Wireless Phones Can Affect The Brain, Swedish Study Suggests

[steven johnson]

Source: Science Daily

A study at Örebro University in Sweden indicates that mobile phones and other cordless telephones have a biological effect on the brain. It is still too early to say if any health risks are involved, but medical researcher Fredrik Söderqvist recommends caution in the use of these phones, above all among children and adolescents. Few children who regularly use mobile phones use a headset often or always, even though the Swedish Radiation Safety Authority recommends this.

"Children may be more sensitive than adults to radiation from wireless phones," says Fredrik Söderqvist, who is presenting his research findings in a new doctoral thesis at Örebro University.

He then went on to study blood samples from adults, looking at two so-called biomarkers to see whether wireless phone use has a biological effect on the brain. One of these studies focused on a protein that exists in the so-called blood-cerebrospinal-fluid barrier, which is part of the brain's protection against outside influences. The study revealed an association between use of wireless telephony and increased content of the protein transthyretin in the blood.

"We should all follow the recommendations of the Radiation Safety Authority when it comes to using headsets and avoiding mobile phone use when the coverage is poor."



Read more: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091111121251.htm

---

Here is a researcher who reports increased headaches, asthmatic complaints, and impaired concentration in children and adolescents who regularly use wireless telephones. No one knows the long term effects of low level microwave radiation to the brain.

Using a headset or putting the phone on speaker mode still seems prudent, especially in young people.

[Double T]

1. splains alot

[BrklynLiberal]

2. I hjave been saying for years that there will probably be an epidemic of

brain cancer in 10 years. I see people talking on those phones for hours...walking the dog, pushing the baby carriage, on the bus going home, walking in the street, sitting in Starbucks. Some people just NEVER get off the cell phone. I would be more surprised if it was proven that they did not have a negative effect on people.

[Divine Discontent]

3. I agree - I have been on the phone

for 1500-2000 minutes a month. I try to use the speaker phone as much as possible but family far away and friends do not like it when I use it and keep it 2 feet away. But, I have seen people on the phone twice as much as me or friends who tell me their minutes. But, surely, this radiation on the same side of the brain 1000 hours a year or more cannot be a good thing.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Psephos]

5. So can love, liquor, stress, hormones, Pepsi on an empty stomach, and DU

Where's the outrage???!!!! lol

The accidents caused by using cellphones are real and number in the thousands. But they don't involve MYSTERIOUS PROTEIN CORRUPTING RAYS that CONTAMINATE PRECIOUS BODILY FLUIDS...so no media event, no news cycle, no celebrity activists, no outrage and indignation at the evil cellphone manufacturers. In other words, no fun.

Makes one long for the fluoridation wars of the 50s. ;)

[pnwmom]

7. And the evidence you have against the Swedish study is what? n/t

[skepticscott]

10. The evidence is

that the photon energy and intensity of cell phone transmissions is known, and is incapable of causing molecular damage of any kind. Period. Unless he can propose and demonstrate an actual mechanism by which this radiation is causing the changes he claims to have found, then his study is nothing but a weak correlation between two things, with no evidence for causation.

[ima_sinnic]

8. you speak so authoritatively and assuredly, so you have valid research to cite?

to draw the conclusion that cellphones "don't involve mysterious protein corrupting rays that contaminate precious bodily fluids" would require a long-term study of at least 15 years (though 20 would seem even better)--who has done that?

[rayofreason]

28. Actually...

..both posts 5 and 10 are correct.

Specifically, regarding "valid research", there are certain facts that one does not need new research to prove. For example, the ionization energy of ground state hydrogen is 13.6 eV. A photon of 13.5 eV that hits a ground-state hydrogen atom will not, cannot ionize it. In materials this is called the photoelectric effect (no flux of photons, regardless of intensity, will produce photoelectrons until the photon energy exceeds the work function of the material), and Einstein won the Nobel prize for explaining it (not for relativity).

I am exceedingly dubious of this report, or any other report of this kind of correlation, without a plausible physical mechanism. Look at all the nonsense that surrounded the issue of high voltage power lines. Even though the RF photons were too low energy to have a biological effect, even though the E fields from the power line could produce no significant potential difference once you were not directly in contact with them, even though the Earth's magnetic field is much larger than B produced by the power line, even though no plausible physical mechanism could be established that would produce cancer, charlatans of every stripe came forward, class-action lawsuits in hand, to shake down the power industry for billions of dollars. Disgusting, and a reflection of the scientific and mathematical illiteracy of society as a whole.

Finally, after so many years, and so many studies showing lack of evidence, and the debunking the poorly constructed studies that claimed a link, the "power lines cause cancer" monster has been slain. Now we see a new pot of gold for the lawyers - after all, with so many people using cellphones the class-action suit could be gianormous! So until there is REAL evidence (not just correlations, but solid double-blind epidemiological studies AND evidence for a plausible physical mechanism), extreme skepticism is warranted - unless you are a trial lawyer with particularly good hair.

