Sunday, February 25, 2024

Tips to Reduce Your Wireless Radiation Exposure

To learn why it is important to reduce your exposure to wireless radiation see my Welcome to EMR Safety page for an overview of the health risks including presentations, radio interviews, and podcasts

This page contains safety tips from various organizations on how to reduce your exposure to wireless radiation from cell phones, cordless phones, laptops, tablets, Wi-Fi routers, and other wireless technology. 

To download the following one-page handout click on the link:  https://bit.ly/wirelesstipsheet




---




---

Environmental Working Group, November 2022

EWG’s big picture recommendations for wireless devices

  • Default to airplane mode.
  • Increase distance from devices.
  • Turn off when not in use.
  • Used wired devices if possible.

Children are almost constantly exposed to wireless radiation, starting as early as the first weeks of life. As they get older, that exposure grows every day, thanks to the widespread use of smartphones, laptops and other wireless devices in the classroom and at home.

Wireless devices radiate radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Research has raised concerns about the health risks of exposure to this radiation, including harm to the nervous and reproductive systems, and higher risk of cancer. Cell phone radiation was classified a “possible carcinogen” in 2011 by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, part of the World Health Organization. The agency said human epidemiological studies showed a link between higher risk of a type of malignant brain cancer and cell phone use.

At home

Parents and caregivers can exert more control over their kids’ wireless radiation exposure at home than at school, and have more latitude to try new ways of using devices.

Getting started

To begin, inventory your home’s electronic devices. Consider smart speakers, cordless phones and mouses, gaming consoles, cell phones, wireless security systems and electric alarm clocks, among other types of technology. Even things you might not think emit electromagnetic radiofrequency radiation, like Fitbits and other wearable fitness devices, are a source of wireless radiation exposure and best for young kids to avoid.

Increase distance

The first, easiest-to-implement option is to increase the distance between your child and wireless devices in the home. The more distance, the less exposure.

Wired headphones or the speaker mode on a cell phone can put distance between the device and kids’ bodies. They should carry the device in a backpack or bag, not a pocket.

When no one is actively using the device, make sure it’s in airplane mode. Otherwise, the device will keep seeking the “signal” – it will continue trying to communicate with nearby cell towers, producing unnecessary radiation.

Another simple but important fix: Locate routers and cordless phone base stations – the worst radiation offenders – away from where your kids sleep, study and play. See if you can lower your Wi-Fi router’s output. It may be set to “High” as a default, which could create more intense wireless radiation output than anyone in your household needs.

Choose wired

To reduce radiation exposures significantly, many experts recommend using wired devices whenever possible. Make replacing wireless headphones with wired your first step then, over time, choose auxiliary devices that plug in or are battery-powered, including keyboards, mouses and microphones. Wireless earbuds also emit radiofrequency radiation, so limit the use of such devices, especially for children and youth.

Here are some other ways to reduce exposure to electromagnetic radiation from wireless.

The big picture

  • Aside from the obvious devices (phones, tablets, computers, game consoles), think twice about wireless digital baby monitors and other wireless or virtual devices. If used, such devices and appliances should be kept away from bedrooms and other areas where children sleep.
  • Shut off all wireless devices, including your router, at night and when they’re not in use.
  • Consult this checklist for a low-electromagnetic field, or EMF, set-up published by Environmental Health Trust if you or a family member spend a lot of time at a computer.

At night

  • Strongly encourage your child not to sleep near their wireless gadgets. If this isn’t possible – and let’s face it, with teenagers, you may not succeed at wresting the phone or tablet away – try to convince them to place it away from their head instead of under a pillow.
  • Even better, keep electronics out of bedrooms as much as possible, or at least away from beds. This includes TV screens and audio speakers.
  • Use an old-fashioned electric or battery alarm clock that doesn’t connect to Wi-Fi. And get one for your children if they claim to need their cell phone so they can get up in the morning.
  • Move beds away from utility meters or large appliances, which also emit radiation, even if they’re on the other side of a wall.

Studying, playing and communicating

  • Experts recommend starting a child’s cell phone use as late as practical, considering the family and educational context and needs of each child. The younger kids are, the more vulnerable their bodies are to potentially harmful effects of wireless radiation exposure.
  • Encourage your children to use a device’s speaker function or wired earbuds when they want to use their phone to talk.
  • Download movies and shows instead of streaming them, then watch in airplane mode. Even better, watch on a wired computer or screen.
  • Teach and encourage your children to use their laptop or tablet placed on a table or another hard surface, away from their bodies.
  • Get wired – consider getting cords and cables for your kids’ game console, and turning it off when your children finish playing.

