This is the ultimate research study which will demystify all the myths related to cellphones & cell-tower radiation! This piece presented by Prof Mike Repacholi, Former Co-ordinator, Radiation and Environmental Health World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. He has presented all the relevant facts about relation of cancer & other health hazards with radiation.

1. Mobile phones and cancers:
What is the evidence?
Prof Mike Repacholi
University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Rome, Italy
Former Co-ordinator, Radiation and Environmental Health
World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland
Chairman Emeritus, International Commission on Non-Ionizing
Radiation Protection (ICNIRP)

2. Topics discussed
 How do RF fields interact with tissues?
 What head cancer are studied?
 How do scientists conduct research?
 Limitations of science
 Scientific reviews
 Assessing health risks
 IARC 2B classification (2011)
 Children’s sensitivity to EMF
 Activism in science
 World Health Organization (WHO)
 Conclusions

3. Wireless technologies are part of
modern life: there is no turning back
Child safety and
emergencies
Personal
Communications
Telecommunications

5. Radiofrequency electromagnetic
waves
Radio waves are electric (E) and magnetic (H) fields that
oscillate at radio frequencies

6. RF heating principle
-+
+
-
-
-
+ +
-
+ +
No Field
+
E
+RF fields can move charged particles, vibrate polar molecules and rotate
polar side chains on proteins.
This increased kinetic energy is manifested as heating.
To date no non-thermal effect has had any impact on health below
ICNIRP guidelines limits

7. Biological and Health Effects
 A biological effect is a measurable physiological response to
EMF exposure ….not necessarily hazardous
 An adverse health effect is a biological effect outside the
body's normal range of physiological compensation that is
detrimental to health or well-being

8. Head cancers
Head cancers are studied that are at locations
most exposed to RF from cell phones
Glioma: Glial cells in brain
surrounding nerve cells
Meningioma: In meninges,
tissue surrounding brain
Acoustic neuroma: Nerve
connecting the ear to the brain
Parotid gland tumour: Largest
salivary gland

9. How do scientists study effects from
mobile phones?
 Studies on cell suspensions or tissues (in vitro studies)
 Studies on whole animals (in vivo studies)
 Studies on human populations (epidemiology studies)
When assessing health risks, epidemiology studies are given
highest weight, but they are subject to biases and so need
support from well-conducted animal and cell studies.
ALL studies need to be replicated or confirmed by
independent labs.
ALL studies need to be taken into account, both +ve and –ve.
ONLY well-conducted studies are used to assess health risk.

10. Limitations of science
 Science cannot prove something does not occur (cant prove
a negative).
 Science needs to conduct many different types of studies
before conclusions can be reached, since studies can be
prone to errors and biases.
 Using well-conducted studies, health risks are determined
based on the weight of the evidence (results of all studies).
 If all study results point in the same direction, one has more
confidence in the conclusions about any risks to health.

11. Evaluating the database of acceptable studies
cellular
studies
clinical
studies
+
animal
studies
+
epidemiological
studies
+

12. Scientific reviews
Base stations and
wireless technologies
 RF exposures from base stations 0.002% to 2% of ICNIRP …lower or
comparable to RF emissions from radio or TV
 Only established health effect from RF fields.. increase in body
temperature (>1°C). Basis for ICNIRP guidelines. Need high field
intensities to increase temperature
A mobile phone against the head raises the temperature of the brain by
less than 0.1oC
 RF signals from wireless technologies in public areas (e.g. schools and
hospitals) normally 1000s times below ICNIRP
Refer: WHO Fact Sheet #304 Base stations and other wireless technologies, May 2006

13. Base stations and wireless
technologies (2)
 Body absorbs up to 5x more RF from FM radio and TV than base
stations .. Because radio and TV use lower RF frequencies and the
body absorbs more RF at these frequencies than the higher mobile
phone frequencies
Radio and TV have operated for over 50 years without any known
health consequence.
Digital versus analogue signals? There seems to be no unique health
effects due to different RF modulations because base station and
wireless technology signals are too weak; modulation effects occur at
much higher intensity levels.
WHO Fact Sheet #304 Base stations and other wireless technologies, May 2006

14. Brain cancer: Interphone study
 The Interphone pooled analysis from 13 participating
countries found no increased risk of glioma or
meningioma with mobile phone use >10 years.
 Some indications of increased risk of glioma for the
highest 10% of cumulative hours of cell phone use, but
no consistent trend of increasing risk with greater
duration of use.
 The researchers concluded biases and errors limit the
strength of these conclusions and prevent a causal
interpretation.

