Sunday, May 28, 2017

Cell Phone and Wireless Technology Safety Tips



These safety tips can be downloaded at http://bit.ly/EMRsafetytips3.

California Department of Public Health


In March, 2017, before the judge could finalize her ruling in a lawsuit we filed under the Public Records Act, the California Department of Public Health released an unofficial cell phone safety document, "Cellphones and Health," dated April, 2014. The document was originally written in 2009 but never released to the public. More information is available on my web site.

Other Safety Tips

American Academy of Pediatrics. "Cell Phone Radiation & Children’s Health: What Parents Need to Know." http://bit.ly/AAPrecs

Athens Medical Association. "16 Rules to Reduce Wireless Radiation Exposure." http://bit.ly/2pOt2HG

Baby Safe Project. "What You Need to Know about Wireless Radiation and Your Baby."
http://bit.ly/babysafetips

Canadians for Safe Technology. "Wireless Safety Tips. http://bit.ly/C4STtips

Connecticut Department of Public Health. "Cell Phones: Questions and Answers about Safety." http://bit.ly/cellphoneFAQsConn

Consumer Reports. "Cell Phone Radiation Warnings." http://bit.ly/CRwarnings

German Federal Office for Radiation Protection. Smartphones and tablets--tips to reduce radiation exposure. http://bit.ly/GFRPtips

New Jersey Education Association. "Minimize Health Risks from Electronic Devices." NJEA Review. Sept 2016. http://bit.ly/NJEAschool


Vienna Medical Association. "Mobile Phone Information." http://bit.ly/viennasafetytips




Wednesday, May 17, 2017

Pregnancy & Wireless Radiation Risks

Grassroots Environmental Edu Wireless Radiation / Doctors Caution Pregnant Women About Wireless Radiation Health Risks (PRNewsFoto/Grassroots Environmental Educati)



Neurodevelopment for the first three years following prenatal mobile phone use, radio frequency radiation and lead exposure

Choi K, Ha M, Ha H, Park H, Kim Y, Hong Y, et al. Neurodevelopment for the first three years following prenatal mobile phone use, radio frequency radiation and lead exposure. Environmental Research, 156:810-817, July 2017.

Highlights

• RFR exposure was measured by mobile phone use questionnaire and 24-h personal exposure meter among pregnant women.
• Child neurodevelopment was assessed by trained examiners at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months of age.
• Associations were not observed between prenatal exposure to RFR and child neurodevelopment during the first three years.
• A potential combined effect of prenatal exposure to lead and mobile phone use was suggested.
Abstract

Background Studies examining prenatal exposure to mobile phone use and its effect on child neurodevelopment show different results, according to child's developmental stages.

Objectives To examine neurodevelopment in children up to 36 months of age, following prenatal mobile phone use and radiofrequency radiation (RFR) exposure, in relation to prenatal lead exposure.

Methods We analyzed 1198 mother-child pairs from a prospective cohort study (the Mothers and Children's Environmental Health Study). Questionnaires were provided to pregnant women at ≤20 weeks of gestation to assess mobile phone call frequency and duration. A personal exposure meter (PEM) was used to measure RFR exposure for 24 h in 210 pregnant women. Maternal blood lead level (BLL) was measured during pregnancy. Child neurodevelopment was assessed using the Korean version of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development-Revised at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months of age. Logistic regression analysis applied to groups classified by trajectory analysis showing neurodevelopmental patterns over time.

Results  The psychomotor development index (PDI) and the mental development index (MDI) at 6, 12, 24, and 36 months of age were not significantly associated with maternal mobile phone use during pregnancy. However, among children exposed to high maternal BLL in utero, there was a significantly increased risk of having a low PDI up to 36 months of age, in relation to an increasing average calling time (p-trend=0.008). There was also a risk of having decreasing MDI up to 36 months of age, in relation to an increasing average calling time or frequency during pregnancy (p-trend=0.05 and 0.007 for time and frequency, respectively). There was no significant association between child neurodevelopment and prenatal RFR exposure measured by PEM in all subjects or in groups stratified by maternal BLL during pregnancy.

Conclusions  We found no association between prenatal exposure to RFR and child neurodevelopment during the first three years of life; however, a potential combined effect of prenatal exposure to lead and mobile phone use was suggested.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28511138

--

Maternal cell phone use during pregnancy and child behavioral problems 
in five birth cohorts

Birks L, Guxens M, Papadopoulou E, Alexander, Ballester F, Estarlich M et al. Maternal cell phone use during pregnancy and child behavioral problems in five birth cohorts. Environment International. Published online April 7, 2017.