Powering down

  • Put phones in airplane mode as much as possible when they are near children, with both Wi-Fi and Bluetooth turned off. If they (or you) want to put a phone in a pocket or backpack, turn it off first.
  • Also, power devices down when you’re in transit, like on a plane, train, bus or in a car.
  • Get to know when radiation emissions are highest – streaming video, traveling in a car, or when the signal is poor – and do what you can to help your child avoid these scenarios. (To see how strong or weak the signal is, check how many bars it has.)

At school

Parents and caregivers don’t have nearly as much control at school over how much their child is exposed to wireless radiation as they do at home. And with technology ever more prevalent in educational settings, chances are kids are close to a variety of devices all day.

Nearly half of U.S. schools report having a computer for every child, according to a Department of Education study. Another 37 percent have a computer for each child in some age groups. In some cases, kids may take the device home with them for long or short periods. The survey also said 70 percent of teachers use technology in the classroom.

It’s tough to shield your child from wireless radiation exposure entirely. But you can take steps to lower their exposure based on advice published by experts. Start by approaching school administrators with your concerns. Learn your school or district’s cell phone policy. If none exists, request that a committee be formed to develop a policy and plan trainings for teachers about safe technology use.

Here are a few ideas teachers can implement in the classroom or that schools and school districts can use. The gold standard: Whenever possible, use wired connections for laptops, tablets, interactive white boards, printers and other devices.

If a wired school network isn’t feasible:

  • Emphasize keeping devices off and turning them on only when in use – and issue frequent reminders.
  • Students’ personal electronic devices, like cell phones, should be turned off or in airplane mode during school.
  • Make sure the school policy on wireless device use is posted in classrooms.
  • Ask school districts to equip new facilities with wired technology.
  • Many experts recommend setting school Wi-Fi routers to the lowest possible level that still allows educational content access, as well as turning off routers when they’re not in use.

Wireless technology use during the pandemic

From the start of the coronavirus pandemic, wireless technology became the main path for accessing education and participating in virtual classrooms for kids and families in the U.S. and across the globe. In 2020, a survey found nearly half of 2- to 4-year-olds and about two in three kids ages 5 to 8 already owned their own mobile devices, a tablet or smartphone – and that was before the Covid-19-related school closures prompted desperate working parents nationwide to employ wireless devices as babysitters and educators.

That’s many kids with constant access to wireless devices – and also exposed to the health risks of wireless radiation. Parents have taken note of these potential harms. A European citizens group coalition in March called for simple steps to protect kids by swapping wireless for cables in places where children spend time and educating the public about the dangers of exposure.

Earlier this year, EWG together with more than 22,000 people petitioned federal regulators to establish stricter standards for kids’ exposure to wireless devices’ radiofrequency radiation.

For more information

To find additional resources, advocacy guidance, tip sheets and other useful suggestions, consult the websites of one of these organizations:

  • The Environmental Health Trust’s “Wi-Fi in Schools Toolkit” offers a wealth of resources, including fact sheets and tip sheets, background on the science of EMF exposure, and guidance for parents, teachers and schools. It also has more than a dozen downloadable and printable posters on exposure and sleep, children’s development, and the effects of EMF exposure on breast cancer risk and male reproductive health.
  • An Environmental Health in Nursing textbook downloadable chapter on EMF, courtesy of the Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments, contains useful information, like a detailed explanation of the health impacts of EMF exposure, advocate organizations’ tip sheets, and other valuable resources.
  • The American Academy of Pediatrics issued recommendations about EMF exposure.
  • The Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition offers a downloadable backgrounder for students and educators on “Cell Phones, Wireless and Your Health,” which includes suggested activities to use in the classroom and as homework. It includes a list of additional websites you may choose to consult.

---

Safety Recommendations for Children Who Use Digital Technologies to Study at Home

Scientific Research Institute of Hygiene and Children's Health in the Russian Ministry of Health 
and the Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (RusCNIRP)
March 25, 2020 

(The recommendations were translated from Russian using Google's translation tool and then edited for easier reading on the Electromagnetic Radiation Safety website.) 

The following recommendations for distance learning at home are intended for children (up to 18 years of age) and their parents and grandparents and anyone who helps children study at home using digital technologies.

