Tuesday, April 23, 2019

Pregnancy & Wireless Radiation Risks


Maternal Cell Phone Use During Pregnancy Increased Preterm Births

Tsarna E, Reedijk M, Birks LE, Guxens M, Ballester F, Ha M, Jiménez-Zabala A, Kheifets L, Lertxundi A, Lim HR, Olsen J, Safont LG, Sudan M, Cardis E, Vrijheid M, Vrijkotte T, Huss A, Vermeulen R. Maternal Cell Phone Use During Pregnancy, Pregnancy Duration And Fetal Growth In Four Birth Cohorts. Am J Epidemiol. 2019 Apr 17. pii: kwz092. doi: 10.1093/aje/kwz092.

Abstract

Previous studies evaluating potential effects of prenatal exposure to radiofrequency fields from cell phones on birth outcomes are inconsistent. We explored if maternal cell phone use was associated with pregnancy duration and fetal growth. 

We used information from 55,507 pregnant women and their children from Denmark (1996-2002; DNBC), the Netherlands (2003-2004; ABCD), Spain (2003-2008; INMA) and Korea (2006-2011; MOCEH). Based on self-reported number of cell phone calls per day, exposure was grouped as none, low (reference level), intermediate, and high. We examined pregnancy duration (gestational age at birth, preterm/postterm birth), fetal growth (birth weight ratio, small/large for gestational age), and birth weight, low and high birth weight, and meta-analyzed cohort specific estimates. 

The intermediate exposure group had higher risk of giving birth at lower gestational age (Hazard Ratio=1.04, 95% CI 1.01, 1.07), and exposure-response relationships were found for shorter pregnancy duration (P<0.001) and preterm birth (P=0.003). We observed no association with fetal growth or birth weight. In conclusion, maternal cell phone use during pregnancy may be associated with shorter pregnancy duration and increased risk for preterm birth. 

Results should be interpreted with caution, as they may reflect stress during pregnancy or other residual confounding, rather than direct effect of cell phone exposure.


Excerpts


Exposure to RF-EMF [radio frequency electromagnetic fields] during pregnancy could affect the growth and development of the fetus and the pregnancy duration either due to direct radiation of the fetus and the placenta, or indirectly as a result of altered maternal physiology ... 

... During calling and texting abdominal exposure is low and modeling studies estimate that exposure levels of the human fetus are very low (9–12), although an experimental study on humans has shown that abdominal RF-EMF exposure may affect the placenta function (13). In addition, an association between RF-EMF exposure and thyroid dysfunction has been indicated in animal studies (14,15)....

... A cohort study from Turkey (N=500) retrospectively assessed cell phone use and reported shorter pregnancy duration and increased risk for preterm birth (16). In a cohort study from Iran (N=1,200), no association with birth weight was found (17). In a much larger sample from Norway (N=100,231), no association was found between cell phone use and low birth weight, preterm birth, or small for gestational age (SGA) (18)....

The mothers from DNBC and ABCD reported their frequency of cell phone calls during pregnancy 7 years postnatally. In INMA and MOCEH, similar questionnaires were given to the mothers during pregnancy. To be consistent with previous analyses within these cohorts (29), we classified exposure in four categories (none, low, intermediate, high), based on available information regarding daily frequency of cell phone calls during pregnancy (Table 2)....

Table 2 footnote: In DNBC, ABCD, and INMA cohorts, none exposure corresponds to no calls per day, low exposure to 0-1 calls per day, intermediate exposure to 2-3 calls per day, and high exposure to 4 or more calls per day. In MOCEH cohort, none exposure corresponds to no calls per day, low exposure to 0-2 calls per day, intermediate exposure to 3-5 calls per day, and high exposure to 6 or more calls per day.

... the OR [odds ratio] for preterm birth gained statistical significance in the highly exposed group within the cohorts with prospective exposure assessment (OR=2.03, 95% CI 1.22, 3.39) (Web Tables 8 and 10). In the analysis with binary exposure, we observed an increased risk of giving birth at lower gestational age (HR=1.04, 95% CI 1.02, 1.07), and increased odds for preterm birth (OR=1.16, 95% CI 1.05, 1.29) for the mothers that used their cell phone more often during pregnancy (Web Tables 8 and 11). The estimates for all the other outcomes were not different from unity (Web Table 11).