"This is the largest study to date to evaluate these associations and to show mostly consistent results across cohorts with retrospectively and prospectively assessed maternal cell phone use."  

Highlights


• Largest study to date to use prenatal cell phone use data collected prospectively.
• High prenatal cell phone use linked to hyperactivity/inattention problems in child.
• No prenatal cell phone use linked to low risk for any behavioral problems in child.
• Analysis adjusted for many confounders, but associations cannot be judged causal.
• Future research should adjust for parenting style, maternal hyperactivity, and more.

Abstract 

Introduction  Previous studies have reported associations between prenatal cell phone use and child behavioral problems, but findings have been inconsistent and based on retrospective assessment of cell phone use. This study aimed to assess this association in a multi-national analysis, using data from three cohorts with prospective data on prenatal cell phone use, together with previously published data from two cohorts with retrospectively collected cell phone use data.

Methods  We used individual participant data from 83,884 mother-child pairs in the five cohorts from Denmark (1996–2002), Korea (2006–2011), the Netherlands (2003–2004), Norway (2004–2008), and Spain (2003–2008). We categorized cell phone use into none, low, medium, and high, based on frequency of calls during pregnancy reported by the mothers. Child behavioral problems (reported by mothers using the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire or Child Behavior Checklist) were classified in the borderline/clinical and clinical ranges using validated cut-offs in children aged 5–7 years. Cohort specific risk estimates were meta-analyzed.

Results Overall, 38.8% of mothers, mostly from the Danish cohort, reported no cell phone use during pregnancy and these mothers were less likely to have a child with overall behavioral, hyperactivity/inattention or emotional problems. Evidence for a trend of increasing risk of child behavioral problems through the maternal cell phone use categories was observed for hyperactivity/inattention problems (OR for problems in the clinical range: 1.11, 95% CI 1.01, 1.22; 1.28, 95% CI 1.12, 1.48, among children of medium and high users, respectively). This association was fairly consistent across cohorts and between cohorts with retrospectively and prospectively collected cell phone use data.

Conclusions  Maternal cell phone use during pregnancy may be associated with an increased risk for behavioral problems, particularly hyperactivity/inattention problems, in the offspring. The interpretation of these results is unclear as uncontrolled confounding may influence both maternal cell phone use and child behavioral problems.


--


A review on Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and the reproductive system

Asghari A, Khaki AA, Rajabzadeh A, Khaki A. A review on Electromagnetic fields (EMFs) and the reproductive system. Electron Physician. 2016 Jul 25;8(7):2655-62. doi: 10.19082/2655. eCollection 2016.

Abstract

Environmental factors, such as electromagnetic waves, induce biological and genetic effects. One of the most important physiological systems involved with electromagnetic fields (EMFs) is the genital system. This paper reviews the effects of EMFs on human reproductive organs, female animals, fetus development and the importance of two types of natural antioxidants, i.e., vitamin E and fennel. The studies presented in this review referred to the effects of different exposures to EMFs on the reproductive system, and we tried to show the role of natural antioxidants in reducingthe effects of the exposures. Many studies have been done on the effects of ionizing and non-ionizing electromagnetic waves on the cell line of spermatogenesis, sexual hormones, and the structure of the testes. Also, about the hormonal cycle, folliculogenesis and female infertility related to EMF have been given more consideration. In particular, attention is directed to pregnant women due to the importance of their fetuses. However, in addition to the studies conducted on animals, further epidemiological research should be conducted.

 Conclusions

Many studies have shown that electromagnetic fields can have destructive effects on sex hormones, gonadal function, fetal development, and pregnancy. So people must be aware of the negative effects of EMFs. Although the impact of the waves varied at different frequencies, it is better to stay as far away as possible from their origin because of the risks associated with exposures to these waves. In addition, people can use natural antioxidants to help reduce the effects of these waves.

