A couple hours ago as I talked to my parents on the phone about how interesting this course has been throughout the quarter, my father pointed out to me that a friend of his had told him about prolonged cell phone use leading to some type of brain cancer. I was really skeptical at first about this information, but I knew that there could be some kind of relation between cell phone use and cancer because of the electromagnetic radiation (on the electromagnetic spectrum between FM radio waves and microwave) transmitted by the antennas. After listening to my father, I decided to do some research in relation to this topic. In the United States to receive approval from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) a cell phone must meet certain requirements, such as the SAR. The Specific Absorption Rate is a measure of Radio Frequency (RF) energy absorbed by the body through a cell phone. The current standard for a phone to be sold in the United States is set at 1.6 watts per kilogram (1.6 W/kg). However, in its website the FCC states that “a single SAR value does not provide sufficient information about the amount of RF exposure under typical usage conditions to reliably compare individual cell phone models.” Moreover, the SAR value only shows how much radio frequency the phone is able to release working at its highest functioning capacity under various frequencies and bands. A quick fun fact for those who love apple technology, according to various articles, the iPhone 4 at ear position has a SAR rating of 1.17 watts per kilogram, which is bellow the National cutoff for radio frequency energy. But does this mean anything significant for possible adverse health effects for iPhone users? Maybe, or maybe not, depending on many factors, such as the frequency of cell phone use by such consumers!
According to the American Cancer Society radio frequency waves cannot cause cancer by directly damaging and breaking DNA chemicals bonds, as x-rays, gamma rays, and UV light are able to. But it states that RF at very high levels can heat up body tissues, causing damage to the cells, nevertheless, RF given off by cell phones are much lower. In an article that I read on the American Cancer Society website it states that over 30 studies have been analyzed and the following results have been generalized for all studies: 1) In most studies when compared to control groups, most patients that developed brain tumor showed no significant difference in regards to cell phone use. 2) The majority of the studies do not show a positive correlation between cell phone use and increased risk for brain tumor. 3) Some studies done by researchers in Sweden show a positive correlation (in patients with cell phone use of >10 years) between increase incidents of brain tumors and cell phone use on the same side of the head where cell phones were held, however, other researches have not suggested the same results. Thinking back to what we have learned in class so far, it might make some sense that these positive correlations, in such patients with prolonged cell phone use, are seen because this long period of time allows for mutations to be accumulated in the cells. Although there is evidence for both sides of the argument, it seems that RF energy given off by cell phones is very low to cause any DNA damage.
In a study conducted by various Danish and German doctors, it was found no significant difference when comparing cases and control groups, and no observed increased risk of acoustic neuroma among regular cell phone users. There were just minor differences between male and females, and socioeconomic status indicators. Moreover, this study suggested no increased risk in acoustic neuroma cases associated with increasing time of cell phone use, completely opposite from the study conducted by Swedish researchers. The study found that “the risk of acoustic neuroma among regular cell phone users did not differ by sex: The odds ratio was 0.79 (95 percent CI: 0.36, 1.75) for males and 1.05 (95 percent CI: 0.45, 2.47) for females.” Interestingly, the findings also suggested that the side of the head where the cell phone was held did not correlate with acoustic neuroma tumor incidents seen more on one side versus the other. Additionally, the study’s results support two United States studies where no association between use of cell phones and risk of acoustic neuroma were observed. The questions to be asking are whether or not cell phones emit enough radiation to cause any harmful health effects, or if it would be any better to use hands-free or Bluetooth devices (which also emit radiation energy) to decrease acoustic neuroma incidents? Overall, it is not very clear whether or not brain tumors (i.e. glioblastomas) are caused by cell phone radiations, but a lot of work is being currently done in this field. Lastly, I wonder why is it that melanomas are not induced by cell phone radiation, since such tissue (skin) is more vulnerable to radiation?
Interested Link: http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/05/31/who.cell.phones/index.html?eref=rss_mostpopular
Sources:
American Cancer Society. "Cellular Phones ." American Cancer Society :: Information and Resources for Cancer: Breast, Colon, Prostate, Lung and Other Forms. N.p., 5 Jan. 2010. Web. 1 June 2011. http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerCauses/OtherCarcinogens/AtHome/cellular-phones.
Christensen, Helle C., Joachim Schüz, Michael Kosteljanetz, Hans S. Poulsen, Jens Thomsen, and Christoffer Johansen. "Cellular Telephone Use and Risk of Acoustic Neuroma." American Journal of Epidemiology 159 (3).Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health (2004): 277-283. Print.