Or maybe it is just Swedish envy and a way to get back at the Finns.

[Joe Chi Minh]

9. Does Diet Coke still contain aspartame?

"The accidents caused by using cellphones are real and number in the thousands."

"..... no outrage and indignation at the evil cellphone manufacturers."

What a mixe-up son of a gun! And posing as know-all medical expert, to boot!

You need a less pretentious-sounding username. Like "Dumbo", maybe.

[Dreamer Tatum]

6. They certainly transform some people into assholes, that's for sure. nt

[SpiralHawk]

11. "But on the bright side, Genetically Mutant food is good for you." - Corporate Panderers

Another zone of toxicity that will eventually be revealed
...

[thesquanderer]

12. clarification on poor reception?

re: "avoiding mobile phone use when the coverage is poor"

Does anyone know why cell phone use could conceivably have greater possible negative effects if used in areas of poor coverage? Seems like a strange thing to put in there with no explanation.

[jberryhill]

13. Transmit Power Adjustment

One of the ways cell phones regulate power usage is to step the transmit power up or down depending on how far they are from the nearest tower.

In poor coverage areas, they increase the transmit power.

[goclark]

14. I always put my home portable on Speaker now and Cell as well

If I'm not in a large crowd it's on Speaker or only for a few minutes on regular.

Try it, its not that bad.

Also, it keeps me from talking about nothing - I only use my phone for what's necessary.

I'm too old to be bothered by text ~ my friends don't text so I would be wasting my time.

[seafan]

15. Comprehensive cell phone list with radiation safety levels here

Get a Safer Phone



In general, phones that emit more radiation than 1.0 Watts/kilogram to the head/body are considered less safe. The lower the W/kg number, the safer the phone. (1 Kg ~ 2.2 lbs)


You can also google for a paticular cell phone model and its "specific absorption rate" (SAR) to find out how much radiation it emits.




World Health Organization (WHO) says cell phones can cause brain cancer , October 28, 2009

Wireless Phones Can Affect The Brain, Swedish Study Suggests, November 11, 2009


D.C. Court of Appeals Resurrects Cell Phone Radiation Cases, November 6, 2009

[BrklynLiberal]

25. Thanks for posting this.

[Butch350]

16. Can You hear Me Now?!

[L. Coyote]

17. How Safe Is Your Wireless-Networked Laptop? by Charles W. Moore

How Safe Is Your Wireless-Networked Laptop?
http://www.pbcentral.com/columns/hildreth_moore/wifisaf.shtml
by Charles W. Moore


In February, itbusiness.ca reported that Lakehead University in Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada has banned wireless Internet access on campus until university president Fred Gilbert is satisfied that EMF (electric and magnetic fields) exposure doesn't pose a health risk, particularly to young people. Gilbert told ITBusiness.ca that he based his decision on scientific literature that indicates the potential for "some fairly significant" health consequences, citing studies done by scientists for the California Public Utilities Commission, whose findings boil down to the fact that while there is no proven link between EMFs exposure and diseases such as leukemia and brain tumours, the possible risk warrants further investigation.

For the full report visit here:
http://www.itbusiness.ca/it/client/en/home/News.asp?id=38093&PageMem=1

An Apple KnowledgeBase article entitled: AirPort Base Station: Minimum Safe Operating Distance (which has apparently been taken down as the URL no longer works) noted:

"To operate within safety guidelines established by the FCC, you should locate an AirPort Base Station such that users are always at least 20 cm (about 8 inches) from the device.

"You should use wireless equipment in a way that minimizes human contact during normal operation. The AirPort Base Station is designed to be used at a distance greater than 20 cm.

Well, who uses an AirPort base Station within eight inches of their body? Not very many people, I imagine. However, if eight inches is a problem, what about nine inches, or a foot, or two feet. It seems implausible that any danger magically cuts off at the eight inch threshold.

Apple's AirPort networking system operates in the 2.4 GHz Frequency band at an output power of 15 dBm, while cellphones use the 800MHz to 1.9 GHz band The power output level of cellular phones can range from 0.006 of a watt to 0.6 of a watt for handheld units and three to six watts for portable units. 2.4 GHz is even farther into microwave territory than the cellphone frequencies, and people will be exposed to emissions from wireless LANs for much longer periods of time than all but the most addicted cellphone users. Could the cumulative effect ultimately be as bad or worse? I'd like to know.

Bluetooth also operates in the range of 2.4 GHz to 2.4835 GHz. However, as Wikipedia notes, "the radiated output power of Bluetooth devices is very low in spectrum and in time, so a possibility of posing risks to health is low, too. Bluetooth devices can operate continuously or sporadically (on demand), so total exposure to EMF radiation is very variable."