Open Access Paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5014506/



Recent studies that found adverse effects on offspring 
from prenatal exposure to wireless radiation
(Updated: May 17, 2017)


miscarriage: http://bit.ly/1Iwye5z
neurodevelopmental (lead interaction): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28511138
preterm birth: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23905441
spontaneous abortion: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25937931
spontaneous abortion: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25877464

liver: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26084117
liver: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27427155
neurodevelopment: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28458069
testes: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24095929


Feb 9, 2016


French cell phone manufacturer warns pregnant women and teens
about cell phone radiation

The French phone manufacturer WIKO states in their manual for the Pulp 4G smartphone (pp. 21-22):


"The maximum SAR value tested on this device when used in its normal position at the ear is 0.114 W/kg and 0.387 W/kg when used close to the body, at a minimum distance of 1.5 cm. It complies with the rules on exposure to radio frequencies when used in its normal position at the ear or at a minimum distance of 1.5 cm from the body. The device uses a high-quality network connection for transmitting files, data and messages. On occasion, the transmission of files or messages may be delayed until the connection is available. When this is the case, be sure to follow the instructions regarding the separation distance for establishing the transmission. If you use a case, belt-clip or holder for carrying the phone, it must not contain any metal and should be kept at a minimum distance of 1.5 cm from your body.

*The SAR limit for mobile devices is 2.0 watts / kilogram (W/kg) averaged over ten grams of body tissue. SAR values may vary according to the standards for reporting information that are in force in different countries.  [My note: This standard is used in France and many other countries. In the U.S. the limit is 1.6 watts / kilogram averaged over one gram of body tissue.]

Tips for Reducing Exposure Levels

We recommend that you use your phone in good reception conditions in order to reduce the amount of radiation received. It is advisable to limit the amount of time you use the phone in underground car parks and when travelling by car or train, etc.

Reception conditions are indicated by the bars that are displayed on your phone: the more bars there are, the better the reception quality.

We recommend that you use the hands-free kit to reduce exposure to radiation.

To reduce the adverse effects of prolonged radiation exposure, we advise teenagers to hold the phone away from their lower abdomen, and that pregnant women hold the phone at a distance from their stomach."

Copyright © 2015 WIKO


http://data.wikomobile.com/documents/fichiers/f404d5a6f9dbd799184f05010cac9cd2.pdf#page=21



July 1, 2015

Doctors Caution Pregnant Women About Wireless Radiation Health Risks

Over one hundred medical doctors and scientific experts from around the world agree: the risks of exposure to RF radiation from wireless devices for pregnant women and their unborn children are real, and women have a Right To Know.

NEW YORK, July 1, 2015 /PRNewswire/ -- More than one hundred medical doctors, scientists and public health experts from around the world have signed a Joint Statement advising pregnant women to take simple precautions to protect themselves and their babies from wireless radiation. The Statement is part of a national right-to-know campaign called the BabySafe Project created by two non-profit organizations to inform pregnant women about the issue.

"The wireless world may be convenient, but it's not without risks," says Patricia Wood, Executive Director of Grassroots Environmental Education and co-creator of the BabySafe Project. "When more than one hundred of the world's leading medical doctors and researchers on wireless radiation say we have enough evidence for women to take protective action, we think women should know about it."

The project is based on recent scientific studies suggesting that radiation from wireless devices is capable of interfering with the tiny electrical impulses that help synapses connect in a developing brain. Researchers at Yale University have been able to demonstrate that the brains of laboratory mice exposed to pulsed radio frequency radiation in utero were wired differently from those of the mice who were not exposed, resulting in behavioral differences that include poorer memory and symptoms that resemble ADHD in children.

The Yale study builds on more than twenty years of research and hundreds of independent, peer-reviewed studies showing that exposure to radiation from wireless devices can have non-thermal, biological effects on humans, including DNA strand breaks and other impacts not previously known. 

The authors of many of those studies are among those calling for precautions.

"The fetus is perhaps the most vulnerable to these types of insults, when the brain is just forming, when all of the organ systems are just beginning to develop," says Dr. Hugh Taylor, Chief of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Yale-New Haven Hospital, Professor of Women's Health at Yale University, and lead author of the study. "There's essentially no downside to being cautious and protecting your baby. Why not do it?"

SOURCE Grassroots Environmental Education

http://bit.ly/1GMY4Nk

June 3, 2014

The following joint statement on pregnancy and wireless radiation is part of the Baby Safe Project, a new public awareness initiative designed to inform women about the links between pregnancy and wireless radiation.  The statement was signed by 44 physicians and scientists from 13 nations, and by 13 educators who have studied wireless radiation health effects.

The project is a joint initiative of two environmental health non-profit organizations: Grassroots Environmental Education and Environmental Health Trust.  

A video of the press conference that launched the Baby Safe Project and supplementary resources are available at http://bit.ly/1kqJUur/.  


Dr. Hugh Taylor from the Yale University School of Medicine, Dr. Devra Davis from the Environmental Health Trust, and Dr. Maya Shetreat-Klein, a pediatric neurologist who treats autistic children, made presentations at the press conference and answered questions from journalists.

