Yes

by Justin Lee

Created on: January 26, 2009   Last Updated: January 29, 2009

Calling all Concerned Cellular Citizens.

In September of 2008, the European Parliament voted 522 to 16 in favor of imposing tighter limits on acceptable levels of electromagnetic radiation exposure, citing as evidence a report that implicated cell phone use with brain tumors (1). However, despite this European action, America has yet to follow suit, and the debate over cell phone safety rages on. Meanwhile, the 260 million cell phone users in the United States, including 46% of U.S. children aged 8-12 (3), remain exposed to the very real dangers of cell phone overuse.

Even though the radiofrequency (RF) radiation that cell phones give off is "non-ionizing" (i.e., it cannot eject electrons out of an atom's orbit), excessive exposure can be extremely harmful. For instance, developmental studies on mammals, birds, and non-mammalian species have found that RF radiation at intensities high enough to cause significant thermal change is teratogenic (causes birth defects) (6). In fact, RF radiation is so potent that it's often used in cancer therapies as a way to incinerate tumor cells; RF ablation involves placing electrodes near the site of a tumor and blasting it with RF, and the Kanzius machine fires an external RF beam into the patient to "boil" tiny bits of metal placed near a tumor (7).

Previous studies denying a cell phone-brain cancer link all suffered from a serious flaw: they did not look at long-term (greater than 10 year) effects of RF radiation exposure. Cell phones have been in mainstream usage for only a decade or so, but according to the American Cancer Society, radiation-induced brain tumors normally take about 10-15 years to develop (3). New, long-term epidemiological studies have shown that cell phone use is linked to cancer, specifically gliomas (malignant brain tumors) and acoustic neuromas (tumors of the brain's auditory nerve) (1, 3).

In 2006, investigators reported in the October issue of the World Journal of Surgical Oncology that there was a 70% increased risk of grade III-IV astrocytomas (highly aggressive brain tumors) and a nearly 4-fold increase in risk for acoustic neuromas after 15 years of exposure to analog cell phones (3, 5). In a study published in the May 2008 issue of the International Journal of Oncology, researchers examined participants who had used cell phones for 10 years or longer and found an approximately twofold increase in risk for both gliomas and acoustic neuromas with ipsilateral exposure (as reflected by which hand the subject typically used to hold his/her cell phone). Notably, there was no increased risk for meningiomas (tumors that occur in the membranes covering the brain and spinal cord), indicating that observational and recall bias were likely non-factors since such bias would have likely existed for all tumor types (1, 2, 3).

The aforementioned and other long-term epidemiological studies have proven that chronic cell phone use significantly increases one's risk of developing cancer, but many opponents still contest the link between cell phone use and cancer on the grounds that there hasn't been a "definitively proven mechanism" through which cell phone radiation can turn normal cells cancerous. Recent scientific findings, however, have suggested several such mechanisms.

First, cell phone radiation upregulates mRNA associated with proteins linked to cell injury. In 2008, researchers at the Medical College of Wisconsin reported that rats chronically exposed to cell phone radiation experienced significant upregulation of mRNA associated with proteins linked to cellular injury. They postulated that such radiation "may result in cumulative injuries that could eventually lead to clinically significant neurological damage." Many other scientists have reported that cell phone radiation also results in DNA damage or modulation, both of which increase the risk of cancer (1).

Second, cell phone waves can change the conformation or binding-affinity of proteins, resulting in functional changes in these proteins/receptors (6). In the August 2007 issue of the Biochemical Journal, Freidman et al. reported that RF waves emitted at intensities even lower than those emitted by mobile phones are able to activate oncogenic signaling (i.e., start a cell down the path to becoming cancerous) (4,10).

Third, evidence suggests that cell phone radiofrequencies interact with magnetite (a metal found in trace amounts in all cells) in the body (6, 9), possibly generating torques that affect nearby ion channel function. RF could also generate radical pair interactions, increasing free-radical concentrations (6). Given the link between ion channel defects, free radicals and disease, these potential RF mechanisms should not be ignored.

The list goes on. There are a myriad of other potential effects of RF radiation on cells that have yet to be investigated in depth. The energy could be absorbed by the vibrational states of biological components important in cell division such as microtubules. Or the RF could be demodulated to produce ELF electric fields (classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as a "possible human carcinogen") (6). At this point in time, we simply don't know enough about the effect of RF on cells to definitively say which mechanisms play the greatest role in the development of cancer. What we do know, however, is that in light of recent epidemiological and scientific findings implicating cell phone use with cancer, we can ill afford to remain complacent on this issue.

Citations

(1) Khurana et al. 2008 (Vini G. Khurana, John E. Moulder, and Colin G. Orton. "There is currently enough evidence and technology available to warrant taking immediate steps to reduce exposure of consumers to cell-phone-related electromagnetic radiation." Medical Physics, Vol. 35, No. 12, pp. 5203-5206, December 2008)

(2) Khurana et al. 2008 (V. G. Khurana, C. Teo, M. Kundi, L. Hardell, and M. Carlberg, "Cell phones and brain tumors: A review including the long-term epidemiologic data.")

(3) Mead 2008 (M. Nathaniel Mead. "Cancer: Strong Signal for Cell Phone Effects" Environ Health Perspect. 2008 October; 116(10): A422.)

(4) Arthur 2007 (Arthur JS. "MAPK activation by radio waves." Biochem J. 2007 Aug 1;405(3):559-68. )

(5) Hardell et al. 2006 (Hardell L, Mild KH, Carlberg M, Sderqvist F. "Tumour risk associated with use of cellular telephones or cordless desktop telephones." World J Surg Oncol. 2006; 4: 74.)

(6) Kheifets et al. 2005 (Kheifets L, Repacholi M, Saunders R, van Deventer E. "The sensitivity of children to electromagnetic fields." PEDIATRICS Vol. 116 No. 2 August 2005, pp. e303-e313)

(7) Nephin 2005 (Dan Nephin "Center to Test Radio Wave Cancer Treatment" Available Online: http://www.health-news.org/breaking/1645/center-to-test-radio-wave-cancer-treatment.html Last accessed: 1/23/09)

(8) Yates & Borenstein 2008 (Jennifer C. Yates, Seth Borenstein. "Pittsburgh cancer institute warns of cell phone-cancer risks" Available Online: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory?id=5439074 Last accessed 1/23/09)

(9) Kirschvink et al. 2001 (Joseph L. Kirschvink, Atsuko Kobayashi-Kirschvink, Juan C. Diaz-Ricci, and Steven J. Kirschvink. "Magnetite in Human Tissues: A Mechanism for the Biological Effects of Weak ELF Magnetic Fields" Bioelectromagnetics Supplement 1 :101-113, 1992)

(10) Friedman et al. 2007 (Joseph Friedman, Sarah Kraus, Yirmi Hauptman, Yoni Schiff, and Rony Seger. "Mechanism of short-term ERK activation by electromagnetic fields at mobile phone frequencies" Biochem J. 2007 August 1; 405(Pt 3): 559-568.)

Learn more about this author, Justin Lee.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.