Environmental levels of background radio frequency and microwave background radiation have been rising by factors of thousands in the general population ...............

[L. Coyote]

18. Health Dangers From Wireless Laptops Siegfried Schwarzmüller, Union for Education and Science

Health Dangers From Wireless Laptops
Siegfried Schwarzmüller, Union for Education and Science
(Gewerkschaft Erziehung und Wissen GEW)
http://omega.twoday.net/stories/1755556/

Danger from high frequency fields

Under the motto of ‘increasing efficiency’, things are happening in many schools in an almost unnoticed and uncritical manner, which would have lead to animated discussions and actions in the past. Without informing or consulting staff, the federal state of Hessen has equipped around 100 schools with laptops in the name of ‘increased media competence’, ’new learning culture’ and ‘better education’. On the surface, the use of these mobile computers certainly offers advantages such as maximising space and flexibility.

Better education through WLAN?

By installing these new student workstations, the government and education authorities are introducing a new technology, against which there are strong concerns about potential health effects. According to the initiative ‘Schools and Future’, in which the government and local education authorities co-operate, ‘only WLAN is to be considered’, when it comes to laptops in schools. This WLAN technology (Wireless Local Area Networks) currently pushed by the authorities, consists of a transmitter installed in the classroom or school via which the students communicate with each other, with the periphery hardware and with the internet. In this case, each laptop is a sender and a receiver. In order to function as such, each workstation emits high frequency electromagnetic fields, which are generally acknowledged to have harmful effects on health.

..................

[Roland99]

21. You'd be surprised at how concise the RF field cone can be

Years ago I wrote some software to read RF tag IDs that were read by an RF reader embedded in the floor at the end of a Ford plant assembly line. They were some powerful devices (able to read a tag attached to the bottom of a Ford Explorer driving over the reader at up to 35mph). The manual showed the RF field cone at various power levels and it was largely contained to an area right over the reader.

I've not looked into the field around things like cell phones or wireless modems but I would imagine once one was a decent distance away, the effects would be minimal.

[L. Coyote]

22. A laptop in a lap can be very dangerous to certain body parts, no doubt

especially given some people work hours at a time, every day, on a laptop.

KEEP it out of your lap, for sure, at a minimum!!!

[Roland99]

23. I haven't been able to keep a laptop in my lap in years. They get too hot.

[L. Coyote]

19. DECT Phones and Wi-Fi Networks pose a significant health risk, especially to children "

DECT Phones and Wi-Fi Networks pose a significant health risk, especially to children
http://www.dirtyelectricity.ca/dect_phones.htm


"DECT (Digitally Enhanced Cordless Technology) has been incorporated into many new cordless phones (and some models of baby monitors) by manufacturers such as Panasonic, GE, Motorola and V-Tech. These phones have become very popular in the last few years because they are very powerful providing clearer reception. If you've purchased a new 2.4 GHz or 5.8 GHz cordless phone recently you may very well own a phone that uses new high-powered DECT technology. DECT technology is "always on" and produce a very strong radiation field, similar to that of a cell phone tower, even when not in use and just sitting idle in the cradle. Constant exposure to this high frequency radiation will lead to much ill health and increases in contributing to the rise in electrosenitivities we are currently seeing in North America " says Kevin Byrne, President, EMF Solutions.

In December 2005 The Health Ministry in Salzburg, Austria issued a Health warning concerning DECT phones and Wi-Fi (wireless networks) and urged they not be used in Schools and Kindergartens.

Read the letter from the Health Minister in Salzburg, Austria: "The official advice ... is not to use WLAN and DECT in Schools or Kindergartens."
http://www.dirtyelectricity.ca/images/Salzburg%20bans%20wi-fi%20and%20DECT.pdf

News:
July 18th 2009: Israeli government bans marketing wi-fi home devices as a precautionary measure
By Aviv Lavie

The communication and environment ministries have banned the cellular companies from marketing
phones in the house and internet connection that are based on cellular modem, because of the radiation concern.

...............

[Kingofalldems]

20. Does it make women start calling people on entrance to their car?

[BrklynLiberal]

26. Ironically, here in NYC, I see many more men bullshitting on their phones

while driving, than I see women doing it. And it is totally illegal to talk on your phone while driving in NYC.

I am referring in all cases to handheld phones.

[Bonobo]

24. Is that why they have private conversations where everyone can hear every detail? nt

[BrklynLiberal]

27. WHO study suggests link between cell phones and tumors

http://www.physorg.com/news175853675.html

Preliminary results of an International investigation by the World Health Organization (WHO) suggest there may be a "significantly increased risk" of some types of brain tumors after use of mobile phones for a decade or more.

[David Zephyr]

29. K&R.

.

[defendandprotect]

30. Ah...they wouldn't give us junk that would hurt us, would they? Just to make $$$$$$??