Dr. Taylor discussed his peer-reviewed, experimental research on pregnant mice that were exposed to cell phone radiation. In his study prenatal exposure to cell phone radiation resulted in decreased memory and increased hyperactivity in the offspring. A dose-response relationship was observed between the amount of fetal exposure to cell phone radiation and altered brain activity in the offspring. Dr. Taylor recommends that pregnant women limit their exposure to cell phone radiation.

Dr. Davis discussed the history of tobacco and asbestos in the U.S. to argue for a precautionary approach to reducing risks from "possibly carcinogenic" environmental exposures like wireless radiation (as determined by the World Health Organization). She summarized peer-reviewed, experimental research on prenatal exposure to microwave radiation conducted by Dr. Nesrin Seyhan which found DNA damage in mice and by Dr. Suleyman Kaplan which found damage to brain cells in the hippocampus as well as adverse behavioral effects in the offspring.  Dr. Davis provided recommendations on how to reduce exposure to cell phone and Wi-Fi radiation.

Dr. Shetreat-Klein discussed peer-reviewed observational research that found prenatal exposure to wireless radiation associated with adverse behavioral changes in children. She advises pregnant women to keep cell phones away from their bodies.

In response to audience questions, Dr. Davis discussed the need for research funding. She mentioned that the Environmental Health Trust and Dr. Joel Moskowitz at Berkeley are calling for an annual, one dollar fee per cell phone to be devoted to training and research on wireless radiation and health.  Dr. Taylor reported that his patients appreciate receiving precautionary information regarding the need to reduce exposure to wireless radiation during pregnancy. Dr. Davis discussed recommendations from the U.S. General Accountability Office and the American Academy of Pediatrics that call on the FCC to test cell phones in a realistic manner. Finally, Dr. Davis discussed the potential product liability faced by the cell phone industry due to adverse health impacts, an issue which she addressed in her book on cell phone radiation, Disconnect.

Joint Statement on Pregnancy and Wireless Radiation

We join together as physicians, scientists and educators to express our concern about the risk that wireless radiation poses to pregnancy and to urge pregnant women to limit their exposures.

We recognize that the exquisitely delicate systems that direct the development of human life are vulnerable to environmental insults, and that even minute exposures during critical windows of development may have serious and life-long consequences.

We know that the scientific process demands a thorough and exhaustive examination of the possible impact of wireless radiation on health; however, we believe substantial evidence of risk, rather than absolute proof of harm, must be the trigger for action to protect public health.

We call on the research community to conduct more studies to identify the mechanisms by which a fetus could be affected by wireless radiation exposures. We call on our elected leaders to support such research and to advance policies and regulations that limit exposures for pregnant women. We call on industry to implement and explore technologies and designs that will reduce radiation exposures until such research is carried out.

We affirm our role as health and science professionals to inform the public about the potential dangers associated with early-life exposures to wireless radiation, and invite all professionals engaged in obstetric, pediatric, and environmental health advocacy to join us in our quest to ensure the safety and health of future generations.

Signatories  
(Affiliations listed for identification purposes only)

