Appendix D
Research articles relevant to wi-fi

Listed below are just some of the articles published on the health effects of microwave exposure, but they indicate something of the range of the effects scientists have found. The list includes research references in the text. Articles are arranged in reverse date order for each section. Some are listed under their main finding but could come under more than one heading.


1 Health effects of living near a phone mast

1.1 Behavioural and functional effects


Khurana, VG et al (2010), Epidemiological evidence for a health risk from mobile phone base stations, Int J Occup Environ Health, 2010 Jul-Sep;16(3):263-7

“Human populations are increasingly exposed to microwave/radiofrequency (RF) emissions from wireless communication technology, including mobile phones and their base stations. By searching PubMed, we identified a total of 10 epidemiological studies that assessed for putative health effects of mobile phone base stations. Seven of these studies explored the association between base station proximity and neurobehavioral effects and three investigated cancer. We found that eight of the 10 studies reported increased prevalence of adverse neurobehavioral symptoms or cancer in populations living at distances < 500 meters from base stations. None of the studies reported exposure above accepted international guidelines, suggesting that current guidelines may be inadequate in protecting the health of human populations. We believe that comprehensive epidemiological studies of long-term mobile phone base station exposure are urgently required to more definitively understand its health impact.”
LINK

Thomas S, et al (2010), Exposure to radio-frequency electromagnetic fields and behavioural problems in Bavarian children and adolescents, Eur J Epidemiol 2010 Feb;25(2):135-4
“We aimed to investigate a possible association between measured exposure to RF EMF fields and behavioural problems in children and adolescents. 1,498 children and 1,524 adolescents were randomly selected from the population registries of four Bavarian (South of Germany) cities ... Seven percent of the children and 5% of the adolescents showed an abnormal mental behaviour ... [T]he results showed an association between exposure and conduct problems for adolescents ... and children.”
LINK

Abdel-Rassoul G, El-Fateh OA, et al, (March 2007) Neurobehavioral effects among inhabitants around mobile phone base stations. Neurotoxicology. 28(2):434-40
“Inhabitants living nearby mobile phone base stations are at risk for developing neuropsychiatric problems and some changes in the performance of neurobehavioral functions either by facilitation or inhibition.”
LINK

Oberfeld G, Navarro A E, et al, (August 2004). The Microwave Syndrome–Further aspects of a Spanish Study. Conference Proceedings
“Researchers from Valencia University in Spain, investigated people’s health in a small town near Murcia, where two mobile phone masts had been erected in the past 7 years. The results of the investigations have been plotted against levels of radiation in their homes from the masts, to see if there is any link between the radiation levels and health problems. Many symptoms of ‘microwave sickness’ increased considerably with exposure to microwave radiation, in particular Depression, Fatigue, Concentration Loss, Appetite Loss and Heart and Blood Pressure Problems. These occurred at radiation levels found around most masts.”
LINK

Bortkiewicz A et al (2004) Subjective symptoms reported by people living in the vicinity of cellular phone base stations: review Med Pr 55(4):345-51
“[P]eople living in the vicinity of base stations report various complaints mostly of the circulatory system, but also of sleep disturbances, irritability, depression, blurred vision, concentration difficulties, nausea, lack of appetite, headache and vertigo. The performed studies showed the relationship between the incidence of individual symptoms, the level of exposure, and the distance between a residential area and a base station.”
LINK

Santini R, Santini P, et al, (2003) Survey Study of people living in vicinity of cellular phone base stations, Biol.Med., 1:41-49
“The complaints nausea, loss of appetite, and visual disturbances were experienced only in the immediate vicinity of cellular phone base stations (up to 10 m). Irritability, depressive tendencies and lowering of libido were experienced up to 100 m whereas headaches, sleep disturbances and feeling of discomfort were noticed in the distance up to 200 m to base stations. Only the complaint of fatigue was experienced in vicinity of 200 to 300 m to base stations. The occurence of complaints was for seven of the reported symptoms and for the distance up to 300 m significantly higher for women compared to men.”
LINK

Santini R, Santini P, et al, (July 2002). Investigation on the health of people living near mobile telephone relay stations: I/Incidence according to distance and sex. Pathol Biol (Paris). 50(6):369-373
“This first study on symptoms experienced by people living in vicinity of base stations shows that, in view of radioprotection, minimal distance of people from cellular phone base stations should not be < 300 m.”
LINK

1.2 Cancer induction


Ha M, et al (2007), Radio-frequency radiation exposure from AM radio transmitters and childhood leukemia and brain cancer, Am J Epidemiol 2007 Aug 1;166(3):270-9. Epub 2007 Jun 7
“The odds ratio for all types of leukemia was 2.15 (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.00, 4.67) among children who resided within 2 km of the nearest AM radio transmitter as compared with those resided more than 20 km from it. For total RFR exposure from all transmitters, odds ratios for lymphocytic leukemia were 1.39 (95% CI: 1.04, 1.86) and 1.59 (95% CI: 1.19, 2.11) for children in the second and third quartiles, respectively, versus the lowest quartile. Brain cancer and infantile cancer were not associated with AM RFR.”
LINK

