IAFF Position on Health Effects from RF/MW Radiation (Cell towers)

http://www.iaff.org/safe/content/celltower/celltowerfinal.htm

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS
DIVISION OF OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH, SAFETY AND MEDICINE

Position on the Health Effects from Radio Frequency/Microwave (RF/MW)
Radiation in Fire Department Facilities from Base Stations for
Antennas and Towers for the Conduction of Cell Phone Transmissions

The International Association of Fire Fighters' position on
locating
cell towers commercial wireless infrastructure on fire department
facilities, as adopted by its membership in August 2004 (1), is that
the IAFF oppose the use of fire stations as base stations for towers
and/or antennas for the conduction of cell phone transmissions until a
study with the highest scientific merit and integrity on health
effects of exposure to low-intensity RF/MW radiation is conducted and
it is proven that such sitings are not hazardous to the health of our
members.

Further, the IAFF is investigating funding for a U.S. and Canadian
study that would characterize exposures from RF/MW radiation in fire
houses with and without cellular antennae, and examine the health
status of the fire fighters as a function of their assignment in
exposed or unexposed fire houses. Specifically, there is concern for
the effects of radio frequency radiation on the central nervous system
(CNS) and the immune system, as well as other metabolic effects
observed in preliminary studies.

It is the belief of some international governments and regulatory
bodies and of the wireless telecommunications industry that no
consistent increases in health risk exist from exposure to RF/MW
radiation unless the intensity of the radiation is sufficient to heat
body tissue. However, it is important to note that these positions
are based on non-continuous exposures to the general public to low
intensity RF/MW radiation emitted from wireless telecommunications
base stations. Furthermore, most studies that are the basis of this
position are at least five years old and generally look at the safety
of the phone itself. IAFF members are concerned about the effects of
living directly under these antenna base stations for a considerable
stationary period of time and on a daily basis. There are established
biological effects from exposure to low-level RF/MW radiation. Such
biological effects are recognized as markers of adverse health effects
when they arise from exposure to toxic chemicals for example. The
IAFF's efforts will attempt to establish whether there is a
correlation between such biological effects and a health risk to fire
fighters and emergency medical personnel due to the siting of cell
phone antennas and base stations at fire stations and facilities where
they work.

Background
----------

Critical questions concerning the health effects and safety of RF/MW
radiation remain. Accordingly, should we allow exposure of our fire
fighters and emergency medical personnel to this radiation to continue
for the next twenty years when there is ongoing controversy over many
aspects of RF/MW health effects? While no one disagrees that serious
health hazards occur when living cells in the body are heated, as
happens with high intensity RF/MW exposure (just like in a microwave
oven), scientists are currently investigating the health hazards of
low intensity RF/MW exposure. Low intensity RF/MW exposure is exposure
which does not raise the temperature of the living cells in the body.
Additionally, a National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
panel designated power frequency electromagnetic fields (ELF/EMF) as
"possible human carcinogens." (2) In March 2002 The International
Association on Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization
also assigned this designation to ELF/EMF in Volume 80 of its IARC
Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. (3)

Fixed antennas used for wireless telecommunications are referred to as
cellular base stations, cell stations, PCS ("Personal Communications
Service") stations or telephone transmission towers. These base
stations consist of antennas and electronic equipment. Because the
antennas need to be high in the air, they are often located on towers,
poles, water tanks, or rooftops. Typical heights for freestanding base
station towers are 50-200 feet.

Some base stations use antennas that look like poles, 10 to 15 feet in
length, that are referred to as "omni-directional" antennas. These
types of antennas are usually found in rural areas. In urban and
suburban areas, wireless providers now more commonly use panel or
sector antennas for their base stations. These antennas consist of
rectangular panels, about 1 by 4 feet in dimension. The antennas are
usually arranged in three groups of three antennas each. One antenna
in each group is used to transmit signals to wireless phones, and the
other two antennas in each group are used to receive signals from
wireless phones.

At any base station site, the amount of RF/MW radiation produced
depends on the number of radio channels (transmitters) per antenna and
the power of each transmitter. Typically, 21 channels per antenna
sector are available. For a typical cell site using sector antennas,
each of the three transmitting antennas could be connected to up to 21
transmitters for a total of 63 transmitters. When omni-directional
antennas are used, a cellular base station could theoretically use up
to 96 transmitters. Base stations used for PCS communications
generally require fewer transmitters than those used for cellular
radio transmissions, since PCS carriers usually have a higher density
of base station antenna sites.

The electromagnetic RF/MW radiation transmitted from base station
antennas travel toward the horizon in relatively narrow paths. The
individual pattern for a single array of sector antennas is
wedge-shaped, like a piece of pie. Cellular and PCS base stations in
the United States are required to comply with limits for exposure
recommended by expert organizations and endorsed by government
agencies responsible for health and safety. When cellular and PCS
antennas are mounted on rooftops, RF/MW radiation levels on that roof
or on others near by would be greater than those typically encountered
on the ground.

The telecommunications industry claims cellular antennas are safe
because the RF/MW radiation they produce is too weak to cause heating,
i.e., a "thermal effect." They point to "safety standards" from groups
such as ANSI/IEEE or ICNIRP to support their claims. But these groups
have explicitly stated that their claims of "safe RF/MW radiation
exposure is harmless" rest on the fact that it is too weak to
produce
a rise in body temperature, a "thermal effect." (4)

There is a large body of internationally accepted scientific evidence
which points to the existence of non-thermal effects of RF/MW
radiation. The issue at the present time is not whether such evidence
exists, but rather what weight to give it.

