September 3, 2024
Today, many major news outlets are promoting a biased review of the literature commissioned by the World Health Organization (WHO)
which claims that cellphone use has no link to cancer.
In my professional opinion, the WHO selected scientists to conduct systematic literature reviews on the biologic and health risks of wireless radiation who had demonstrated their bias through prior publications by either not finding evidence of harm or dismissing any evidence they found.
Moreover, each WHO team has one or more members of the ICNIRP, a German NGO that issues exposure limits
for wireless radiation primarily based on
research produced by its own members, their former students and close
colleagues. The ICNIRP limits, designed to protect humans only from the acute effects
of heating induced by wireless radiation, are promoted by the WHO and are similar to those adopted by the FCC.
In 2019 investigative journalists from eight European countries
published 22 articles in major news media that exposed
conflicts of interest in this "ICNIRP cartel." The journalists report that the cartel promotes the ICNIRP guidelines by conducting biased reviews of the scientific literature that minimize health risks from electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure. These reviews have been conducted for the WHO and other government agencies. By preserving the ICNIRP exposure guidelines favored by industry, the cartel ensures that the cellular industry will continue to fund their research. Since then, a former ICNIRP member who served as editor in chief of the Bioelectromagnetics Society journal accused ICNIRP
of "groupthink."
Recently, the ICBE-EMF
published several peer-reviewed papers refuting the "thermal-only
paradigm" upon which the ICNIRP exposure limits are based because the preponderance of peer-reviewed research finds non-thermal effects.
International
Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields
(ICBE-EMF). Scientific evidence invalidates health assumptions
underlying the FCC and ICNIRP exposure limit determinations for
radiofrequency radiation: implications for 5G. Environmental Health.
2022. 21:92. DOI:10.1186/s12940-022-00900-9. https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12940-022-00900-9
Héroux P, Belyaev I, Chamberlin K, Dasdag S, De Salles AAA, et al. on behalf of the ICBE-EMF. Cell phone radiation exposure limits and engineering solutions. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2023, 20, 5398. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20075398
Héroux P, Belyaev I, Chamberlin K, Dasdag S, De Salles AAA, et al. on behalf of the ICBE-EMF. Cell phone radiation exposure limits and engineering solutions. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2023, 20, 5398. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20075398
ICBE-EMF also published a critique of another WHO-commissioned review:
Frank,
J.W,, Melnick, R.L, Moskowitz, J.M., on behalf of the International
Commission on the Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields
(ICBE-EMF). A critical appraisal of the WHO 2024 systematic review of
the effects of RF-EMF exposure on tinnitus, migraine/headache, and
non-specific symptoms. Reviews on Environmental Health. 2024. doi:
10.1515/reveh-2024-0069. https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/reveh-2024-0069/html
The pre-proof version of the WHO-commissioned paper that has revived the controversy about the cancer risks of cellphone radiation is now available:
Karipidis K, Baaken D, Loney T, Blettner M, Brzozek C, Elwood M, Narh C, Orsini N, Röösli M, Paulo MS, Lagorio S. The effect of exposure to radiofrequency fields on cancer risk in the general and working population: A systematic review of human observational studies – Part I: Most researched outcomes. Environment International (2024). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
The paper's main conclusions seem biased (although not nearly as strong as reported in the news media)....
"For
near field RF-EMF [radio frequency electromagnetic fields] exposure to the head from mobile phone use, there was
moderate certainty evidence that it likely does not increase the risk
of glioma, meningioma, acoustic neuroma, pituitary tumours, and salivary
gland tumours in adults, or of paediatric brain tumours.
For near field RF-EMF exposure to the head from cordless phone use, there was low certainty evidence that it may not increase the risk of glioma, meningioma or acoustic neuroma."
For near field RF-EMF exposure to the head from cordless phone use, there was low certainty evidence that it may not increase the risk of glioma, meningioma or acoustic neuroma."
My colleagues and I arrived at very different conclusions based upon our 2020 systematic review of 46 case-control studies
on cellphone use and tumor risk:
Choi Y-J,
Moskowitz JM, Myung S-K,
Lee Y-R, Hong Y-C.
Cellular Phone Use and Risk of Tumors: Systematic Review
and Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(21):8079.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17218079
"In
sum, the updated comprehensive meta-analysis of case-control studies
found significant evidence linking cellular phone use to increased tumor
risk, especially among cell phone users with cumulative cell phone use
of 1000 or more hours in their lifetime (which corresponds to about 17
min per day over 10 years), and especially among studies that employed
high quality methods. Further quality prospective studies providing
higher level of evidence than case-control studies are warranted to
confirm our findings."
A preliminary comparison of the differences between our review and the new WHO review indicates that our review:
- examined only case-control studies of tumor risk and cellphone use as we did not consider any occupational, cohort or time-trend studies to be of sufficient quality to warrant consideration;
- our rubric for rating risk of bias of individual studies resulted in very different results;
- and most importantly, we employed a more conventional approach to the analysis of the cumulative call time data that examined the effects of heavy cell phone use.
Furthermore, we successfully rebutted criticisms of our review made by three authors of the new WHO review in letters to the editor:
de Vocht F, Röösli M. Comment on Choi, Y.-J., et al. Cellular Phone
Use and Risk of Tumors: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int. J.
Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(6), 3125; doi: 10.3390/
Myung S-K, Moskowitz JM, Choi Y-J, Hong Y-C. Reply to Comment on Choi, Y.-J., et al. Cellular Phone
Use and Risk of Tumors: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18(6), 3326; doi: 10.3390/
Brzozek C, Abramson MJ, Benke G, Karipidis K. Comment on Choi et al. Cellular Phone Use and Risk of Tumors: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 8079. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 18(10): 5459. 2021. doi: 10.3390/
Moskowitz JM, Myung S-K, Choi Y-J, Hong Y-C. Reply to
Brzozek et al. Comment on “Choi et al. Cellular Phone Use and Risk of
Tumors: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 8079”. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18(11), 5581. doi: 10.3390/ijerph18115581.https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/11/5581
The new WHO review relies heavily on cohort and time-trend studies of cellphone use and cancer risk which we have found to be at least as problematic as case-control studies in terms of drawing causal inferences:
Hardell L, Moskowitz JM. A critical analysis of the MOBI-Kids study of wireless phone use in childhood and adolescence and brain tumor risk. Reviews on Environmental Health. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1515/reveh-2022-0040
Moskowitz JM. RE: Cellular Telephone Use and the Risk of Brain Tumors: Update of the UK Million Women Study. JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2022. Djac109. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djac109
Moskowitz JM, Frank JW, Melnick RL, Hardell L, Belyaev I et al., ICBE-EMF. COSMOS. A methodologically-flawed cohort study of the health effects from exposure to radiofrequency radiation from mobile phone use. Environment International, Volume 190, 2024, 108807, doi: 1016/j.envint.2024.108807. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412024003933
Moskowitz JM. RE: Cellular Telephone Use and the Risk of Brain Tumors: Update of the UK Million Women Study. JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 2022. Djac109. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djac109
Moskowitz JM, Frank JW, Melnick RL, Hardell L, Belyaev I et al., ICBE-EMF. COSMOS. A methodologically-flawed cohort study of the health effects from exposure to radiofrequency radiation from mobile phone use. Environment International, Volume 190, 2024, 108807, doi: 1016/j.envint.2024.108807. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412024003933
Although no scientific literature review is perfect, I believe that our 2020 review of cellphone use and tumor risk is less biased and will withstand the test of time better than the new review commissioned by the WHO.
