Wireless Industry's Patented System to Reduce Cancer Risk from Wireless Local Networks Never Adopted

A major telecom company patented a system to reduce "electrosmog" from wireless local networks to reduce cancer risks associated with non-thermal exposures to microwave radiation. The industry has known the risks for many years but has failed to act. 

Joel M. Moskowitz, PRLog (Press Release) - Mar 11, 2013

Swisscom AG, a major telecommunications provider in Switzerland, filed U.S. and international patent applications for an innovative system to reduce “electrosmog” from wireless local networks (i.e., Wi-Fi) in 2003.

This patent application acknowledged the cancer risk from exposure to wireless radiation eight years before the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer declared that radiofrequency energy, including cell phone and Wi-Fi radiation, is a “possible carcinogen” to humans, like DDT and lead.

Furthermore, the application acknowledged that low-intensity, non-thermal exposures to wireless radiation is genotoxic. This is critical because the current U.S. regulatory standard for wireless radiation, established in 1996, does not protect us from non-thermal exposures ...

To see entire news release: http://www.prlog.org/12094566

Council of Europe: Restrict Wi-Fi and Mobile Phone Use in Schools

Excerpts from the British Medical Journal news story:
 
Rory Watson. Radiation fears prompt possible restrictions on wi-fi and mobile phone use in schools. BMJ 2011;342:d3428. Published June 1, 2011.

"The Council of Europe is recommending that restrictions be put in place on the use of mobile phones and access to the internet in all schools across the continent to protect young children from harmful radiation."

"governments should “give preference to wired internet connections, and strictly regulate the use of mobile phones by schoolchildren on school premises” for children in general and particularly in schools and classrooms."

"In addition, they are pressing for steps to be taken to reduce exposure to electromagnetic fields especially for children and young people “who seem to be most at risk from head tumours.”"

"The Council of Europe recommendation has no legal force, but Mr Huss said he believed it sent a strong signal to the 47 member governments."

"The report calls on governments to give more information and run awareness raising campaigns on the potentially harmful biological effects of electromagnetic fields targeting “children, teenagers and young people of reproductive age.”"

"It also recommends that national authorities provide information on possible health risks from DECT type wireless telephones, baby monitors and other domestic appliances that emit continuous pulse waves if left permanently on standby and instead recommend the use of wired, fixed telephones."
 
http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d3428?view=long&pmid=21632672

Exposure to Electricity May Increase Risk for Alzheimer’s Disease and ALS

Research review finds evidence of neurodegenerative effects from electrical exposure.

Joel M. Moskowitz, PRLog (Press Release) - Feb. 25, 2013 - 

A review of 42 studies of occupational exposure to electric and magnetic fields (MF) and neurodegenerative diseases found "moderately increased risk" for Alzheimer's  Disease (AD) and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) ...
 
http://www.prlog.org/12087069

Cellphone Use on Planes: A Bad Idea

SPECIAL REPORT: Cellphone use may soon be allowed on U.S. flights

Ten O'Clock News, KTVU-TV (SF Bay Area Fox Affiliate),  Feb 17, 2013

Video clip (3 min.):

http://www.ktvu.com/videos/news/special-report-cellphone-use-may-soon-be-allowed/vqzdj/

 

Cellphone use on planes could become reality

KTVU, Feb 17, 2013

OAKLAND, Calif. — A new change to the ban against using a cellphone when flying could be coming soon, but there are some emerging controversies over cellphone use on planes, including a possible health risk.

Some European and Middle East airlines now allow personal cellphone use while flying outside United States airspace.

Onboard equipment solves navigation interference problems, but in the United States the Federal Aviation Administration requires passengers to turn off their cellphone for take-off and landing, only allowing for airplane mode at altitude.

Regulators are poised to allow regular, in-flight cellphone use on domestic airline flights.

This has polarized some experts and passengers.

"I think it's a bad idea personally because we'll be listening to everyone's gossip and their whole life story," said Karen Sager of Napa.

"I think the pros would be that if there's an emergency you can get hold of somebody," said Sonoma resident Lisa Carlsson.

Flight attendants worry no one would pay attention to cabin instructions.

And then there's another concern, passengers health.

"Looking at brain tumor risk and other kinds of cancer risk, I would say it's a bad idea," said Joel Moskowitz, director of the University of California, Berkeley's Center for Family and Community Health.

Moskowitz said cellphones radiate low power microwaves and that inside a metal container, such as a jet fuselage, microwaves reflect and amplify.