Internationally acknowledged experts in the field of RF/MW radiation
research have shown that RF/MW transmissions of the type used in
digital cellular antennas and phones can have critical effects on cell
cultures, animals, and people in laboratories and have also found
epidemiological evidence (studies of communities, not in the
laboratory) of serious health effects at "non-thermal levels," where
the intensity of the RF/MW radiation was too low to cause heating.
They have found:

* Increased cell growth of brain cancer cells (5)
* A doubling of the rate of lymphoma in mice (6)
* Changes in tumor growth in rats (7)
* An increased number of tumors in rats (8)
* Increased single- and double-strand breaks in DNA, our genetic
material (9)
* 2 to 4 times as many cancers in Polish soldiers exposed to RF
(10)
* More childhood leukemia in children exposed to RF (11)
* Changes in sleep patterns and REM type sleep (12)
* Headaches caused by RF/MW radiation exposure (13)
* Neurologic changes (14) including:

o Changes in the blood-brain-barrier (15)
o Changes in cellular morphology (including cell death) (16)
o Changes in neural electrophysiology (EEG) (17)
o Changes in neurotransmitters (which affect motivation and
pain perception) (18)
o Metabolic changes (of calcium ions, for instance) (19)
o Cytogenetic effects (which can affect cancer, Alzheimer's,
neurodegenerative diseases) (20)

* Decreased memory, attention, and slower reaction time in school
children (21)
* Retarded learning in rats indicating a deficit in spatial
"working memory" (22)
* Increased blood pressure in healthy men (23)
* Damage to eye cells when combined with commonly used glaucoma
medications (24)

 
Many national and international organizations have recognized the need
to define the true risk of low intensity, non-thermal RF/MW radiation
exposure, calling for intensive scientific investigation to answer the
open questions. These include:

* The World Health Organization, noting reports of "cancer,
reduced fertility, memory loss, and adverse changes in the behavior
and development of children." (25)
* The U. S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) (26)
* The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) (27)
* The Swedish Work Environmental Fund (28)
* The National Cancer Institute (NCI) (29)
* The European Commission (EC) (30)
* New Zealand's Ministry of Health (31)
* National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (32)
* Commonwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organization of
Australia (CSIRO) (33)
* The Royal Society of Canada expert group report prepared for
Health Canada (34)
* European Union's REFLEX Project (Risk Evaluation of Potential
Environmental Hazards from Low Frequency Electromagnetic Field
Exposure Using Sensitive in vitro Methods) (35)
* The Independent Group on Electromagnetic Fields of the Swedish
Radiation Protection Board (SSI) (36)
* The United Kingdom's National Radiological Protection Board
(NRPB) (37)
* The EMF-Team Finland's Helsinki Appeal 2005 (38)

 
Non-thermal effects are recognized by experts on RF/MW radiation and
health to be potential health hazards. Safe levels of RF/MW exposure
for these low intensity, non-thermal effects have not yet been
established.

The FDA has explicitly rejected claims that cellular phones are
"safe." (39)

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has stated repeatedly that
the current (ANSI/IEEE) RF/MW safety standards protect only against
thermal effects. (40)

Many scientists and physicians question the safety of exposure to
RF/MW radiation. The CSIRO study, for example, notes that there are no
clear cutoff levels at which low intensity RF/MW exposure has no
effect, and that the results of ongoing studies will take years to
analyze. (41)

Internationally, researchers and physicians have issued statements
that biological effects from low-intensity RF/MW radiation exposure
are scientifically established:

· The 1998 Vienna-EMF Resolution (42)

· The 2000 Salzburg Resolution on Mobile Telecommunication
Base Stations (43)

· The 2002 Catania Resolution (44)

· The 2002 Freiburger Appeal (45)

· The 2004 Report of the European Union's REFLEX Project
(Risk
Evaluation of Potential Environmental Hazards from Low Frequency
Electromagnetic Field Exposure Using Sensitive in vitro Methods) (46)

· The 2004 Second Annual Report from Sweden's Radiation
Protection Board (SSI) Independent Expert Group on Electromagnetic
Fields Recent Research on Mobile Telephony and Health Risks (47)

· Mobile Phones and Health 2004: Report by the Board of
NRPB
(The UK's National Radiological Protection Board) (48)

The county of Palm Beach, Florida, the City of Los Angeles,
California, and the country of New Zealand have all prohibited cell
phone base stations and antennas near schools due to safety concerns.
The British Columbia Confederation of Parent Advisory Councils
[BCCPAC] passed a resolution in 2003 banning cellular antennae from
schools and school grounds. This organization is comparable to the
Parent Teachers Association (PTA) in the United States. The
resolution was directed to B.C. Ministry of Education, B.C. Ministry
of Children and Family Development, B.C. School Trustees Association,
and B.C. Association of Municipalities.

US Government Information

 

In the United States, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has
used safety guidelines for RF/MW radiation environmental exposure
since 1985.

 

The FCC guidelines for human exposure to RF/MW radiation are derived
from the recommendations of two organizations, the National Council on
Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) and the Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). In both cases, the
recommendations were developed by scientific and engineering experts
drawn from industry, government, and academia after extensive reviews
of the scientific literature related to the biological effects of
RF/MW radiation.

Many countries in Europe and elsewhere use exposure guidelines
developed by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation
Protection (ICNIRP). The ICNIRP safety limits are generally similar to
those of the NCRP and IEEE, with a few exceptions. For example, ICNIRP
recommends different exposure levels in the lower and upper frequency
ranges and for localized exposure from certain products such as
hand-held wireless telephones. Currently, the World Health
Organization is working to provide a framework for international
harmonization of RF/MW radiation safety standards.

In order to affirm conformity to standards regarding heating of
tissue, measurements are time averaged over 0.1 hours [6 minutes].
This method eliminates any spikes in the readings. Computer power
bars have surge protectors to prevent damage to computers. Fire
fighters and emergency medical personnel do not!

The NCRP, IEEE, and ICNIRP all have identified a whole-body Specific
Absorption Rate (SAR) value of 4 watts per kilogram (4 W/kg) as a
threshold level of exposure at which harmful biological thermal
effects due to tissue heating may occur. Exposure guidelines in terms
of field strength, power density and localized SAR were then derived
from this threshold value. In addition, the NCRP, IEEE, and ICNIRP
guidelines vary depending on the frequency of the RF/MW radiation
exposure. This is due to the finding that whole-body human absorption
of RF/MW radiation varies with the frequency of the RF signal. The
most restrictive limits on whole-body exposure are in the frequency
range of 30-300 MHz where the human body absorbs RF/MW energy most
efficiently. For products that only expose part of the body, such as
wireless phones, exposure limits in terms of SAR only are specified.

Similarly, the exposure limits used by the FCC are expressed in terms
of SAR, electric and magnetic field strength, and power density for
transmitters operating at frequencies from 300 kHz to 100 GHz. The
specific values can be found in two FCC bulletins, OET Bulletins 56
and 65.