In our study, we observed an association of maternal cell phone use during pregnancy with pregnancy duration, but not with fetal growth. Since fetal exposure is very low during cell phone calls (9–12), for the interpretation of these results we considered the potential effect of RF-EMF on maternal head and neck structures, as well as indirect pathways related to the use of cell phones rather than the radiation per se. Animal studies have suggested that RF-EMF exposure may result in minor thyroid gland dysfunction (14,15). Additionally, higher preconception thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) levels and subclinical hypothyroidism  during pregnancy have been associated with higher risk for miscarriage and preterm birth (46–49). Thus, the increased risk for giving birth preterm among heavier users of cell phones that we observed could be mediated by mild thyroid dysfunction. However, the association of RF-EMF exposure from cell phone use with thyroid function is not established, and large-scale epidemiological studies on the topic are lacking. Increased oxidative stress has been also considered (50). However, it is not clear whether the elevation of radical oxygen species resulting from local RF-EMF exposure is of such an extent in humans that it could trigger systematic responses affecting the birth outcomes. Causal pathways involving local radiation of parts of the human body other than maternal head and neck structures were not considered, as this exposure would not be reflected in the number of cell phone calls per day....

The exposure variable was based only on the number of cell phone calls per day; duration of calling was not taken into account, as it was available only in MOCEH. Furthermore, the number of cell phone calls per day during pregnancy was self-reported in all cohorts, and was validated only in MOCEH (59). Thus, misclassification of exposure should have attenuated the observed association, under our assumption that misclassification was predominantly non-differential (60–62). We expect that misclassification was much larger in the older cohorts (DNBC and ABCD), as the number of cell phone calls per day was reported seven years postnatal. Therefore, the estimates in DNBC and ABCD cohorts should be more biased towards the null in comparison to INMA and MOCEH cohorts....

In conclusion, in our study more frequent maternal cell phone use during pregnancy was associated with shorter pregnancy duration, resulting in increased risk for preterm birth. No association with fetal growth and birth weight was observed. Study results make strong effects unlikely and should be interpreted with caution, as they may reflect an effect of stress during pregnancy or other residual confounding, rather than a direct effect of RF-EMF exposure.

My note: See Thyroid Cancer and Mobile Phone Use for studies that examine the effects of cell phone use on the thyroid gland.

--

Prenatal maternal cell phone use linked to lower child cognition at 5 years of age: 3 birth cohorts
Sudan M, Birks LE, Aurrekoetxea JJ, Ferrero A, Gallastegi M, Guxens M, Ha M, Lim H, Olsen J, González-Safont L, Vrijheid M, Kheifets L. Maternal cell phone use during pregnancy and child cognition at age 5 years in 3 birth cohorts.Environ Int. 2018 Nov;120:155-162. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2018.07.043.
Highlights

• Prenatal maternal cell phone use may be related to child cognition.
• Cognition scores are slightly lower in relation to higher frequency use, although imprecise.
• The causal mechanisms are unknown at this time.
• The association is likely affected by social and behavioral factors.
Abstract

BACKGROUND: There have been few studies of children's cognitive development in relation to mothers' cell phone use, and most were limited to outcomes at age 3 years or younger. We examined the relationship between maternal cell phone use during pregnancy and cognitive performance in 5-year old children.

METHODS: This study included data from 3 birth cohorts: the Danish National Birth Cohort (DNBC) (n = 1209), Spanish Environment and Childhood Project (INMA) (n = 1383), and Korean Mothers and Children's Environment Health Study (MOCEH) (n = 497). All cohorts collected information about maternal cell phone use during pregnancy and cognitive performance in children at age 5. We performed linear regression to compute mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) in children's general, verbal, and non-verbal cognition scores comparing frequency of maternal prenatal cell phone use with adjustments for numerous potential confounding factors. Models were computed separately for each cohort and using pooled data in meta-analysis.

RESULTS: No associations were detected between frequency of prenatal cell phone use and children's cognition scores. Scores tended to be lower in the highest frequency of use category; MD (95% CI) in general cognition scores were 0.78 (-0.76, 2.33) for none, 0.11 (-0.81, 1.03) for medium, and -0.41 (-1.54, 0.73) for high compared to low frequency of use. This pattern was seen across all cognitive dimensions, but the results were imprecise overall.

CONCLUSION: We observed patterns of lower mean cognition scores among children in relation to high frequency maternal prenatal cell phone use. The causal nature and mechanism of this relationship remain unknown.
Excerpt
In this investigation of maternal cell phone use during pregnancy and cognition in children, we observed a pattern of slightly lower mean cognition scores among children at age 5 years in relation to high frequency maternal prenatal cell phone use in pooled data from three different birth cohorts. Patterns were consistent across cognitive dimensions, but the results were imprecise. We cannot conclude that our results reflect an effect of RF from cell phones, nor do our results indicate that maternal cell phone use directly influences child cognition as we still lack a known mechanism for how cell phone exposure may impact cognitive function. Although the magnitude of the mean differences in cognition scores that we observed were slight, and 1- or 2-point differences in scores are unlikely to have a considerable impact on individuals, there may be considerable costs to society associated with a negative shift of population IQ, especially if it is due to a very common exposure (Trasande et al., 2005). Thus, with the ubiquity of cell phone use among parents and children alike, it is clearly important to continue investigations into the possible health and cognitive effects of this exposure, with more studies examining associations related to frequency and duration of cell phone use and additional specific exposure parameters.
--
Neurodevelopment for first 3 years following prenatal mobile phone use 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 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: Apr 23, 2019)


miscarriage: http://bit.ly/1Iwye5z
neurodevelopment (interaction w/ lead exposure): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28511138
preterm birth: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23905441
preterm birth: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30995291
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
low birth weight: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30243215 (NTP study)
neurodevelopment: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28458069
neurodevelopment: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29397508
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