He said over-limit exposures are well documented in container-like buses and trains -- exposures that are linked to health effects.

"You're going to have very high exposures in certain parts of that container and it's hard to predict even where those hot spots, so to speak, occur" Moskowitz said.

But according to author and U.C. Berkeley physicist Richard Muller the danger from these things is so small that there are more important things to focus on like crossing the street. Muller supports the use of cellphones on planes.

"I think it's a great idea," he said. "I think it's time we did it. The only downside is now I can't escape my cellphone when I'm flying in an airplane."

Frequent flyers told KTVU they are eager for more in flight connectivity.

"I'd have access to a lot more emails than paying the outrageous fees for Wi-Fi on the plane," said Uwem Umontuen of Nashville.

"I think as long as it was kept to emails and text messaging that would be OK," said Taneha Lay, another Nashville resident.

Though, several new surveys by the airlines conclude that most passengers want solitude.

"It's a nice quiet environment to do work, I don't want to hear people talking on their phone" said Amy Heiserman of Denver.

So far no U. S. airline has asked for the FAA to allow in flight cellphone calls, but that day could be coming.

http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/special-reports/cellphone-use-planes-could-become-reality/nWRf5/


Related News Release:

Secondhand Exposure to Cell Phone Radiation: An Emerging Public Health Problem?
http://www.prlog.org/12010018

Adoption of Wi-Fi in Los Angeles USD Classrooms

TO:        Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD)

FROM:    Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D.
               Director, Center for Family and Community Health
               School of Public Health
               University of California, Berkeley
           
RE:   Adoption of Wi-Fi in Classrooms

DATE: February 8, 2013

Based upon my review of the research of the health effects associated with exposure to radiofrequency (RF) electromagnetic radiation (EMR), especially microwave radiation, I feel compelled to register my concern that adoption of Wi-Fi in LAUSD classrooms is likely to put at risk the health of many students and employees in the District.

In December, Dr. Gayle Nicoll of URS Corporation asked me to serve as an expert reviewer for a report that URS prepared for the LAUSD regarding the adoption of Wi-Fi in classrooms. Since Ms. Nicoll could not assure me that URS has no conflicts of interest, I turned down her request and sent her references to recent studies about Wi-Fi radiation. I cc:ed Board members and key staff as I was concerned about the health risks of unnecessarily subjecting 660,000 children to 13,000 hours of Wi-Fi microwave radiation during their K-12 school years.

Although I have not seen the URS report, I imagine it is based on the FCC's outmoded 1996 safety standards which only protect the public from the thermal risk of RF EMR exposure (i.e., from heating of tissue). For the past three years, in numerous media interviews I have been calling on the FCC to strengthen its standards and testing procedures to protect the public and workers from the low-intensity, non-thermal risks of RF EMR exposure that have been reported in hundreds, if not thousands, of research studies. These include increased risk of neurological and cardiovascular problems, sperm damage and male infertility, reproductive health risks, and cancer.

The precautionary principle should be applied to this critical policy decision. This principle, developed at a U.N. environmental conference in 1992, states that in the absence of scientific consensus if an action has a suspected risk of causing harm, the burden of proof it is not harmful falls on those taking the action, and all reasonable measures to reduce the risk must be taken.

Internet access can be provided to students through wires or optical fiber without installing Wi-Fi in the classrooms.

For further information, please see my Electromagnetic Radiation Safety web site at http://saferemr.blogspot.com where I have archived news releases and links to recent reports by major scientific groups and political agencies.

Sincerely,

Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D.

Media: Cell Phone Health Policy

SPECIAL REPORT: Cellphone use may soon be allowed on U.S. flights 
 Ten O'Clock News, KTVU-TV (SF Bay Area Fox Affiliate), Feb 17, 2013
Video clip: http://www.ktvu.com/videos/news/special-report-cellphone-use-may-soon-be-allowed/vqzdj/
News story: http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/special-reports/cellphone-use-planes-could-become-reality/nWRf5/

*Op-Ed: Government must inform us of cell phone risk

Joel M. Moskowitz, Open Forum, San Francisco Chronicle, April 28, 2010
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/04/28/EDMB1D58TC.DTL
Article appeared on page A - 14 accompanied by the following editorial: 

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/04/28/EDR31D5PV3.DTL

Cell phone safety

Daniel Krewski, Debbie Raphael, Joel Moskowitz, Sophie Maxwell, Dave Iverson, KQED Forum (San Francisco), Jun 14, 2010

San Francisco would become the first city in the country to require retailers to label mobile phones with radiation emission levels under legislation set for a vote Tuesday at the Board of Supervisors.