1. Children under 18 years of age who study at home should primarily use personal computers and laptops connected to the Internet via a wired network. When using a wireless network, the distance from the Wi-Fi router to the student should be at least 5 meters (16 feet).

2. The keyboard of the computer or laptop must be disinfected with an antiseptic every day before starting work. The monitor also needs to be treated with an antiseptic agent.

3. Before using the keyboard wash the hands of both the child and the adult who helps him or her.

4. To reduce the risk of visual impairment and musculoskeletal system disorders, provide a child working at a computer or laptop with a convenient workplace (the height of the table and chair should correspond to the height of the child), to exclude the illumination of the monitor screen.

5. The main light source at the child's workplace should be located on the side of the screen (not behind the screen and not from the back of the person working with the screen). The brightness of the source should approximately correspond to the brightness of the screen.


6. The use of tablets for distance learning at home is acceptable for adolescents over 15 years old. Before using the tablet, you need to wash your hands and wipe the screen with a disinfectant (wet towel). The location of the Wi-Fi point should be at least 5 meters (16 feet) from the student’s workplace. The tablet is placed on the table on a stand at an angle of 30 degrees, the distance from the screen to the pupil’s eyes is at least 50 centimeters (20 inches). Do not use a laptop or tablet on your lap, in your hands, lying down and the like.
30 degree angle
         
7. For all age groups: completely avoid use of smartphones for educational purposes (reading, searching for information)

8. For all age groups: for reading or completing tasks, mainly use ordinary books and notebooks.

9. Children under 6 years old must not use any computer equipment for educational purposes at home.

10. Children 6 to 12 years of age should minimize the use of computer equipment for educational purposes at home. If it is necessary to use it, the total duration of all types of on-screen activities should not exceed 2 hours per day (including watching TV). The class schedule should be based on a one-to-three schedule for 6 to 8 year olds (for every 10 minutes of work 30 minutes of rest) and one-to-two schedule for ages over 8 and up to 12 years (for every 10 minutes of work - 20 minutes of rest).

11. For children 12 to 18 years of age, the following mode of computer use is recommended: “one to two” for 12 to 15 year olds (for every 30 minutes of work - 60 minutes of rest) and “one to one” for children for 16 to 18 year olds (for every 45 minutes of work - 45 minutes of rest). 


The total duration of all types of screen activities for children 12 to 18 years of age, including watching TV, should not exceed 3.5–4 hours per day.

12. For the prevention of visual fatigue, perform gymnastics for the eyes during the break; for the prevention of general fatigue - a warm-up (tilts, body turns, squats, etc.)

13. If necessary to use headphones limit their continuous use: no more than an hour at a volume of not more than 60%.

14. Ventilate the room where the students study, before the start of classes (at least 15 minutes) and after each hour of work.

15. Do not use tablets and smartphones for educational purposes outdoors (in the park, on the playground and similar places).


The above recommendations are based upon research from multicenter studies on children's health and safety while using digital educational technologies, materials from the Scientific Research Institute of Hygiene and Children's Health “NRCM of Children's Health,” and the Russian National Committee for Protection against Non-Ionizing Radiation, as well as recommendations from the World Health Organization and the best safety practices for children's digital educational environments.

--

California Department of Public Health


In December, 2017, the California Department of Public Health captured worldwide attention when it published an official cell phone safety document,"How to Reduce Exposure to Radiofrequency Energy from Cell Phones." The three-page document is available at http://bit.ly/CDPHguidance.

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.
To download 3-page document: http://bit.ly/CDPHguidance

More 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."
bit.ly/BabySafeEMR

City of Berkeley. Berkeley Cell Phone "Right to Know" Ordinance.

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

Electrosensitive Society. "How to reduce your exposure: Electromagnetic hygiene in 12 easy steps. http://bit.ly/ESsafetytips

Environmental Health Trust. "10 Tips to Reduce Cell Phone Radiation."  http://bit.ly/EHT10tips

Environmental Working Group. "EWG's Guide to Safer Cell Phone Use." http://bit.ly/EWGcellphone

German Federal Office for Radiation Protection. Recommendations from the BfS for making telephone calls on mobile communications. http://bit.ly/BfScalls

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

International Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields. "Safety Tips on Reducing Wireless Radiation Exposure." https://bit.ly/ICBE-safety-tips 

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

Physicians for Safe Technology. "Safety Tips for Wireless Devices." bit.ly/MDsafeTechTips

Prevent Cancer Now, "11 Ways to Use Your Cell Phone More Safely."  https://preventcancernow.ca/11-ways-to-use-your-cell-phone-safely/

Vienna Medical Association. "Mobile Phone Information." 




