[79307] in Cypherpunks
(fwd) Cell Phone Cancer Study
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Stewart Fist)
Wed Apr 30 11:32:21 1997
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 07:34:34 -0700
To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
From: azur@netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Cc: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net
Reply-To: azur@netcom.com (Steve Schear)
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 16:01:23 +1000
From: fist@ozemail.com.au (Stewart Fist)
-----------------------------
Cell phones/cancer connection.
by Stewart Fist
The Australian newspaper, Tues 29 April 1997
A team of scientists funded by Telstra to investigate claimed links
between cellular phones and cancer has turned up probably the most
significant finding of an adverse health effects yet.
When presented to 'Science' magazine for publication the study was
rejected on the grounds that publication "would cause a panic". Three
other prominent magazines including 'Nature' also later rejected the
report, suggesting that they would not handle such important
conclusions without the research being further confirmed.
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.
The mice were subject to GSM-type pulsed microwaves at a power-density
roughly equal to a cell-phone transmitting for two half-hour periods each
day; this was pulsed transmission as from a handset, not the steady
transmission of a cell-phone tower.
A significant increase in B-cell lymphomas was evident early in the
experiment, but the incidence continued to rise over the 18 months. The
implications of the B-cell (rather than the normal T-cell) lymphomas here,
is that B-cell effects are implicated in roughly 85 percent of all
cancers.
The experiment was conducted as a blind trial, using absolutely identical
equipment and conditions for two groups of 100 mice. The only difference
between handling the two groups was that the power to one antenna was never
switched on. Over the 18 months, the exposed mice had 2.4-times the tumour
rate of the unexposed - but this was later corrected downwards to a more
confident 2-times claim to remove other possible influences.
According to Dr Alan Harris from the Walter and Eliza Institute in
Melbourne: "This is important because at present, there was no convincing
evidence that radio fields (in contrast to X- and Gamma-rays, ultraviolet
and atomic radiation) can directly cause the changes in genes responsible
for cancer development."
In fact, until late 1996, most governments and all cell-phone companies
have been claiming that the safety of their product has been proved - and
that the only possible biological effect of radio frequency transmission is
localised body heating.
The conduct of this experiment actually raises questions more about the
potential for cell-phone hanset radiation to effect people nearby
(passive exposures) than just the user him/herself. The experiment was conducted in the 'far field', at distances greater from the mice than the cell-phone is normally held from the head.
Near-field biological effects in EMF effects are thought to be sustantially
different from far-field, although the biomedical implications are not
clear. Also, in close proximity, most of the energy transfers from the
handset to the head by induction rather than just radiation, and this can
raise the energy transfer by a factor of four.
The study therefore under-rates the potential power effects on the handset
user, while over-rating those for people nearby.
The Adelaide study has been held back from publication for over two years
while the B-cell implications were checked at a laboratory in Maryland,
USA. Under their contract with Telstra, those involved in the study were
prohibited from discussing their findings until after publication.
Increased tumours began to be recorded after about 9 months. It is
important to note that these were transgenic mice, specially bred to be
susceptible to cancers of the immune system. However susceptible mice are
commonly used in these studies as 'proxies', since cancer-causing effects
are believed to be cumulative at the cell level.
The total exposure period is very much less than can be expected from human
use over a lifetime, so while one of the scientists downplayed the
importance, saying, "humans are not rodents" another pointed out that "DNA
is DNA".
Every attempt appears to have been made to hose down the significance
of this report, however the importance of the finding will not be lost
on the international scientific community. This research now places
Australia at the fore-front of EMF-health research, and it demands a
series of follow-up studies to investigate dose-related responses and
near-field effects.
An expensive video-conference is being mounted on Wednesday by Telstra
in
Adelaide to officially release the report, with Dr Michael Repacholi
speaking from Geneva. He has been prominent crusader on the side of
"cell-phones are safe" lobby for many years. However, none of the
technical or medical press involved in this debate have been invited to
Adelaide conference.
The official press release issued by the chairman of the scientific
committee, Professor Tony Basten of Sydney University, also leads with
gentle fire-extinguisher statement that "In our opinion the findings are
valid for this genetically-engineered mouse model, but they must be put in
context. Mice and humans absorb energy from these fields differently so we
cannot conclude from this single study that humans have an increased risk
of cancer from the use of digital mobile phones. More focussed research
needs to be done to resolve that issue"
I couldn't agree more on the last point, but nothing done in the last
few years with the exception of the Drs. Lai-Singh work in Seattle has
more obviously established that cell-phone safety has not yet been
proved. There has been evidence accumulating over many years that the
long-term effects of radio-frequency exposures may have serious
consequences for a small percent of the population, but this has been
ignored by the industry and by governments.
The fact that Prof. Tony Basten concluded his release with the statement
"For the time being, at least, I see no scientific reason to stop using my
own mobile phone," is largely irrelevant. At his age and in his
occupation, the potential dangers from increased phone use are probably
minimal.
The question is, would he buy his teenage child one?
SIDEBAR
This report follows two other fierce brush-fire in the cell-phone
industry. The first was generated last year when Dr Henry Lai and Dr
Singh at Washington State University reported enormous increases in
double-strand DNA breaks in rat-brain tissue following microwave
exposures of only two hours. The industry largely ignored these
findings claiming that the frequencies used were not identical to
cell-phones.
In addition, the Wireless Technology Research (WTR) group in the USA,
which is funded by the cell-phone industry has become embroiled in a
number of scandals. The WTR was promoted to the public and to the US
Government as being an 'independent' and 'arms-length' body
controlling $25 million in research funding.
Recent leaked documents show that it has been under the direct control
of the industry association, and it has long operated as a PR front.
In the last four years it has spent $17 million "without wetting a
test-tube, " according to Microwave News editor, Louis Slessin.
Following the tobacco industry's problems, the WTR scientists recently
went on strike for nearly a year, refusing to perform their contracted
research until adequately covered for indemnity against law suits by
the cellular phone industry association. Last week, the WTR was
finally paid US$938,000 to fund indeminity insurance coverage.
The US scientists' sensitivity to this issue follows the filing of
thirty-eight cases which are now before the courts over past
tobacco-safety studies. Both the tobacco company lawyers and the
scientists they funded have been charged as co-conspirators with the
Tobacco Institute and the cigarette companies in suppressing evidence
and manipulating research results.
END
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The sleight of hand comes while you are reading their lips!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stewart Fist
Technical writer and journalist.
Homepage:< http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/stewart_fist >
Archives of my columns:< http://www.abc.net.au/http/pipe.htm >
Development site: <http://electric-words.com>
Phone:+612 9416 7458 Fax: +612 9416 4582
PGP mail preferred
Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9
Key available on BAL server, http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/~bal/pks-toplev.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Schear | tel: (702) 658-2654
CEO | fax: (702) 658-2673
First ECache Exchange |
7075 West Gowan Road |
Suite 2148 |
Las Vegas, NV 89129 | Internet: azur@netcom.com
---------------------------------------------------------------------
