A Summary of the Scientific Arguments against Mobile Phone Masts and associated Base Stations
Introduction
There are many problems associated with trying to convey the Scientific Arguments against masts and base stations to a non-scientific audience. Scientists use complicated language and abbreviations are common - I have tried to translate much of the scientific language into plain English without distorting the meaning. I have also provided a list of
commonly used abbreviations.
The matter is further complicated by the fact that masts and base stations - especially those using 3G technology - are relatively new and some of the ill-health effects may only be experienced over longer time periods. Experiments conducted by scientists on rats rely on the rats being destroyed, and their brains and other organ tissues being examined. Obviously we cannot do that with people or children who are especially at risk. Instead Scientists conduct 'in vitro' experiments - that is experiments on groups of living cells in Petri dishes. The mobile phone industry has poured scorn on in vitro studies, claiming that they do not represent how cells behave in the human body. However, Scientists take the opposite view stating "in vitro studies...neither preclude nor confirm a health risk...but they speak in favour of such a possibility"
(The EU REFLEX Report Nov 2004)
There is also the matter of scientific impartiality. Contrary to popular opinion, scientists are not usually free to conduct research into anything that takes their fancy. Most scientific endeavours are sponsored either by industry or by Governments - and both industry and Government in the UK has an incedible amount of money invested in
3G technology.
The industry offered - and the Government accepted a whopping £22.5 billion pounds
for the 3G licences - at the time that represented 2.5% of the Gross Domestic Product of the UK. The licence holders obviously have a vested interest in recouping their investment - they are hardly likely therefore to invest in research to prove that their technology is unsafe, and open themselves to compensation claims. On the other hand, the Government are likewise unwilling to invest in research which could ultimately result in them being forced to refund the £22.5 billion to the licence holders. For details of dirty tricks campaigns by the mobile phone industry against specific researchers, see the
University of Washington Alumni Magazine concerning the case of Professor Lai.
There is also the question of the specific impartiality of specific individuals who are called upon to advise the Government about the safety of masts and base stations. A detailed report on the independance of the World Health Organisation's (WHO) International EMF Project and the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) [the two main international bodies responsible for setting safety standards] was published by Don Maisch in the
Journal of the Australian College of Nutritional and Environmental Medicine in April 2006. This challenged the claims of the ICNIRP to be independent from the industry, and criticised the WHO claiming in conclusion
"Such a blatant disregard for the fundamental principles of credible science....speaks of a desperation to bury independent science at all costs, even if that cost is the integrity of WHO."
Despite this there are now a number of reports and studies that demonstrate a clear link between the radiation emitted from base stations and ill-health, as recognised by the UK Government Commissioned
Stewart Report. The report concluded:
"The balance of evidence suggests that exposures to radiation below NRPB and ICNIRP guidelines do not cause adverse health effects to the general population...There is now scientific evidence, however, which suggests that there may be biological effects occurring at exposures below these guidelines...We conclude therefore that it is not possible at present to say that exposure to RF radiation, even at levels below national guidelines, is totally without potential adverse health effects, and that the gaps in knowledge are sufficient to justify a precautionary approach....we recommend that a precautionary approach to the use of mobile phone technologies be adopted until much more detailed and scientifically robust information on any health effects becomes available."
Since then both the Government and the industry, have claimed that this need for a ‘precautionary approach’ is fully satisfied by adopting the ICNIRP guidelines. But Stewart recommended a precautionary approach specifically because there is scientific evidence which suggests that there may be biological effects occurring at exposures below the ICNIRP guidelines (as quoted above). Therefore it is totally without logic that the Government and industry can claim to be satisfying Stewart's recommendations for a precautionary approach by adhereing to the ICNIRP guidelines, when it is evidence of biological effects below those guideline limits that caused Stewart to recommend a precautionary approach in the first place!
I appreciate that the above paragraphs are not easily understood so let me paraphrase it in laymans terms. Stewart says there is a potential problem with emissions below the ICNIRP guidelines so I recommend caution. The Government and industry say that they are acting with caution - they are sticking to the ICNIRP guidelines. Whichever way you look at it
the Government and industry position is a contradiction of Stewart's recommendations.
The ICNIRP Guidelines do not actually consider all of the potential ill-effects of EMF. The ICNIRP Guidelines state:
"these guidelines are based on short-term, immediate health effects such as stimulation of peripheral nerves and muscles, shocks and burns caused by touching conducting objects, and elevated tissue temperatures resulting from absorption of energy during exposure to EMF. In the case of potential long-term effects of exposure, such as an increased risk of cancer, ICNIRP concluded that available data are insufficient to provide a basis for setting exposure restrictions" (Source: ICNIRP 'Guidelines for Limiting Exposure to Time-Varying Electrical, Magnetic and Electromagnetic Fields (up to 300 GHz)’ Page 496 (April 1998 Volume 7, number 4 - 'Health Physics' section. Read the original source
here (PDF).
