Informant: Salvador Lourdes
Long-Term Mobile Phone Use and Brain Tumor Risk
Questioning the authority of scientific journals
Long-Term Mobile Phone Use and Brain Tumor Risk
Interphone British Results
Criticism on former Interphone Study
Letters to the Editor
Sent: Friday, September 02, 2005 11:03 AM
Professor: "Report on acoustic-neuroma is worthless"
Created: 1 Sep 2005
Danish Professor Albert Gjedde of Aarhus Hospital knocks the recently published results in a international study that suggest that people using mobile phones for more than 10 years are at greater risk of developing "acoustic-neuroma", a benevolent type of tumor in the ear.
In the British-Scandinavian part of the study, 678 people with acoustic-neuroma tumors and a control group of 3553 people without the tumor, were tested.
"The study shows a possibilty [for developing acoustic-neuroma] that warrants further investigation, but it does not prove any direct risk and is basically just a hypothesis or theory. The study in itself is worthless" - says Prof. Albert Gjedde.
Prof. Albert Gjedde disputes the test on the grounds that the results relied on the testees recalling their own amount of mobile-phone usage going years back in time. He suggests that this may have lead the tested people with acoustic-neuroma to subconsciously excaggerate their recollection of mobile-phone usage.
The study is a cooperation between England, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Finland and is a part of the "Interphone" project that aims to study possible relationsships between mobile-phone usage and brain/nerve related diseases.
Danish Government has given 30 million kroner (= 2.7 million pounds) to research into health effects of mobile telephony, but that won't go far says Albert Gjedde who would like to see more money for research.
Article text in Danish
Source: ComOn.dk, 1. sept. 2005
Informant: Iris Atzmon
Omega see also:
Professor Albert Gjedde of Aarhus Hospital
Now we learn that the study checked phone use that is equivalent to only one hour a week....
----- Original Message ----- From: christinedoyle To: Iris Atzmon Sent: Monday, September 05, 2005 9:05 AM Subject: Emailing: newsprint.htm
Doctor warns against long-term cellphone use
Hong Kong - People should avoid long-term use of cellphones a Hong Kong neurosurgeon has warned, a media report said on Sunday.
Dawson Fong To-sang, chief of neurosurgery at Tuen Mun Hospital, said further research was needed to study the effects of phone use on the brain, the South China Morning Post reported.
Fong wanted more investigation to be done on the effects of phone use in the temporal region of the brain which is slightly in front of and above the ear. That area is most likely to be covered by the mobile phone and exposed to the highest frequencies, the doctor said.
He was commenting following the most recent study, carried out by Britain's Institute of Cancer Research, which found no links to the incidence of acoustic neuroma-type brain tumours which occur directly underneath the ear.
Surveyed 678 people who have used cellphones for 10 years The results of study, which surveyed 678 people who have used cellphones for 10 years, were published last week.
Fong said the study was limited because only one type of brain tumour -acoustic neuroma - was studied and the amount of time people spent using their phone was only equivalent to one hour a week.
He believed this was much less than many people, particularly youngsters and businessmen, spend using cellphones.
Fong said people should limit cellphone use to emergencies and avoid buying them for children under 14 years old.
"It's a very good invention, but to abuse it might well cause trouble in later years," he added. - Sapa-dpa
Published on the Web by IOL on 2005-09-04 10:46:16 © Independent Online 2005. All rights reserved. IOL publishes this article in good faith but is not liable for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information it contains.
Thanks for this Iris!!!
I knew there had to be something missing -- the same way studies were done re EMF RAPID -- either not checking effects of the obvious "white blood cells" which is the well-known way to check for overdose of ionizing radiation. As you know, "white blood cells" are related to Leukemia/Leukaemia regardless of the type of radiation and yet one scientist after another chooses some other parameter for their studies to prove whether there are effects. Then, as you know, studies are often re "intermittent exposures" unlike what happens to the innocent child/person who sleeps close to electric appliances, high frequencies on electrical wiring, electric meters, high voltage powerlines and cell tower antennae.
Assoc. Prof. Olle Johansson of the Karolinska Institute in Sweden specializes in dermatologic effects. You will note his research re EMR does investigate known effects of chronic, prolonged ultraviolet exposure when studying other EMR effects.
Since Leukemia/Leukaemia has been known to be the main cancer associated with nuclear radiation for over 50 years and since Leukemia/Leukaemia is the primary cancer that has been linked to Leukemia/Leukaemia, the most obvious studies to prove/disprove effects of chronic, prolonged EMR exposures at low doses are those that focus on white blood cell changes.