OET Bulletin 56, "Questions and Answers about Biological Effects
and
Potential Hazards of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields" was
designed to provide factual information to the public by answering
some of the most commonly asked questions. It includes the latest
information on FCC guidelines for human exposure to RF/MW radiation.
Further information and a downloadable version of Bulletin 56 can be
found at: http://www.fcc.gov/oet/info/documents/bulletins/#56

OET Bulletin 65, "Evaluating Compliance With FCC Guidelines for
Human
Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields" was prepared to
provide assistance in determining whether proposed or existing
transmitting facilities, operations or devices comply with limits for
human exposure to RF/MW radiation adopted by the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC). Further information and a
downloadable version of Bulletin 65 can be found at:
http://www.fcc.gov/oet/info/documents/bulletins/#65

The FCC authorizes and licenses products, transmitters, and facilities
that generate RF and microwave radiation. It has jurisdiction over all
transmitting services in the U.S. except those specifically operated
by the Federal Government. Under the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 (NEPA), the FCC has certain responsibilities to consider
whether its actions will significantly affect the quality of the human
environment. Therefore, FCC approval and licensing of transmitters and
facilities must be evaluated for significant impact on the
environment. Human exposure to RF radiation emitted by FCC-regulated
transmitters is one of several factors that must be considered in such
environmental evaluations. In 1996, the FCC revised its guidelines for
RF/MW radiation exposure as a result of a multi-year proceeding and as
required by the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

For further information and answers to questions about the safety of
RF/MW radiation from transmitters and facilities regulated by the FCC
go to http://www.fcc.gov/oet/rfsafety/rf-faqs.html.
 

Canadian Government Information
-------------------------------

Industry Canada is the organization that sets regulatory requirements
for electromagnetic spectrum management and radio equipment in Canada.
Industry Canada establishes standards for equipment certification and,
as part of these standards, developed RSS-102, which specifies
permissible radiofrequency RF/MW radiation levels. For this purpose,
Industry Canada adopted the limits outlined in Health Canada's
Safety-Code 6, which is a guideline document for limiting RF exposure.
A downloadable version of "RSS-102 - Evaluation Procedure for
Mobile
and Portable Radio Transmitters with respect to Health Canada's Safety
Code 6 for Exposure of Humans to Radio Frequency Fields", as well
as
additional information can be found at:
http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/insmt-gst.
nsf/vwapj/rss102.pdf/$FILE/rss102.pdf
.

Safety Code 6 specifies the requirements for the use of radiation
emitting devices. This Code replaces the previous Safety Code 6 -
EHD-TR-160. A downloadable version of "Limits of Human Exposure
to
Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields in the Frequency Range from 3
kHz TO 300 GHz – Safety Code 6", as well as further detailed
information can be found at
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hecs-sesc/ccrpb/publication/99ehd237/toc.htm.


US and Canadian Legal Issues
----------------------------
 
Although some local and state governments have enacted rules and
regulations about human exposure to RF/MW radiation in the past, the
Telecommunications Act of 1996 requires the United States Federal
Government to control human exposure to RF/MW radiation. In
particular, Section 704 of the Act states that, "No State or local
government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement,
construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities
on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions
to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission's
regulations concerning such emissions." Further information on federal
authority and FCC policy is available in a fact sheet from the FCC's
Wireless Telecommunications Bureau at www.fcc.gov/wtb.

In a recent opinion filed by Senior Circuit Judge Stephen F. Williams,
No. 03-1336 EMR Network v. Federal Communications Commission and
United States of America, the Court upheld the FCC's decision not to
initiate an inquiry on the need to revise its regulations to address
non-thermal effects of radiofrequency (RF) radiation from the
facilities and products subject to FCC regulation as EMR Network had
requested in its September 2001 Petition for Inquiry.

At the request of the EMR Network, the EMR Policy Institute provided
legal and research support for this appeal. On January 13, 2005, a
Petition for Rehearing en banc by the full panel of judges at the DC
Circuit Court of Appeals was filed. Briefs, background documents and
the DC Circuit decision are found at:
http://www.emrpolicy.org/litigation/case_law/index.htm.

The Toronto Medical Officer of Health for the Toronto Board of Health
recommended to Health Canada that public exposure limits for RF/MW
radiation be made 100 times stricter; however the recommendation was
not allowed, since, as in the US, only the Canadian federal government
can regulate RF/MW radiation exposure level.

 
World Health Organization Efforts
---------------------------------
 
In 1996, the World Health Organization (WHO) established the
International EMF Project to review the scientific literature and work
towards resolution of health concerns over the use of RF/MW
technology. WHO maintains a Web site that provides addition
information on this project and about RF/MW biological effects and
research. For further information go to http://ww
w.who.int/peh-emf/en/.

Conclusion
----------

For decades, the International Association of Fire Fighters has been
directly involved in protecting and promoting the health and safety of
our membership. However, we simply don't know at this time what the
possible health consequences of long-term exposure to low-intensity
RF/MW radiation of the type used by the cell phone base stations and
antennas will be. No one knows--the data just aren't there. The
chairman of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation
Protection ICNIRP), one of the leading international organizations
which formulated the current RF/MW radiation exposure guidelines, has
stated that the guidelines include "no consideration regarding prudent
avoidance" for health effects for which evidence is less than
conclusive (49)

Again, fire department facilities, where fire fighters and emergency
response personnel live and work are not the proper place for a
technology which could endanger their health and safety

The only reasonable and responsible course is to conduct a study of
the highest scientific merit and integrity on the RF/MW radiation
health effects to our membership and, in the interim, oppose the use
of fire stations as base stations for towers and/or antennas for the
conduction of cell phone transmissions until it is proven that such
sitings are not hazardous to the health of our members.
 