Saturday, February 3, 2024

Featured News Stories


  "In a shocking reversal, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences has quietly disclosed that it will stop studying the biological or environmental impacts of cell phone radiofrequency radiation." 

Louis Slesin. Paul Brodeur: The Original Microwave Pioneer. Microwave News, Oct 9, 2023.

  "Brodeur got the facts right. Electromagnetic radiation can do more than simple heating. This has been known—but denied—for decades. As for links to cancer, they have grown stronger over the years .... he was right about a cover-up. It continues today."

Peter Elkind. What to Know About Cellphone Radiation. ProPublica, Jan 4, 2023.
 
  ProPublica recently examined how the federal government, based on quarter-century-old standards, denies that cellphones pose any risks. This guide answers some of the most common questions people ask about cellphone radiation.     

Peter Elkind. How the FCC Shields Cellphone Companies From Safety Concerns. ProPublica, Nov 10, 2022.  

   A major exposé of the FCC's negligence and complicity with the telecom industry .... "The wireless industry is rolling out thousands of new transmitters amid a growing body of research that calls cellphone safety into question. Federal regulators say there’s nothing to worry about — even as they rely on standards established in 1996."

Ahmad El Hajj. Will 5G Kill Me? When Telecom Politics Become a Deadly SinInside Telecom (International Telecoms Business Magazine), May 4, 2022.

  "What is the safe exposure time to these radiations? What is the safe distance between a person and a transmitting antenna? What are safe transmission power levels? Why haven’t safety guidelines been updated for some time? Why are the opinions of some scientists been disregarded? Can telecom tower radiations clearly cause cancer or other devastating effects?"

Lyle Laver. Raise the RoofThe National Business Post, Mar 29, 2022.

  "It is great to have immediate access in our mobile world, but at what cost? Should we “raise the roof” on this issue and 'put it up to 11?' Certainly, that is what the WIA and the FCC are doing right now; and the longer we wait, the more we will see this infrastructure devalue our neighborhoods, homes and health. These electromagnetic fields will only grow in strength and frequency."

Barbara Koeppel. Federal Court Instructs FCC to Review Electromagnetic Radiation StandardsThe Washington Spectator, Mar 9, 2022.

  "For 25 years ... the Federal Communications Commission has refused to revise the regulations it set in 1996 that address what level of radiation from cell phones should be considered safe."

Anne Brice. Moskowitz: Cellphone radiation is harmful, but few want to believe it. Berkeley News, July 1, 2021.

  " there are strong parallels between what the telecom industry has done and what the tobacco industry has done, in terms of marketing and controlling messaging to the public."


  Oregon's public health agency issued a shoddy, biased report on the potential harm to 600,000 schoolkids from wireless devices in classrooms.

Dariusz Leszczynski. 5G is testing the limits of trust. Medium, Apr 13, 2021.

  "ICNIRP’s guidelines, in addition to being set to prevent only thermal effects, are also based only on short-term, acute exposures ... there is very little research on long-term chronic exposures... applying ICNIRP guidelines to long-term exposures is based on an assumption of safety and not on the scientific evidence."

Devra Davis. Why I'm challenging the FCC about antiquated safety standards for wireless devicesThe Washington Times, Feb 23, 2021.

  "In 1996, Congress decided the FCC should have the primary responsibility for protecting the public from radiation exposure even though it has no health expertise and typically sides with phone companies rather than citizens. That was a mistake..."

Katie Alvord. Is Wireless Technology an Environmental Health Risk? Society of Environmental Journalists. Jan 6, 2021.

  "Those concerned say thousands of studies conclude that RFR can hurt us at levels well below those microwave ovens used for cooking."

Barbara Koeppel. Wireless Hazards. The Washington Spectator, Dec 28, 2020.

   "If you think your cellphone is safe, have you considered why you believe that? Is it a fact or is it based on carefully crafted messages that you’ve read or heard?"

Joel Moskowitz. Regulators Steamroll Health Concerns as the Global Economy Embraces 5GThe Washington Spectator. 46(9):6, September 2020. ISSN 0887-428X.