Physicians for Safe Technology
https://mdsafetech.org/baby-safe/

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/12026867


Cell 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 

Wednesday, April 17, 2019

Effects of Wireless Radiation on Birds and Other Wildlife

Letter to the National Park Service from the Environmental Health Trust

This thirteen page letter to the National Park Service from the Environmental Health Trust, dated April 10, 2019, summarizes the scientific basis for major health and environmental concerns about a proposal to install wireless telecom facilities in Grand Teton National Park.

The letter summarizes research on harm to the environment and wildlife from wireless radiation exposure. Furthermore, it addresses the following topics: (1) research on harm to humans; (2) rapid increase in wireless radiation exposure; (3) inadequacy of the Federal Communications Commission's exposure limits to protect humans; (4) greater susceptibility of children; (5) recent appeals from hundreds of experts to reduce exposure limits; and (6) other cell tower safety hazards. 

This well-documented letter (81 references) can be downloaded from the following link:



July 18, 2016

A Briefing Memo by Dr. Albert Manville

Albert M. Manville, II, Ph.D. A Briefing Memorandum: What We Know, Can Infer, and Don’t Yet Know about Impacts from Thermal and Non-thermal Non-ionizing Radiation to Birds and Other Wildlife — for Public Release. July 14, 2016.


In this memo, Dr. Manville reviews the scientific literature that examines the impacts on wildlife from exposure to radio frequency radiation. 

He observes that although the FCC has standards to protect humans from the heating  (i.e., thermal) effects of wireless radiation exposure from cellular and broadcast towers, no standards exist to protect wildlife from thermal or non-thermal effects:

“The radiation effects on wildlife need to be addressed by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Department of Commerce, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and other governmental entities.”

Dr. Manville concludes with the following statement:

“In summary, we need to better understand … how to address these growing and poorly understood radiation impacts to migratory birds, bees, bats, and myriad other wildlife. At present, given industry and agency intransigence … massive amounts of money being spent to prevent addressing impacts from non-thermal radiation — not unlike the battles over tobacco and smoking — and a lack of significant, dedicated and reliable funding to advance independent field studies, … we are left with few options. Currently, other than to proceed using the precautionary approach and keep emissions as low as reasonably achievable, we are at loggerheads in advancing meaningful guidelines, policies and regulations that address non-thermal effects....”

Dr. Manville recommends that the U.S. adopt the following recommendations because federally-protected wildlife species are currently in danger from RFR exposure:

“We desperately need to conduct field research on thermal and non-thermal radiation impacts to wild migratory birds and other wildlife here in North America, similar to studies conducted in Europe….”

“Studies need to be designed to better tease out and understand causality of thermal and non-thermal impacts from radiation on migratory birds…. efforts need to be made to begin developing exposure guidelines for migratory birds and other wildlife …”

“To minimize deleterious radiation exposures, these guidelines should include use of avoidance measures such as those developed by the electric utility industry for bird collision and electrocution avoidance …”

“Studies need to be conducted on the use of “faux” branches (i.e., metal arms that mimic pine or fir branches) on cell and/or FM towers intended to disguise the towers as trees, but provide nesting and roosting opportunities for migratory birds including Bald Eagles, which will almost certainly be impacted both by thermal and non-thermal radiation effects.”

“Agencies tasked with the protection, management, and research on migratory birds and other wildlife … need to develop radiation policies that avoid or minimize impacts to migratory birds and other trust wildlife species.”

“As Levitt and Lai (2010) concluded, we do not actually need to know whether RFR effects are thermal or non-thermal to set exposure guidelines. Most scientists consider non-thermal effects as well established, even though the implications are not fully understood.”

“Given the rapidly growing database of peer-reviewed, published scientific studies (e.g., http://www.saferemr.com, School of Public Health, University of California, Berkeley), it is time that FCC considers thermal and non-thermal effects from EMR in their tower permitting, and incorporates changes into their rulemaking regarding ‘effects of communication towers on migratory birds.’”


Dr. Albert Manville II is an adjunct faculty member at Johns Hopkins University. He served as a senior wildlife biologist with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service from 1997 to 2014.  He chaired the Communication Tower Working Group, partnering with the communications industry, federal and state agencies, researchers, and non-profit organizations. He testified more than 40 times before Congress and other governmental bodies and published more 170 papers. For more information, see http://advanced.jhu.edu/about-us/faculty/albert-manville/.

Dr. Manville’s memo is available at http://bit.ly/Manvillewildlife.