Hallberg Ö (2006). A theory and model to explain the skin melanoma epidemic. Melanoma Research, 2006; 16; 115-118
“The aims of this study were to examine this sudden change in melanoma trends and to develop an explanatory model ... The proposed model may shed light on the melanoma epidemic and may be useful in predicting future melanoma trends based on known birth cohort data and possible effects from policy changes with regard to population exposure to electromagnetic radiation.”
LINK

Eger H et al (2004) The influence of being physically near to a cell phone transmission mast on the incidence of Cancer Umwelt Medizin Gesellschaft 17.4.2004
“The result of the study shows that the proportion of newly developing cancer cases was significantly higher among those patients who had lived during the past ten years at a distance of up to 400 metres from the cellular transmitter site, which has been in operation since 1993, compared to those patients living further away, and that the patients fell ill [developed tumours] on average 8 years earlier.”
LINK

Park SK, et al (2004), Ecological study on residences in the vicinity of AM radio broadcasting towers and cancer death: preliminary observations in Korea, Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2004 Aug; 77(6):387-94. Epub 2004 Jul 31
“All cancers-mortality was significantly higher in the exposed areas [near the AM radio broadcasting towers] ... Leukemia mortality was higher in exposed areas (MRR [mortality rate ratio] = 1.70 ... ), especially among young adults aged under 30 years (0-14 years age group, MRR = 2.29...; 15-29 age group, MRR = 2.44, ...).”
LINK

Wolf R & Wolf D (2004), Increased incidence of cancer near a cell-phone transmitter station, Int J of Cancer Prevention 1(2)
“In the area of exposure (area A) [within 350 metres of the phone mast] eight cases of different kinds of cancer were diagnosed in a period of only one year ... Relative cancer rates for females were 10.5 for area A, 0.6 for area B and 1 for the whole town of Netanya ... A comparison of the relative risk revealed that there were 4.15 times more cases [of cancer] in area A than in the entire population. The enormous[ly] short latency period, less than 2 years, indicates that if there is a real causal association between RF radiation emitted from the cell-phone base station and the cancer cases (which we strongly believe there is), then the RF radiation should have a very strong promoting effect on cancer at very low radiation.”
LINK

Hallberg Ö, Johansson O (2002), Cancerdödlighet och långtidssjukskrivning (Cancer mortality and long-term sick leave), Tidskriften Medikament 2002; 7: 40-41
“In 1997 the mortality starts to increase clearly again, ... It is interesting to note that the radio and TV broadcasting net changes exactly these years.”
LINK

Paola Michelozzi et al (2002), Adult and Childhood Leukemia near a High-Power Radio Station in Rome, Italy, American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 155, No. 12 : 1096-1103
“The risk of childhood leukemia was higher than expected for the distance up to 6 km from the radio station (standardized incidence rate = 2.2, 95% confidence interval: 1.0, 4.1), and there was a significant decline in risk with increasing distance both for male mortality (p = 0.03) and for childhood leukemia (p = 0.036)”
LINK

Neil Cherry (2000), Health effects associated with mobile base stations in communities: the need for health studies, Lincoln University, Environmental Management and Design Division, Canterbury, New Zealand
“Public health surveys of people living in the vicinity of cell site base stations should be being carried out now, and continue progressively over the next two decades. This is because prompt effects such as miscarriage, cardiac disruption, sleep disturbance and chronic fatigue could well be early indicators of the adverse health effects. Symptoms of reduced immune system competence, cardiac problems, especially of the arrhythmic type and cancers, especially brain tumour and leukaemia are probable. However, since cell phone radiation has already been shown to reduce melatonin, damage DNA and chromosomes, surveys should look for a very wide range health effects and not be limited to a narrow set.”
LINK

Helen Dolk et al (1997), Cancer Incidence near Radio and Television Transmitters in Great Britain I. Sutton Coldfield Transmitter, American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 145, No. 1: 1-9
“The risk of adult leukemia within 2 km was 1.83 (95% confidence interval 1.22–2.74), and there was a significant decline in risk with distance from the transmitter (p = 0.001) ... In the context of variability of leukemia risk across census wards in the West Midlands as a whole, the Sutton Coldfield findings were unusual.”
LINK

Lai, H. and Singh, N.P. (1996): Single- and double-strand DNA breaks in rat brain cells after acute exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation. Int. J. Radiation Biology, 69 (4): 513-521.
“An increase in both types of DNA strand breaks was observed after exposure to either the pulsed or continuous-wave radiation ... We speculate that these effects could result from a direct effect of radiofrequency electromagnetic energy on DNA molecules and/or impairment of DNA-damage repair mechanisms in brain cells. Our data further support the results of earlier in vitro and in vivo studies showing effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation on DNA.”
LINK

Bruce Hocking et al (1996), Cancer incidence and mortality and proximity to TV towers, Medical Journal of Australia, 1996; 165: 601
“We found an association between increased childhood leukaemia incidence and mortality and proximity to TV towers.”
LINK


