Study: Cell Phone Radiation harms DNA

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2004-12-20 05:23pm

MUNICH/AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - Radio waves from mobile phones harm body cells and damage DNA in laboratory conditions, according to a new study majority-funded by the European Union, researchers said on Monday.

The so-called Reflex study, conducted by 12 research groups in seven European countries, did not prove that mobile phones are a risk to health but concluded that more research is needed to see if effects can also be found outside a lab.

The $100 billion a year mobile phone industry asserts that there is no conclusive evidence of harmful effects as a result of electromagnetic radiation.

About 650 million mobile phones are expected to be sold to consumers this year, and over 1.5 billion people around the world use one.

The research project, which took four years and which was coordinated by the German research group Verum, studied the effect of radiation on human and animal cells in a laboratory.

After being exposed to electromagnetic fields that are typical for mobile phones, the cells showed a significant increase in single and double-strand DNA breaks. The damage could not always be repaired by the cell. DNA carries the genetic material of an organism and its different cells.

"There was remaining damage for future generation of cells," said project leader Franz Adlkofer.

This means the change had procreated. Mutated cells are seen as a possible cause of cancer.

The radiation used in the study was at levels between a Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) of between 0.3 and 2 watts per kilogram. Most phones emit radio signals at SAR levels of between 0.5 and 1 W/kg.

SAR is a measure of the rate of radio energy absorption in body tissue, and the SAR limit recommended by the International Commission of Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection is 2 W/kg.

The study also measured other harmful effects on cells.

Because of the lab set-up, the researchers said the study did not prove any health risks. But they added that "the genotoxic and phenotypic effects clearly require further studies ... on animals and human volunteers."

Adlkofer advised against the use of a mobile phone when an alternative fixed line phone was available, and recommended the use of a headset connected to a cellphone whenever possible.

"We don't want to create a panic, but it is good to take precautions," he said, adding that additional research could take another four or five years.

Previous independent studies into the health effects of mobile phone radiation have found it may have some effect on the human body, such as heating up body tissue and causing headaches and nausea, but no study that could be independently repeated has proved that radiation had permanent harmful effects.

None of the world's top six mobile phone vendors could immediately respond to the results of the study.

In a separate announcement in Hong Kong, where consumers tend to spend more time talking on a mobile phone than in Europe, a German company called G-Hanz introduced a new type of mobile phone which it claimed had no harmful radiation, as a result of shorter bursts of the radio signal.

(Additional reporting by Doug Young in Hong Kong)

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2004-12-20 08:37pm

"We don't want to create a panic, but it is good to take precautions," he said, adding that additional research could take another four or five years.

What "precautions" is he talking about, specifically? Like a cell phone crash helmet that protects against EM fields? Then I say do it. If the people who use cell phones the most are most at risk for damaged DNA, I think that proactively putting "Special Ed"-type crash helmets on their heads would be a good, proactive measure.

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2004-12-20 08:54pm

I don't need a study to know that cell phones cause DNA & brain damage, I just have to look at all those damn kids with cell phones glued to their ears yaking away about the most stupid & retarded shit I can imagine.

But seriously, I think it would be a good idea to break out the metal foil.

President Sharky · Post by **President Sharky** » 2004-12-20 08:58pm

Yay! Now I can add another reason as to why I don't need a cellular phone.

CDS · Post by **CDS** » 2004-12-20 08:58pm

What concerns me is where it's stored when you're not talking into it.. in your pocket, or on your belt: quite close to a person's reproductive organs...

Can't be good for future generations...

Wicked Pilot · Post by **Wicked Pilot** » 2004-12-20 09:07pm

Durandal wrote:What "precautions" is he talking about, specifically?

Buy a phone like this that has the antenna further away form the skull. The amount of radiation drops off exponentially as you move away from the source. The mobile phone industry is starting to push these types of phone, probably for that reason, but they can't admit it because doing so would open the flood gates of litigation.

muse · Post by **muse** » 2004-12-20 09:21pm

CDS wrote:What concerns me is where it's stored when you're not talking into it.. in your pocket, or on your belt: quite close to a person's reproductive organs...

Wonderful, if I ever get cancer in my left breast I'll know what caused it...

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2004-12-20 09:35pm

Well this sucks, fucking weakling human cells that can't take the heat.

