https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/smartphones/cell-phone-radiation As the debate over cell-phone radiation
heats up, consumers deserve answers to whether there’s a cancer connection Last updated: September 28, 2015
Does
radiation from cell phones cause brain cancer—or doesn’t it?
Researchers investigating that
question have gone back and forth over the years, a game of scientific pingpong
that has divided the medical community and cell-phone users into two camps: those
who think we should stop worrying so much about cell-phone radiation, and
others who think that there’s enough evidence to warrant some cautionary
advice.
Most Americans fall squarely on
the “don’t worry” side. In a recent nationally representative Consumer Reports
survey of 1,000 adults, only 5 percent said they were very concerned about the
radiation from cell phones, and less than half took steps to limit their
exposure to it.
Many respected scientists join
them. “We found no evidence of an increased risk of brain tumors or any other
form of cancer” from cell-phone radiation, says John Boice Jr., Sc.D.,
president of the National Council on Radiation Protection & Measurements
and a professor of medicine at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in
Nashville, Tenn. “The worry should instead be in talking or texting
with your cell phone while driving.”
The U.S. government doesn’t seem very troubled, either. The Food and Drug Administration says on its website that
research generally doesn’t link cell phones to any health problem. And although
the Federal Communications Commission requires manufacturers to include
information in user manuals about cell-phone handling, that’s often buried deep
in the fine print.
But not everyone is unconcerned.
In May 2015, a group of 190
independent scientists from 39 countries, who in total have written more
than 2,000 papers on the topic, called on the United Nations, the World Health
Organization, and national governments to develop stricter controls on
cell-phone radiation. They point to growing research—as well as the
classification of cell-phone radiation as a possible carcinogen in 2011 by the
International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of the WHO—suggesting that
the low levels of radiation from cell phones could have potentially
cancer-causing effects. “I think the
overall evidence that wireless radiation might cause adverse health effects is
now strong enough that it’s almost unjustifiable for government agencies and
scientists not to be alerting the public to the potential hazards,” says David
O. Carpenter, M.D., director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at
the University at Albany in New York & one of the authors of the recent
letter to the U.N. & WHO.
Some countries have taken steps to
protect users, at least when it comes to children. For example, France, Russia,
the U.K., and Zambia have either banned ads that promote phones’ sale to or use
by children, or issued cautions for use by children. The city council of Berkeley, Calif., has also acted. In May
2015, it approved a “Right to Know” law that requires electronics retailers to
notify consumers about the proper handling of cell phones. CTIA-The Wireless
Association, a trade group, is now trying to block that law from going into
effect, as it successfully did after San Francisco passed its own Right to Know
law five years ago.
Of course, scientific seesawing
like that doesn’t provide a lot of clarity or confidence for the 90 percent of
American adults and roughly 80 percent of teens who report having a cell phone.
So how concerned should you be about cell-phone radiation? Consumer Reports’
health and safety experts conducted a thorough review of the research and offer
some guidance.
Your phone sends radiofrequency,
or RF, waves from its antenna to nearby cell towers, and receives RF waves to
its antenna from cell towers when you make a call or text or use data. The
frequency of a cell phone’s RF waves falls between those emitted by FM radios
and those from microwave
ovens, all of which are considered “non-ionizing” forms of radiation. That
means that—unlike radiation from a nuclear explosion, a CT
scan, or a standard X-ray—the radiation from your phone does not carry
enough energy to directly break or alter your DNA, which is one way that cancer
can occur. (FM radios and microwaves don’t raise alarms, in part because they
aren’t held close to your head when in use and because microwave ovens have
shielding that offers protection.)