1.3 Physiological, cellular and sub-cellular effects

Falzone, N et al (2011), The effect of pulsed 900-MHz GSM mobile phone radiation on the acrosome reaction, head morphometry and zona binding of human spermatozoa, Int J Androl 2011 Feb;34(1):20-6
“Several recent studies have indicated that radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) have an adverse effect on human sperm quality, which could translate into an effect on fertilization potential. This study evaluated the effect of RF-EMF on sperm-specific characteristics to assess the fertilizing competence of sperm ... [It] concludes that although RF-EMF exposure did not adversely affect the acrosome reaction, it had a significant effect on sperm morphometry. In addition, a significant decrease in sperm binding to the hemizona was observed. These results could indicate a significant effect of RF-EMF on sperm fertilization potential.”
LINK

Baste V et al (April 2008), Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields; male infertility and sex ratio of offspring, Eur J Epidemiol. 2008 Apr 16
“[A] cross-sectional study among military men employed in the Royal Norwegian Navy, [who work] close to equipment emitting radiofrequency electromagnetic fields ... In all age groups there were significant linear trends with higher prevalence of involuntary childlessness with higher self-reported exposure to radiofrequency fields ... For self-reported exposure both to high-frequency aerials and communication equipment there were significant linear trends with lower ratio of boys to girls at birth.”
LINK

Yurekli AI (2006), GSM base station electromagnetic radiation and oxidative stress in rats, Electromagn Biol Med 25(3):177-88
“When EM fields at a power density of 3.67 W/m2 (specific absorption rate = 11.3 mW/kg), which is well below current exposure limits, were applied, MDA (malondialdehyde) level was found to increase and GSH (reduced glutathione) concentration was found to decrease significantly (p < 0.0001). Additionally, there was a less significant (p = 0.0190) increase in SOD (superoxide dismutase) activity under EM exposure.”
LINK

Balmori A (2005), Possible Effects of Electromagnetic Fields from Phone Masts on a Population of White Stork, Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, 24:109–119
“Monitoring of a white stork population in Valladolid (Spain) in the vicinity of Cellular Phone Base Stations was carried out, with the objective of detecting possible effects. The total productivity, in the nests located within 200 meters of antennae, was 0.86 ± 0.16. For those located further than 300 m, the result was practically doubled, with an average of 1.6 ± 0.14 ... Twelve nests (40%) located within than 200 m of antennae never had chicks, while only one (3.3%) located further than 300 m had no chicks.”
Pdf HERE

2. Health effects of using a mobile phone
2.1 Effects on the brain and central nervous system


Aalto S, Haarala C, et al (July 2006), Mobile phone affects cerebral blood flow in humans. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 26(7):885-90
“Our results provide the first evidence, suggesting that the EMF emitted by a commercial mobile phone affects rCBF [regional cerebral blood flow] in humans. These results are consistent with the postulation that EMF induces changes in neuronal activity.”
LINK

Esen F, Esen H (March 2006), Effect of electromagnetic fields emitted by cellular phones on the latency of evoked electrodermal activity. Int J Neurosci. 116(3):321-9
“[T]he findings point to the potential risks of mobile phones on the function of CNS and consequently, possible increase in the risk of phone-related driving hazards.”
LINK

Hallberg Ö, Johansson O. (2005), Alzheimer mortality—why does it increase so fast in sparsely populated areas? European Biology and Bioelectromagnetics. 2005; 1: 225-246.
“The mortality in Alzheimer’s disease appears to be associated with mobile phone output power. The mortality is increasing fast and is expected to increase substantially within the next 10 years.”
LINK

Huber R, Treyer V, et al,(Feb 2005), Exposure to pulse-modulated radio frequency electromagnetic fields affects regional cerebral blood flow. Eur J Neurosci. 21(4):1000-6
“We investigated the effects of radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF EMF) similar to those emitted by mobile phones on waking regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF) in 12 healthy young men ... We observed an increase in relative rCBF in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex on the side of exposure ... This finding supports our previous observation that pulse modulation of RF EMF is necessary to induce changes in the waking and sleep EEG, and substantiates the notion that pulse modulation is crucial for RF EMF-induced alterations in brain physiology.”
LINK

Kramarenko AV, Tan U (July 2003), Effects of high-frequency electromagnetic fields on human EEG: a brain mapping study. Int J Neurosci. 113(7):1007-19
“Cell phones emitting pulsed high-frequency electromagnetic fields (EMF) may affect the human brain, but there are inconsistent results concerning their effects on electroencephalogram (EEG) ... The results [of our study] suggested that cellular phones may reversibly influence the human brain, inducing abnormal slow waves in EEG of awake persons. [I]n children, ... the slow-waves with higher amplitude appeared earlier in children (10-20 s) than adults, and their frequency was lower (1.0-2.5 Hz) with longer duration and shorter intervals. ”
LINK

Huber R, Schuderer J, et al (May 2003), Radio frequency electromagnetic field exposure in humans: Estimation of SAR distribution in the brain, effects on sleep and heart rate. Bioelectromagnetics, 24(4):262-76
“In two previous studies we demonstrated that radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF EMF) similar to those emitted by digital radiotelephone handsets affect brain physiology of healthy young subjects exposed to RF EMF ... either during sleep or during the waking period preceding sleep ... Here we report an extended analysis of the two studies.”
LINK

Krause CM, Sillanmäki L, et al (December 2000), Effects of electromagnetic fields emitted by cellular phones on the electroencephalogram during a visual working memory task. Int J Radiat Biol. 76(12):1659-67
“The results suggest that the exposure to EMF modulates the responses of EEG oscillatory activity approximately 8 Hz specifically during cognitive processes.”
LINK