15. IARC
 WHO specialized agency for research on cancer classified
RF* as possibly carcinogenic to humans (2B) based on 2
studies reporting an increased risk of glioma from cell
phone use
 Weakest classification for a potential carcinogen does NOT
mean RF causes cancer but there is some weak scientific
evidence to suggest this but chance, bias or confounding
cannot be ruled out as causing this result with reasonable
confidence
 This merely means more research is needed before any
firm conclusion can be reached.
*IARC Press Release 208 (May 2011)

16. WHO Fact Sheet on Mobile Phones
Conclusion: An increased risk of brain tumors is not established

17. Activism in science
 There has been a huge amount of activism on this topic.
 Many web sites have been produced that provide misleading
information about health effects
 The BioInitiative Report (2012) presents the activists view
and uses only poorly conducted or unreplicated studies that
report positive effects in their review, merely to support
their preconceived conclusions.
 Unfortunately some national authorities believe the activists
instead of the highly reputable reviews and conclusions of
WHO, merely to placate a concerned public; but this will
ONLY generate more public concern.
 Activists have their own scientific journal, with an activist
as editor in chief, to publish activist articles.

18. Myths propagated by activists (1)
Cook popcorn? No. Some video clips were circulated in May
2008 on the internet claiming that it is possible to cook popcorn using
the electromagnetic energy. It was a hoax!
Cook an egg or the brain? No. Mobile phones are low powered
(0.25W max) and if all its power was deposited in the egg or the brain,
it would cause a very small temperature increase (0.10C) well below
that required to cook an egg which is > 700C
Cause explosions at petrol stations? No. There is no evidence
mobile phones caused explosions at any petrol station (UK Institute of
Petroleum). RF energy from mobile phones is too low to cause sparks
that ignite petrol.
Attract lightning? No. US National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration (NOAA) advises that cell phones, small metal items,
jewelry, etc., do not attract lightning. Lightning tends to strike much
taller objects.

19. Myths propagated by activists (2)
Cause collapse of bee colonies? Researchers in Germany suggested bees
were being "confused" by mobile phone signals causing Colony Collapse
Disorder (CCD) and bee deaths. But researchers from US universities have
identified a virus causing the deaths. The US Department of Agriculture says
there is no link between mobile phones and CCD.
Do 'shields' reduce RF from mobile phones? RF shield cases, earpiece
pads/shields, antenna clips/caps, “absorbing” buttons and ‘neutraliser’ chips
claim to reduce RF.
 Mobile phones automatically operate at the lowest power necessary to
maintain a quality call.
 Adding a device interfering with normal operation can reduce coverage,
reduce battery life and increase transmitter power of the phone and base
station (up to its maximum).
 WHO states that ‘shield’ products are unnecessary and their effectiveness in
reducing RF exposure is unproven.
 Concerned individuals can limit exposure by reducing call times or using
"hands-free" kits to keep mobile phones away from the head and body.

20. Reliable sources of information
 World Health Organization, fact sheets and reports
 International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation
(ICNIRP), reports, statements and guidelines
 European Commission Scientific Committee on Emerging
and Newly Identified Health Risks, (SCENIHR) reviews
 UK Health Protection Agency, reviews and fact sheets
 U.S. National Cancer Institute fact sheets
 Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety
Agency, reports and fact sheets
 Health Council of the Netherlands, reports
 Sweden SSI, reports

21. Head cancer:
Conclusions
 Large Interphone study found no evidence of
head cancers except in the heavy user group.
Almost certainly due to recall bias
 Hardell group has published many positive
results, but they are distinct “outliers” to most
other epidemiological studies
 Recent “systematic review” found no evidence mobile phones use up
to 10 yrs causing any head cancer (>10 yrs?)
 Only a few epidemiological studies have been conducted but found no
evidence of head cancers in children; more research is needed.
 Although there remains some uncertainty, the trend in the
accumulating evidence is increasingly against the hypothesis that
mobile phone use can cause brain tumours in adults. (ICNIRP)
 An increased risk of brain tumors is not established (WHO)

22. Thank you for
Thank you
your attention
for your
आपका ध्यान क लिए
े
attention
धन्यवाद
Prof. Mike Repacholi
Department of Information Engineering, Electronics and
Telecommunications (DIET)
University of Rome “La Sapienza”, Rome, Italy
E-mail: mrepacholi@yahoo.com