  "The FCC, however, has been “short on science” for more than two decades...."
  "A new generation of superfast wireless internet is coming soon. But no one can say for sure if it’s safe."

Louis Slesin. The Lies Must Stop Disband ICNIRP: Facts Matter, Now More Than EverMicrowave News, Apr 9, 2020.

  "The public has been fed lies and half-truths about the health effects of RF/microwave radiation for as long as I have been involved, since the 1970s." 

International EMF Alliance. Misconception of 5G. Unpublished letter submitted to Scientific American, Nov 7, 2019.

  This letter rebuts David Robert Grimes' article that attacks, "We Have No Reason to Believe 5G is Safe." The Grimes article has been removed from the Scientific American website.

Louis Slesin. Will WHO Kick Its ICNIRP Habit? Non-Thermal Effects Hang in the Balance. Microwave News, Nov 4, 2019.

    After 8 years of work, the WHO is reopening its review of RF radiation health effects. This investigative report exposes ties between the WHO EMF Project, the ICNIRP, and the telecom industry.

Joel Moskowitz. We Have No Reason to Believe 5G is Safe. Scientific American, Oct 17, 2019.

   "we should support the recommendations of the 250 scientists and medical doctors who signed the 5G Appeal that calls for an immediate moratorium on the deployment of 5G and demand that our government fund the research needed to adopt biologically based exposure limits that protect our health and safety."

Simon Hill. Is cell phone radiation actually dangerous? We asked some experts. Digital Trends, Sep 25, 2019.

  "The ... standards that are in place, which haven’t changed since 1996, were set based on when animal behavior changed ... If we can’t draw conclusions about the NTP study, why is this earlier animal research still the basis of our safety limits?"
  The paper's year-long investigation found some of the most popular cell phones, including Apple iPhones, emit radiation that exceeds government (FCC) safety limits

Sam Roe. Testing cellphones for radiofrequency radiation: How we did it. Chicago Tribune, Aug 21, 2019. 

Joel Moskowitz. 5G Health RisksBBC Radio 5, May 30, 2019 (9 minute news segment).

  The deployment of 5G in the United Kingdom today has generated great concern among the public. This is a brief overview of the health risks from exposure to 5G millimeter waves.

Devra Davis. 5G: The Unreported Global Threat. Medium, May 18, 2019.

  Major mainstream newspapers commonly ignore the substantial body of science pinpointing wireless radiation and 5G hazards detailed in journalistic investigations.

Investigate Europe. Mobile phones and health: Is 5G being rolled out too fast? Computer Weekly, April, 2019.

  Countries are deploying 5G at breakneck speed to gain a competitive edge, but scientists have concerns about effects on public health and are calling for a precautionary approach.

Markham Heid. Are AirPods and Other Bluetooth Headphones Safe? Medium, Mar 7, 2019.

  Numerous scientific publications have shown that EMF affects living organisms at levels well below international and national guidelines including cancer, neurological disorders, and DNA damage.

Investigate Europe. The 5G mass experiment. Jan 13, 2019.

   In a series of news stories, a team of investigative journalists examines the risks of 5G deployment.
"
it could also harm your health. Europe's governments ignore the danger." 

Hiawatha Bray. Could your cellphone’s electromagnetic field make you sick? Boston Globe, Jan 17, 2019.

  The Massachusetts Department of Public Health may be withholding information about possible health risks posed by cellphones and other wireless technologies.

Ronald Melnick, Ph.D. There's a clear cell phone-cancer link, but FDA is downplaying itThe Hill, Nov 13, 2018.

  Dr. Melnick was the senior toxicologist who led the design of the National Toxicology Program cell phone radiation studies.

Joyce Nelson. 5G Corporate Grail: Smart cities/dumb people?  Watershed Sentinel, Nov 5, 2018.

  "There’s a lot of hype about 5G, the fifth-generation wireless technology that is being rolled out in various “5G test beds” in major cities ...But it’s hard to see why we should be excited."

Annelie Fitzgerald. Mobile Phone Cover-up? Gov’t advisory body disbanded – inaccurate and misleading conclusions remain. TruePublica (UK), Oct 17, 2018.

   UK disbanded advisory group on non-ionizing radiation (AGNIR) after group issued inaccurate assessment of wireless radiation science subject to conflicts of interest. Public Heath England still relies on AGNIR report.