Huber R, Graf T, et al (October 2000), Exposure to pulsed high-frequency electromagnetic field during waking affects human sleep EEG. Neuroreport. 11(15):3321-5
“The aim of the study was to investigate whether the electromagnetic field (EMF) emitted by digital radiotelephone handsets affects brain physiology ... The present results demonstrate that exposure during waking modifies the EEG during subsequent sleep. Thus the changes of brain function induced by pulsed high-frequency EMF outlast the exposure period.”
LINK

Krause CM, Sillanmäki L, et al (March 2000), Effects of electromagnetic field emitted by cellular phones on the EEG during a memory task. Neuroreport. 11(4):761-4
“Our results suggest that the exposure to EMF does not alter the resting EEG per se but modifies the brain responses significantly during a memory task.”
LINK

Eulitz C, Ullsperger P, et al (October 1998), Mobile phones modulate response patterns of human brain activity. Neuroreport. 9(14):3229-32
“Our investigations show that these electromagnetic fields alter distinct aspects of the brain’s electrical response to acoustic stimuli.”
LINK

Eugene Sobel et al (1995), Occupations with Exposure to Electromagnetic Fields: A Possible Risk Factor for Alzheimer’s Disease, American Journal of Epidemiology Vol. 142, No. 5: 515-524
[Research into effects of extremely low frequency (ELF) radiation; ELF is radiofrequency.] “The most obvious, possibly etiologically relevant exposure is that of electromagnetic fields, which may have biologic plausibility because they may adversely influence calcium homeostasis and/or inappropriately activate immune system cells such as microglial cells, initiating events that result in neuronal degeneration.”
LINK

2.2 Cancer induction

Hardell L, et al (August 2010), Mobile phone use and the risk for malignant brain tumors: a case-control study on deceased cases and controls, Neuroepidemiology. 2010 Aug; 35(2):109-14. Epub 2010 Jun 15.
“We investigated the use of mobile or cordless phones and the risk for malignant brain tumors in a group of deceased cases ... This investigation confirmed our previous results of an association between mobile phone use and malignant brain tumors.”
LINK

Lehrer, S et al (June 2010), Association between number of cell phone contracts and brain tumor incidence in nineteen U.S. States, J Neurooncol, 2011 Feb;101(3):505-7. Epub 2010 Jun 30
“Some concern has arisen about adverse health effects of cell phones, especially the possibility that the low power microwave-frequency signal transmitted by the antennas on handsets might cause brain tumors or accelerate the growth of subclinical tumors. We analyzed data from the Statistical Report: Primary Brain Tumors in the United States, 2000-2004 and 2007 cell phone subscription data from the Governing State and Local Sourcebook ... The very linear relationship between cell phone usage and brain tumor incidence is disturbing and certainly needs further epidemiological evaluation. In the meantime, it would be prudent to limit exposure to all sources of electro-magnetic radiation.
LINK

Hardell L et al (September 2007), Long-term use of cellular phones and brain tumours—increased risk associated with use for > 10 years, Occup Environ Med. 2007 Sep;64(9):626-32
“Results from present studies on use of mobile phones for > or =10 years give a consistent pattern of increased risk for acoustic neuroma and glioma. The risk is highest for ipsilateral exposure.”
LINK

Hardell L, et al (2006), Tumour risk associated with use of cellular telephones or cordless desktop telephones., World J Surg Oncol 2006 Oct 11;4:74
“We found for all studied phone types an increased risk for brain tumours, mainly acoustic neuroma and malignant brain tumours.”
LINK

Lonn S et al (November 2004), Mobile phone use and the risk of acoustic neuroma, Epidemiology. 2004 Nov;15(6):653-9
“Our findings do not indicate an increased risk of acoustic neuroma related to short-term mobile phone use after a short latency period. However, our data suggest an increased risk of acoustic neuroma associated with mobile phone use of at least 10 years’ duration.”
LINK

Leszczynski D, Joenväärä S, Reivinen J, Kuokka R (May 2002), Non-thermal activation of the hsp27/p38MAPK stress pathway by mobile phone radiation in human endothelial cells: molecular mechanism for cancer- and blood-brain barrier-related effects. Differentiation. 70(2-3):120-9
“Based on the known functions of hsp27, we put forward the hypothesis that mobile phone radiation-induced activation of hsp27 may (i) facilitate the development of brain cancer by inhibiting the cytochrome c/caspase-3 apoptotic pathway and (ii) cause an increase in blood-brain barrier permeability through stabilization of endothelial cell stress fibers. We postulate that these events, when occurring repeatedly over a long period of time, might become a health hazard because of the possible accumulation of brain tissue damage.”
LINK

Neil Cherry (2000), Evidence that Electromagnetic Radiation is Genotoxic: The implications for the epidemiology of cancer and cardiac, neurological and reproductive effects.
“Many studies have shown that radiofrequency/microwave (RF/MW) radiation and extremely low frequency (ELF) fields cause increased DNA strand breakage and chromosome aberrations. This has been shown in cell lines, human blood, animals and living human beings. This means that epidemiological studies of people exposed to electromagnetic radiation (EMR) are likely to show increased cancer, miscarriage and reproductive adverse effects. In fact many epidemiological studies have shown these effects, Goldsmith (1995, 1996, 1997, 1997a), Szmigielski (1991, 1996).”
LINK

