|
Safe Cell Tab
Radiation protection
for cell phone users
go to page bottom for special offer
Articles Index for cell phone radiation reports
What can I use to protect myself from cell phone radiation
How cell phone radiation and electromagnetic radiation works
|
|
Cell Phone Radiation
Augusta, Maine — Cell phones are virtually everywhere in our society,
providing wireless, pocket-sized safety and convenience to great-grandparents,
business professionals, soccer moms, teenagers and, increasingly, young
children. But are they safe?
The Legislature’s Health and Human Services Committee heard from national
advocates claiming that cell phone use is linked to brain cancer and other
disorders and calling for a prominent and graphic warning label on every unit
sold in Maine.
Maine would become the first state with such a requirement.
Opponents, including Maine’s top public health official as well as
representatives of the wireless industry, called the proposal misguided and
inflammatory and said it would conflict with federal regulatory policies.
The bill, LD 1706, sponsored by Rep. Andrea Boland, D-Sanford, would require
cell phone manufacturers to apply a permanent, non-removable warning label to
every unit sold in Maine. The label would cover at least 30 percent of the plain
area of the phone and caution users to hold the unit several inches away from
their heads or to use earphone-and-speaker technology.
Boland testified that a warning label is an easy way to alert people to the
dangers cell phones can pose. “No one is suggesting we don’t use cell phones,”
she said. “We’re only suggesting people use them safely.”
The label also would include a color graphic of the brain of a 5-year-old child
showing the extent to which radiation from a cell phone is absorbed. The
illustration would be drawn from the recent research of professor Om Gandhi of
the University of Utah, who has studied the relative absorption and effect of
cell phone radiation on the brains of children and adults. Gandhi was among a
number of scientific experts who traveled to Augusta on Tuesday for the public
hearing before the HHS committee.
Several individuals told the committee stories of personal tragedy, including
Ellie and Alan Marks, who traveled to Augusta from their home in San Francisco.
Realtor Alan Marks told lawmakers he was diagnosed two years ago with a
malignant brain tumor on the right side of his brain — the same side as the ear
he used most when on his cell phone.
“It was malignant and it was my death sentence,” he said. Marks said physicians
and scientists “around the world” have determined that the tumor was directly
attributable to his long-term use of a cellular telephone.
Marks said that if he had had any idea that cell phones have been linked with
brain cancers, he would have altered his use of the devices.
“I wish I could go back 23 years and start over by never holding that thing to
my head,” he said. “But I can’t. All I can do is let others know my story.”
Marks accused the cell phone industry of denying and disregarding growing
evidence that use of the devices is related to brain tumor development.
That evidence includes a recent study by Dr. Franz Adlkofer, a biologist and
professor of internal medicine in Munich, Germany. Adlkofer told the committee
that the kind of electromagnetic radiation emitted by cell phones damages DNA
strands, setting the stage for many disorders, including cancer.
“Special attention should be given to the most frequent users of this
technology, children and adolescents, who are also the most vulnerable members
of our society,” he said in his testimony in support of a warning label.
Professor Devra Davis of Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York said recent
studies of people who have used cell phones for 10 years or longer show a clear
connection to cancers of the brain, salivary glands and acoustic nerves, as well
as less deadly problems ranging from reduced sperm count to insomnia.
Davis cautioned that older safety studies referenced by the cell phone industry
looked at subjects who had been using the technology only for a few years. She
said it can take 20 or 30 years for cancer to develop and that increased use
among youngsters poses a heightened risk.
Local supporters of the bill included Dr. Meryl Nass, a physician from Bar
Harbor who specializes in toxic exposures and “odd illnesses,” and Michael
Belliveau of the Maine-based Environmental Health Strategy Center. In his
testimony, Belliveau said the “three irrefutable facts” about cell phones — that
they expose the hu-man brain to radiation, that radiation causes biological
changes in human cells, and that some studies link cell phone use to brain
cancer in humans — are reason enough to alert consumers to the potential dangers
of the technology and encourage them to reduce exposure among children and adopt
the use of hands-free devices.
But Dr. Dora Anne Mills, director of the Maine Center for Disease Control and
Prevention, referenced a number of U.S. and international agencies and said
there is not sufficient evidence of harm to require a warning label on cell
phones.
The state could require warnings on “everything from apples to xylophones,”
which would only result in “an overwhelmed and turned-off public,” she said.
Mills noted that cell phones are often key to providing safety and security for
children and their families.
Dane Snowden of CTIA, the international association for the wireless
communications industry, also spoke against the measure on the grounds that
there is insufficient evidence of danger. The warning specified in the bill
“strongly suggests a safety concern that is unfounded, unsupported and contrary
to the views of interna-tional health organizations and government agencies
regarding the safety of wireless devices,” he said in his testimony. He also
said the measure would violate federal rules regarding states’ ability to
regulate telecommunications technology.
Curtis Picard of the Maine Merchants Association argued the warning could drive
down cell phone sales, adversely affecting Maine businesses.
|
|
|
