Mobile World

There has been a controversy for some time on the health risks that cell phones pose to humans through their use. While many have claimed most studies to be inconclusive a new recent study has been conducted that claims to have proven and shown an increase in cancer risks through the use of cell phones.
In Stockholm, Sweden a recent study conducted by the Karolinska Institute found that there was an increased risk of brain cancer in certain parts of the brain through the regular use of cell phones. The study consisted of 634 subjects over a two year period. Of the subjects 209 already had brain tumors and 425 were completely healthy. This most recent study took place over a 2 year period and showed that increased microwaves from the cell phones did indeed pose a health risk to the brain. Due to the small amount of subjects however a larger study is being done with 3,000 subjects with results due out late in 2009.
While it is not good to fall into a hysteria over every study, enough studies have been done on microwaves to prove that microwaves themselves can indeed pose serious health risks. Cell phones emit microwaves, it’s simple as that.
The FDA claims that cell phones pose no real serious threat to the public however the FDA allows drugs each year to be administered to the public that later get recalled for their dangerous side effects. Common sense will show you that the FDA is not always right when it comes to our safety, so using the FDA as a reliable source for safety information is not my first choice. I prefer to listen to the scientists rather than a government agency that in my opinion is flawed.
Without going into a panic and trashing your cell phone there are some steps to help reduce your microwave exposure from your cellular device. Following these steps may not entirely eliminate the risks but can significantly reduce them.
Step One – Trash Your Analog Phone
Okay, so I said don’t go trashing your cell phone in a panic. All I can say is oops. If you are using an analog cell phone you are increasing your microwave exposure by up to three times the normal compared to digital cell phone usage. If you have a concern for your health you will want to switch to a digital phone which has been shown to have a significant decrease in microwave exposure compared to analog.
Step Two – Use an Ear Piece or Bluetooth
This step has an obvious benefit. By using an ear piece you are directing the microwave exposure away from your head where the vulnerable area of the brains have been shown to have the risk factors. Ear pieces are fairly inexpensive ($20.00) and are considered more acceptable for driving use as well. Many laws have been passed requiring the use of earpieces during driving due to safety concerns so you actually are getting two birds with one stone here. Your cell phone may have even came with an ear piece already so now is the time to dust that baby off and take it for a run. Bluetooth can be pricier but the quality of communication is enhanced for talking in respects to earpieces.
Step Three – Check Specific Absorption Rate (SAR)
SAR is the amount of radio waves absorbed by your body through cell phone use. The FCC has a regulation standard of 1.6 watts or lower per kilogram of flesh weight. Cnet did some recent research on actual SAR levels with cell phones and these were the overall winners for the lowest SAR levels:
CELL PHONE LIMIT SAR 1.6
LG KG800 SAR 0.135
Motorola Razr V3x SAR 0.14
Nokia 9300 SAR 0.21
Nokia N90 SAR 0.22
Samsung SGH-G800 SAR 0.23
Samsung Sync SGH-A707 SAR 0.236
Nokia 7390 SAR 0.26
Samsung SGH-T809 SAR 0.32
Samsung SGH-E910 SAR 0.33
Motorola Razr2 V8 SAR 0.36
Step Four – Don’t Give Kids Cell Phones
With so many studies and controversy over the cell phone slash brain cancer issue it is best to not have a young developing child own a cell phone. This is somewhat problematic because a cell phone can actually increase safety in respect to emergencies and parent to child contact. I say if you must give a child a cell phone make sure they use earpieces, have a cell phone lowest on the SAR level, and limit their use to emergencies.
Step Four – Reduce Usage
We have become reliant on our cell phones and perhaps it’s time we start using them less. This of course is a personal decision and relies on how important this issue is to you. Some call the issue a media scare while others claim it’s an urgent health issue. As a free American it is up to you to decide from the facts if a cell phone is causing you harm. I always say better safe than sorry and you have to admit, how urgent are most of your cell phone calls?

The head of a prominent cancer research institute issued an unprecedented warning to his faculty and staff Wednesday: Limit cell phone use because of the possible risk of cancer.
The warning from Dr. Ronald B. Herberman, director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, is contrary to numerous studies that don’t find a link between cancer and cell phone use, and a public lack of worry by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
Herberman is basing his alarm on early unpublished data. He says it takes too long to get answers from science and he believes people should take action now especially when it comes to children.
“Really at the heart of my concern is that we shouldn’t wait for a definitive study to come out, but err on the side of being safe rather than sorry later,” Herberman said.
No other major academic cancer research institutions have sounded such an alarm about cell phone use. But Herberman’s advice is sure to raise concern among many cell phone users and especially parents.
In the memo he sent to about 3,000 faculty and staff Wednesday, he says children should use cell phones only for emergencies because their brains are still developing.
Adults should keep the phone away from the head and use the speakerphone or a wireless headset, he says. He even warns against using cell phones in public places like a bus because it exposes others to the phone’s electromagnetic fields.