2.3 Physiological, cellular and sub-cellular effects

Wiart, J. et al (2008), Analysis of RF exposure in the head tissues of children and adults, Phys Med Biol, 2008 Jul 7;53 (13):3681-95. Epub 2008 Jun 19
“The simulations that have been performed ... indicate that the maximum SAR [specific absorption rate, a measure of energy absorbed] in 1 g of peripheral brain tissues of the child models aged between 5 and 8 years is about two times higher than in adult models. This difference ... can be explained by the lower thicknesses of pinna, skin and skull of the younger child models.”
LINK

De Salles, A.A., et al (2006), Electromagnetic absorption in the head of adults and children due to mobile phone operation close to the head, Electromagn Biol Med 2006; 25(4):349-60.
“The SAR results are compared with the available international recommendations. It is shown that under similar conditions, the 1g-SAR calculated for children is higher than that for the adults. When using the 10-year old child model, SAR values higher than 60% than those for adults are obtained.”
LINK

Nylund R, Leszcynski D (2006), Mobile phone radiation causes changes in gene and protein expression in human endothelial cell lines and the response seems to be genome- and proteome-dependent, Proteomics Sep;6(17):4769-80
“[T]he same genes and proteins were differently affected by the exposure in each of the cell lines. This suggests that the cell response to mobile phone radiation might be genome- and proteome-dependent. Therefore, it is likely that different types of cells and from different species might respond differently to mobile phone radiation or might have different sensitivity to this weak stimulus. Our findings might also explain, at least in part, the origin of discrepancies in replication studies between different laboratories.”
LINK

Belyaev IY, Hillert L, et al (April 2005), 915 MHz microwaves and 50 Hz magnetic field affect chromatin conformation and 53BP1 foci in human lymphocytes from hypersensitive and healthy persons Bioelectromagnetics. 26(3):173-84
“In conclusion, 50 Hz magnetic field and 915 MHz microwaves under specified conditions of exposure induced comparable responses in lymphocytes from healthy and hypersensitive donors that were similar but not identical to stress response induced by heat shock.”
LINK

Czyz J, Guan K, et al (May 2004), High frequency electromagnetic fields (GSM signals) affect gene expression levels in tumor suppressor p53-deficient embryonic stem cells. Bioelectromagnetics, 25(4):296-307
“Our data indicate that the genetic background determines cellular responses to GSM modulated EMF.”
LINK

Sarimov R, Malmgren LOG, et al (2004), Nonthermal GSM Microwaves Affect Chromatin Conformation in Human Lymphocytes Similar to Heat Shock. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci 32:1600-1608
“The findings have shown that microwaves from GSM mobile phone affected chromatin conformation in human normal and transformed lymphocytes. Because of the very low SAR value in the exposed samples, the microwave effects could not be attributed to heating induced by the exposure system. The exposure level in this study was far below the ICNIRP value. GSM microwaves under specific conditions of exposure affected human lymphocytes similar to stress response. The findings indicated that the microwave effects differ at various GSM frequencies and vary between donors.”
LINK

Hallberg Ö, Johansson O. (2004), Does GSM 1800 MHz affect the public health in Sweden? Experimental Dermatology Unit, Department of Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
“The results show that there is an apparent connection between the increasing use of mobile phones, and especially handsets that are capable of communicating at 1800 MHz, and the degrading health status of the Swedish population.”
LINK

Gandhi, OP, Kang, G (2002), Some present problems and a proposed experimental phantom for SAR compliance testing of cellular telephones at 835 and 1900 MHz, Phys Med Biol, 2002 May 7;47(9):1501-18.
“The paper also expands the previously reported study of energy deposition in models of adults versus children to two different and distinct anatomically-based models of the adult head, namely the Utah model and the ‘Visible Man’ model, each of which is increased or reduced by the voxel size to obtain additional head models larger or smaller in all dimensions by 11.1% or -9.1%, respectively. The peak 1 g body-tissue SAR calculated using the widely accepted FDTD method for smaller models is up to 56% higher at 1900 MHz and up to 20% higher at 835 MHz compared to the larger models.”
LINK

Allan H. Frey (1998), Headaches from Cellular Telephones: Are They Real and What Are the Implications? Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol 106 No 3 March 1998
“There have been numerous recent reports of headaches occurring in association with the use of hand-held cellular telephones. Are these reported headaches real? Are they due to emissions from telephones? There is reason to believe that the answer is “yes” to both questions. There are several lines of evidence to support this conclusion ... Could the current reports of headaches be the canary in the coal mine, warning of biologically significant effects?”
LINK

3. Animal studies
3.1 Effects on the brain and central nervous system

Narayanan, SN et al (2010), Effect of radio-frequency electromagnetic radiations (RF-EMR) on passive avoidance behaviour and hippocampal morphology in Wistar rats, Ups J Med Sci 2010 May;115(2):91-6
“We evaluated the effect of RF-EMR from mobile phones on passive avoidance behaviour and hippocampal morphology in rats ... Passive avoidance behaviour was significantly affected in mobile phone RF-EMR-exposed rats demonstrated as shorter entrance latency to the dark compartment when compared to the control rats. Marked morphological changes were also observed in the CA(3) region of the hippocampus of the mobile phone-exposed rats in comparison to the control rats.”
LINK