Inflammation is the beginning of the precancerous process. Inflammation can initially be identified by white blood cell changes. Studies must simulate "real life exposures" such as sleeping in one location for 6-8 hours every night for a month to six weeks (at a minimum depending on distance from source) re chronic, prolonged EMR exposures and obviously, any study relying on cell phone usage for an average of one hour even if evaluating months of exposure, does not come close to providing meaningful results!!!
Each and every study that did not find EMR adversely affects health should be challenged in similar way. Take care - Joanne
Joanne C. Mueller Guinea Pigs R Us
731 - 123rd Avenue N.W. Minneapolis, Minnesota 55448-2127 USA Phone: 763-755-6114 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
The breaking of bonds in DNA during transcription need not be the high-energetic effect of covalent bonds, but more likely breaking the much weaker Van der Waals forces. Damage during transcription is not the same as watching DNA being literally blown apart by photons.
Further, the damage is just as likely to be via free radicals, which do cause DNA damage. And since studies show that EMF does affect both the generation of free radicals and the supression of free radical removal, this mechanism cannot be dismissed either.
Therefore we have observational studies of actual DNA damage, and two possible mechanisms.
And I really can't understand where they get "the absence of a known biological mechanism for this" from.
Sorry: I keep muttering about this study. Interesting that even the establishment is remaining very cautious over this study. How would its methodology be challenged if the results had been the other way? I'd like to see the whole Journal article: does anyone have access?
Risk of a tumour on the same side of the head as reported phone use was raised for use for 10 years or longer (OR=1.8, 95% CI: 1.1-3.1).
Andy, did the news report this? An increased risk of 80% (OR=1.8) on the same side of the head.
is the 'Swedlow' referred to as the chief investigator in this study, the 'Swerdow' with an R, who used to work for the telecoms and in fact was the one who tried to stop all further research as it would be a 'waste of time'? If they are one and the same, the conclusions of this study are no suprise - and obviously extremely suspect!
I believe it is one and the same. And Chairman of AGNIR. Swerdlow also noted the night-time melatonin and women shift workers, which was brought up in the Andrew Mitchell MP debate, Jan 04.
Did he actually say no more research? Several time he has remained cautious "we still don't know".
Andy, I'm almost certain Swerdlow is the one who called for research to stop....perfectly safe, no need to waste more time and money. Unfortunately I can't recall the details or when this occurred - but if anyone else can call it to mind with anything more accurate than a memory, it could be useful I would think. If I am correct (and I think I am) the fact that he is also a 'telecom' man pretending to be independent, should indicate bias and bring this study into disrepute. Perhaps this might be something for the PR people?
Hi Jenny and Andy.
The Dane "Jorgen Bach Andersen" who is the main person on the Danish research into "Mobile damage" is one of those you call a "Telecom man" Pretending to be an independent ( he was also on the European study, The name COST). Our H3G expert witness Dr. Chadwick was on the same study, repeating the "same old" INCIRP, NRPB, whatever, nothing not repeated or read (I wonder how did Dr. Chadwick ever get a degree?, or has he?) Yeah, the schools degrade!
Andersen has been successful to convince the Danish Government to hire him as "THE INDEPENDENT SCIENTIST" they could use for this project and they are wondering (Danish government) why foreign scientists do not want to join the program. Why would they? With Anderson at the steering wheel they risk serious discrediting if they do not agree with him.
The thing is, he is not a scientist, he earns his living by working for the mobile phone industry, but then, he serves up all the answers the government wants to hear. There is a Danish scientist who has been fighting for the harmful mobile telephony cause for years. Her name is Sianette Kwee, who would have made a really good job of this research, so why do you think she has not been asked and she has been degraded, (even her university website has been taken away). SHE IS NOT POSITIVE ENOUGH. So much for Nordic Democracy! She has the same views as Olle Johansen. She has been warning of dangers for years. Look her up
If you type in her name on Google you get loads more.
We have just got the cost bill from the courtcase from Freshfields, Hutchisons lawyers in our court case for £. 470.000.- (yesterday) so I am a bit bloody minded right now, but I will be OK tomorrow if I can sleep, for a few hours, and get even more bloody minded and tell them to: F... O..) So see you later.
The wrong signals
Before you read this bear in mind that it is in Spiked an online publication and BT and the Mobile Operators Association are amongst its sponsors. They also rather curiously have the Medical Research Council as a sponsor. Spiked claims to stand for liberty, enlightenment and something else - writing biased and poorly researched articles hardly bears that out. It seems to have Burgess amongst its supporters. The study referred to is the one out the other day. Andy has written us a press release which went out yesterday.