Martin Röösli. Mobile phone radiation may affect memory performance in adolescents. Medical Xpress. July 20, 2018.

  Radio frequency radiation may have adverse effects on memory performance of specific brain regions exposed during mobile phone use.

  Current cellphone safety regulations are based on a premise that is now arguably false: that cellphone radiation can cause harm only by heating tissue.

Mark Hertsgaard and Mark Dowie. The inconvenient truth about cancer and mobile phones.The Guardian, July 14, 2018.

  We dismiss claims about mobiles being bad for our health – but is that because studies showing a link to cancer have been cast into doubt by the industry?

Reynard Loki. Our cellphone addiction is turning wireless tech into an invisible weapon that’s destroying wildlife. Salon, July 14, 2018.

  Electromagnetic radiation from Wi-Fi and cell towers poses a “credible risk” to birds, mammals, insects and plants

Lynne Peeples. Should cell phone providers warn customers of health risks? Berkeley says yesMcClatchy News Washington Bureau, July 11, 2018.

  Although the scientific community has not reached consensus, the California health department said research indicates long-term, extensive cellphone use may affect health.
  Complete version of the article. News websites published the McClatchy version.

Louis Slesin. "'Clear evidence' of cell phone cancer risk, say leading pathologists." Microwave News, April 9, 2018.

  Why the peer review panel and NTP interpreted the same animal data differently. 

Mark Hertsgaard and Mark Dowie. "How big wireless made us think that cell phones are safe: A special investigation." The Nation, March 29, 2018.

  The disinformation campaign—and massive radiation increase—behind the 5G rollout.

Timothy Schoechle. "Reinventing Wires: The Future of Landlines and Networks." National Institute for Science, Law & Public Policy. 2018.

   The U.S. should invest in hard-wired telecom infrastructure to support economic growth, bridge the digital divide & diminish risks to security, privacy, public health & the environment.


Thursday, February 1, 2024

The Incidence of Meningioma, a Non-Malignant Brain Tumor, is Increasing in the U.S.



In the U.S. nonmalignant meningioma, a non-malignant tumor on the outer covering of the brain, is the most common brain tumor.

Since the year 2000, the U.S. has experienced significant increases in the age-adjusted incidence rates of meningioma along with three other head and neck tumors. 

Whereas the size of the population in the U.S. increased 16% between 2000 and 2019, the number of cases reported in the National Cancer Institute's SEER 22 registry for this tumor increased 124%.  

The overall age-adjusted incidence rate for nonmalignant meningioma of the brain and nervous system significantly increased 70% in the U.S. from 2004 (6.46 per 100,000) to 2019 (11.01 per 100,000). From 2004 to 2008, the increase was 12.3% per year, and from 2008 to 2019, the increase was 2.1% per year.

Among youth less than 20 years of age the incidence of nonmalignant meningioma significantly increased by 2.8% per year from 2004 to 2019.

The increase in age-adjusted incidence rate for this tumor is likely attributable to the chronic effects of mobile phone use in addition to other factors including improvements in screening. The incidence of this tumor was not reported to the SEER registry prior to 2004.

The tumor incidence rate data are from the SEER 22 Registry which covers 48% of the total U.S. populationThe data were age-adjusted to the population in the year 2000 so observed differences over time are not affected by changes in the age composition of the population.



--

March 15, 2023

http://bit.ly/3Tjzxxx

March 15, 2023 (Updated March 18, 2023)

It is tricky trying to interpret the results of ecological studies (studies used to understand the relationship between outcome and exposure at a population level, where 'population' represents a group of individuals with a shared characteristic)

(1) it is difficult to control for confounding, 
(2) associations may be due to chance, and 
(3) population-level associations may not correspond to processes that occur at the individual-level (i.e., ecological fallacy). 

The risk factors underlying changes over time in tumor incidence in the population can be difficult to identify if there were changes in screening and diagnostic procedures or changes in reporting practices.

Moon (2023) recently reported that the age-standardized incidence rate of nonmalignant meningioma (D32) increased from 1999 to 2018 [Average Annual Percent Change =36.69% (95% CI = 33.53–39.85)] in South Korea. The rate increased from 2.08 per 100,000 in 2004 to 7.07 per 100,000 in 2018 (see Supplementary Material B).