Ragbetli, MC et al (2010), The effect of mobile phone on the number of Purkinje cells: a stereological study, Int J Radiat Biol, 2010 Jul; 86(7):548-54
“The World Health Organisation proposed an investigation concerning the exposure of animals to radiofrequency fields because of the possible risk factor for health. At power frequencies there is evidence to associate both childhood leukaemia and brain tumours with magnetic field exposures. There is also evidence of the effect of mobile phone exposure on both cognitive functions and the cerebellum. Purkinje cells of the cerebellum are also sensitive to high dose microwave exposure in rats ... A significant decrease in the number of Purkinje cells and a tendency for granule cells to increase in cerebellum was found.”
LINK

Arendash, GW, et al (2010), Electromagnetic field treatment protects against and reverses cognitive impairment in Alzheimer’s disease mice, J Alzheimers Dis 2010;19(1):191-210
“[T]his report presents the first evidence that long-term EMF exposure directly associated with cell phone use (918 MHz; 0.25 w/kg) provides cognitive benefits. Both cognitive-protective and cognitive-enhancing effects of EMF exposure were discovered for both normal mice and transgenic mice destined to develop Alzheimer’s-like cognitive impairment ... Although caution should be taken in extrapolating these mouse studies to humans, we conclude that EMF exposure may represent a non-invasive, non-pharmacologic therapeutic against Alzheimer’s disease and an effective memory-enhancing approach in general.” [See footnote no. 63]
LINK

Eberhardt JL et al (2008), Blood-brain barrier permeability and nerve cell damage in rat brain 14 and 28 days after exposure to microwaves from GSM mobile phone’, Electromagn Biol Med. 2008;27(3):215-29
“Ninety-six non-anaesthetized rats were either exposed to microwaves or sham exposed in TEM-cells for 2h at specific absorption rates of average whole-body Specific Absorption Rates (SAR) of 0.12, 1.2, 12, or 120 mW/kg. ... Albumin extravazation and also its uptake into neurons was seen to be enhanced ... neuronal albumin uptake was significantly correlated to occurrence of damaged neurons.”
LINK

Nittby et al (2008), Radofrequency and Extremely Low-Frequency Electromagnetic Field Effects on the Blood-Brain Barrier, Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, 27:2, 103–126, esp. pp. 119-
“One remarkable observation, which we have made in our studies throughout the years is that exposure with whole-body average power densities below10mW/kg gives rise to a more pronounced albumin leakage than higher power densities, all at non-thermal levels.”
LINK

Leif G. Salford et al (2007), Non-thermal effects of EMF upon the mammalian brain: the Lund experience, The Environmentalist, Volume 27, Number 4 / December, 2007 (Special Issue on Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields)
“Since 1988 our group has studied the effects upon the mammalian blood-brain barrier (BBB) by non-thermal radio frequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF). These have been revealed to cause significantly increased leakage of albumin through the BBB of exposed rats as compared to non-exposed animals—in a total series of about two thousand animals. One remarkable observation is the fact that the lowest energy levels give rise to the most pronounced albumin leakage. If mobile communication, even at extremely low energy levels, causes the users’ own albumin to leak out through the BBB, also other unwanted and toxic molecules in the blood, may leak into the brain tissue and concentrate in and damage the neurons and glial cells of the brain.”
LINK

Panagopoulos DJ, et al, (2006) Cell death induced by GSM 900-MHz and DCS 1800-MHz mobile telephony radiation, Mutat Res 2006 Oct 10
“[F]lies were exposed in vivo to either GSM 900-MHz (Global System for Mobile telecommunications) or DCS 1800-MHz (Digital Cellular System) radiation from a common digital mobile phone ... Our present results suggest that the decrease in oviposition previously reported, is due to degeneration of large numbers of egg chambers after DNA fragmentation of their constituent cells, induced by both types of mobile telephony radiation.”
LINK

Leif Salford et al (2003), Nerve Cell Damage in Mammalian Brain after Exposure to Microwaves from GSM Mobile Phones, in Environmental Health Perspectives, Online 29 January 2003
“We have previously shown that weak pulsed microwaves give rise to a significant leakage of albumin through the blood-brain barrier. In this study we investigated whether a pathologic leakage across the blood-brain barrier might be combined with damage to the neurons. Three groups each of eight rats were exposed for 2 hr to Global System for Mobile Communications (GSM) mobile phone electromagnetic fields of different strengths. We found highly significant (p < 0.002) evidence for neuronal damage in the cortex, hippocampus, and basal ganglia in the brains of exposed rats.”
LINK

Henry Lai (1998), Neurological effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation, Mobile Phones and Health, Symposium, October 25-28, 1998, University of Vienna, Austria
“We reported an increase in DNA single and double strand breaks, two forms of DNA damage, in brain cells of rats after exposure to RFR [radio frequency radiation]. DNA damages in cells could have an important implication on health because they are cumulative ... DNA damage that accumulates in cells over a period of time may be the cause of slow onset diseases, such as cancer ... However, when too much DNA damage is accumulated over time, the cell will die ... Particularly, cumulative DNA damage in nerve cells of the brain has been associated with neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s, Huntington’s, and Parkinson’s diseases.”
LINK