To contact Spiked go to
the email address to write/complain to is email@example.com
They boast that content is of immense importance to them. I think this lot below can be torn apart fairly easily. Please email this article to anyone who has fought a mast campaign because they claim that one or two campaigners force others to join them and so stop masts going up. Please could anyone suffering ill effects from masts email them. This article is badly researched and they are ill-informed and bear in mind BURGESS has no scientific qualifications whatsoever.
What a remarkably ignorant editorial from "Spiked". Technology is wonderful, don't worry about the risks till later? Sounds like "New Orleans is a great holiday destination, don't shore up the levees, it won't happen" (as per today's news).
Of course you have to think worst case.
Re the 'Spiked' outfit.
Note their past ill-doings in the promotion of gm crops and foods - as uncovered by gmwatch and forerunner - 'ngin' in their article - 'Strange Bedfellows'- http://ngin.tripod.com/190303d.htm
The wrong signals
A major new study rejects the notion that mobile phones cause cancer. That the health authorities tell us to worry anyway shows that there's more to this debate than the science. First they don't say the real findings (it's about benign tumors, it shows increase AFTER 10 years), and then they continue their own manipulation and build a whole theory on this. It's ridiculus. it's spin in spin in spin etc....
I find it hard to grasp how the journalists are ready to make such idiots of themselves, and how "experts" from government can say very unscientific things and people still treat them with respect. They should be ridiculed publically, they invite it. It's unbelievable how brainwash works. Things like "an apple is black" can be accepted without question. Just makes you wonder what a world we live in.
Although you describe yourself as an online publication which stands for liberty and "enlightenment", your latest article on mobile phones is an appalling piece of journalism, which demonstrates the exact opposite. Looking at your list of sponsors, it becomes glaringly obvious why your article is so biased and ill researched. I will discuss this with Mike Dolan of the MOA at our next meeting.
To attack the precautionary approach on the basis of your obvious lack of understanding of Science is a dangerous path to tread, in particular as your article fuels a careless attitude to mobile phone use. This approach will backfire in due course when the dangers become clear.
Ever heard of the Freiburger and Bamberger Appeal which was signed by thousands of European medical professionals and the Naila Study, carried out by German doctors, which indicates that within a 400 m radius around a mobile phone mast cancer rates treble?? Obvioulsy NOT!
Please check the credentials of "Scientists" like Burgess before solely relying on their evidence. It is also very disturbing that Prof. Swerdlow from Cancer Research is Chair of AGNIR, advising government on non ionising radiation. Don't you think that this represents a conflict of interest?
Attacks on campaign groups like MastSanity - a registered National charity, representing thousands of members and giving help and advise to people who experience health problems due to exposure to pulsed magnetic fields - demonstrate your desperate attempt to appease your sponsors. For further feedback please see
From Mast Sanity
New study on acoustic neuromas and cell phone use
Here’s some good news for the Telcos spin factories: “No brain cancer link to mobile phones, study says” Watch the spinning of media articles coming out proclaiming the old ‘mobiles proven safe’ line. More justification for Motorola’s call to end all future research.
Note however, that Swerdlow is not saying there is no risk, just no “substantial risk in the first decade after starting use”. This is not new news as it is generally accepted that it would take at least 10 years for a statistically detectible risk to appear - if there is a risk. And what about that other study that found a connection with acoustic neuroma after 10 years of cell phone use?
What about what the Russian and Chinese RF scientists who see the risk of a whole range of possible neurological effects from prolonged cell phone use?
Note what Swerdlow et al said in December of 2004*:
“Despite the ubiquity of new technologies using RF’s, little is known about population exposures from RF sources and even less about the relative importance of different sources. Other cautions are that mobile phone studies to date have been able to address only relatively short lag periods, that almost no data are available on the consequences of childhood exposure, and that published data largely concentrate on a small number of outcomes, especially brain tumor and leukemia.”
* Ahlbom A, Green A, Kfeifets L, Savitz D, Swerdlow A, Epidemiology of Health Effects of Radiofrequency Exposure, Env. Health Pers. Vol. 112, NO. 17, Dec. 2004
This study is just another footnote in a long history of studies that have failed to give any real answers to the urgent question. What will be the effects on their mental wellbeing for the millions of children using mobile phones in 10-15 -20 years of use?
The Lonn study: no connection with mobile phone use and cancer. Really? http://www.emfacts.com/weblog/index.php?p=195
The Lonn study, commentary from Lloyd Morgan
Definitive Comments from the Central Brain Tumor Registry (USA)
The Lonn study: commentary from Sam Milham
Power Watch analysis on that acoustic neuroma study
Spinning of the Interphone study from “Spiked”
The Bizarre foundations of “Spiked”