There have been informations going around suggesting heavy mobile phone use is ‘likely’ to cause cancer,these informations are misleading, and don’t reflect what the evidence really shows.
With a lot of the evidence around mobile phones and cancer before. Overall, this evidence shows that mobiles are unlikely to cause brain tumours (nor any other type of cancer).
It is important that additional research be conducted into the long‐
term, heavy use of mobile phones.
Source of Radiation
When talking on a cell phone, a transmitter takes the sound of your voice and encodes it onto a continuous sine wave. A sine wave is just a type of continuously varying wave that radiates out from the antenna and fluctuates evenly through space. Sine waves are measured in terms of frequency, which is the number of times a wave oscillates up and down per second. Once the encoded sound has been placed on the sine wave, the transmitter sends the signal to the antenna, which then sends the signal out.
Cell phones have low-power transmitters in them. Most car phones have a transmitter power of 3 watts. A handheld cell phone operates on about 0.75 to 1 watt of power. The position of a transmitter inside a phone varies depending on the manufacturer, but it is usually in close proximity to the phone's antenna. The radio waves that send the encoded signal are made up of electromagnetic radiation propagated by the antenna. The function of an antenna in any radio transmitter is to launch the radio waves into space; in the case of cell phones, these waves are picked up by a receiver in the cell-phone tower.
Electromagnetic radiation is made up of waves of electric and magnetic energy moving at the speed of light. All electromagnetic energy falls somewhere on the electromagnetic spectrum, which ranges from extremely low frequency (ELF) radiation to X-rays and gamma rays.
Potential Health Risks
In the late 1970s, concerns were raised that magnetic fields from power lines were causing leukemia in children. Subsequent epidemiological studies found no connection between cancer and power lines. A more recent health scare related to everyday technology is the potential for radiation damage caused by cell phones. Studies on the issue continue to contradict one another.All cell phones emit some amount of electromagnetic radiation. Given the close proximity of the phone to the head, it is possible for the radiation to cause some sort of harm to the 118 million cell-phone users in the United States,Currently
59%of the Tanzanians are subscribed as users of mobile phones.More
What is being debated in the scientific and
political arenas is just how much radiation is considered unsafe, and if
there are any potential long-term effects of cell-phone radiation
exposure.There are two types of electromagnetic radiation:
- Ionizing radiation - This type of radiation contains enough electromagnetic energy to strip atoms and molecules from the tissue and alter chemical reactions in the body. Gamma rays and X-rays are two forms of ionizing radiation. We know they cause damage, which is why we wear a lead vest when X-rays are taken of our bodies.
- Non-ionizing radiation - Non-ionizing radiation is typically safe. It causes some heating effect, but usually not enough to cause any type of long-term damage to tissue. Radio-frequency energy, visible light and microwave radiation are considered non-ionizing.
Lyon, France, May 31, 2011 ‐‐ The WHO/International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer 1 , associated with wireless phone use.
Background
Over the last few years, there has been mounting concern about the possibility of adverse
health effects resulting from exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, such as those
emitted by wireless communication devices. The number of mobile phone subscriptions is
estimated at 5 billion globally.
From May 24–31 2011, a Working Group of 31 scientists from 14 countries has been meeting
at IARC in Lyon, France, to assess the potential carcinogenic hazards from exposure to
radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. These assessments will be published as Volume 102 of the IARC Monographs, which will be the fifth volume in this series to focus on physical agents, after Volume 55 (Solar Radiation), Volume 75 and Volume 78 on ionizing radiation (X‐rays, gamma‐rays, neutrons, radio‐nuclides), and Volume 80 on non‐ionizing radiation (extremely low‐frequency electromagnetic fields).
The IARC Monograph Working Group discussed the possibility that these exposures might induce long‐term health effects, in particular an increased risk for cancer. This has relevance for public health, particularly for users of mobile phones, as the number of users is large and growing, particularly among young adults and children.
The IARC Monograph Working Group discussed and evaluated the available literature on the following exposure categories involving radiofrequency electromagnetic fields: 3⁄4 occupational exposures to radar and to microwaves; 3⁄4 environmental exposures associated with transmission of signals for radio, television and wireless telecommunication; and 3⁄4 personal exposures associated with the use of wireless telephones.
International experts shared the complex task of tackling the exposure data, the studies of cancer in humans, the studies of cancer in experimental animals, and the mechanistic and other relevant data.
1237 913 new cases of brain cancers (all types combined) occurred around the world in 2008 (gliomas represent 2/3 of these). Source: Globocan 2008Page 2
IARC CLASSIFIES RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AS
POSSIBLY CARCINOGENIC TO HUMANS
Results
The evidence was reviewed critically, and overall evaluated as being limited 2 among users of
wireless telephones for glioma and acoustic neuroma, and inadequate 3 to draw conclusions for
other types of cancers. The evidence from the occupational and environmental exposures
mentioned above was similarly judged inadequate. The Working Group did not quantitate the risk; however, one study of past cell phone use (up to the year 2004), showed a 40% increased risk for gliomas in the highest category of heavy users (reported average: 30 minutes per day over a 10‐year period).
Conclusions
Dr Jonathan Samet (University of Southern California, USA), overall Chairman of the Working Group, indicated that "the evidence, while still accumulating, is strong enough to support a conclusion and the 2B classification. The conclusion means that there could be some risk, and
therefore we need to keep a close watch for a link between cell phones and cancer risk."
"Given the potential consequences for public health of this classification and findings," said IARC
Director Christopher Wild, "it is important that additional research be conducted into the long‐term, heavy use of mobile phones. Pending the availability of such information, it is important to take pragmatic measures to reduce exposure such as hands‐free devices or texting. "
The Working Group considered hundreds of scientific articles; the complete list will be published in the Monograph. It is noteworthy to mention that several recent in‐press scientific articles 4 resulting from the Interphone study were made available to the working group shortly before it was due to convene, reflecting their acceptance for publication at that time, and were included in the evaluation.
A concise report summarizing the main conclusions of the IARC Working Group and the evaluations of the carcinogenic hazard from radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (including the use of mobile telephones) will be published in The Lancet Oncology in its July 1 issue, and in a few days online.
2
'Limited evidence of carcinogenicity': A positive association has been observed between exposure to the agent
and cancer for which a causal interpretation is considered by the Working Group to be credible, but chance, bias or
confounding could not be ruled out with reasonable confidence.
3
'Inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity': The available studies are of insufficient quality, consistency or statistical
power to permit a conclusion regarding the presence or absence of a causal association between exposure and
cancer, or no data on cancer in humans are available.
4
a. 'Acoustic neuroma risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the INTERPHONE international case‐
control study' (the Interphone Study Group, in Cancer Epidemiology, in press)
b. 'Estimation of RF energy absorbed in the brain from mobile phones in the Interphone study' (Cardis et al.,
Occupational and Environmental Medicine, in press)
c. 'Risk of brain tumours in relation to estimated RF dose from mobile phones – results from five Interphone
countries' (Cardis et al., Occupational and Environmental Medicine, in press)
d. 'Location of Gliomas in Relation to Mobile Telephone Use: A Case‐Case and Case‐Specular Analysis' (American
Journal of Epidemiology, May 24, 2011. [Epub ahead of print].