At high power levels, RF waves can
heat up water molecules (which is how microwave ovens work). Scientists used to
focus their concerns on the possibility that such heating of human tissue,
which is mostly water, might damage cells. In fact, the FCC’s test of
cell-phone emissions—which was set in 1996 and which all phones must pass
before being allowed on the market—is based on that effect. But most experts now aren’t concerned about
that possible tissue heating caused by RF waves. Instead, what’s worrying some
scientists are newer lab studies suggesting that exposure to cell-phone
radiation can have biological effects without raising temperature. In 2011, researchers at the National
Institutes of Health showed that low-level radiation from an activated cell
phone held close to a human head could change the way certain brain cells
functioned, even without raising body temperature. The study did not prove that
the effect on brain cells was dangerous, only that radiation from cell phones
could have a direct effect on human tissue.
RF waves from cell phones have
also been shown to produce “stress” proteins in human cells, according to
research from Martin Blank, Ph.D., a special lecturer in the department of
physiology and cellular biophysics at Columbia University and another signer of
the recent letter to the WHO and U.N. “These proteins are used for protection,”
Blank says. “The cell is saying that RF is bad for me and it has to do something
about it.”
And just this year, a German study
found that RF waves promoted the growth of brain tumors in mice, again at
radiation levels supposedly too low to raise body temperature. The U.S.
National Toxicology Program is now running an animal study of its own,
exposing rats and mice to low-dose radiation. Results are expected in 2016.
The research above describes some
lab and animal studies that looked at how cell-phone radiation might cause
cancer or affect the body in other ways. But we also reviewed studies that
investigated whether cell phones increased brain-cancer risk in humans. We focused on five large population studies,
plus follow-ups to those studies, that investigated that question. Together the
studies included more than a million people worldwide, comparing cell-phone
users with nonusers.
Though some findings were
reassuring, others do raise concerns. Specifically, three of the studies—one
from Sweden, another from France, and a third that combined data from 13
countries—suggest a connection between heavy cell-phone use and gliomas, tumors
that are usually cancerous and often deadly. One of those studies also hinted
at a link between cell phones and acoustic neuromas (noncancerous tumors), and
two studies hinted at meningiomas, a relatively common but usually not deadly
brain tumor.
Though those findings are
worrisome, none of the studies can prove a connection between cell phones and
brain cancer, for several reasons. For one thing, cell-phone use in certain
studies was self-reported, so it may not be accurate. In addition, the findings might be influenced by the fact that
the study subjects owned cell phones that were in some cases manufactured two
decades ago. The way we use cell phones and the networks they’re operated on
have also changed since then. Last, cancer can develop slowly over decades, yet
the studies have analyzed data over only about a five- to 20-year span.
Perhaps our best protection is
that more people today use phones to text instead of talk, and headphones and
earbuds are growing in popularity. On the other hand, it’s also true that
we use cell phones much more than we used to, so our overall exposure may be
greater.
No, Consumer Reports does not
think that’s necessary. But we do have some concerns.
“The evidence so far doesn’t prove
that cell phones cause cancer, and we definitely need more and better
research,” says Michael Hansen, Ph.D., a senior scientist at Consumer Reports.
“But we feel that the research does raise enough questions that taking some
common-sense precautions when using your cell phone can make sense.”
Specifically, CR recommends these steps:
·
Try to keep the phone away from your head and body. That is
particularly important when the cellular signal is weak—when your phone has
only one bar, for example—because phones may increase their power then to
compensate.
·
Text or video call when possible.
·
When speaking, use the speaker phone on your device or a hands-free headset.
·
Don’t stow your phone in your pants or shirt pocket.
Instead, carry it in a bag
or use a belt clip.
• The Federal Communications
Commission’s cell-phone radiation test is based on the devices’ possible effect
on large adults, though research suggests that children’s thinner skulls mean
they may absorb more radiation.
• Consumer Reports agrees with
concerns raised by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Government
Accountability Office about the tests, and thinks that new tests should be developed
that take into account the potential vulnerability of children.
• We think that cell-phone
manufacturers should prominently display advice on steps that cell-phone users
can take to reduce exposure to cell-phone radiation.
This article also appeared in the November
2015 issue of Consumer Reports magazine.