Mikko Ahonen, PhD,
 University of Tampere, Finland

Jennifer Armstrong, MD, Ottawa Environmental Health
Martin Blank, PhD, Associate Professor of Physiology and Cellular Biophysics, Columbia University
David Brown, PhD, Public Health Toxicologist, Environment and Human Health, Inc.
Lois Brustman, MD, Maternal-Fetal Medicine Specialist, St. Luke's - Roosevelt Hospital Center
Sheila Bushkin-Bedient, MD, Concerned Health Professionals of New York
David Carpenter, MD, School of Public Health, University at Albany
Richard Clapp, DSc, MPH, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Health, Boston University
Devra Davis, PhD, MPH, Visiting Scholar, University of California at Berkeley
Alvaro Augusto de Salles, PhD, Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
Larysa Dyrszka, MD, Pediatrician, New York
Dr. Elizabeth Evans, MA, (Cantab) MBBS (London), DRCOG,  UK
Beatrice Golomb, MD, PhD, Professor of Medicine, UC San Diego School of Medicine
Oleg Gregoriev, DrSc, PhD, Chairman, Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation
Magda Havas, PhD,  Associate Professor of Environmental & Resource Studies, Trent University, Ontario, Canada
Gunnar Heuser, MD, University of California at Los Angeles (retired)
Olle Johansson, PhD, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Sweden
Cynthia Johnson-McKay, MD, Columbia University
Süleyman Kaplan, PhD, Ondokuz Mayıs University, Samsun, Turkey
Henry Lai, PhD,  Bioelectromagnetics Research Laboratory, University of Washington
Michael Lerner, PhD, President, Commonweal
Luana Licata, PhD, University of Rome Tor Vergata
Don Maisch, PhD, www.emfacts.com, Australia
Asish Mehta, MD, MCh, DNB, Neurological Surgeon Mumbai, India
Anthony Miller, MD, School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Canada
Joel Moskowitz, PhD, School of Public Health, University of California at Berkeley
Hildor Palsdottir, PhD, School of Medicine, New York University
Janet Perlman, MD, MPH, University of California at Berkeley
Rachel Naomi Remen, MD, School of Medicine, University of California at San Francisco
Lisa Ridgway, MD, Pediatrician
Aviva Romm, MD, Family Physician, Boston
Annie SascoMD, DrPH, University of Bordeaux, France
Stephen Sinatra, MD, FACC, CNS, CBT
Maya Shetreat-Klein, MD, Pediatric Neurologist, Bronx, New York
Colin L. Soskolne, PhD, University of Canberra, Australia
Ken Spaeth, MD, MPH, Hofstra University, North Shore--LIJ Health System
Yael Stein, MD, Hebrew University – Hadassah Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
Anne Steinemann, PhD, University of California at San Diego
Hugh Taylor, MD, Chief of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Yale-New Haven Hospital
Leonardo Trasande, MD,  Institute of Environmental Medicine, Langone Medical Center, New York University
Lucy Waletzky, MD, Psychiatrist, Sleepy Hollow, New York
John Wargo, PhD, Professor of Risk Analysis, Environmental Policy, and Political Science, Yale University
John West, MD, Surgeon, RadNet
Jingduan Yang, MD, Myrna Brind Center of Integrative Medicine at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia

Wafaa Aborashed,
 Bay Area Healthy 880 Communities
Nancy Alderman, Environment and Human Health, Inc.
Mary Beth Brangan & James Heddle, Ecological Options Network (EON)
Giorgio Cinciripini, Italian Network of No-Electrosmog NGOs
Frank Clegg, Canadians For Safe Technology
Desiree Jaworski, Center for Safer Wireless
B. Blake Levitt, former New York Times contributor, medical/science journalist, author
Ellen Marks, California Brain Tumor Association
L. Lloyd Morgan,  Environmental Health Trust
Janet Newton, EMRadiation Institute
Camilla Rees, MBA, ElectromagneticHealth.org
Cindy Sage, MA, Sage Associates; Co-Editor, BioInitiative 2012 Report

--

For more information about wireless radiation reproductive health effects and effects on children

The Baby Safe Project. "What You Need to Know about Wireless Radiation and Your Baby"
http://bit.ly/babysafetips

The Baby Safe Project
http://bit.ly/1rDKjiq

Environmental Health Trust
http://bit.ly/1kjkaRP


Electromagnetic Radiation Safety
http://www.saferemr.com/2015/09/effect-of-mobile-phones-on-sperm.html


Related news releases from Electromagnetic Radiation Safety

Cell Phone Use and Prenatal Exposure to Cell Phone Radiation May Cause Headaches in Children
http://www.prlog.org/12269207

Children's Cell Phone Use May Increase Their Risk of ADHD
http://www.prlog.org/12110138


MOBI-KIDS: Childhood Brain Tumor Risk & Mobile Phone Use Study

Cell Phone Radiation, Pregnancy, and Sperm
http://www.prlog.org/12026867Cell Phone Radiation Damages Sperm
http://www.prlog.org/11911996

Magnetic Field Exposure Before Birth May Contribute to Childhood Obesity
http://www.prlog.org/1193609

Belgium Adopts New Regulations to Promote Cell Phone Radiation Safety

French Health Agency Recommends Children and Vulnerable Groups Reduce Cell Phone Radiation Exposure
http://www.prlog.org/12226630 

Monday, May 8, 2017

Long-term cell phone use increases brain tumor risk

According to a recent CDC survey, for the first time more American households have cell phones than land lines. Meanwhile the evidence keeps accruing that long term cell phone use appears to increase brain cancer risk.

In the U.S. the lifetime risk of developing glioma, the most common brain cancer, is between 1 in 200 and 1 in 250. If glioma risk doubled after 20 years of cell phone use (as the research cited below suggests), the lifetime risk would be between 1 in 100 and 1 in 125.