Seggybop · Post by **Seggybop** » 2004-12-20 10:50pm

Anyone know if this picture is real?

salm · Post by **salm** » 2004-12-21 08:55am

muse wrote:
CDS wrote:What concerns me is where it's stored when you're not talking into it.. in your pocket, or on your belt: quite close to a person's reproductive organs...
Wonderful, if I ever get cancer in my left breast I'll know what caused it...

bah, at least you´ll still have your right breast left. think about all the guys who carry their cell phones in their pockets right next to their dicks.

Post by **Edi** » 2004-12-21 09:39am

Using a hands-free device would also be a good idea if you're afraid of the radiation. The antenna is on the phone, so if you've got that in your pocket or on your belt (like I do, in a leather holster), it's no different than using a walkman, and I haven't seen anybody sue over that.

Edi

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2004-12-21 09:41am

I've read that the absolutely worst place you can have your phone is on your belt.

Bertie Wooster · Post by **Bertie Wooster** » 2004-12-21 09:51am

Spending 1000+ minutes a month on my cell-phone suddenly looks not-as-harmless as I had thought. Minimal cell-phone use may have just become my New Year's Resolution.

Post by **Edi** » 2004-12-21 09:57am

His Divine Shadow wrote:I've read that the absolutely worst place you can have your phone is on your belt.

Where was that and why is it such a bad place? I'm curious about it. It does make sense in a way, because there it's relatively close to the internal organs (I have the holster all the way to the side, not the front (which would be the worst place considering genitals). Fact is, there is no way to avoid the radiation completely, but it shouldn't affect anything more than the skin cells, and when the phone is on my belt, all that radiation must go through a double layer of thick leather first (holster plus belt), which is more than there would be if I carried it in a breast pocket, for example.

Edi

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2004-12-21 09:58am

Edi wrote:
His Divine Shadow wrote:I've read that the absolutely worst place you can have your phone is on your belt.
Where was that and why is it such a bad place? I'm curious about it. It does make sense in a way, because there it's relatively close to the internal organs (I have the holster all the way to the side, not the front (which would be the worst place considering genitals). Fact is, there is no way to avoid the radiation completely, but it shouldn't affect anything more than the skin cells, and when the phone is on my belt, all that radiation must go through a double layer of thick leather first (holster plus belt), which is more than there would be if I carried it in a breast pocket, for example.

Edi

I haven't heard the reasons why but the balls are close, good enough for me anyway

Post by **Edi** » 2004-12-21 10:00am

Bertie Wooster wrote:Spending 1000+ minutes a month on my cell-phone suddenly looks not-as-harmless as I had thought. Minimal cell-phone use may have just become my New Year's Resolution.

As in... 17+ hours?

Fuck! I'd be bankrupt at those rates. I use the cell phone for quick calls and arranging things, 20 minutes at a stretch max, and that very rarely. Most calls of mine last under two minutes.

Edi

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-12-21 10:03am

Edi wrote:
Bertie Wooster wrote:Spending 1000+ minutes a month on my cell-phone suddenly looks not-as-harmless as I had thought. Minimal cell-phone use may have just become my New Year's Resolution.
As in... 17+ hours?
Fuck! I'd be bankrupt at those rates. I use the cell phone for quick calls and arranging things, 20 minutes at a stretch max, and that very rarely. Most calls of mine last under two minutes.

Edi

my cell plan has a thousand free peak minutes a month, unlimited free nights and weekeds and thousands of mobile-to-mobile minutes. You still get charged by the minute over there?

Post by **Edi** » 2004-12-21 10:08am

Col. Crackpot wrote:
Edi wrote:
Bertie Wooster wrote:Spending 1000+ minutes a month on my cell-phone suddenly looks not-as-harmless as I had thought. Minimal cell-phone use may have just become my New Year's Resolution.
As in... 17+ hours?
Fuck! I'd be bankrupt at those rates. I use the cell phone for quick calls and arranging things, 20 minutes at a stretch max, and that very rarely. Most calls of mine last under two minutes.

Edi
my cell plan has a thousand free peak minutes a month, unlimited free nights and weekeds and thousands of mobile-to-mobile minutes. You still get charged by the minute over there?

Yes, and it happens that way in most of Europe too. Of course, that might have something to do with the fact that I haven't switched operators in a long time and it's about time I did, then I'd get more free speech time. However, your operator must be subsidizing all that free air-time you're getting somehow, either from a related or unrelated business activity, in order to promote the product. How much does your contract cost you over the period of its duration (12 months, 24 months or whatever)? And how much does that make per month on average, not counting the cost of the phone?

Edi

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-12-21 10:30am

Edi wrote: Yes, and it happens that way in most of Europe too. Of course, that might have something to do with the fact that I haven't switched operators in a long time and it's about time I did, then I'd get more free speech time. However, your operator must be subsidizing all that free air-time you're getting somehow, either from a related or unrelated business activity, in order to promote the product. How much does your contract cost you over the period of its duration (12 months, 24 months or whatever)? And how much does that make per month on average, not counting the cost of the phone?

Edi

about $90USD total for two phones (one for me, one for my wife) including all taxes.

GrandMasterTerwynn · Post by **GrandMasterTerwynn** » 2004-12-21 10:53am

CDS wrote:What concerns me is where it's stored when you're not talking into it.. in your pocket, or on your belt: quite close to a person's reproductive organs...

Can't be good for future generations...

The phone isn't causing problems if it's just sitting there. The transmitter only produces an EMF when the it is actively transmitting data (producing radio waves to carry this data.) When it's just sitting there, the most data it sends is the occasional packet to let the network know where you are so it can forward your calls and text messages and other stuff like that to you.

What I'd like to see studies conducted on are cordless phones of the variety one connects to a land-line with. The most popular varieties (900 MHz and 2.2 GHz) sit very close to the common cellular bands (840 - 860 MHz for old-fashioned analog cellphones, and 1.9 GHz for digital cellphones.)

Post by **Edi** » 2004-12-21 10:56am

$90 a month? If it's for two phones, you have a good deal. An extremely good deal given the amount of free air-time your contract includes. I pay by the minute, but my monthly total stays between €25 and €50 depending on how much I talk on the horn. The bills starts pushing €50 if I have to call dozens of companies about potential jobs or otherwise spend a lot of time on the phone, but usually it stays around €35. That's comparable, because while the euro is now stronger than the dollar, that slide didn't happen until recently.

Of course, when I switch operators sometime soon, I expect my bills to decrease somewhat.

Edi

Justforfun000 · Post by **Justforfun000** » 2004-12-21 11:18am

You guys get screwed over there. Same with internet.

The prices you pay are ridiculous.

Do you even have cable internet in the homes yet? It's 50 bucks a month here unlimited. Canadian.

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-12-21 11:20am

Edi wrote:$90 a month? If it's for two phones, you have a good deal. An extremely good deal given the amount of free air-time your contract includes. I pay by the minute, but my monthly total stays between €25 and €50 depending on how much I talk on the horn. The bills starts pushing €50 if I have to call dozens of companies about potential jobs or otherwise spend a lot of time on the phone, but usually it stays around €35. That's comparable, because while the euro is now stronger than the dollar, that slide didn't happen until recently.

Of course, when I switch operators sometime soon, I expect my bills to decrease somewhat.

Edi

it is two phones sharing a pool of minutes. we NEVER go over our allotted minutes either, so it's a great deal.

Post by **Edi** » 2004-12-21 11:26am

Justforfun000 wrote:You guys get screwed over there. Same with internet.

The prices you pay are ridiculous.

Do you even have cable internet in the homes yet? It's 50 bucks a month here unlimited. Canadian.

How fast? I've got a 300/256 kbps unlimited connection that costs me €25 a month, and it's adequate. Mind you, just five months ago the same connection cost €39 a month, but prices have been coming down very quickly now. Broadband implementation in Finland has been a complete clusterfuck, but when the Communications Authority and the Consumer Protection Authority got their act together, the operators decided to lower prices. The problem here is that the market is small, so there are few big operators and until this year they could squeeze higher prices without much interference. Then they lost several court cases in a row to the Consumer Protection Agency and I'm not sure if there was a law change, but things have improved a lot since summer.

Edi

Col. Crackpot · Post by **Col. Crackpot** » 2004-12-21 11:34am

Edi, i get a 5 MEG cable internet connection, digital cable with HBO (200 channels + 40 music channels) and a phone line from the cable company for $100/month