The Government and industry regularly dismiss concerns about cancer by stating their adherence to the ICNIRP exposure limits, yet the ICNIRP exposure limits take no account of any long term risks like cancer! And they claim to be acting responsibly!
The Stewart Report was published in May 2000, and since then there have been numerous studies that have elaborated and enhanced upon the scientific evidence of biological effects well below ICNIRP guidelines as noted in the report. I do not have the time nor the webspace to detail them all, but have summarised some in the following paragraphs.
Six Studies Showing Ill-Health Effects from Masts and Associated Base Stations
1. Study of the health of people living in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations.
Santini et al.
Pathol Biol (Paris) [Pathologie Biologie (Paris)] 2002; 50: 369–73
Found significant health effects on people living within 300 metres of mobile phone base stations. Conclusions include the recommendation:
"it is advisable that mobile phone base stations not be sited closer than 300meters to populations"
2. Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research (TNO)
Study for the Netherlands Ministries of Economic Affairs, Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment, and Health, Welfare and Sport
"Effects of Global Communications System Radio-Frequency Fields On Well Being and Cognitive Function of Human Subjects With and Without Subjective Complaints" (September 2003)
Found significant effects on wellbeing, according to a number of internationally-recognised criteria (including headaches, muscle fatigue/pain, dizziness etc) from 3G mast emissions well below accepted ‘safety’ levels (less than 1/25,000th of ICNIRP guidelines).
3. THE MICROWAVE SYNDROME - FURTHER ASPECTS OF A SPANISH STUDY
Oberfeld Gerd(1), Navarro A. Enrique(3), Portoles Manuel(2), Maestu Ceferino(4),GomezPerretta Claudio(2)
1) Public Health Department Salzburg, Austria
2) University Hospital La Fe. Valencia, Spain
3) Department of Applied Physics, University Valencia, Spain
4) Foundation European Bioelectromagnetism (FEB) Madrid, Spain
Presented at an International Conference in Kos (Greece), 2004
This study found significant ill-health effects in those living in the vicinity of two GSM mobile phone base stations. They observed that:
"The strongest five associations found are depressive tendency, fatigue, sleeping disorder, difficulty in concentration and cardiovascular problems."
4. INCREASED INCIDENCE OF CANCER NEAR A CELL-PHONE TRANSMITTER STATION
Ronni Wolf MD(1), Danny Wolf MD(2)
1. The Dermatology Unit, Kaplan Medical Center, Rechovot, and the Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel
2. The Pediatric Outpatient Clinic, Hasharon Region, Kupat Holim, Israel
Published in: International Journal of Cancer Prevention Volume 1, No. 2, April 2004
This study, based on medical records of people living within 350 metres of a long-established phone mast, showed a
fourfold increased incidence of cancer generally compared with the general population of Israel, and a tenfold increase specifically among women, compared with the surrounding locality further from the mast.
5. Naila Study, Germany (November 2004) Report by Researchers (five medical doctors)
"Following the call by Wolfram König, President of the Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz (Federal Agency for radiation protection), to all doctors of medicine to collaborate actively in the assessment of the risk posed by cellular radiation, the aim of our study was to examine whether people living close to cellular transmitter antennas were exposed to a heightened risk of taking ill with malignant tumors."
"The basis of the data used for the survey were PC files of the case histories of patients between the years 1994 and 2004. While adhering to data protection, the personal data of almost 1.000 patients were evaluated for this study, which was completed without any external financial support. It is intended to continue the project in the form of a register."
The result of the study shows that
the proportion of newly developing cancer cases was significantly higher among those patients who had lived during the past ten years at a distance of up to 400 metres from the cellular transmitter site, which bas been in operation since 1993, compared to those patients living further away, and that the patients fell ill on average 8 years earlier.
In the years 1999-2004, i.e. after five years’ operation of the transmitting installation,
the relative risk of getting cancer had trebled for the residents of the area in the proximity of the installation compared to the inhabitants of Naila outside the area.
6. Austrian Study - Press Release 1st May 2005
The radiation of a cell phone base station at a distance of 80 metres causes significant changes of the electrical currents in the brains of testees (measured by electroencephalogram, EEG). All the testees said they felt unwell during the radiation, some of them seriously.
According to the scientists,
this is the first worldwide proof of significant changes of the electrical currents in the brain by a cell phone base station at a distance of 80 metres.
These six reports are highlighted by
Dr Grahame Blackwell who concludes:
"These are the ONLY studies known of that specifically consider the effects of masts on people. All six of these studies show clear and significant ill-health effects.
There are no known studies relating to health effects of masts that do not show such ill-health effects.
