radiaiton

Researcher's strong signal on cell phone risk (Q&A)

Throughout my seven years of reviewing cell phones and covering the wireless industry for CNET, the issue of a possible link between cell phones and brain cancer has surfaced every few months. And as my colleague Marguerite Reardon explains in her comprehensive feature, the debate isn't going away anytime soon. Indeed, research abounds on the subject, and there are plenty of voices on both sides. Some say there's nothing to worry about, and others recommend proceeding with care.

One voice on the cautionary side is Dr. Devra Davis, the author of the 2010 book "Disconnect: The Truth about Cell Phone Radiation, What the Industry Has Done to Hide it and How to Protect Your Family." An epidemiologist and environmental health researcher, Davis is a founding director of the toxicology and environmental studies board of the National Academy of Sciences and founder of the Environmental Health Trust. Davis argues that cell phone use can have very real effects on health, and that cancer is only part of the story.

A few months ago, I interviewed Dr. Davis after reading her book. Though I can tell you a lot about cell phones, I'm not a scientist, and frankly, I wasn't very good at science in school. Yet, I approached the subject with a genuine curiosity, and I was glad to see that Davis breaks down her arguments in a manner that's easy to follow. The material is accessible and digestible, even if it's a bit scattered in places. And though the book's title is over the top, Davis takes a more measured tone inside. She's no alarmist, but she forcefully advocates that more research is needed. And while she does use a cell phone regularly, she also suggests that cell phone users take small steps to reduce radio frequency (RF) energy.

Q: What is the one thing that you want readers to take away from your book? Davis: If we fail to pay attention to experimental evidence, we're treating people as subjects in an experiment with no controls. And if we say that we'll accept that cell phone radiation is harmful only when we have enough sick or dead people, then we're dooming three generations to illness.

The chapter that I think is most important is the one that discusses the effects on male reproductive health. A phone in a pocket may be linked to lower sperm count. This is not a confirmed association, but I've talked to several urologists who have begun to advise men that they should not keep the phone in their pocket if they're concerned about libido or impotence. That's not to say that they're the cause of impotence; like everything else in health, it's multifactorial and there can be multiple explanations.

How did you first become interested in this issue? Davis: About six years ago my grandson was born. I saw the incredible enthusiasm he had toward a cell phone, and I began to wonder about its safety. Later, I worked for Dr. Ronald Herbermann at the Center for Environmental Oncology at the University of Pittsburgh. I was stunned by what I found. … Read more

SF shelves cell phone radiation ordinance

San Francisco officials have indefinitely delayed implementation of the city's Right to Know ordinance, which would have required retailers to display a phone's Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) at the point of sale and distribute materials educating consumers on cell phone radiation. A revamped version of the legislation is likely to be introduced in its place, but no further details have been announced.

First passed last June, the ordinance (PDF) quickly prompted a lawsuit from the wireless industry's lobbying arm, the CTIA. In addition to claiming that the law was unconstitutional because only the FCC and FDA have … Read more

On Call: Are you carrying your phone wrong?

On Call runs every two weeks, alternating between answering reader questions and discussing hot topics in the cell phone world.

Next Monday, the Environmental Quality Committee of the California State Senate will hold its first hearing on a bill that would require retailers in the state to inform consumers of the possible health risks of cell phone use. SB 932, which was introduced by Sen. Mark Leno (D-San Francisco), would add notices on product packaging and at the point of sale explaining that phones emit radio frequency (RF) energy. If it passes, it would be the first statewide law of … Read more

CTIA sues SF over cell phone radiation law

The wireless industry's lobbying arm has stepped up its attack on a recent San Francisco ordinance requiring cell phone retailers to display a handset's specific absorption rate, or SAR.

Just three weeks after it said it would no longer hold its autumn trade show in the city, the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA) on Friday filed a lawsuit to block enforcement of the legislation.

The suit (PDF), filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, accuses the city of unlawfully interfering with the "FCC's exclusive, congressionally derived authority" of radio frequency emissions from cell … Read more

On Call: About that Interphone study

On Call runs every two weeks, alternating between answering reader questions and discussing hot topics in the cell phone world.

