Will Your Cell Phone Give You Cancer?
EmailIt's enough to make anyone crazy. The radiation from cell phones is invisible, impossible to measure without instruments — and yet it's there, getting into your brain for several hundred minutes a month, whenever you put the phone to your ear. Most people can't help wondering just a little if they've been doing themselves harm.
But has the explosion of cell phones onto the world scene caused an increase in brain tumors? A study in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute — a big one — says no.
The authors, led by Isabelle Deltour of the Institute of Cancer Epidemiology at the Danish Cancer Society, pored through public health statistics from Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden, where medical record-keeping has historically been very detailed. They crunched the numbers from 1974 to 2003, during the period when cell phones grew from zero to near-ubiquity.
16 million adults were included in the records. The authors looked for two types of brain tumors, glioma and meningioma. 59,984 people were diagnosed with them during the study period.
The key line:
"No change in incidence trends were observed from 1998 to 2003, the time when possible associations between mobile phone use and cancer risk would be informative about an induction period of 5-10 years."
The abstract of the study is HERE, and the complete paper is HERE. Some numbers from it:
"From 1974 to 2003, the incidence rate of glioma increased by 0.5% per year (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.2% to 0.8%) among men and by 0.2% per year (95% CI = -0.1% to 0.5%) among women and that of meningioma increased by 0.8% per year (95% CI = 0.4% to 1.3%) among men, and after the early 1990s, by 3.8% per year (95% CI = 3.2% to 4.4%) among women."
That said, the researchers caution that this is probably not the final word. It is hard, of course, to prove a negative. The authors say it may be that tumors from cell phones take more time to develop; that there may be people who are more vulnerable than others, but their numbers were hidden in the mass of data; or that the increased risk really is very small.
That said, the study does seem to calm the fears about cell phones and cancer. Cell phones and driving are another matter.
Steve Jobs' FBI File: Bomb Threat? 
Steve Jobs' FBI File Released 
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
I cannot believe they did not look at acoustic neuromas, a fairly common tumor near the ear. Why not? Makes me question the validity of this “tumor” study.
Posted by: Mark from atlanta | December 3, 2009, 8:42 pm 8:42 pm
Here we go with this again. If you talk on a cell phone several hundred minutes a month you can get external earitis from the friction of the phone against the ear. Removal of the ear is recommended, however, in some cases it merely callouses over.
Posted by: Robert Smith | December 3, 2009, 8:50 pm 8:50 pm
I got permanent headaches and insomnia when I had a cordless phone base station in my house. Hours after unplugging it my headaches went away. Since then I read phone radiations cause lipid peroxidation, a sign of oxidative stress. Oxidative stress means DNA damage and DNA damage in the long run causes cancer. By the way there is another source of high level of oxidative stress: pharmaceutical drugs…
Posted by: Rose | December 3, 2009, 10:12 pm 10:12 pm
On the roof of the building where I use to live,over the water’s tank, there is a sophisticated telecomunications base installed by a prestigious celular phones company;it has been working for almost a year, and since then I haven’t feel nothing strange on my health in this year.What do you think? best,Manuel
Posted by: Manuel Berggrun | December 16, 2009, 10:19 am 10:19 am
I cannot do without mobile. If this research is true, then isn’t there any way out this problem?
Posted by: Benn | December 23, 2009, 3:53 am 3:53 am
1. It’s hard to prove a negative. How true.
2. Were any of these studies done on children?
As an educator, I have seen many children with cell phones. I would like to see a well researched study like the one done in another country (perhaps Europe) that clearly does not show a correlation between cancer rates and cell phone use (especially in children).
Posted by: Stuart | January 12, 2010, 12:13 pm 12:13 pm
This is really an alarming news for cell for users. Scientists must find any way so that cell phone may not harm any body.
Posted by: Sebestian | January 15, 2010, 7:21 am 7:21 am
Radiation limits used to be 10mw per square cm.
People were afraid of big transmitting dishes however a small antenna with the same power level is more dangerous as the power is not spread over a large area as with a dish.
I suspect the radiation limits became politically expedient to ignore!
Posted by: Ed Taylor | January 18, 2010, 8:17 pm 8:17 pm
Ok, my friend made a comment earlier today about cell phones causing cancer. I’ve heard this before, but not for a long time. This got me thinking and i realized that this theory didn’t really make sense. Even if this were true then cell phones should be the last thing we should be worried about as a risk of causing cancer. The answer is actually quite seemingly simple and makes me wonder why there is so much hype money and research being put into the issue. This is why I’ve came to the conclusion i have, get ready for a brief physics lesson. Cell phones work by producing light as a signal, yes i said LIGHT, however also called electromagnetic radiation, they are the same thing. the difference is the light is a term used for referencing the visible spectrum of EMR, Think of it as a cow, cows can come in many different colors but they are still cows. in the electromagnetic spectrum you have in ascending order of its frequency: Radio, Microwave, Infrared, Visible, Ultraviolet, X-rays, Gamma-rays… and it goes on. now what is true is that higher frequencies of light do cause harm to your body and the higher it goes , the more dangerous they are. on that note, wouldn’t it make sense to say that visible light being much higher frequency than microwave light(cell phones signal) would be much more dangerous? Now you could argue that intensity could make a difference, and yes it could for example microwave ovens. but cell phones don’t use a lot of energy and if it were that intense, you wouldnt be able to hold the phone anyways because you would be burned because water absorbs microwaves(we are at least 60% water). no-one ever worries about shining a flashlight on themselves or others and putting a phone to your head is more like holding one of those little tiny LED lights to your head as far as intensity goes. you could make phones work in the visible spectrum but reception would SUCK! this is also why most things are broadcast in lower spectrums because most objects in the world are like clear glass to them and they pass through easily, pluss it uses less energy to broadcast at those levels too. another point i was going to make is there are many other things that produce more microwaves than a cell phone things like electric blankets for example probably produce more microwave light than a cell phone does, i think most if the heat from them is more in the infrared spectrum though but still its enough light to keep you warm meaning way more intensity, and yes heat and light are the same thing, with absolutely no light, you would have absolute 0. but thats another issue im not going to explain here. you can look it up yourselves if you like. I hope everyone understands where im coming from now. Witch brings me to my next question. why isnt anyone else pointing this out? I know theres people out there that realize this. i also know most people dont understand this concept of light and how broadcasting and recieving work even though it is a relativly simple one when you think about it, every phone has a unique microwave frequency assigned to it, just like radio stations (i dont hear any hype over them). could it be that people are just taking money and advantage over the ignorance of the masses or am i missing something? ps i may post this on some other blogs too, im curious for some input on this point and this one doesnt seem to have alot of traffic atm. Thanks, Tom.
Posted by: Tom | August 24, 2010, 4:29 am 4:29 am
I feel that if it is so important to talk text or share photos then do so from your house or from a place giving the indiviual all due privacy without endangering others on the roads, lack of common sence and be distracted to the point of not haveing control of your vehical then you should not be able to drive for a year, for each event you are found guilty of. I feel that if the cell phones were programed by the manufacturer as to prevent a cell phone not to be operational while within ten feet of a running car or motorcycle engine the problem would or should be resulved. If cell phones companys can not prevent them from working under these restraints then they should pay for any harm done to other. after all it is the device that is as much the problem as those who feel that it is their right to be in compt of others who like to live to a ripe old age.
Posted by: bob | September 24, 2010, 3:03 pm 3:03 pm