Three reviews of the research on cell phone use and brain tumor risk have been published in peer-reviewed journals in 2017. Each of these studies reports a statistically significant relationship between cell phone use of ten or more years and brain tumor risk especially on the side of the head where the cell phone was predominantly placed during phone calls (i.e., ipsilateral use).
---

Evaluation of Mobile Phone and Cordless Phone Use and Glioma Risk Using the
Bradford Hill Viewpoints from 1965 on Association or Causation

"The nine Bradford Hill viewpoints on association or causation regarding RF radiation and glioma risk seem to be fulfilled in this review.

Based on that we conclude that glioma is caused by RF radiation. Revision of current guidelines for exposure to RF radiation is needed."
This review paper by Michael Carlberg and Lennart Hardell evaluates the strength of the scientific evidence to determine whether there is a causal relationship between a risk factor and an associated disease -- namely, wireless (cellphone and cordless) phone use and glioma, the most common brain cancer. The paper applies the nine perspectives developed by Sir Austin Bradford Hill to the peer-reviewed data pertaining to this health risk.

The authors allege that official bodies that have reviewed the evidence on mobile phone use and health risks have been dominated by individuals with conflicts of interest. Moreover, these reviewers have relied upon data from methodologically unsound studies, including the Danish Cohort Study and a UK cohort study, to dismiss the evidence from case-control studies.

Drawing upon several lines of research, the authors present a compelling argument for their conclusion that glioma is caused by radio frequency (RF) radiation. The paper recommends that the current guidelines for RF exposure must be revised to protect the population from exposure to low-intensity, non-thermal levels of radio frequency radiation.


Carlberg M, Hardell L. Evaluation of Mobile Phone and Cordless Phone Use and Glioma Risk Using the Bradford Hill Viewpoints from 1965 on Association or Causation. Biomed Research International. 2017;2017:9218486. doi: 10.1155/2017/9218486. Epub 2017 Mar 16.

Abstract

Objective. Bradford Hill's viewpoints from 1965 on association or causation were used on glioma risk and use of mobile or cordless phones. 

Methods. All nine viewpoints were evaluated based on epidemiology and laboratory studies. 

Results. Strength: meta-analysis of case-control studies gave odds ratio (OR) = 1.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.31-2.76 with highest cumulative exposure. 

Consistency: the risk increased with latency, meta-analysis gave in the 10+ years' latency group OR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.20-2.19. 

Specificity: increased risk for glioma was in the temporal lobe. Using meningioma cases as comparison group still increased the risk. 

Temporality: highest risk was in the 20+ years' latency group, OR = 2.01, 95% CI =1.41-2.88, for wireless phones.

Biological gradient: cumulative use of wireless phones increased the risk. 

Plausibility: animal studies showed an increased incidence of glioma and malignant schwannoma in rats exposed to radiofrequency (RF) radiation. There is increased production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) from RF radiation.

Coherence: there is a change in the natural history of glioma and increasing incidence.

Experiment: antioxidants reduced ROS production from RF radiation. 

Analogy: there is an increased risk in subjects exposed to extremely low-frequency electromagnetic fields. 

Conclusion. RF radiation should be regarded as a human carcinogen causing glioma.

Abstract for open access paper: http://bit.ly/2p1ovBU

---


Mobile phone use and risk for intracranial tumors and salivary gland tumors--A meta-analysis

This study conducted by scientists at the Nofer Institute of Occupational Medicine, in Łódź, Poland, examined the research on mobile phone use and the risk of brain tumors and salivary gland tumors. The study found a significant relationship between mobile phone use and the risk of an intracranial tumor on the same side of the head where the phone was placed during calls. The study also reported a significant relationship between mobile phone use of 10 or more years and intracranial tumor risk.



Bortkiewicz A, Gadzicka E, Szymczak W. Mobile phone use and risk for intracranial tumors and salivary gland tumors - A meta-analysis. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2017 Feb 21;30(1):27-43. doi: 10.13075/ijomeh.1896.00802. Epub 2017 Feb 13. 

Abstract

Results of epidemiological studies on the association between use of mobile phone and brain cancer are ambiguous, as well as the results of 5 meta-analysis studies published to date. Since the last meta-analysis (2009), new case-control studies have been published, which theoretically could affect the conclusions on this relationship. Therefore, we decided to perform a new meta-analysis. We conducted a systematic review of multiple electronic data bases for relevant publications. The inclusion criteria were: original papers, case-control studies, published till the end of March 2014, measures of association (point estimates as odds ratio and confidence interval of the effect measured), data on individual exposure. Twenty four studies (26 846 cases, 50 013 controls) were included into the meta-analysis. A significantly higher risk of an intracranial tumor (all types) was noted for the period of mobile phone use over 10 years (odds ratio (OR) = 1.324, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.028-1.704), and for the ipsilateral location (OR = 1.249, 95% CI: 1.022-1.526). The results support the hypothesis that long-term use of mobile phone increases risk of intracranial tumors, especially in the case of ipsilateral exposure. Further studies are needed to confirm this relationship.