Q: I saw that the long-awaited Interphone study finally came out. I'm concerned about the issue and was looking forward to the findings. Given its mixed results, have you changed your position on cell phone radiation? - Jose

A: As you note, Jose, the International Agency for Research on Cancer finally published the results of its Interphone study on May 17. The $24 million study attempted to determine whether long-term cell phone use leads to an increased risk of … Read more

On Call: Cell phone radiation? There's no easy answer

Last December, just as I returned from covering the first flight of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner in Seattle, I learned that a longtime friend was diagnosed with brain cancer. He had collapsed that day at work and was in the hospital awaiting immediate removal of his tumor. Needless to say, it was a distressing few days, but the surgery was successful and he was back home by Christmas.

About a month later he called me with a question. He hesitated before asking and, frankly, I felt a lump in my throat, because I knew what was coming. "So, do you think there really is a connection between cell phones and brain cancer?" he asked. "I figured that you'd know more about this than I do." Unfortunately, I couldn't answer him, and I may never be able to do so.

For background on cell phone radiation, see CNET's cell phone radiation charts

Though he was hardly the first person to ask that question, this time it came from someone who really cared about the answer. He was searching for an explanation for what had happened to him; he wanted to make sense of it and understand how cancer had come into his otherwise carefully organized life. I felt bad that I couldn't reply, but I just don't know if there is any link between cell phone radiation and cancer risk. Though studies on the subject abound, none can tell us conclusively whether mobile radiation does or does not adversely affect your health.

I realize that may not be what you want to hear, but science can't conform to human emotion and our desire to find an answer quickly. Single scientific studies (the good ones, at least) investigate and often suggest causal relationships between one thing and another based on their findings, but it can take years of exhaustive research before studies actually prove anything (if they do at all). And when you throw in a bunch of studies that seem to contradict each other, you wind up with a lot of confusion.

Perhaps? Just take the Interphone study, for example. Started in 2000 by a group of 13 countries, to date the study remains the largest body of work on the subject. Many hoped that it would offer some solid guidance, but that hasn't been the case. Not only did researchers disagree on how to interpret the data, some health advocacy groups decried that the mobile industry had partially funded the effort. Some participating have reported that the study found a link between long-term cell phone use (10 years or more) and increased brain cancer risk, but the final results have yet to be published.

Consider also Dr. Ronald B. Herberman, director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, who published a controversial memo in 2008 that cautioned his staff against frequent cell phone use. Herberman acknowledged that the ongoing research remained controversial, but said there was sufficient data to be concerned. He was criticized, however, for basing his conclusions on unpublished data from the Interphone study.

Perhaps not The cell phone industry continues to point to other studies that show no risk. According to the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA), the industry's lobbying group in Washington, "impartial groups, such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the World Health Organization (WHO), the American Cancer Society, and the National Institute of Health, have all concluded that the scientific evidence to date does not demonstrate any adverse health effects associated with the use of wireless phones."

That may sound better, but keep in mind that the industry has an interest in assuring you that cell phones are safe. Similarly, studies can be flawed and can be published by someone eager to get their name in print. So again, think about the issue carefully; we don't know with certainty that there is a risk, but we don't know that there isn't one. So don't panic and don't bury your head in the sand. You may scoff that I'm even writing this column, but I'd be irresponsible not to. Research has to continue, and I hope that we get it from impartial sources (if they exist). … Read more

House subcommittee debates cell phone radiation

Scientists told a House of Representatives subcommittee Thursday that more research is needed over the possible link between cell phone use and cancer. While past studies have found that cell phone radiation isn't dangerous, the scientists pointed to research that has found just the opposite.

"I cannot tell this committee that cell phones are definitely dangerous," said Dr. Ronald Herberman, director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute. "But, I certainly cannot tell you that they are safe."

Herberman, who expressed a similar sentiment in a controversial memo he wrote last July, appeared before the … Read more