Footnotes
---------

[back] 1. Revised and Amended IAFF Resolution No. 15; August 2004


Study of Firefighters Exposed to Radio Frequency (RF) Radiation from
Cell Towers/Masts

WHEREAS, fire stations across the United States and Canada are being
sought by wireless companies as base stations for the antennas and
towers for the conduction of cell phone transmissions; and

WHEREAS, many firefighters who are living with cell towers on or
adjacent to their stations are paying a substantial price in terms of
physical and mental health. As first responders and protectors of the
general public, it is crucial that firefighters are functioning at
optimal cognitive and physical capacity at all times; and

WHEREAS, the brain is the first organ to be affected by RF radiation
and symptoms manifest in a multitude of neurological conditions
including migraine headaches, extreme fatigue, disorientation, slowed
reaction time, vertigo, vital memory loss and attention deficit amidst
life threatening emergencies; and

WHEREAS, most of the firefighters who are experiencing symptoms can
attribute the onset to the first week(s) these towers/antennas were
activated; and

WHEREAS, RF radiation is emitted by these cellular antennas and RF
radiation can penetrate every living cell, including plants, animals
and humans; and

WHEREAS, both the U. S. and Canadian governments established
regulatory limits for RF radiation based on thermal (heat)
measurements with no regard for the adverse health effects from
non-thermal radiation which is proven to harm the human brain and
immune system; and

WHEREAS, the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency stated in a July
16, 2002, letter, "Federal health and safety agencies have not yet
developed policies concerning possible risk from long-term,
non-thermal exposures. The FCC's exposure guideline is considered
protective of effects arising from a thermal mechanism (RF radiation
from cell towers is non-thermal) but not from all possible mechanisms.
Therefore, the generalization by many that the guidelines protecting
human beings from harm by any or all mechanisms is not
justified"; and

WHEREAS, an Expert Panel Report requested by the Royal Society of
Canada prepared for Health Canada (1999) stated that, "Exposure
to RF
fields at intensities far less than levels required to produce
measurable heating can cause effects in cells and tissues. These
biological effects include alterations in the activity of the enzyme
ornithine decarboxylase, in calcium regulation, and in the
permeability of the blood-brain barrier. Some of these biological
effects brought about by non-thermal exposure levels of RF could
potentially be associated with adverse health effects"; and

WHEREAS, based on concerns over growing scientific evidence of dangers
from RF radiation, an international conference was convened in
Salzburg, Austria, in the summer of 2000 where renowned scientists
declared the upper-most RF radiation exposure limit from a tower-mast
should be 1/10th of 1 microwatt (Note that 1/10th of 1 microwatt is
10,000 times lower than the uppermost limit allowed by the U. S. or
Canada.); and it should be noted this limit was set because of study
results showing brain wave changes at 1/10th of 1 microwatt; and

WHEREAS, in a recently cleared paper by Dr. Richard A. Albanese of the
U. S. Air Force, a highly recognized physician in the area of the
impact of radiation on the human body, Dr. Albanese states, "I
would
ask a good faith effort in achieving as low exposure rates as are
possible within reasonable financial constraints. Also I would fund
targeted studies using animal subjects and human groups living or
working in high radiation settings or heavy cellular phone users,
emphasizing disease causations. I urge acceptance of the ideal that
there should be no unmonitored occupational or environmental exposures
whose associated disease rates are unknown." (The opinions
expressed
herein are those of Dr. Albanese, and do not reflect the policies of
the United States Air Force.); and

WHEREAS, recently a study, not affiliated with the wireless industry,
was conducted of firefighters exposed to RF radiation from cell
towers/antennas affixed to their stations.** The study revealed brain
damage that can be differentiated from chemical causation (such as
inhalation of toxic smoke) suggesting RF radiation as the cause of the
brain damage found on SPECT scans; and

WHEREAS, firefighters are the protectors of people and property and
should be protected under the Precautionary Principle of Science and
therefore, unless radiation is proven safe and harmless, cellular
antennas should not be placed on or near fire stations; therefore be
it

RESOLVED, That the IAFF shall seek funding for an initial U. S. and
Canadian study with the highest scientific merit and integrity,
contrasting firefighters with residence in stations with towers to
firefighters without similar exposure; and be it further

RESOLVED, That in accordance with the results of the study, the IAFF
will establish protective policy measures with the health and safety
of all firefighters as the paramount objective; and be it further

RESOLVED, That the IAFF oppose the use of fire stations as base
stations for antennas and towers for the conduction of cell phone
transmissions until such installations are proven not to be hazardous
to the health of our members.

 

**Note: A pilot study was conducted in 2004 of six California fire
fighters working and sleeping in stations with towers. The study,
conducted by Gunnar Heuser, M.D., PhD. of Agoura Hills, CA, focused on
neurological symptoms of six fire fighters who had been working for up
to five years in stations with cell towers. Those symptoms included
slowed reaction time, lack of focus, lack of impulse control, severe
headaches, anesthesia-like sleep, sleep deprivation, depression, and
tremors. Dr. Heuser used functional brain scans - SPECT scans - to
assess any changes in the brains of the six fire fighters as compared
to healthy brains of men of the same age. Computerized psychological
testing known as TOVA was used to study reaction time, impulse
control, and attention span. The SPECT scans revealed a pattern of
abnormal change which was concentrated over a wider area than would
normally be seen in brains of individuals exposed to toxic inhalation,
as might be expected from fighting fires. Dr. Heuser concluded the
only plausible explanation at this time would be RF radiation
exposure. Additionally, the TOVA testing revealed among the six fire
fighters delayed reaction time, lack of impulse control, and
difficulty in maintaining mental focus.

 

[back] 2. An international blue ribbon panel assembled by the
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) designated
power frequency electromagnetic fields (EMF) as "possible human
carcinogens" on June 24, 1998. The panel's decision was based largely
on the results of epidemiological studies of children exposed at home
and workers exposed on the job. The evaluation of the EMF literature
followed procedures developed by the International Agency for Research
on Cancer (IARC), based in Lyon, France. The working group's report
will be the basis for the NIEHS report to Congress on the EMF Research
and Public Information Dissemination program (EMF RAPID). The National
Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) of the United Kingdom noted that
the views of its Advisory Group on Non-Ionizing Radiation are
"consistent with those of the NIEHS expert panel."

June 26, 1998 statement of the National Radiological Protection Board,
sited in Microwave News, July/August 1998
[back] 3. World Health Organization; International Agency for
Research on Cancer; IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic
Risks to Humans; Volume 80 Non-Ionizing Radiation, Part 1: Static and
Extremely Low-Frequency (ELF) Electric and Magnetic Fields; 2002; 429
pages; ISBN 92 832 1280 0; See
http://www-cie.iarc.fr/htdocs/monographs/vol80/80. This IARC
Monograph provides the rationale for its designation of ELF/EMF as a
possible human carcinogen. It states that:

A few studies on genetic effects have examined chromosomal aberrations
and micronuclei in lymphocytes from workers exposed to ELF electric
and magnetic fields. In these studies, confounding by genotoxic agents
(tobacco, solvents) and comparability between the exposed and control
groups are of concern. Thus, the studies reporting an increased
frequency of chromosomal aberrations and micronuclei are difficult to
interpret.