Excerpts

The results obtained in the random effects model indicated that there was a significant relationship between mobile phone use for longer than 10 years and the risk of intracranial tumors (OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.07–1.98).

Because OR is significantly greater than 1 (OR = 1.25, 95% CI: 1.04–1.52), we can conclude that there is a significant relationship between the time from the first regular use of mobile phone of 10 years or more and the risk of intracranial tumors.

Since OR is greater than 1 (OR = 1.29, 95% CI: 1.06–1.57), there is a significant relationship between ipsilateral use of mobile phone and the risk of intracranial tumor.

We found a significant relationship between:
–– all intracranial tumors and all phone types; ipsilateral exposure;
–– all intracranial tumors and all phone types, when the time of mobile phone use was not shorter than 10 years;
–– all intracranial tumors and all phone types when the time from the first regular use of mobile phone was 10 years or more.

We are not able to compare our results with reference to different kinds of intracranial tumors (glioma, meningioma, acoustic neuroma) in relation to time of using mobile phones. A reliable analysis was not feasible because, in our opinion, the number of original works is too small. 

Conclusions
Our results support the hypothesis that long-term (over 10 years) use of mobile phones increases the risk of intracranial tumors, especially in the case of ipsilateral exposure. The same conclusions are valid for the work by Davis et al. (2013) [45], who reviewed papers on the association between the use of wireless (mobile and cordless) phones and intracranial tumors. Those authors stress that the risk of tumors in people who have used the phone for periods longer than 10 years is significantly elevated. In people who had started using the phone on a regular basis before they were 20 years old, the risk of ipsilateral glioma was found to be fourfold higher. Hardell et al. (2013) [46] stress the significance of the “lifetime exposure dose.” For an exposure of ≥ 1640 h, the risk of ipsilateral acoustic neuroma is 2.55 (95% CI: 1.5–4.4). 

These results are in concordance with the conclusion of the expert panel for the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), that cell phones are possibly carcinogenic (Group 2B) [47]. More research is needed to confirm that electromagnetic fields emitted by mobile phones are carcinogenic to humans.

Open Access Paper: http://bit.ly/2m8Amwt

---

Mobile phone use and risk of brain tumors: a systematic review 

The results of a review and meta-analysis of the research on cell phone use and brain tumor risk found that long-term or heavy cell phone use was associated with a statistically significant increased risk of brain tumors.

Overall, the study found that long-term or heavy cell phone use was associated with a 33% increased risk of a brain tumor.

The risk of a brain tumor for long-term cell phone use varied depending upon the quality of the research study with higher quality studies tending to yield greater risk estimates 
(see Table below). For the five highest quality studies, the estimates ranged from a 21% increased risk to 2.6 times the risk of a non-cellphone user. For five lower quality studies. the estimates ranged from a 47% reduced risk to 5.1 times the risk of a non-cellphone user.

Based upon the results of this review, the authors recommend that precautionary measures be taken to reduce the adverse effects of cell phone use.

In this study, long-term cell phone use was defined as ten or more years. The highest quality studies scored 7 or 8 on a 10-point scale, and the lower quality studies scored 5 or 6.

This paper was published in the peer-reviewed medical journal, Neurological Sciences

The first author of this paper, Dr. Manya Prasad is in the Department of Community Medicine, Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Rohtak. India. His colleagues are in the Department of Neurology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences in New Delhi, India.



Prasad M, Kathuria P, Nair P, Kumar A, Prasad K. Mobile phone use and risk of brain tumours: a systematic review of association between study quality, source of funding, and research outcomes. Neurological Sciences. 2017 Feb 17. doi: 10.1007/s10072-017-2850-8. 

Abstract

Mobile phones emit electromagnetic radiations that are classified as possibly carcinogenic to humans. Evidence for increased risk for brain tumours accumulated in parallel by epidemiologic investigations remains controversial. This paper aims to investigate whether methodological quality of studies and source of funding can explain the variation in results.

PubMed and Cochrane CENTRAL searches were conducted from 1966 to December 2016, which was supplemented with relevant articles identified in the references. Twenty-two case control studies were included for systematic review.