Audio: http://www.kqed.org/a/forum/R201006140900

Cell phones affect brain activity, study says

Erin Allday, San Francisco Chronicle, February 23, 2011, pg. A–1

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2011/02/23/MNCO1HS9QJ.DTL

S.F. puts cell phone radiation law on hold

Heather Knight, San Francisco Chronicle, May 6, 2011, page A - 1

UC Berkeley researcher Joel Moskowitz says the commonly accepted way to measure radiation is not very useful.                                  

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/05/06/BAVB1JB9L6.DTL

Commentary by Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D. on Cell Phone SAR Ratings and Consumer Health

ElectromagneticHealth.org, May 12, 2011

http://electromagnetichealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Cell-Phone-Radiation-and-Health-Recommendations.pdf

http://electromagnetichealth.org/electromagnetic-health-blog/commentary-by-joel-m-moskowitz-ph-d-on-cell-phone-sar-ratings-and-consumer-health/

*Q&A: Cell phones: Assessing and preventing risks
David Katz, M.D., Huffington Post, May 31, 2011
Q&A with Joel Moskowitz.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-katz-md/cell-phone-health-risks_b_869241.html

Cell phones & cancer: 8 dumb ways to boost possible risk
CBS News, Sep 29, 2011
http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-204_162-10009602.html

Precautionary warnings for cellphones

Deirdre Imus, FoxNews, Oct 24, 2011

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/10/24/precautionary-warnings-for-cellphones/

Call for Action to Reduce Mobile Phone Radiation

The European Environment Agency published a major report to alert governments about the need to attend to early warning signs about technology health risks, including mobile phones.

The 750-page volume, “Late Lessons from Early Warnings,” which includes twenty new case studies, has major implications for policy, science and society.  Although the report was prepared by the European Environment Agency to provide guidance to the EU nations, its implications are global. (1)

Brain tumor risk associated with cell phone use is addressed in one of the report's chapters.  (2) The World Health Organization (WHO) International Agency for Research on Cancer's (IARC) classification of this form of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) as "possibly carcinogenic", or cancer causing, is highlighted.

The report reviews the research that has found increased brain tumor risk associated with long term mobile phone use. The authors note that governments and industry have been slow to respond to IARC’s precautionary warnings in May, 2011, and urges policy makers to respond to early warnings more quickly.  It argues that industries that cause future harm must pay for the damage and suggests that taking early precautions "can stimulate rather than stifle innovation."

The report accuses the mobile phone industry of “inertia in considering the various studies and taking the IARC carcinogenic classification into account,” criticizes the media for not “providing the public with robust and consistent information on potential health risks,” and attacks governments for shirking “their responsibilities to protect public health from this widespread source of radiation.” 

Although the report acknowledges the many benefits of mobile phones to society, it recommends the need for precautionary actions to reduce cell phone radiation exposures to minimize the extent and seriousness of health risks to the brain and other organs of the body.

The report makes four specific recommendations about cell phones:

a.       Governments, the mobile phone industry, and the public should take all reasonable measures to reduce EMR exposure, especially from mobile phones, particularly exposure to children and young adults who are likely at greatest risk for brain and salivary gland tumors. The report recommends texting, use of hands-free devices, and improved design of phones to generate less radiation and make hands-free use more convenient.

b.      Governments should reconsider the scientific basis for the present exposure standards “which have serious limitations such as reliance on the contested thermal effects paradigm; and simplistic assumptions about the complexities of radio frequency exposures.” Bioeffects have been found for exposures considerably less than the FCC's legal limit allows.

c.       Mobile phones should be required to have effective labeling and warnings about potential risks for users. San Francisco is the first municipal government in the U.S. to adopt such legislation, but the CTIA (wireless industry association), has blocked implementation of the law in court arguing that it violates the industry's free speech rights.

d.      Adequate funding should be provided for the “urgently needed research into the health effects of phones” and base stations.  Funding could include industry grants and a small fee on the purchase and/or use of mobile phones.   A nickel a month collected on each cell phone subscription in the U.S. would generate sufficient funds to undertake the needed training and research to head off this potential epidemic.

It is time for the U.S. to end its decades of denial and assume a leadership role in adopting precautionary measures to reduce the potential harms associated with exposure to mobile phone radiation. (3)  Otherwise we may face a steep price in terms of preventable health care costs, lost productivity, reduced survival and quality of life.