Many studies have been conducted to investigate the effects of ELF
magnetic fields on various genetic end-points. Although increased DNA
strand breaks have been reported in brain cells of exposed rodents,
the results are inconclusive; most of the studies show no effects in
mammalian cells exposed to magnetic fields alone at levels below 50
µT. However, extremely strong ELF magnetic fields have caused
adverse
genetic effects in some studies. In addition, several groups have
reported that ELF magnetic fields enhance the effects of known DNA-
and chromosome-damaging agents such as ionizing radiation.

The few animal studies on cancer-related non-genetic effects are
inconclusive. Results on the effects on in-vitro cell proliferation
and malignant transformation are inconsistent, but some studies
suggest that ELF magnetic fields affect cell proliferation and modify
cellular responses to other factors such as melatonin. An increase in
apoptosis following exposure of various cell lines to ELF electric and
magnetic fields has been reported in several studies with different
exposure conditions. Numerous studies have investigated effects of ELF
magnetic fields on cellular end-points associated with signal
transduction, but the results are not consistent.

[back] 4. The International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation
Protection (ICNIRP) statement "Health Issues Related to the Use of
Hand-Held Radiotelephones and Base Transmitters" of 1996 reads:

"Thermally mediated effects of RF fields have been studied in animals,
including primates. These data suggest effects that will probably
occur in humans subjected to whole body or localized heating
sufficient to increase tissue temperatures by greater than 1C. They
include the induction of opacities of the lens of the eye, possible
effects on development and male fertility, various physiological and
thermoregulatory responses to heat, and a decreased ability to perform
mental tasks as body temperature increases. Similar effects have been
reported in people subject to heat stress, for example while working
in hot environments or by fever. The various effects are well
established and form the biological basis for restricting occupational
and public exposure to radiofrequency fields. In contrast, non-thermal
effects are not well established and currently do not form a
scientifically acceptable basis for restricting human exposure for
frequencies used by hand-held radiotelephones and base stations."

International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, "Health
Issues Related to the Use of Hand-Held Radiotelephones and Base
Transmitters," Health Physics 70:587-593, 1996

The ANSI/IEEE Standard for Safety Levels of 1992 similarly states:

"An extensive review of the literature revealed once again that the
most sensitive measurements of potentially harmful biological effects
were based on the disruption of ongoing behavior associated with an
increase of body temperature in the presence of electromagnetic
fields. Because of the paucity of reliable data on chronic exposures,
IEEE Subcommittee IV focused on evidence of behavioral disruption
under acute exposures, even disruption of a transient and fully
reversible nature."

IEEE Standards Coordinating committee 28 on Non-Ionizing Radiation
Hazards: Standard for Safe Levels With Respect to Human Exposure to
Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields, 3 KHz to 300 GHz (ANSI/IEEE
C95.1-1991), The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers,
New York, 1992.

[back] 5. Drs. Czerska, Casamento, Ning, and Davis (working for the
Food and Drug Administration in 1997) using "a waveform identical to
that used in digital cellular phones" at a power level within our
current standards (SAR of 1.6 W/Kg, the maximum spatial peak exposure
level recommended for the general population in the ANSI C95.1-1991
standard) found increases in cellular proliferation in human
glioblastoma cells. This shows that "acceptable" levels of radiation
can cause human cancer cells to multiply faster. The authors note that
"because of reported associations between cellular phone exposure and
the occurrence of a brain tumor, glioblastoma, a human glioblastoma
cell line was used" in their research.

E.M. Czerska, J. Casamento, J. T. Ning, and C. Davis, "Effects of
Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Radiation on Cell Proliferation,"
[Abstract presented on February 7, 1997 at the workshop 'Physical
Characteristics and Possible Biological Effects of Microwaves Applied
in Wireless Communication, Rockville, MD] E. M. Czerska, J. Casamento
Centers for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug
Administration, Rockville, Maryland 20857, USA; H. T. Ning, Indian
Health Service, Rockville, Maryland 20857, USA; C. Davis, Electrical
Engineering Dept., Univ. of Maryland, College Park, Maryland 20742,
USA

[back] 6. Dr. Michael Repacholi (in 1997, currently the director of
the International Electromagnetic Fields Project at the World Health
Organization) took one hundred transgenic mice and exposed some to
radiation for two 30 minute periods a day for up to 18 months. He
found that the exposed mice developed lymphomas (a type of cancer) at
twice the rate of the unexposed mice. While telecommunications
industry spokespersons criticized the experiment for using mice with a
mutation which predisposed them to cancer (transgenic) the researchers
pointed out that "some individuals inherit mutations in other
genes...that predispose them to develop cancer, and these individuals
may comprise a subpopulation at special risk from agents that would
pose an otherwise insignificant risk of cancer."

Dr. Repacholi stated "I believe this is the first animal study showing
a true non-thermal effect." He repeated the experiment in 1998 using
50 Hz fields instead of the 900 MHz pulsed radiation (the type used by
cellular phones) used in the original experiment and found no cancer
risk. He stated that this new data had implications for his original
cellular phone study: "the control groups for both our RF and 50 Hz
field studies showed no statistical differences, which lessens the
possibility that the RF/MW radiation study result was a chance event
or due to errors in methodology."

It is extremely important to note that Dr. Michael Repacholi was
Chairman of the ICNIRP at the time its Statement on Health Issues
Related to the Use of Hand-Held Radiotelephones and Base Transmitters
was developed in 1996.

M. Repacholi et al., "Lymphomas in Eµ-Pim1 Transgenic Mice Exposed
to
Pulsed 900 MHz Electromagnetic Fields," Radiation Research, 147,
pp.631-640, May 1997

[back] 7. Dr. Ross Adey (Veterans Administration Hospital at Loma
Linda University in 1996) found what appeared to be a protective
effect in rats exposed to the type of radiation used in digital
cellular phones. The rats were exposed to an SAR of 0.58-0.75 W/Kg 836
MHz pulsed radiation of the TDMA type two hours a day, four days a
week for 23 months, with the signals turned on and off every 7.5
minutes, so total exposure was 4 hours a week. Interestingly this
effect was not present when a non-digital, analog signal was used.
Rats exposed developed cancer less often. This study shows that low
power fields of the digital cellular frequency can influence cancer
development. Whether they would protect or promote in our children is
a question for further study.