Keeping the caveats mentioned above in mind about ecological studies, it is intriguing that Moon (2023) reported that the correlation of the age-standardized incidence rate of nonmalignant meningioma with the cell phone subscription rate ten years earlier in South Korea was very high (r = .92, 95% CI = .80 - .97). This result suggests that cell phone use in the population could be contributing to the development of nonmalignant tumors of the meninges, the tissue covering the outer portion of the brain, ten years later.

In the U.S., based on SEER 22 Areas tumor registry data, the age-standardized incidence rate of nonmalignant meningioma increased from 6.4 per 100,000 in 2004 (the first year this tumor was reported by SEER) to 10.1 per 100,000 in 2018 (see Figure above). 

Based upon my calculation, in the U.S. the correlation of age-standardized incidence rates of nonmalignant meningioma (from 2004-2018 in SEER 22) with cell phone subscription rates in the U.S. ten years earlier (from 1994-2008 as reported in Supplementary Material B in Moon, 2023) was also very high (r=.89, 95% CI =.70 - .96).

Case-control studies provide stronger evidence of this risk factor. Although not all case-control studies have found an association between heavy wireless phone use and meningioma, at least three studies reported significant associations:

In Sweden, Carlberg and Hardell (2015) found that heavy use of wireless phones (i.e., cell phones and cordless phones) was associated with greater risk of meningioma. Heavy cordless phone users (defined as more than 1,436 hours of lifetime use) had a 1.7-fold greater risk of meningioma (OR = 1.7; 95% CI = 1.3-2.2). The heaviest cordless phone users (defined as more than 3,358 hours of lifetime use) had a two-fold greater risk of meningioma (OR = 2.0; 95% CI = 1.4 - 2.8). The heaviest cell phone users had a 1.5-fold greater risk of meningioma (OR = 1.5, 95% CI = 0.99 - 2.1).

In France, Coureau et al. (2014) found a two and a half-fold greater risk of meningioma for heavy cell phone users (defined as 896 or more hours of lifetime use) (OR = 2.57; 95% CI = 1.02 to 6.44).

Using data from Australia, Canada, France, Israel and New Zealand, Cardis et al. (2011) found a two-fold greater risk of meningioma for heavy cell phone users (defined as 3,124 or more hours of lifetime use) (OR = 2.01; 95% CI = 1.03 to 2.93). 

In sum, use of wireless phones over a ten-year period, including cell phone and cordless phone use, may contribute to the development of nonmalignant meningioma in the U.S. as well as other countries.

See also:

April 20, 2015

The age-adjusted incidence rate for meningioma, the most common non-malignant brain tumor, increased from about 6.3 per 100,000 in 2004 to about 7.8 per 100,000 in 2009 before leveling off (through 2011). 

The annual percentage increase between 2004 and 2009 was 2.4% per year. The annual increase was significant for males and females, whites and blacks, and non-Hispanics. Although the incidence of these tumors increased for all age groups except 0-19, the increase was statistically significant only for 45-54 years of age and 65 and older. 

The case-control research that has examined the association between long-term use of mobile phones and risk of meningioma has yielded mixed results. Some studies have found a significant association whereas others have not.

---

Dolecek TA, Dressler EV, Thakkar JP, Liu M, Al-Qaisi A, Villano JL. Epidemiology of meningiomas post-Public Law 107-206: The Benign Brain Tumor Cancer Registries Amendment Act. Cancer. 2015 Apr 14. doi: 10.1002/cncr.29379. [Epub ahead of print]

Abstract


BACKGROUND: The current analysis follows the implementation of Public Law 107-260, the Benign Brain Tumor Cancer Registries Amendment Act, which mandated the collection of nonmalignant brain tumors.

METHODS: Meningiomas were selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program database for the years 2004 to 2011. Demographic and clinical characteristics, initial treatment patterns, and survival outcomes were evaluated using surveillance epidemiology statistical methods.

RESULTS: The average annual age-adjusted incidence rate per 100,000 population was 7.62 (95 % confidence interval [CI], 7.55-7.68) for all meningiomas, 7.18 (95% CI, 7.12-7.25) for benign meningiomas, 0.32 (95% CI, 0.31-0.33) for borderline malignant meningiomas, and 0.12 (95% CI, 0.11-0.12) for malignant meningiomas. The annual rates increased for benign and borderline malignant tumors but decreased for malignant tumors. The rates for women exceeded those for men, especially for those with benign meningiomas. Black race was associated with significantly higher rates as was advancing age. Greater than 80% of tumors were located in cerebral meninges. Diagnostic confirmation through pathology occurred for approximately 50% of benign tumors, 90% of borderline malignant tumors, and 80% of malignant tumors. No initial treatment was reported for greater than 60% of benign tumors, 29% of borderline malignant tumors, or 31% of malignant tumors. The 5-year relative survival estimates for benign tumors, borderline malignant tumors, and malignant tumors were 85.6% (95% confidence interval [CI], 85%-86.2%), 82.3% (95% CI, 79.3%-84.8%), and 66% (95% CI, 60.6%-70.9%), respectively. Predictors of poorer survival were advanced age, being male gender, black race, no initial treatment, and malignant tumor behavior.