 

For more information about the health risks of cell phone radiation and other forms of EMR see the new BioInitiative Report at http://www.bioinitiative.org and the news releases and commentary on this web site at http://saferemr.blogspot.com .

(1)   “The cost of ignoring the warning signs - EEA publishes ‘Late Lessons from Early Warnings, volume II’ “

New technologies have sometimes had very harmful effects, but in many cases the early warning signs have been suppressed or ignored. The second volume of Late Lessons from Early Warnings investigates specific cases where danger signals have gone unheeded, in some cases leading to deaths, illness and environmental destruction.

News Release, European Environment Agency,  Jan 23, 2013. URL: http://www.eea.europa.eu/pressroom/newsreleases/the-cost-of-ignoring-the

  

(2) Lennart Hardell, Michael Carlberg, and David Gee. “Mobile phone use and brain tumour risk: early warnings, early actions?” Chapter 21 in Part C-Emerging Issues. “Late lessons from early warnings: science, precaution, innovation.” European Environment Agency. EEA Report No 1/2013. Pp. 541-561. January 23, 2013.

Part C: http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/late-lessons-2/part-c-emerging-issues-1

 The full 750 page report is available at:
 http://www.eea.europa.eu/publications/late-lessons-
 

(3)  Joel M. Moskowitz. "Comments on the 2012 GAO Report: 'Exposure and Testing Requirements for Mobile Phones Should Be Reassessed.'” http://saferemr.blogspot.com/2013/01/commentary-gao-2012-report-on-mobile.html

Press Release:  http://www.prlog.org/12065677

Drs. Oz & Gupta Caution About Cell Phones

Dr. Mehmet Oz, in a recent episode of his popular TV program, "The Dr. Oz Show," and his guest, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, a neurosurgeon and chief medical correspondent for CNN, discussed cell phone radiation health effects.  Dr. Gupta issued important precautionary messages about cell phone use.

Both Dr. Oz and Dr. Gupta should be commended for their continued work in reporting about the health risks associated with cell phone radiation and for issuing precautionary warnings to the public.

Dr. Gupta provided some misinformation in this interview which I address in my comments below.

 
Are Cellphones Dangerous for Your Health?

The Dr. Oz Show, Original air date: Jan 15, 2013

Are cell phones a serious health risk on par with tobacco and asbestos? Dr. Oz and Sanjay Gupta separate fact from fiction on this hotly contested issue. Plus, the medical reason why you should wait to give your child a cell phone.

5 minute video clip: http://www.doctoroz.com/videos/are-cellphones-dangerous-your-health


Episode Summary and My Comments

Gupta: "I think both groups you just mentioned, people who say it's absolutely safe and people who say it's absolutely dangerous, they don't know. And that's the important point here."

My comment:  Very few health scientists or medical professionals argue either that cell phones are "absolutely safe" or "absolutely dangerous."  Most now recognize that cell phone radiation is biologically active and agree we need more research to determine in what ways it can be harmful to our bodies and how best to reduce risks.  Many scientists and health professionals recommend precautionary measures to the public. Some others who have conflicts of interest or interpret the data more conservatively tell their family members to take precaution.

Gupta: "We need 30 years of data to know for sure."

My comment:  Although scientific consensus takes a long time, Dr. Gupta's contention that we need 30 years of data is speculative. 

We have had evidence of harm to humans from exposure to low intensity microwave radiation for about 40 years. Allan Frey reported in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences in 1975 that 1900 MHz microwaves pulsed at certain modulations induce blood-brain barrier leakage in humans. 

We now have evidence of increased brain tumor risk associated with cell phone use from multiple case-control studies. We have also begun to see increased incidence of certain brain tumors in some countries. There is now considerable evidence of sperm damage in humans and some evidence of increased male infertility associated with cell phone use.

To put this in perspective, in 1912 a monograph documenting a strong link between cigarette smoking and lung cancer was published.  Fifty two years later, in the 1964 report to the Surgeon General smoking was recognized to cause lung cancer in men and probably cause it in women. 

Given how widespread cell phone use is and the fact that many children, teenagers, and pregnant women now use cell phones, it would be irresponsible for us to wait for scientific consensus that we have conclusive evidence of harm to humans before adopting precautionary measures.

Gupta: The Interphone Study found an increase in one type of brain tumor after 10 years.