Ross Adey of the Veterans Administration Hospital at Loma Linda
University, CA presented the results of pulsed (digital cellular)
radiation on June 13, 1996 at the 18th Annual Meeting of the
Bioelectromagnetics Society in Victoria, Canada. He presented the
findings of the analog cellular phone radiation effect at the June
1997 2nd World Congress for Electricity and Magnetism in Biology and
Medicine in Bologna, Italy. Reviews can be found in Microwave News
issues July/August, 1996 and March/April 1997.

In recognition of his more than three decades of "fundamental
contributions to the emerging science of the biological effects of
electromagnetic fields," the authors of the November 2004 Report of
the European Union's REFLEX Project (Risk Evaluation of Potential
Environmental Hazards From Low Frequency Electromagnetic Field
Exposure Using Sensitive in vitro Methods) chose to include Dr. Adey's
personal views on Electromagnetic Field Exposure research as the
Foreword to that report. To view the entire report, see:
http://www.itis.ethz.ch/downloads/REFLEX_Final%20Report_171104.pdf

The following is taken from Dr. Adey's Foreword found on pages 1-3 of
the REFLEX Report:

The Future of Fundamental Research in a Society Seeking Categoric
Answers to Health Risks of New Technologies

In summary, we have become superstitious users of an ever-growing
range of technologies, but we are now unable to escape the web that
they have woven around us.

Media reporters in general are no better informed. Lacking either
responsibility or accountability, they have created feeding frenzies
from the tiniest snippets of information gleaned from scientific
meetings or from their own inaccurate interpretation of published
research. In consequence, the public has turned with pleading voices
to government legislatures and bureaucracies for guidance . . .

We face the problem brought on by the blind leading the blind.
Because of public pressure for rapid answers to very complex
biological and physical issues, short-term research programs have been
funded to answer specific questions about certain health risks.

In many countries, and particularly in the USA, the effects of such
harassing and troublesome tactics on independent, careful fundamental
research have been near tragic. Beguiled by health hazard research as
the only source of funding, accomplished basic scientists have
diverted from a completely new frontier in physical regulation of
biological mechanisms at the atomic level. Not only have governments
permitted corporate interests in the communications industry to fund
this research, they have even permitted them to determine the research
questions to be addressed and to select the institutions performing
the research.

[back] 8. Dr. A. W. Guy reported an extensive investigation on rats
chronically exposed from 2 up to 27 months of age to low-level pulsed
microwaves at SARs up to 0.4 W/Kg. The exposed group was found to have
a significantly higher incidence of primary cancers.

A. W. Guy, C. K. Chou, L. Kunz, L, Crowley, and J. Krupp, "Effects of
Long-Term Low-Level Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure on Rats." Volume
9. Summary. Brooks Air Force Base, Texas, USAF School of Aerospace
Medicine, USF-SAM-TR-85-11; 1985

[back] 9. Drs. Henry Lai and N. P. Singh of the University of
Washington in Seattle have reported both single- and double-strand DNA
breaks in the brains of rats exposed to radiofrequency electromagnetic
radiation at an SAR of 1.2 W/Kg. DNA is the carrier of the genetic
information in all living cells. Cumulated DNA strand breaks in brain
cells can lead to cancer or neurodegenerative diseases.

H. Lai and N. P. Singh, "Single- and Double-Strand DNA Breaks in Rat
Brain Cells After Acute Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic
Radiation," International Journal of Radiation Biology, Vol 69, No. 4,
513-521, 1996

[back] 10. Dr. Stanislaw Szmigielski has studied many thousands of
Polish soldiers. He has found that those exposed to radiofrequency
and microwave radiation in the workplace had more than double the
cancer rate of the unexposed servicemen analyzing data from 1971-1985.
He has presented further data suggesting a dose-response relationship
with soldiers exposed to 100-200 W/cm2 suffering 1.69 times as many
cancers as the unexposed, and those exposed to 600-1000 W/cm2
suffering 4.63 times as many cancers. The level considered safe for
the public according to FCC regulations is 1000 W/cm2. Occupational
exposure up to 5000 W/cm2 is allowed.

S. Szmigielski, "Cancer Morbidity in Subjects Occupationally Exposed
to High Frequency (Radiofrequency and Microwave) Electromagnetic
Radiation," The Science of the Total Environment 180:9-17, 1996

[back] 11. Dr. Bruce Hocking found an association between increased
childhood leukemia incidence and mortality in the proximity of
television towers. The power density ranged from 0.2-8.0 W/cm2 nearer
and 0.02 W/cm2 farther from the towers.

B. Hocking, I. R. Gordon, H. L. Grain, and G. E. Hatfield, "Cancer
Incidence and Mortality and Proximity to TV Towers," Medical Journal
of Australia 165: 601-605; 1996

[back] 12. Drs. Mann and Röschke investigated the influence of
pulsed
high-frequency RF/MW radiation of digital mobile radio telephones on
sleep in healthy humans. They found a hypnotic effect with shortening
of sleep onset latency and a REM (Rapid Eye Movement) suppressive
effect with reduction of duration and percentage of REM sleep. "REM
sleep plays a special physiological role for information processing in
the brain, especially concerning consolidation of new experiences.
Thus the effects observed possibly could be associated with
alterations of memory and learning functions."

K. Mann and J. Röschke, "Effects of Pulsed High-Frequency
Electromagnetic Fields on Human Sleep," Neuropsychobiology 33:41-47,
1996

[back] 13. Dr. Allen Frey has been researching RF/MW radiation for
over 3 decades. Here is the abstract on a paper concerning headaches
and cellular phone radiation. "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. First, headaches as a consequence of
exposure to low intensity microwaves were reported in the literature
30 years ago. These were observed during the course of microwave
hearing research before there were cellular telephones. Second, the
blood-brain barrier appears to be involved in headaches, and low
intensity microwave energy exposure affects the barrier. Third, the
dopamine-opiate systems of the brain appear to be involved in
headaches, and low intensity electromagnetic energy exposure affects
those systems. In all three lines of research, the microwave energy
used was approximately the same--in frequencies, modulations, and
incident energies--as those emitted by present day cellular
telephones, Could the current reports of headaches be the canary in
the coal mine, warning of biologically significant effects?"

