More Research on Cell Phone Safety Needed, Experts Say

Isthere a link between use and cancer? Moreresearch isneeded, say experts who met last week to discuss the topic.

Cell phone safety has beendebated for years, but current research is contradictory orinconclusive. Some studies have suggested a link between cell phone useand brain cancer, as well as some benign tumors. Most studies, though,do not show a clear link.

Cell phones operate with radiofrequencies (RF); they do not emit ionizing radiation, the type thatdamages DNA and is known to have the ability to cause cancer. However,there is some concern that cell phone use may indirectly affect tumorgrowth.

Experts convene in Washington

The 3-day meeting was sponsoredby the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, Universityof Pittsburgh, and the Environmental Health Trust, among others. It wasorganized by Devra L. Davis, PhD, MPH, Professor of Epidemiology,University of Pittsburgh, Graduate School of Public Health, and founderof the Environmental Health Trust, an organization devoted toresearching environmental health risks.

It coincided with a Senatehearing on the topic, as well as a recent on cell phone safetyby the Environmental Working Group. According to the report, concernsabout cell phone radiation exposure have prompted some countries– Germany, Switzerland, Israel, United Kingdom, France, andFinland– to recommend limiting exposure to it, especially forchildren. The report asks why the United States hasn't taken similaraction.

The meeting featureddiscussions with notable researchers in the field, including expertsfrom the National Institutes of Health and the American Cancer Society.

American Cancer Societyresearchers agree it's important to monitor the safety of cell phonesbecause they are so widely used.

What current evidence shows

"Cell phones are now usedworldwide by an estimated 3-4 billion people and there is increasingheavy use by children," says Michael J. Thun, MD, American CancerSociety Vice President Emeritus of Epidemiology and SurveillanceResearch. "Questions about the current evidence can only be resolved bylonger term epidemiologic follow-up and by critical evaluation ofexperimental studies that report biological effects from cell phones."

According to Thun,approximately 30 epidemiological studies have looked at therelationship between cell phones and brain cancer or benign tumors(meningioma, acoustic neuroma, salivary gland tumors), but they haveyielded contradictory results.

This may reflect the relatively shortuse (less than 20 years) of cell phones in most countries, differencesin study design, or the fact that all but 2 of the studies areretrospective. Those studies asked people with and without cancer toremember details about their past cell phone use. Results of that kindof study are considered less definitive than studies that beginmeasuring cell phone use in participants before they ever developcancer.

Thun says some importantstudies have not yet been published, such as the combined results fromInterphone, a large study of cell phone use and brain tumors being donein 13 countries. In addition, there have been no long-term studies ofchildren who have used cell phones since an early age. The heavy use ofcell phones by young children is of particular concern because theradiofrequency (RF) waves from cell phones reach more brain tissue inchildren than in adults.

Some researchers at thismeeting reported that RF waves from cell phones have biological effectsthat might affect tumor development, but those findings have not yetbeen replicated by independent scientists.

How to reduce your risk

While more research is needed,the American Cancer Society recommends that people who are concernedtake simple steps to reduce their exposure:

• Use a speaker phoneor other hands-free device. 
• Purchase a cell phone modelwith lower SAR (specificabsorption rate) ratings. 
• Parentsmay wish to limit their children's use of cellphones.

Concerned about the radiationemitted from your phone? See this of cell phone radiation levelsfrom CNET.

For more information, see ourdocument, .

Reviewed by:Members of the