CONCLUSIONS: The current analysis demonstrates that there is an increasing incidence.

Excerpts

Population-based studies of meningiomas have been limited because of the benign nature of the histology; and, before diagnosis year 2004, state central cancer registries were not required to collect nonmalignant cases. That changed with the passage of Public Law 107-260, the Benign Brain Tumor Cancer Registries Amendment Act.1 This law mandated the collection of benign and borderline malignant brain tumors beginning with diagnosis year 2004. Our analysis on this common but understudied tumor follows the implementation of this law ...

Meningiomas have the highest incidence rate among all primary brain and central nervous system (CNS) tumors. Nonmalignant meningioma is the most frequently reported histology, accounting for >33% of all primary brain and CNS tumors.

We evaluated population-based data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program 18 registries of the National Cancer Institute. The SEER Program is an authoritative source of cancer incidence and survival in the United States with registries that cover approximately 28% of the US population. Although Public Law 107-260 only applies to state-wide registries, SEER has voluntarily agreed to collect nonmalignant brain tumor data in accordance with the mandate.

In total, 51,065 new meningiomas occurred in the 18 SEER geographic areas during the period from 2004 to 2011. Of these tumors, 50,290 (>98%) were determined to be nonmalignant (benign or borderline malignant) and were collected under the mandate of Public Law 107-260. Greater than 95% of these tumors were benign, and the remaining tumors were classified as borderline malignancies. Only 775 malignant tumors were diagnosed during the 8 study years.

... Statistically significant increases in the annual AAIRs from 2004 to 2011 were apparent for benign and borderline malignant tumors, whereas AAIRs for malignant tumors significantly decreased....

... Statistically significant increases were observed from 2004 to 2009 for benign meningiomas (APC, 3.86; P<.05), with a leveling off and no significant change in AAIRs during 2009 to 2011. The pattern for borderline malignant meningiomas was similar, but the significant increase appeared from 2004 to 2008 (APC, 5.50; P<.05), with no significant change over the years from 2008 to 2011. No joinpoint was apparent for malignant meningiomas, but a significant linear decline (APC, 27.27; P<.05) was observed.
Rising risk over the study period very well may have been an artifact of increasingly accurate reporting associated with implementation of the law. The extent to which this contributed to the increased incidence is unknown. There is also a degree of ascertainment bias because of improving diagnostic techniques, because 50% of patients with benign tumors were registered based on imaging versus pathology, which is required for most other cancers ...

The piece-wise regression trend analyses suggest that benign meningioma rates stabilized at diagnosis year 2009 and had no significant change from 2009 to 2011. Reporting for the diagnosis years 2004 through 2009 may have been influenced by the many factors discussed above, and diagnosis years 2009 through 2011 actually may reflect accurate incidence estimates for meningiomas with more complete registration of nonmalignant tumors ...

Conclusions

The implementation of the Benign Brain Tumor Cancer Registries Amendment Act, Public Law 107-260, afforded an opportunity to gain a better understanding and new insights into nonmalignant brain tumors. This legislative contribution has distinctive relevance to patients with meningioma, because it is known as the most common CNS tumor in which the vast major of patients present with benign histologies. Our current analysis after the implementation of Public Law 107-260 in diagnosis year 2004 demonstrates increasing incidence rates of nonmalignant meningiomas that stabilized around 2009. This trend was undoubtedly because of learning curves associated with registration procedures put into practice to comply with the law. The period of rate stabilization likely reflects meningioma estimates that are closer to its true incidence with more precise behavior classifications in the SEER registries data. Our report, for which we used this improved, high-quality cancer registry data set on brain tumors, represents the most current population-based description of the demographic and clinical characteristics, initial treatment patterns, and survival outcomes for patients with nonmalignant and malignant meningiomas.