A. H. Frey, "Headaches from Cellular Telephones: Are they Real and
What Are the Implications?" Environmental Health Perspectives Volume
106, Number 3, pp.101-103, March 1998

[back] 14. Henry Lai's review of the literature concerning
neurological effects of RF/MW radiation: Existing data indicate that
RF/MW radiation of relatively low intensity can affect the nervous
system. Changes in blood-brain barrier, morphology, electrophysiology,
neurotransmitter functions, cellular metabolism, and calcium efflux,
and genetic effects have been reported in the brain of animals after
exposure to RF. These changes can lead to functional changes in the
nervous system. Behavioral changes in animals after exposure to RR
have been reported.

Even a temporary change in neural functions after RF/MW radiation
exposure could lead to adverse consequences. For example, a transient
loss of memory function or concentration could result in an accident
when a person is driving. Loss of short term working memory has indeed
been observed in rats after acute exposure to RF/MW radiation.

Research has also shown that the effects of RF/MW radiation on the
nervous system can cumulate with repeated exposure. The important
question is, after repeated exposure, will the nervous system adapt to
the perturbation and when will homeostasis break down? Related to this
is that various lines of evidence suggest that responses of the
central nervous system to RF/MW radiation could be a stress response.
Stress effects are well known to cumulate over time and involve first
adaptation and then an eventual break down of homeostatic processes.

H. Lai, "Neurological Effects of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic
Radiation Relating to Wireless Communication Technology," Paper
presentation at the IBC-UK Conference: "Mobile Phones-Is There a
Health Risk?" September 16-17, 1997, Brussels, Belgium

[back] 15. Blood-Brain-Barrier: The blood-brain-barrier (BBB) is
primarily a continuous layer of cells lining the blood vessels of the
brain. It is critical for regulation of the brain's activity. Lai
notes that "Even though most studies indicate that changes in the BBB
occurs only after exposure to RF/MW radiation of high intensities with
significant increase in tissue temperature, several studies have
reported increases in permeability after exposure to RF/MW radiation
of relatively low intensities...Pulsed RF seems to be more potent than
continuous wave RF." Pulsed RF/MW is the type used in digital
cellular systems. Effects on the BBB were noted at the 0.2 W/cm2
level, and even at SAR of 0.016-5 W/kg. These effects could lead to
local changes in brain function.

H. Lai, Ibid

[back] 16. Cellular Morphology: RF/MW radiation induced morphological
changes of the central nervous system cells and tissues have been
shown to occur under relatively high intensity or prolonged exposure
to the RF/MW radiation. However, there are several studies which show
that repeated exposure at relatively low power intensities caused
morphological changes in the central nervous system. Again here pulsed
(as in digital phone use) RF/MW radiation produced more pronounced
effects. Certain drugs given to nonhuman primates sensitized them, for
instance allowing eye damage to occur at very low power intensities.
Dr Lai notes "Changes in morphology, especially cell death, could have
an important implication on health. Injury-induced cell proliferation
has been hypothesized as a cause of cancer." Some of these experiments
were in the range of SAR 0.53 W/kg or even 0.26 W/kg.

H. Lai, Ibid

[back] 17. Neural Electrophysiology: Changes in neuronal
electrophysiology, evoked potentials, and EEG have been reported. Some
effects were observed at low intensities and after repeated exposure,
suggesting cumulative effect. Energy density levels were as low as 50
W/cm2.

H. Lai, Ibid

[back] 18. Neurotransmitters: Neurotransmitters are molecules which
transmit information from one nerve cell to another. Early studies
have reported changes in various neurotransmitters (catecholamines,
serotonin, and acetylcholine) in the brain of animals only after
exposure to high intensities of RF/MW radiation. However, there are
more recent studies that show changes in neurotransmitter functions
after exposure to low intensities of RF radiation. For example,
effects were seen at 50 µW/cm2 in one experiment. U.S. and
Canadian
RF/MW radiation safety policies allow exposures of 1000 µW/cm2 at
that
frequency.

RF/MW radiation activates endogenous opioids in the brain. Endogenous
opioids are neurotransmitters with morphine-like properties and are
involved in many important physiological and behavioral functions,
such as pain perception and motivation.

The response to RF/MW radiation depends on the area of the brain
studied and on the duration of exposure. Exposure to RF/MW radiation
has been shown to affect the behavioral actions of benzodiazepines
(these are drugs such as Valium).

H. Lai, Ibid

[back] 19. Metabolic Changes in Neural Tissue: Several studies
investigated the effects of RF/MW radiation exposure on energy
metabolism in the rat brain. Surprisingly, changes were reported after
exposure to relatively low intensity RF/MW radiation for a short
duration of time (minutes). The effects depended on the frequency and
modulation characteristics of the RF/MW radiation and did not seem to
be related to temperature changes in the tissue.

Calcium ions play important roles in the functions of the nervous
system, such as the release of neurotransmitters and the actions of
some neurotransmitter receptors. Thus changes in calcium ion
concentration could lead to alterations in neural functions. This is
an area of considerable controversy because some researchers have also
reported no significant effects of RF/MW radiation exposure on
calcium efflux. However, when positive effects were observed, they
occurred after exposure to RF/MW radiation of relatively low
intensities and were dependent on the modulation and intensity of the
RF/MW radiation studied (window effects). Some studies had SARs as
low as 0.05-0.005 W/Kg.

H. Lai, Ibid

[back] 20. Cytogenetic effects have been reported in various types of
cells after exposure to RF/MW radiation. Recently, several studies
have reported cytogenetic changes in brain cells by RF/MW radiation ,
and these results could have important implication for the health
effects of RF/MW radiation . Genetic damage to glial cells can result
in carcinogenesis. However, since neurons do not undergo mitosis, a
more likely consequence of neuronal genetic damage is changes in
functions and cell death, which could either lead to or accelerate the
development of neurodegenerative diseases. Power densities of 1 mW/cm2
were employed, a level considered safe for the public by the FCC.