Meta-analysis of 14 case-control studies showed practically no increase in risk of brain tumour [OR 1.03 (95% CI 0.92-1.14)]. However, for mobile phone use of 10 years or longer (or 1,640 or more hours in lifetime), the overall result of the meta-analysis showed a significant 1.33 times increase in risk. The summary estimate of government funded as well as phone industry funded studies showed 1.07 times increase in odds which was not significant, while mixed funded studies did not show any increase in risk of brain tumour. Meta-regression analysis indicated that the association was significantly associated with methodological study quality (p < 0.019, 95% CI 0.009-0.09). Relationship between source of funding and log OR for each study was not statistically significant (p < 0.32, 95% CI 0.036-0.010).

We found evidence linking mobile phone use and risk of brain tumours especially in long-term users (10 or more years). Studies with higher quality showed a trend towards high risk of brain tumour, while lower quality showed a trend towards lower risk/protection.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28213724

Excerpts

In the 22 case–control studies, a total of 48,452 participants (17,321 patient cases and 31,131 controls) were identified, with the mean age of 46.65 years (range 18–90 years). Data for ipsilateral use and temporal lobe location could not be retrieved from the papers. However, data for long-term use of mobile phones (10 or more years) were extracted from 12 studies out of 22 studies (Tables 1, 2).

Data from 14 case control studies were included in the meta-analysis. We identified a total of 30,421 participants (12,426 cases and 19,334 controls). In Fig. 2, the study with quality sum of 8 shows that there is 1.64 times increase in odds of having brain tumour with mobile phone use. In the hierarchical meta-analysis of studies with progressively lower quality scores of 7, 6, and 5, the odds ratio progressively decreased to 1.08, 0.98, and 0.81, respectively. Therefore, the overall result [OR 1.03 (95% CI 0.92–1.14)] shows a statistically insignificant increase in odds of risk of brain tumour.

In Fig. 3, the study with quality sum of eight shows that there is 2.58 times increase in odds of having brain tumour with mobile phone use of more than 10 years duration. In the meta-analysis, studies with progressively lower quality score of 7 and 6 show a progressively lower risk of brain tumour with odds ratio 1.44 and 1.13, respectively. However, the overall result of the meta-analysis shows a significant 1.33 times increase in odds of having risk of brain tumours with mobile phone use.

Stratified meta-analysis according to sources of funding shows a consistent increase in risk of brain tumour with mobile phone use of more than 10 years. While summary estimate of government funded studies shows 1.64 times increase in odds (Supplementary Figure IV), mixed funded studies show 1.05 times increase in odds of risk of brain tumours, but the results were not statistically significant (Supplementary Figure V). The data for more than 10 years of use were not available for phone industry funded studies.


The meta-analysis of case–control studies found that there is a significant positive correlation between study quality and risk of brain tumour associated with use of mobile phones. Higher quality studies show a statistically significant association between mobile phone use and risk of brain tumour, but adding poor quality studies leads to loss of significance. We found that Government funded studies were generally of higher methodological quality than phone industry funded or mixed funded.

However, one qualitatively similar finding in both government funded as well as mixed funded studies is that long-term use (10 or more years or 1640 or more hours of lifetime cellphone use) is associated with increased risk of brain tumour.

Conclusion

In our review of the literature and meta-analysis of case–control studies, we found evidence linking mobile phone use and risk of brain tumours especially in long-term users (greater than 10 years). We also found a significantly positive correlation between study quality and outcome in the form of risk of brain tumour associated with use of mobile phones. Higher quality studies show a statistically significant association between mobile phone use and risk of brain tumour. Even the source of funding was found to affect the quality of results produced by the studies. As mobile phone use certainly continues, our findings are pertinent to warrant application of precautionary measures aimed at reducing its adverse effects. Furthermore, well-designed studies embedded with prospective cohorts are required to provide a higher level of evidence.


--

More information about cell phone use and brain tumor risk

Brain Tumor Rates Are Rising in the US: The Role of Cellphone & Cordless Phone Use
The Incidence of Meningioma, a Non-Malignant Brain Tumor, is Increasing in the U.S.
Why do many scientists believe mobile phone use increases cancer risk?
MOBI-KIDS: Childhood Brain Tumor Risk & Mobile Phone Use Study

Wall Street Journal asks "Should Cellphones Have Warning Labels?"
WHO Monograph on Cancer Risk from Mobile Phone Use Released
Key Cell Phone Radiation Research Studies