By Natasha Lomas, 31 March 2008 16:35
NEWS
Mobile phones could represent a public health time bomb akin to asbestos or smoking, according to a study by neurosurgeon Dr Vini G Khurana. It suggests there is growing evidence of a link between excessive long-term use of mobiles and certain types of brain tumours - reigniting a long-running debate about the safety of the technology.
Mobile in pictures
Check out silicon.com's latest mobile photo stories here
♦ Photos: Behind the scenes at Mobile World Congress 2008
♦ Photos: Bling up your BlackBerry
♦ Photos: When art meets tech - Nokia phone Morphs into view
♦ Photos: Lunar mobile phones preparing to soar
♦ Photos: Nokia Navigator maps out the route on foot
♦ Photos: Google Android comes out to play
During a 14-month-long study Khurana reviewed more than 100 studies on the effects of mobile phone use in recent medical and scientific literature - in addition to press and internet coverage - and concludes "there is a significant and increasing body of evidence for a link between mobile phone usage and certain brain tumours".
The risk may be as great as a two- to four-fold increase of developing a tumour on the same side of the head as the 'preferred side' for mobile phone use, the report warns.
It states: "There is a growing and statistically significant body of evidence reporting that brain tumours such as vestibular schwannoma (acoustic neuroma) and astrocytoma are associated with 'heavy' and 'prolonged' mobile phone use, particularly on the same side as the 'preferred ear' for telephony
"It is anticipated that this danger has far broader public health ramifications than asbestos and smoking, and directly concerns all of us, particularly the younger generation, including very young children."
Khurana, a Mayo Clinic-trained neurosurgeon with an advanced neurosurgery Fellowship in Cerebrovascular and Complex Tumor Surgery from the Barrow Neurological Institute in Phoenix, Arizona, and a fellow of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, points out that previous studies which found no evidence of a link between mobile use and an increased risk of cancer often did not include enough long-term mobile phone users in their study sample.
Because 10 or more years is the length of time it can take for tumours to develop, Khurana says health studies of mobile phones must consider lengthy exposure to the devices - of a decade or more. He believes mobile technology has now been around long enough for any public health effects to begin emerging.
The report states: "The 'incubation time' or 'latency' (i.e., the time from commencement of regular mobile phone usage to the diagnosis of a malignant solid brain tumour in a susceptible individual) may be in the order of 10 to 20 years. In the years 2008 to 2012, we will have reached the appropriate length of follow-up time to begin to definitively observe the impact of this global technology on brain tumour incidence rates."
While there is still no proven link between cancer and exposure to electromagnetic radiation from mobile phone use, Khurana said the growing body of evidence is cause for concern. Children's use of mobiles is particularly worrying, he claims, suggesting kids' use of mobiles should be restricted to emergency situations only.
Comments
There are 9 comments. Join the discussion
1. anonymous
"...risk may be as great as a two- to four-fold increase of developing a tumour on the same side of the head..."
This phrase is a bit of a giveaway; it makes me think that this is the same study as another that used very similar language a while ago. The key difference is that this seems to be FUDing whereas the other concluded that more study needs to be done to find the cause of the correlation, eg it might be to do with 'handed-ness'.
2. pete fitzmaurice
I used a landline phone for many hours a day and for twenty years. Usually using my left ear. I have suffered with tinitus in this same ear for a few years. I have recently started to get sharp twinges under this same ear. For a long time now, maybe three or four years i have only used my right ear when listening to phone conversations. Having thought about this problem for a long time, i am sure this is caused by the pressure from sound waves in close proximity to the ear drum and delicate nerves.
3. anonymous
immediately move all the cigarette taxes to mobile phone sales and usage fees
4. anonymous
It is good bet that these high frequency emissisions will have an effect on human health and the health of many animals on the planet.
Mankind and the animal kingdom have evolved over many millenia and can cope with natural radiation....how can they be expected to survive this ongoing and growing blitz of non natural radiation ?
Of course all the "big players" will deny any liability and will use the catch all phrase that there is insufficient
scientific evidence to prove a danger exists.
Sl
5. John H Woods
My boss exposed me to 2000 per cent of my usual air-incident risk, by asking me to complete a short time assignment with weekly air travel. I could increase my chance of winning the Lotto six-fold by spending another £5 a week. Do either of these things really make a difference? Of course not, because the chances are so low to begin with.
It is worth noting that, if there is an effect, we should minimise the radiation that people receive by having more masts around, therefore allowing the phones to transmit at lower power. I notice he hasn't suggested that.
6. Dr Mike Fryer
An interesting literature review but disappointing in that it lacks real data. It uses phrases such such as 'possible' 'could not be ruled out', 'suggesting' to persuade the reader of an effect but without real substance. The stated hypothesis of the work is 'that malignant brain tumours can be caused by "excessive" and prolonged mobile phone use.' However, nowhere is there any quantification or definition of what 'heavy' means. Therefore, although highlighting a possible problem and encouraging further research (a very good idea), this paper does nothing to facilitate a proper risk assessment. How many hours use of a mobile phone per week or day does the author regard as 'safe' and how many as 'dangerous'? He does not know?
7. Tim Jackson
Maths? Doubling the incidence of brain tumours (about 0.5%) does not bring it up to the incidence of lung cancers associated with smoking and asbestos (about 5%).
It may be true that if the trend suggested is proportionate to lifetime exposure, then if nothing is done, ever, then such a figure may ultimately be reached, but that is a highly unlikely scenario.
In practice this is an alarmist statement.
8. anonymous
Well guess what - electromagnetic radiation is found with:
CRT and other monitors
Hybrid fueled cars..
Guess you pays your money and takes your choice...
9. Jay
too many people are oblivious to this, the phone companys are too greedy to switch off as are some users