Leif Salford el al (1997), Blood-brain barrier permeability in rats exposed to electromagnetic fields used in wireless communication, in Wireless Networks, Volume 3 , Issue 6 (December 1997).
“The frequency of pathological rats was 170/481 (0.35 ± 0.03) among rats exposed to pulse modulated (PW) and 74/149 (0.50 ±0.07) among rats exposed to continuous wave exposure (CW). These results are ... highly significantly different to their corresponding controls.”
LINK

Henry Lai (1997), Neurological Effects of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation Relating to Wireless Communication Technology, Paper presented at the IBC-UK Conference: “Mobile Phones—Is there a Health Risk?” September16-17, 1997 in Brussels, Belgium
“Data available suggest a complex reaction of the nervous system to RFR. The response is not likely to be linear with respect to the intensity of the radiation. Other parameters of RFR exposure, such as frequency, duration, waveform, frequency- and amplitude-modulation, etc, are also important determinants of biological responses and affect the shape of the dose (intensity)-response relationship. Some of the studies described above also suggested frequency and power window effects, i.e., effect is only observed at a certain range of frequency and intensity and not at higher or lower ranges; and dependency on the duration of individual exposure episodes. In order to understand the possible health effects of exposure to RFR from cellular telephones, one needs first to understand the effects of these different parameters and how they interact with each other.”
LINK

Salford, LG et al (1994), Permeability of the blood-brain barrier induced by 915 MHz electromagnetic radiation, continuous wave and modulated at 8, 16, 50, and 200 Hz., Microsc Res Tech 1994 Apr 15;27(6):535-42
“The results show albumin leakage in 5 of 62 of the controls and in 56 of 184 of the animals exposed to 915 MHz microwaves.”
LINK

Lai H, Carino MA, et al (1989), Low-level microwave irradiation and central cholinergic systems, Pharmacol Biochem Behav 33(1):131-8
“Our previous research showed that 45 min of exposure to low-level, pulsed microwaves (2450-MHz, 2-microseconds pulses, 500 pps, whole-body average specific absorption rate 0.6 W/kg) decreased sodium-dependent high-affinity choline uptake in the frontal cortex and hippocampus of the rat. The effects of microwaves on central cholinergic systems were further investigated in this study. Increases in choline uptake activity in the frontal cortex, hippocampus, and hypothalamus were observed after 20 min of acute microwave exposure, and tolerance to the effect of microwaves developed in the hypothalamus, but not in the frontal cortex and hippocampus.”
LINK

Albert, EN, Kerns JM (1981), Reversible microwave effects on the blood-brain barrier, Brain Res. 1981 Dec 28;230(1-2):153-64.
“Low level microwave exposure of Chinese hamsters resulted in reversible permeability of the blood-brain barrier (BBB) to horseradish peroxidase (HRP). Lesions were grossly visible in random areas of the brain immediately following exposure, but were not as common following a 1 h recovery period and were absent after a 2 h recovery period.”
LINK

Oscar KJ, Hawkins TD (1997), Microwave alteration of the blood-brain barrier system of rats, Brain Res. 1977 May 6;126(2):281-93
“Our findings suggest that microwaves induce a temporary change in the permeability for small molecular weight saccharides in the blood-brain barrier system of rats.”
LINK


4 Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS)


Eltiti S, Wallace D, et al. (2007), Development and evaluation of the electromagnetic hypersensitivity questionnaire. Bioelectromagnetics 28: 137-151
“EHS individuals showed a higher severity of symptoms on all subscales compared to the control group”
LINK

Johansson O. (2006), Electrohypersensitivity: State-of-the-art of a fundamental impairment.
Electromagnetic Biol. Med. 25: 235-258

“In summary, it is evident from our preliminary data that various alterations are present in the electrohypersensitive person’s skin. In view of recent epidemiological studies, pointing to a correlation between long-term exposure from power-frequent magnetic fields or microwaves and cancer, our data ought to be taken seriously and further analyzed.”
LINK

Schreier N, Huss A, Röösli M. (2006) The prevalence of symptoms attributed to electromagnetic field exposure: a cross-sectional representative survey in Switzerland, Soz Praventivmed. 51(4):202-9
“We found a prevalence of 5% (95% CI 4-6%) for electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EHS) in our study sample. The most common health complaints among EHS individuals were sleep disorders (43%) and headaches (34%), which were mostly attributed to power lines and mobile phone handsets. In addition, 53 percent (95% CI 51-55%) were worried about adverse health effects from EMF, without attributing their own health symptoms to them.”
LINK

Health Protection Agency (2005), Definition, Epidemiology and Management of Electrical Sensitivity: Report for the Radiation Protection Division [formerly NRPB] of the Health Protection Agency, 2005 (The Irvine Report)
“Electrical sensitivity (ES) [or EHS] is one of a number of terms ... used by some people to describe symptoms they attribute to exposure to commonly occurring electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields (EMFs) ... Many reports predate the extensive roll out of mobile telephony ... The NRPB ... recognised scientific uncertainties associated with new technologies particularly mobile telephony.”
LINK