**************************************************************************************************
https://www.consumerreports.org/cro/smartphones/cell-phone-radiation As the debate over cell-phone radiation
heats up, consumers deserve answers to whether there’s a cancer connection Last updated: September 28, 2015
D oes
radiation from cell phones cause brain cancer—or doesn’t it?
Researchers investigating that
question have gone back and forth over the years, a game of scientific pingpong
that has divided the medical community and cell-phone users into two camps: those
who think we should stop worrying so much about cell-phone radiation, and
others who think that there’s enough evidence to warrant some cautionary
advice.
Most Americans fall squarely on
the “don’t worry” side. In a recent nationally representative Consumer Reports
survey of 1,000 adults, only 5 percent said they were very concerned about the
radiation from cell phones, and less than half took steps to limit their
exposure to it.
Many respected scientists join
them. “We found no evidence of an increased risk of brain tumors or any other
form of cancer” from cell-phone radiation, says John Boice Jr., Sc.D.,
president of the National Council on Radiation Protection & Measurements
and a professor of medicine at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in
Nashville, Tenn. “The worry should instead be in talking or texting
with your cell phone while driving.”
The U.S. government doesn’t seem very troubled, either. The Food and Drug Administration says on its website that
research generally doesn’t link cell phones to any health problem. And although
the Federal Communications Commission requires manufacturers to include
information in user manuals about cell-phone handling, that’s often buried deep
in the fine print.
But not everyone is unconcerned.
In May 2015, a group of 190
independent scientists from 39 countries, who in total have written more
than 2,000 papers on the topic, called on the United Nations, the World Health
Organization, and national governments to develop stricter controls on
cell-phone radiation. They point to growing research—as well as the
classification of cell-phone radiation as a possible carcinogen in 2011 by the
International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of the WHO—suggesting that
the low levels of radiation from cell phones could have potentially
cancer-causing effects. “I think the
overall evidence that wireless radiation might cause adverse health effects is
now strong enough that it’s almost unjustifiable for government agencies and
scientists not to be alerting the public to the potential hazards,” says David
O. Carpenter, M.D., director of the Institute for Health and the Environment at
the University at Albany in New York & one of the authors of the recent
letter to the U.N. & WHO.
Some countries have taken steps to
protect users, at least when it comes to children. For example, France, Russia,
the U.K., and Zambia have either banned ads that promote phones’ sale to or use
by children, or issued cautions for use by children. The city council of Berkeley, Calif., has also acted. In May
2015, it approved a “Right to Know” law that requires electronics retailers to
notify consumers about the proper handling of cell phones. CTIA-The Wireless
Association, a trade group, is now trying to block that law from going into
effect, as it successfully did after San Francisco passed its own Right to Know
law five years ago.
Of course, scientific seesawing
like that doesn’t provide a lot of clarity or confidence for the 90 percent of
American adults and roughly 80 percent of teens who report having a cell phone.
So how concerned should you be about cell-phone radiation? Consumer Reports’
health and safety experts conducted a thorough review of the research and offer
some guidance.
Your phone sends radiofrequency,
or RF, waves from its antenna to nearby cell towers, and receives RF waves to
its antenna from cell towers when you make a call or text or use data. The
frequency of a cell phone’s RF waves falls between those emitted by FM radios
and those from microwave
ovens, all of which are considered “non-ionizing” forms of radiation. That
means that—unlike radiation from a nuclear explosion, a CT
scan, or a standard X-ray—the radiation from your phone does not carry
enough energy to directly break or alter your DNA, which is one way that cancer
can occur. (FM radios and microwaves don’t raise alarms, in part because they
aren’t held close to your head when in use and because microwave ovens have
shielding that offers protection.)
