancer research agency has reviewed more than 900 occupational exposures, chemicals and other agents since 1971, classifying their link to cancer by labeling them from carcinogenic to probably not carcinogenic. The American Cancer Society has estimated that only about 6 percent of cancers are related to environmental causes and most of that is on-the-job occupational exposure.
More information: http://www.iarc.fr
http://www.cancerresearchuk.org
©2011 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
-
From lemons to lemonade: Reaction uses carbon dioxide to make carbon-based semiconductor,
32 comments
-
Thioridazine kills cancer stem cells in human while avoiding toxic side-effects of conventional cancer treatments,
3 comments
-
SpaceX private rocket blasts off for space station (Update),
42 comments
-
Climate scientists say they have solved riddle of rising sea,
31 comments
-
Research team claims to have found evidence Lake Cheko is impact crater for Tunguska Event,
18 comments
-
Classical and Quantum Mechanics via Lie algebras
Apr 15, 2011
- More from Physics Forums - Independent Research
More news stories
Keep food safety in mind this memorial day weekend
(HealthDay) -- Picnics, parades and cookouts are as much a part of Memorial Day weekend as tributes to the United States' war veterans.
12 hours ago |
not rated yet |
0
Family history of Alzheimer's affects functional connectivity
(HealthDay) -- Cognitively normal individuals with a family history of late-onset Alzheimer's disease (AD) may display lower resting state functional connectivity in the default mode network (DMN) of the brain, ...
Medicine & Health / Alzheimer's disease & dementia
21 hours ago |
not rated yet |
0
Transvaginal mesh op restores pelvic organ prolapse at price
(HealthDay) -- Transvaginal mesh (TVM) procedures are effective for anatomical restoration of pelvic organ prolapse (POP), but patients report a worsening of sexual function following surgery, according to ...
22 hours ago |
not rated yet |
0
Travel to high altitudes tied to Crohn's, colitis flare-ups
(HealthDay) -- People with inflammatory bowel disease, which includes Crohn's disease and colitis, may be at increased risk for flare-ups when they fly or travel to high altitudes for skiing or mountain climbing, ...
Medicine & Health / Inflammatory disorders
22 hours ago |
not rated yet |
1
|
Color-changing contact lenses to help diabetics (w/ Video)
For the millions of Americans with diabetes, the inconvenient and often painful method of testing blood sugar levels is a way of life. But research and innovative product design by scientists at The University of Akron may ...
May 23, 2012 |
4.4 / 5 (7) |
4
|
Nvidia trumpets Tegra 3 phone design wins for 2012
(Phys.org) -- Nvidias competitive war paint has a name, Tegra 3. On the heels of Nvidia announcements about lowering costs of its Tegra 3 processors and Nvidia-enabled tablets running Android Ice Cream ...
Browser wars flare in mobile space
The browser wars are heating up again, but this time the fight is for dominance of the mobile Internet.
Scientist: Evolution debate will soon be history
(AP) -- Richard Leakey predicts skepticism over evolution will soon be history. Not that the avowed atheist has any doubts himself.
Dell tablet leak: 10.1-inch display, two-battery choice
(Phys.org) -- Headline after headline talks about vendors tablets in the wings as likely number-one contenders for the iPad. Such claims have justifiably been taken with a grain of salt, considering ...
SpotterRF debuts Radar Backpack Kit (w/ Video)
(Phys.org) -- SpotterRF has announced a special radar backpack kit designed to enhance situational awareness for soldiers on the ground. The company says its special radar is designed for warfighters as part ...
SpaceX capsule has 'new car' smell, astronauts say (Update)
SpaceX's Dragon cargo vessel smells like a new car, said astronauts at the International Space Station after opening the hatches Saturday following the spacecraft's landmark mission to the orbiting lab.