Leitgeb N, Schröttner J, (2003), Electrosensibility and electromagnetic hypersensitivity, Bioelectromagnetics, Sep;24(6):387-94
“The presented data show that the variation of the electrosensibility among the general population is significantly larger than has yet been estimated by non-ionising radiation protection bodies, but much smaller than claimed by hypersensitivity self-aid groups.”
LINK

5 Documents summarising the dangers of wi-fi / mobile phone technology


The Seletun Scientific Statement (2011)
“The Seletun Scientific Panel has adopted a Consensus Agreement that recommends preventative and precautionary actions that are warranted now, given the existing evidence for potential global health risks. We recognize the duty of governments and their health agencies 1) to educate and warn the public, 2) to implement measures balanced in favor of the Precautionary Principle, 3) to monitor compliance with directives promoting alternatives to wireless, and 4) to fund research and policy development geared toward prevention of exposures and development of new public safety measures as well as new, safer communications technologies.”
Seletun statement as PDF
LINK

Carpenter, DO (2010), Electromagnetic fields and cancer: the cost of doing nothing, Rev Environ Health, 2010 Jan-Mar; 25(1):75-80
“Recent studies demonstrate elevations in rates of brain cancer and acoustic neuroma only on the side of the head where individuals used their cell phone. Individuals who begin exposure at younger ages are more vulnerable. These data indicate that the existing standards for radiofrequency exposure are not adequate. While there are many unanswered questions, the cost of doing nothing will result in an increasing number of people, many of them young, developing cancer.”
LINK


Updated Memorandum on WiFi Research, 10.12.07, published by eight members of the Health Protection Agency’s Electromagnetic Fields Discussion Group
“On the 12 October 2007, the HPA [Health Protection Agency] announced a new “systematic programme of research” into wireless local area networks . We welcome the extra money for research in this area. However, we believe that this programme needs a different focus in order for it to result in valuable new information for the required re-evaluation of the ICNIRP Guidelines. As the project is presently planned to ignore reported health effects, we question if this is appropriate expenditure by a public body responsible principally for the protection of public health.”
LINK

Magda Havas (2007), Analysis of Health and Environmental Effects of Proposed San Francisco Earthlink Wi-Fi Network
“The Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco should adopt the
precautionary principle in their decision regarding the Earthlink Wi-Fi Network. The scientific evidence indicates that exposure to radio frequency radiation near cell phone antennas and in laboratory studies is associated with and/or causes adverse biological and health effects at levels well below federal guidelines and at levels to which people who use wireless computers are likely to be exposed. Policy makers and the public should heed the warning that this form of energy, at current exposures, is far from benign and should act accordingly to protect human health and the environment.”
LINK

Michael Bevington (2007), Wi-fi in the classroom: health advice to schools
“Until further research has been undertaken into the health effects of wi-fi, especially on children, it is recommended that it should not be used in schools. Studies of similar types of radiation, both epidemiological and mechanistic, over several decades have shown serious health effects on the general population.”
LINK

Carpenter D and C Sage (2007), BioInitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields, Pathophysiology, Vol. 16, Issues 2-3, Pages 67 – 250, August 2009, Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) Special Issue.
Contents include:
Evidence for effects on gene and protein expression (Dr. Xu and Dr. Chen)
Evidence for genotoxic effects—RFR and ELF DNA damage (Dr. Lai)
Evidence for stress response (stress proteins) (Dr. Blank)
Evidence for effects on immune function (Dr. Johansson)
Evidence for effects on neurology and behaviour (Dr. Lai)
Evidence for brain tumours and acoustic neuromas (Dr. Hardell, Dr. Mild, Dr. Kundi)
LINK

Chris Busby and Roger Coghill (September 2006), Health Effects of Mobile Phone Transmitter Masts and the Planning Application by Orange plc for a mast in St Michael’s Church, Aberystwyth, Green Audit Aberystwyth
LINK

Bamberg Report (July 2005), Open letter to Edmund Stoiber, president of the federal state of Bavaria, from a group of general medical doctors regarding 357 patients, with supporting details of symptoms and microwave exposure levels.
LINK

The Freiburg Appeal, originally issued in 2002 by over sixty medical doctors, in which they associate mobile phone technology with “a dramatic rise in severe and chronic diseases among our patients“, now has over 36,000 signatories, of whom 1,000 are medical. The document is available at a number of websites, including:
HERE

Neil Cherry (2002), Criticism of the health assessment in the ICNIRP guidelines for radiofrequency and microwave radiation (100 kHz - 300 GHz), Human Sciences Division, Lincoln University, Canterbury, New Zealand (pp. 128 & 131)
“The ICNIRP assessment is grossly biased by selectively choosing studies, consistently misrepresenting the results, the significance of results, the implications of the results of cellular experiments, animal experiments and human studies. The large number of published studies are a consistent and coherent set of evidence, that RF/MW is causally associated with reproductive and cancer effects, as well as altering and impairing brain function, reaction times, sleep and learning, and impairment of the immune system. There is compelling and consistent evidence of cancer, especially leukaemia and brain cancer ... It is simply not scientifically credible to claim that there are no established non- thermal effects and hence it is wrong to adopt a guideline such as the ICNIRP guideline as a public exposure standard.”
LINK




next ...