"In this respect, any statement by industry or official sources that claims (or suggests) that:
(a) There is no evidence of ill-health effects from masts;
or
(b) The overwhelming evidence is that masts do not cause ill-health effects;
is completely and blatantly untrue."
The Reflex Project
An EU Funded project undertaken by 12 institutions from 7 EU Countries published in November 2004. The Report concluded:
"Based on the methodology used and the data obtained in the REFLEX study, the findings on genotoxicity caused by RF-EMF are hard facts"
This means that emissions
within the ICNIRP 'safety' guidelines damage DNA causing both single-strand and double-strand breaks. As the report notes, earlier research established that
DNA double strand breaks may lead to cell death, uncontrolled cell growth or cancer.
The RELEX Report is available in full
here or in summary, with the forward by Professor Ross Adey
here.
Dutch Government Study - Ministry of Economics 2003
Researchers conclude that exposure to EMF from 3G masts "cause health problems". The Dutch Economics Ministry reported
"If the test group was exposed to third generation [3G] base station signals, there was a significant impact. They felt tingling sensations, got headaches and felt nauseous." Exposure to traditional 2G base stations did not produce the same result. The blind trials were conducted on volunteers. Typically the industry and Government watchdogs dismissed the findings.
The
BBC Website published details of the research.
The Freiburger Appeal
Started in October 2002, the Freiburger Appeal is an open letter signed by over 2000 doctors against exposure to High Frequency Microwave Radiation (HFMR). The doctors have observed a dramatic rise of:
· Learning, concentration, and behavioural disorders (e.g. attention deficit disorder, ADD)
· Extreme fluctuations in blood pressure, ever harder to influence with medications
· Heart rhythm disorders
· Heart attacks and strokes among an increasingly younger population
· Brain-degenerative diseases (e.g. Alzheimer–s) and epilepsy
· Cancerous afflictions: leukemia, brain tumors
The doctors go on to state that:
We can no longer believe this to be purely coincidence, for:
· Too often do we observe a marked concentration of particular illnesses in correspondingly HFMR-polluted areas or apartments;
· Too often does a long-term disease or affliction improve or disappear in a relatively short time after reduction or elimination of HFMR pollution in the patient’s environment;
· Too often are our observations confirmed by on-site measurements of HFMR of unusual intensity.
The full text of the letter can be viewed on the
Planning Sanity Website.
The Catania Resolution
The Scientists at the International Conference “State of the Research on Electromagnetic Fields Scientific and Legal Issues”, organized by The National Institute for Prevention and Work Safety, Italy, the University of Vienna and the City of Catania, held in Catania (Italy) on September 13th 14th, 2002 signed a resolution stating that there are
potential health risks from phone masts operating below the EU limits, and request more research and development based on the precautionary principle.
For full details
click here
Dr Neil Cherry
Professor Cherry of New Zealand was one of the first researchers research and publish strong evidence that:
Electromagnetic fields and radiation damage DNA and enhance cell death rates and therefore they are a Ubiquitous Universal Genotoxic Carcinogen that enhances the rates of Cancer, Cardiac, Reproductive and Neurological disease and mortality in human populations. Therefore there is no safe threshold level. The only safe exposure level is zero, a position confirmed by dose-response trends in epidemiological studies.
See
Professor Cherry's website for more information.
A Report in The Sunday Times Links Phone Masts to Clusters of Cancer
Reports in the Sunday Times of 22nd April 2007 found high incidences of cancer, brain haemorrhages and high blood pressure within 400 yards of mobile phone masts, and a story in The Times on 23rd April reported that a mast has been dismantled on the back of this research after 25% of the staff at a school near a mast have developed tumours. Read the full details
here
and
here
20th April 2007 - The Sunday Times report that T-Mobile tried to bury adverse research
On 15th April The Sunday Times reported that T-Mobile had tried to bury a report that they themselves commissioned to evaluate the links between masts, handsets and ill health.
Read the article
here
The BioInitiative Report summarises Problems associated with Mobile Phones
A widely respected group of 14 scientists, public health professionals and engineers have published the BioInitiative Report. They summarise all evidence linking mobile phones and ill-health including brain tumors, breast cancer and leukemia amongst others and conclude
The existing ICNIRP and FCC limits for public and occupational exposure to ELF and RF are insufficiently protective of public heath
Read the full report
here
and the Summary of Conclusions
here
This is by no means the extent of the Scientific evidence supporting the view that mobile phone masts and base stations are harmful to health. Slowly - despite the vested interests, the case is being proven.
In the meantime, when confronted with the truth Dr Michael Clark NRPB Spokesman could only concur:
Interviewer: "Are we all guinea pigs in some global multi-billion pound commercial experiment?"
Dr Michael Clark (NRPB Spokesman): "In a way, yes, we are"
Source - Sunday Times 3/10/04
Moral Arguments
The flawed 'Consultation' Process
Useful Links
Return to Homepage