The issue that concerns some scientists though nowhere near a consensus is electromagnetic radiation, especially its possible effects on children. It is not a major topic in conferences of brain specialists.
A 2008 University of Utah analysis looked at nine studies including some Herberman cites with thousands of brain tumor patients and concludes “we found no overall increased risk of brain tumors among cellular phone users. The potential elevated risk of brain tumors after long-term cellular phone use awaits confirmation by future studies.”
Studies last year in France and Norway concluded the same thing.
“If there is a risk from these products and at this point we do not know that there is it is probably very small,” the Food and Drug Administration says on an agency Web site.
Still, Herberman cites a “growing body of literature linking long-term cell phone use to possible adverse health effects including cancer.”
“Although the evidence is still controversial, I am convinced that there are sufficient data to warrant issuing an advisory to share some precautionary advice on cell phone use,” he wrote in his memo.
A driving force behind the memo was Devra Lee Davis, the director of the university’s center for environmental oncology.
“The question is do you want to play Russian roulette with your brain,” she said in an interview from her cell phone while using the hands-free speaker phone as recommended. “I don’t know that cell phones are dangerous. But I don’t know that they are safe.”
Of concern are the still unknown effects of more than a decade of cell phone use, with some studies raising alarms, said Davis, a former health adviser in the Clinton Administration.
She said 20 different groups have endorsed the advice the Pittsburgh cancer institute gave, and authorities in England, France and India have cautioned children’s use of cell phones.
Herberman and Davis point to a massive ongoing research project known as Interphone, involving scientists in 13 nations, mostly in Europe. Results already published in peer-reviewed journals from this project aren’t so alarming, but Herberman is citing work not yet published.
The published research focuses on more than 5,000 cases of brain tumors. The National Research Council in the U.S., which isn’t participating in the Interphone project, reported in January that the brain tumor research had “selection bias.” That means it relied on people with cancer to remember how often they used cell phones. It is not considered the most accurate research approach.
The largest published study, which appeared in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute in 2006, tracked 420,000 Danish cell phone users, including thousands that had used the phones for more than 10 years. It found no increased risk of cancer among those using cell phones.
A French study based on Interphone research and published in 2007 concluded that regular cell phone users had “no significant increased risk” for three major types of nervous system tumors. It did note, however, that there was “the possibility of an increased risk among the heaviest users” for one type of brain tumor, but that needs to be verified in future research.
Earlier research also has found no connection.
Joshua E. Muscat of Penn State University, who has studied cancer and cell phones in other research projects partly funded by the cell phone industry, said there are at least a dozen studies that have found no cancer-cell phone link. He said a Swedish study cited by Herberman as support for his warning was biased and flawed.
“We certainly don’t know of any mechanism by which radiofrequency exposure would cause a cancerous effect in cells. We just don’t know this might possibly occur,” Muscat said.
Cell phones emit radiofrequency energy, a type of radiation that is a form of electromagnetic radiation, according to the National Cancer Institute. Though studies are being done to see if there is a link between it and tumors of the brain and central nervous system, there is no definitive link between the two, the institute says on its Web site.
“By all means, if a person feels compelled that they should take precautions in reducing the amount of electromagnetic radio waves through their bodies, by all means they should do so,” said Dan Catena, a spokesman for the American Cancer Society. “But at the same time, we have to remember there’s no conclusive evidence that links cell phones to cancer, whether it’s brain tumors or other forms of cancer.”
Joe Farren, a spokesman for the CTIA-The Wireless Association, a trade group for the wireless industry, said the group believes there is a risk of misinforming the public if science isn’t used as the ultimate guide on the issue.
“When you look at the overwhelming majority of studies that have been peer reviewed and published in scientific journals around the world, you’ll find no relationship between wireless usage and adverse health affects,” Farren said.
Frank Barnes, who chaired the January report from the National Research Council, said Wednesday that “the jury is out” on how hazardous long-term cell phone use might be.
Speaking from his cell phone, the professor of electrical and computer engineering at the University of Colorado at Boulder said he takes no special precautions in his own phone use. And he offered no specific advice to people worried about the matter.
It’s up to each individual to decide what if anything to do. If people use a cell phone instead of having a land line, “that may very well be reasonable for them,” he said.
Susan Juffe, a 58-year-old Pittsburgh special education teacher, heard about Herberman’s cell phone advice on the radio earlier in the day.
“Now, I’m worried. It’s scary,” she said.
She says she’ll think twice about allowing her 10-year-old daughter Jayne to use the cell phone.
“I don’t want to get it (brain cancer) and I certainly don’t want you to get it,” she explained to her daughter.
Sara Loughran, a 24-year-old doctoral student at the University of Pittsburgh, sat in a bus stop Wednesday chatting on her cell phone with her mother. She also had heard the news earlier in the day, but was not as concerned.
“I think if they gave me specific numbers and specific information and it was scary enough, I would be concerned,” Loughran said, planning to call her mother again in a matter of minutes. “Without specific numbers, it’s too vague to get me worked up.”