My comment: The 13-nation Interphone Study paper reported an increase in glioma, a malignant brain tumor, for those who used cell phones for 1,640 or more hours in their lifetime. Many of these people used cell phones for less than 10 years. The paper also found a dose-response effect in terms of the number of years since the cell phone was first used (see Appendix 2).  Lennart Hardell's research in Sweden has obtained similar results.

Gupta: Fact: "Cell phone radiation is regulated by the government."  The government was looking at people who used their cell phones once a week for 6 months. Not a good standard for people who were more regular cell phone users.  It applied to adults.

My comment: This is incorrect. Although the government regulates cell phone radiation, the FCC's regulatory standard was developed by industry and does not assume once a week cell phone use. See my critique of the GAO Report for a discussion of how the standard was developed, and why it is inadequate.

Gupta: Fact: "In your cell phone instructions, there's a warning to keep the phone a certain distance from your body."  There are very specific warnings about minimum distance, e.g. the Blackberry is about 3/4 of an inch. 

My comment:The manufacturers' warnings vary from 5/8 of an inch (15 mm) to 1 inch (25 mm). More importantly, these minimum distances are inadequate as they assume that the only harm from cell phones is due to heating tissue which is not true. Furthermore, the standard is based on large males and is not adequate for others, especially women and children.

Gupta: The amount of radiation absorbed by a child is more. He showed Om Gandhi's slide comparing absorption in users of different ages. 

My comment:  Excellent point. The testing procedures established by the FCC employ a simulated head from a 6 foot 2 inch, 220 pound male. Most people's heads absorb far more radiation.  Moreover, individuals with metal fillings or braces on their teeth and those who wear metal eyeglass frames will be exposed to more radiation.

Gupta: Fiction: "Cell phones emit the same kind of radiation as X-ray machines." Non-ionizing radiation is like a microwave oven.  You don't want to hold a microwave oven by your head.  

My comment: This is not a good analogy as the radiated power of a cell phone is much less than a microwave oven.  Moreover, the harm from cell phone radiation exposure is not likely due to heating tissue but through sub-thermal mechanisms.

Oz: We don't have long-term data. There are flaws in studies. What should we do?

Gupta: I always use a wired earpiece. I think about not giving my kids cell phones. If you're having a hard time hearing, the phone emits more radiation, make the call another time.

My comment: These are good, basic precautionary messages. Other messages should include: 1) turn off your phone when not using; 2) never put the phone to your ear - use a headset, especially a corded device, or other hands-free method such as a speakerphone or text; 3) keep away from the head, eyes, salivary glands and reproductive organs – never in your pants pockets; and 4) use by pregnant women, children and teenagers should be extremely limited.

BioInitiative 2012 Report

Commentary on BioInitiative 2012 Report

Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D.

"BioInitiative 2012: A Rationale for Biologically-based Exposure Standards for Low-Intensity Electromagnetic Radiation" updates the 2007 BioInitiative Report. The 2012 report was written by 29 authors from ten countries including ten MDs and 21 PhDs. Authors include three former presidents and five members of the Bioelectromagnetics Society. One author is Chair of the Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation, and another is Senior Advisor to the European Environmental Agency.

Critics of the report have argued that it is not published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it is biased. It is true that the report was prepared independent of governments, existing bodies and industry professional societies. The critics of this report, many of whom suffer from serious conflicts of interest, ignore a large and growing body of scientific literature that demonstrates biologic activity and harmful health effects from exposure to low (i.e., sub-thermal) levels of electromagnetic radiation (EMR).

The critics of this report only recognize EMR effects caused by heating tissue (i.e., thermal effects).  As such, the critics have upheld the outdated EMR safety standards which their professional organizations established in the early 1990’s. 

With minor variations, these EMR standards were adopted by the U.S. and other Western nations in the mid-1990's. At that time, exposure of the general population to sources of EMR, especially in close proximity to the body (e.g., cell and cordless phones, wi-fi), was quite minor as compared to the present day.

The 2012 BioInitiative Report presents the scientific evidence why we need to adopt much stronger, biologically-based standards. The report presents a solid scientific and public health policy assessment that is evidence-based. 

Read the report and judge for yourself which side of this decades-long debate you believe.

BioInitiative 2012 Report Issues New Warnings on Wireless and EMF
www.bioinitiative.org

Press Release, Business Wire, Jan 3, 2013

Rensselaer, N.Y., A new report by the BioInitiative Working Group 2012 says that evidence for risks to health has substantially increased since 2007 from electromagnetic fields and wireless technologies (radiofrequency radiation). The Report reviews over 1800 new scientific studies. Cell phone users, parents-to-be, young children and pregnant women are at particular risk.

