Mobile phones, wifi, devices linked to cancer 35



View Profile

Finally a scientist has come out and demonstrated what we all fear… that our mobile phone, wifi, radio, and TV transmitters that produce low intensity radio frequency radiation are damaging to our health. A paper released last week in Electromagnetic Biology & Medicine suggests that all these things indeed could her causing oxidative stress in cells and could cause DNA damage and other biological effects referred to as reactive oxygen species (ROS) and antioxidant defense.

“These data are a clear sign of the real risks this kind of radiation poses for human health,” Co-author Dr. Igor Yakymenko said.

The study, done by American and Ukrainian scientists, “indicates that among 100 currently available peer-reviewed studies dealing with oxidative effects of low-intensity RFR, in general, 93 confirmed that RFR induces oxidative effects in biological systems.”

“Ordinary wireless radiation” could trigger ROS production in cells, the study said.

Yakymenko said that use of mobile phone for 20 minutes a day for five years can boost the risk of one type of brain tumour by three times, while using a mobile phone for an hour a day for four years and increase the risk of certain tumours by three to five times.

According to the cancer council, in 2015, about 1,820 Australians (1,080 men and 740 women) are expected to be diagnosed with brain cancer and this is expected to rise in coming years.

Yakymenko also cautioned that brain and related cancers can take as many as 30 years to develop.

The “data were obtained on adults who used cell phones mostly up to 10 years as adults,” he said, according to the New York Daily News. “The situation can dramatically differ for children who use cells phone in childhood, when their biology much more sensitive to hazardous factors, and will use it over the life.”

There has been some debate in the media today about Mr Yakymenko’s study and whether the sample is appropriate for the media coverage he is getting.

Emeritus Professor in the School of Public Health a the The University of Sydney, Bruce Armstrong commented on the study today.

“The soundness of the research is hard to judge because the paper focuses mainly on the research results and not on the research quality, which is likely to be highly variable.”

“The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) reviewed the evidence for cancer causing effects (one of the possible outcomes of oxidative stress in cells) of RFR in 2011 and concluded that RFR possibly causes cancer in humans. IARC would have considered most of the papers covered by this review in its deliberations.” With respect specifically to the effects in cellular systems IARC concluded “Overall, the Working Group concluded that there was weak evidence that exposure to RF radiation affects oxidative stress and alters the levels of reactive oxygen species”. With respect to experimental animals IARC concluded “There is limited evidence in experimental animals for the carcinogenicity [cancer causing effect] of radiofrequency radiation”.

In practical terms, the conclusions of the Yakymenko paper and the IARC monograph are little different. Yakymenko et al concluded:  “… a broad biological potential of ROS and other free radicals, including both their mutagenic effects and their signalling regulatory potential, makes RFR a potentially hazardous factor for human health.”

With respect to cancer, there is little if anything in cancer trends over the past 30 years, and particularly in the brain (given concerns about mobile phone use), to suggest that recent large increases in exposure to RFR are increasing cancer risk.”

How cautious have you been over the years about the risks of mobile devices and radiation?  And how at risk are you and your loved ones?

Rebecca Wilson

Rebecca Wilson is the founder and publisher of Starts at Sixty. The daughter of two baby boomers, she has built the online community for over 60s by listening carefully to the issues and seeking out answers, insights and information for over 60s throughout Australia. Rebecca is an experienced marketer, a trained journalist and has a degree in politics. A mother of 3, she passionately facilitates and leads our over 60s community, bringing the community opinions, needs and interests to the fore and making Starts at Sixty a fun place to be.

  1. I already keep my exposure to these as low as possible. However the big problem for me now is wifi everywhere I go, and no way of knowing I am being exposed. I.e. My neighbours, airports, etc.

    1 REPLY
    • Its all about distance. The power emitted by a mobile phone next to your brain is immensely greater than the stray signals you mention. However country people have it better, with less signals, pure food, lower stress and more

  2. I am always very careful with my use of these things – have been aware of EMR and feel that, regardless of arguments either way, it is better to be sure!

    1 REPLY
  3. As far as the “experts” over the years are concerned – everything will give us cancer. I remember years ago when the same thing was said about using microwave ovens. Maybe they want us to live like in the depression. Everything should be used in moderation.

    2 REPLY
    • Microwave ovens – and mobile phones – are dangerous at close distances. That’s why microwave ovens have a metal screen viewing grid and you are advised not to look too close. I predict one day mobile phones will have a screen that directs signal away from your ear and brain. They are available from third party suppliers now, but speakerphone is good too, as the signal is not pressed against you.

  4. No surprise at all! Thing is we don’t want to know about it! We love our mobile devices though! I only use mine on speaker! Not near the ear!

  5. He just doesn’t make sense! The air around us. and that includes inside us, is crammed with radio energy all the time, and was before we discovered it and made use of it! If his contention was true, then we would all have died of cancer long ago – in fact I doubt if the human race could have come into existence at all. And don’t forget, radio frequency is simply one small part of the overall spectrum of energy that surrounds us, which also includes, sound and heat. Personally, I won’t be panicking about his ‘findings’!

    2 REPLY
    • It makes absolute sense when you introduce the distance factor. Five watts of Radio Frequency radiation pressed hard against your brain is immensely – massively greater than from say 10 meters away. All the other radio signals in the ether are microscopic too, compared to radiation at the source pressed against your ear/brain.
      A pratical example – high voltage power lines can make a fluorescent tube glow in close proximity, but walk a few meters away and nothing happens.
      As a Radio Technician who has studied what Neurosurgeon Dr Charlie Teo has to say, I totally understand his view.
      I always answer calls on speaker. The radiation is hugely less.

      1 REPLY
      • I’m with you all the way, Kevin.

    • It makes sense. Mobile phone is used close range next the the head.

  6. ‘Scientists’ are credited with saying lots of things, especially by the popular media or via social media speculation…I think it’s essential that a qualified, independent body of knowledgeable practitioners review and test the data and the facts of the matter to well and truly determine the long and short-term risk of this technology. To have an industry study would be of little to no value, given the profit motive.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *