cancer: Microwave News Article Archive (2004 - )

Korean researchers working on NTP Lite have joined their Japanese collaborators in reporting no evidence of adverse effects among rats chronically exposed to cell phone radiation.

“Long-term exposure to CDMA-modulated 900 MHz RF was neither carcinogenic or genotoxic at an SAR of 4 W/Kg in male rats,” Young Hwan Ahn and coworkers write in Toxicological Sciences, the same journal that published the Japanese results a few days ago. The Korean paper was posted on January 16. 

A major review of animal studies has found reliable evidence that RF radiation increases the risk of cancer.

The new systematic review was commissioned by the World Health Organization (WHO) EMF office in Geneva as part of its ongoing assessment of RF health effects.

It concludes: “[T]here is evidence that RF EMF exposure increases the incidence of cancer in experimental animals with the [certainty of evidence] being strongest for malignant heart schwannomas and gliomas” (brain tumors).

This finding runs counter to the views of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) and the WHO itself, as well those of most national health agencies.

An international team of researchers, many with close ties to ICNIRP, is trying to put to rest the very possibility that RF radiation can lead to brain cancer —and, by extension, any type of cancer.

On August 30, they published a detailed systematic review of RF and cell phone epidemiological studies, which concludes that there is little evidence to justify continued concern over a possible cancer link.

“We can now be more confident that exposure to radio waves from mobile phones or wireless technologies is not associated with an increased risk of brain cancer,” declares Ken Karipidis in the press release. He is an assistant director of the ARPANSA, Australia’s radiation protection agency, and the vice chair of ICNIRP.

On November 23, 2002, Elisabete Weiderpass, the Director of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), revealed that a new assessment of the evidence linking radiofrequency (RF) radiation to cancer would likely take place in early 2024. A formal decision could come within a few months.

Calls for a new IARC evaluation have been mounting for some years following the release of two large animal studies showing elevated tumor counts after lifelong exposure to RF radiation.

David Robert Grimes is a “got lemons, make lemonade” kind of guy. Or as his famous Irish countryman Oscar Wilde quipped more than 100 years ago, “a grapefruit is just a lemon that saw an opportunity and took advantage of it.”

Well, actually, though that line is attributed to Wilde on countless websites, he never said or wrote it. The first documented use was more than a decade after he died in Paris in 1900. But given so, it seems all the more appropriate to mention it in the context of the Grimes affair.

I bring all this up because I’m still trying to understand why JAMA Oncology would have commissioned or accepted a manuscript on a hotly controversial subject —a review of radiofrequency (RF) radiation and cancer— by a junior Irish academic-cum-columnist without any relevant qualifications, David Robert Grimes, at the time of Dublin City University.

“Science, Politics, and Groupthink,” by James Lin, IEEE Microwave Magazine, May 2021.

Lin faults ICNIRP for preferring to “quibble” over the 2018 NTP and Ramazzini RF–animal studies rather than concluding that they point to a cancer risk. He writes: “The simultaneous penchant to dismiss and criticize positive results and the fondness for and eager acceptance of negative findings are palpable and concerning.”

“If Jet Radars Don’t Raise Cancer Risk, Why Did the Navy Coat Some Cockpits in Gold?” McClatchy News, November 27, 2019.

An investigation has found a cluster of cancer cases among U.S. Navy pilots of E-2 Hawkeye early warning aircraft exposed to radar radiation.

“Evaluation of the NTP and Ramazzini Studies,” BERENIS Newsletter, November 2018.

This expert group on EMF/NIR, which advises the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment, states that these two animal cancer studies are “the most comprehensive” to date. Despite their methodological differences, they both showed “relatively consistent results in schwannomas and gliomas, as well as a dose-dependent trend to an increase in the carcinogenicity of these tumors.” Based on these findings, BERENIS favors a precautionary approach for RF/EMF exposures.

The cell phone cancer controversy will never be the same again.

The U.S. National Toxicology Program (NTP) is expected to issue a public announcement that cell phone radiation presents a cancer risk for humans. The move comes soon after its recently completed study showed statistically significant increases in cancer among rats that had been exposed to GSM or CDMA signals for two-years.

Discussions are currently underway among federal agencies on how to inform the public about the new findings. NTP senior managers believe that these results should be released as soon as possible because just about everyone is exposed to wireless radiation all the time and therefore everyone is potentially at risk.