May 31, 2011
Rank: 2.4 / 5 (8)
T-Mobile Official Site® - Get Unlimited Data, Talk & Text. From America's Largest 4G Network! - T-Mobile.com
LMAO
May 31, 2011
Rank: 1.5 / 5 (2)
May 31, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
May 31, 2011
Rank: 3.6 / 5 (8)
This persisten cellphone paranoia is unbelievable. No matter how many studies say a firm "no", it only takes one study that says "we cannot exclude", and everybody pees in their pants.
People eat too much salt, fat, red meat, they smoke and drink, even when they know that's bad. And you wouldn't want to know the number of people that die from these things. (You probably shouldn't, you'd get a heart attack.) But cellphones, they're lethal! You just know, right?
May 31, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
No. you might not..in fact, unlike environmental factors of a chemical, biological/vector, or mechanical nature, electromagnetic factors would be MOST difficult to trace because they left no residue/metabolite/smoking gun as we have come to expect over the decades and centuries of non-EM related carcinogens.
Just establishing a wattage/centimeter threshold for cancer would require a broadband expression for damage(frequency) as well as a power component to disease threshold. Further, the fact that this is an issue at all means something caught the attention of the public and science B4 now. Smoke cigarettes, get lung cancer. Microwave a chicken dinner, get cancer from the same frequency RF at 1/100th the power; hummm..who knew?!
word-to-ya-muthas
May 31, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
May 31, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (2)
Yes- non-ionizing radiation. Does anyone know what mechanism is proposed as the cause?
May 31, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (4)
May 31, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Why are therefore so few studies done ?
May 31, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
THERE! THAT is the REAL problem! The satisfaction of immediacy and fulfillment of a positive, reinforced emotional need trumps science (some who are less kind would say, 'common-sense') every time. No matter how much you love your ring tone, pictures, TV, porn, talk/talking...you WILL hate the expense and pain of cancer/especially brain cancer in lost wages, time, weight, and the pain of the disease. Telling you this now just invites an argument but I have to say something now before it is too late to say anything. Yes, science will find a solution please be around to use it!
word-to-ya-muthas
May 31, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (3)
How many studies do they have with mice and cell phone radiation.
Make the mice genetically identical.
Put a bunch of 24/7 actively transmitting cell phones around mice in some cages, have another batch of mice in a RF isolated chamber. The cell phone usage would be equivalent to using 6 cell phones 24/7 right next to your head.
Take detailed MRI's every year on both batches and check the brains. You don't even have to do a histological analysis. Cancer will always show up in an MRI. If it doesn't, it was nothing to worry about.
Does anyone have links to pubmed articles with research like this? Please post!!!
Jun 01, 2011
Rank: 3 / 5 (2)
Jun 01, 2011
Rank: 1 / 5 (1)
Why is it assumed that the phone has to be next to your head to cause Cancer?
At any time you are surrounded by dozens (hundreds?)of cellphones all active and bathing you in radiation so someone explain to me how this doesn't affect the metabolism?
Jun 01, 2011
Rank: 4 / 5 (4)
As for this article is is effectively NON NEWS and completely pointless since "Anything is a possible carcinogen" according to mr Berry. So this brings absolutely nothing new, it's just a headline that draws attention without any new information behind it so I'll gladly 1/5 it.
Jun 01, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
One can only hope.
Jun 01, 2011
Rank: 5 / 5 (1)
Inverse square law
Jun 01, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Search for: Billy Meier Foretold Cell Phone Dangers 22 Years Agoof Course.
Jun 05, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Jun 05, 2011
Rank: 4 / 5 (1)
Jun 07, 2011
Rank: not rated yet
Everyone and everything of value will soon be Connected. Our physical states will be constantly monitored. This data will be analyzed to find out just what makes people sick. We will be part of an unending field study, as we are now.
Cell phone use is obviously a facet of this study; which frequencies at what powers will damage us, and what wont? We will soon know enough to design implant networks with extended functionality. Your list of titillations indicates how we are compelled to test this new tech. Early movies were very racy for the same reason. Sex and gossip sell- this has been known for 1000s of years. Smart phones enable us to indulge in both.
Jun 07, 2011
Rank: not rated yet