“There is a consistent pattern of increased risk for glioma (a malignant brain tumor) and acoustic neuroma with use of mobile and cordless phones.”

“There is a consistent pattern of increased risk for glioma (a malignant brain tumor) and acoustic neuroma with use of mobile and cordless phones,” says Lennart Hardell, MD at Orebro University, Sweden. “Epidemiological evidence shows that radiofrequency should be classified as a human carcinogen. The existing FCC/IEE and ICNIRP public safety limits and reference levels are not adequate to protect public health.”

A dozen new studies link cell phone radiation to sperm damage. Even a cell phone in the pocket or on a belt may harm sperm DNA, result in misshapen sperm, and impair fertility in men. Laptop computers with wireless internet connections can damage DNA in sperm.

Based on strong evidence for vulnerable biology in autism, EMF/RFR can plausibly increase autism risk and symptoms.

"While we aggressively investigate the links between autism disorders and wireless technologies, we should minimize wireless and EMF exposures for people with autism disorders, children of all ages, people planning a baby, and during pregnancy,” says Martha Herbert, MD, PhD.

Wireless devices such as phones and laptops used by pregnant women may alter brain development of the fetus. This has been linked in both animal and human studies to hyperactivity, learning and behavior problems.

According to David O. Carpenter, MD, co-editor:

“There is now much more evidence of risks to health affecting billions of people world-wide. The status quo is not acceptable in light of the evidence for harm.”

This study covers EMF from powerlines, electrical wiring, appliances and hand-held devices; and from wireless technologies (cell and cordless phones, cell towers, ‘smart meters’, WI-FI, wireless laptops, wireless routers, baby monitors, and other electronic devices). Health topics include damage to DNA and genes, effects on memory, learning, behavior, attention, sleep disruption, cancer and neurological diseases like Alzheimer’s disease. New safety standards are urgently needed for protection against EMF and wireless exposures that now appear everywhere in daily life.

The BioInitiative 2012 Report is available at: www.bioinitiative.org. 

"In twenty-one technical chapters of this 2012 update, the contributing authors discuss the content and implications of about 1800 new studies. Overall, there is reinforced scientific evidence of risk where there is chronic exposure to low-intensity electromagnetic fields and to wireless technologies (radiofrequency radiation including microwave radiation).”

“There is more evidence in 2012 that such exposures damage DNA, interfere with DNA repair, evidence of toxicity to the human genome (genes), more worrisome effects on the nervous system (neurology) and more and better studies on the effects of mobile phone base stations (wireless antenna facilities or cell towers) that report lower RFR levels over time can result in adverse health impacts. There has been a big increase in the number of studies looking at the effects of cell phones (on the belt, or in the pocket of men radiating only on standby mode) and from wireless laptops on impacts to sperm quality and motility; and sperm death (fertility and reproduction).”

“In other new studies of the fetus, infant and young child, and child-in-school – there are a dozen or more new studies of importance."

http://www.bioinitiative.org/report/participants/do-we-know-enough-to-take-action/

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface
Table Of Contents
Summary For The Public And Conclusions
Statement Of The Problem
The Existing Public Exposure Standards
Evidence For Inadequacy Of The Standards
Evidence For Effects On Gene And Protein Expression
Evidence For Genotoxic Effects – RFR And ELF DNA Damage
Evidence For Stress Response (Stress Proteins)
Evidence For Effects On Immune Function
Evidence For Effects On Neurology And Behavior
Effects Of EMF From Wireless Communication Upon The Blood-Brain Barrier
Evidence For Brain Tumors And Acoustic Neuromas
Evidence For Childhood Cancers (Leukemia)
Evidence For Effects On Melatonin: Alzheimer’s Disease And Breast Cancer
Evidence For Breast Cancer Promotion
Evidence For Disruption By The Modulating Signal
Plausible Genetic And Metabolic Mechanisms For Bioeffects Of Very Weak ELF Magnetic Fields On Living Tissue
Evidence Based On EMF Medical Therapeutics
Fertility And Reproduction Effects Of EMF
Fetal And Neonatal Effects Of EMF
Findings In Autism Consistent With EMF And RFR
Mobile Phone Base Stations: Well-being And Health
Precaution In Action - Global Public Health Examples Since Bioinitiative 2007
The Precautionary Principle
Key Scientific Evidence And Public Health Policy Recommendations
List Of Participants And Affiliations
Glossary Of Terms And Abbreviations
Appendix
Acknowledgements