At high power levels, RF waves can
heat up water molecules (which is how microwave ovens work). Scientists used to
focus their concerns on the possibility that such heating of human tissue,
which is mostly water, might damage cells. In fact, the FCC’s test of
cell-phone emissions—which was set in 1996 and which all phones must pass
before being allowed on the market—is based on that effect. But most experts now aren’t concerned about
that possible tissue heating caused by RF waves. Instead, what’s worrying some
scientists are newer lab studies suggesting that exposure to cell-phone
radiation can have biological effects without raising temperature. In 2011, researchers at the National
Institutes of Health showed that low-level radiation from an activated cell
phone held close to a human head could change the way certain brain cells
functioned, even without raising body temperature. The study did not prove that
the effect on brain cells was dangerous, only that radiation from cell phones
could have a direct effect on human tissue.
RF waves from cell phones have
also been shown to produce “stress” proteins in human cells, according to
research from Martin Blank, Ph.D., a special lecturer in the department of
physiology and cellular biophysics at Columbia University and another signer of
the recent letter to the WHO and U.N. “These proteins are used for protection,”
Blank says. “The cell is saying that RF is bad for me and it has to do something
about it.”
And just this year, a German study
found that RF waves promoted the growth of brain tumors in mice, again at
radiation levels supposedly too low to raise body temperature. The U.S.
National Toxicology Program is now running an animal study of its own,
exposing rats and mice to low-dose radiation. Results are expected in 2016.
The research above describes some
lab and animal studies that looked at how cell-phone radiation might cause
cancer or affect the body in other ways. But we also reviewed studies that
investigated whether cell phones increased brain-cancer risk in humans. We focused on five large population studies,
plus follow-ups to those studies, that investigated that question. Together the
studies included more than a million people worldwide, comparing cell-phone
users with nonusers.
Though some findings were
reassuring, others do raise concerns. Specifically, three of the studies—one
from Sweden, another from France, and a third that combined data from 13
countries—suggest a connection between heavy cell-phone use and gliomas, tumors
that are usually cancerous and often deadly. One of those studies also hinted
at a link between cell phones and acoustic neuromas (noncancerous tumors), and
two studies hinted at meningiomas, a relatively common but usually not deadly
brain tumor.
Though those findings are
worrisome, none of the studies can prove a connection between cell phones and
brain cancer, for several reasons. For one thing, cell-phone use in certain
studies was self-reported, so it may not be accurate. In addition, the findings might be influenced by the fact that
the study subjects owned cell phones that were in some cases manufactured two
decades ago. The way we use cell phones and the networks they’re operated on
have also changed since then. Last, cancer can develop slowly over decades, yet
the studies have analyzed data over only about a five- to 20-year span.
Perhaps our best protection is
that more people today use phones to text instead of talk, and headphones and
earbuds are growing in popularity. On the other hand, it’s also true that
we use cell phones much more than we used to, so our overall exposure may be
greater.
No, Consumer Reports does not
think that’s necessary. But we do have some concerns.
“The evidence so far doesn’t prove
that cell phones cause cancer, and we definitely need more and better
research,” says Michael Hansen, Ph.D., a senior scientist at Consumer Reports.
“But we feel that the research does raise enough questions that taking some
common-sense precautions when using your cell phone can make sense.”
Specifically, CR recommends these steps:
·
Try to keep the phone away from your head and body. That is
particularly important when the cellular signal is weak—when your phone has
only one bar, for example—because phones may increase their power then to
compensate.
·
Text or video call when possible.
·
When speaking, use the speaker phone on your device or a hands-free headset.
·
Don’t stow your phone in your pants or shirt pocket.
Instead, carry it in a bag
or use a belt clip.
• The Federal Communications
Commission’s cell-phone radiation test is based on the devices’ possible effect
on large adults, though research suggests that children’s thinner skulls mean
they may absorb more radiation.
• Consumer Reports agrees with
concerns raised by the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Government
Accountability Office about the tests, and thinks that new tests should be developed
that take into account the potential vulnerability of children.
• We think that cell-phone
manufacturers should prominently display advice on steps that cell-phone users
can take to reduce exposure to cell-phone radiation.
This article also appeared in the November
2015 issue of Consumer Reports magazine.
**************************************************************************************************