RF/MW radiation -induced increases in single and double strand DNA
breaks in rats can be blocked by treating the rats with melatonin or
the spin-trap compound N-t-butyl--phenylnitrone. Since both compounds
are potent free radical scavengers, these data suggest that free
radicals may play a role in the genetic effect of RF. If free radicals
are involved in the RF-induced DNA strand breaks in brain cells,
results from this study could have an important implication on the
health effects of RF exposure. Involvement of free radicals in human
diseases, such as cancer and atherosclerosis, has been suggested. Free
radicals also play an important role in the aging process, which has
been ascribed to be a consequence of accumulated oxidative damage to
body tissues, and involvement of free radicals in neurodegenerative
diseases, such as Alzheimer's, Huntington, and Parkinson, has also
been suggested. One can also speculate that some individuals may be
more susceptible to the effects of RF/MW radiation exposure.

H. Lai, Ibid

[back] 21. Dr. A. A. Kolodynski and V. V. Kolodynska of the Institute
of Biology, Latvian Academy of Sciences, presented the results of
experiments on school children living in the area of the Skrunda Radio
Location Station in Latvia. Motor function, memory, and attention
significantly differed between the exposed and control groups. The
children living in front of the station had less developed memory and
attention and their reaction time was slower.

A. A. Kolodynski, V. V. Kolodynska, "Motor and Psychological Functions
of School Children Living in the Area of the Skrunda Radio Location
Station in Latvia," The Science of the Total Environment 180:87-93,
1996

[back] 22. Dr. H. Lai and colleagues in 1993 exposed rats to 45
minutes of pulsed high frequency RF/MW radiation at low intensity and
found that the rats showed retarded learning, indicating a deficit in
spatial "working memory" function.

H Lai, A. Horita, and A. W. Guy, "Microwave Irradiation Affects
Radial-Arm Maze Performance in the Rat," Bioelectromagnetics
15:95-104, 1994

NOTE: Dr. Lai's January 2005 compilation of published RF/MW radiation
studies demonstrating biological effects of exposure to low-intensity
RF/MW radiation is included as a Reference section at the end of this
report.

[back] 23. Dr. Stefan Braune reported a 5-10 mm Hg resting blood
pressure rise during exposure to RF/MW radiation of the sort used by
cellular phones in Europe. The Lancet, the British medical journal
where the report appeared, stated that "Such an increase could have
adverse effects on people with high blood pressure."

S. Braune, "Resting Blood Pressure Increase During Exposure to a
Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Field," The Lancet 351, pp.
1,857-1,858, 1998

[back] 24. Dr. Kues and colleagues (of Johns Hopkins University and
the Food and Drug Administration) found that placing timolol and
pilocarpine into the eyes of monkeys and then exposing them to low
power density pulsed RF/MW radiation caused a significant reduction in
the power-density threshold for causing damage to the cells covering
the eye and the iris. In fact the power was reduced by a factor of 10,
so that it entered the "acceptable, safe" level of the FCC, 1 mW/cm2!
Timolol and pilocarpine are commonly used by people suffering from
glaucoma. This is a very important study, as it points to the fact
that laboratory experiments under "ideal" conditions are rarely what
one finds in real life. The "safe" level of RF/MW radiation exposure
for healthy people is likely to be very different than for those of us
who suffer from illness, take medications, or are perhaps simply
younger or older than those in the experiments.

H. A. Kues, J. C. Monahan, S. A. D'Anna, D. S. McLeod, G. A. Lutty,
and S. Koslov, "Increased Sensitivity of the Non-Human Primate Eye to
Microwave Radiation Following Ophthalmic Drug Pretreatment,"
Bioelectromagnetics 13:379-393, 1992

[back] 25. The World Health Organization states that "concerns have
been raised about the safety of cellular mobile telephones, electric
power lines and police speed-control 'radar guns.' Scientific reports
have suggested that exposure to electromagnetic fields emitted from
these devices could have adverse health effects, such as cancer,
reduced fertility, memory loss, and adverse changes in the behaviour
and development of children." Therefore, "In May 1996, in response to
growing public health concerns in many Member States over possible
health effects from exposure to an ever-increasing number and
diversity of EMF sources, the World Health Organization launched an
international project to assess health and environmental effects of
exposure to electric and magnetic fields, which became known as the
International EMF Project. The International EMF Project will last for
five years." "A number of studies at [frequencies above about 1 MHz]
suggest that exposure to RF fields too weak to cause heating may have
adverse health consequences, including cancer and memory loss.
Identifying and encouraging coordinated research into these open
questions is one of the major objectives of the International EMF
Project."

World Health Organization Fact Sheet N181, "Electromagnetic Fields and
Public Health, The International EMF Project," reviewed May 1998 and
World Health Organization Fact Sheet N182, "Electromagnetic Fields and
Public Health, Physical Properties and Effects on Biological Systems,"
reviewed May 1998,  

[back] 26. The U. S. Food and Drug Administration in a January 14,
1998 letter to the House Telecommunications Subcommittee stated it
"believes additional research in the area of RF is needed." In 1997
the FDA established the following priorities:

* Chronic (lifetime) animal exposures should be given the highest
priority.
* Chronic animal exposures should be performed both with and
without the application of chemical initiating agents to investigate
tumor promotion in addition to tumorigenesis.
* Identification of potential risks should include end points
other than brain cancer (e.g. ocular effects of RF radiation
exposure).
* Replication of prior studies demonstrating positive biological
effects work is needed. A careful replication of the Chou and Guy
study (Bioelectromagnetics, 13, pp.469-496, 1992) which suggests that
chronic exposure of rats to microwaves is associated with an increase
in tumors, would contribute a great deal to the risk identification
process for wireless communication products.
* Genetic toxicology studies should focus on single cell gel
studies of DNA strand breakage and on induction of micronuclei.
* Epidemiology studies focused on approaches optimized for hazard
identification are warranted.
*  

Food and Drug Administration Recommendations quoted in Microwave News,
March/April, 1997

[back] 27. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) is
planning a multi-country, multi-million dollar study of cancer among
users of wireless phones, beginning 1998. Microwave News,
January/February, 1998

[back] 28. The Swedish Work Environmental Fund initiated a new
epidemiological study on cellular phone radiation and brain tumors in
1997. Microwave News, November/December, 1997

[back] 29. The National Cancer Institute announced plans for a 5 year
study of brain tumors and RF/MW radiation in 1993. Microwave News,
January/February, 1993

[back] 30. The European Commission (EC) Expert Group on health effects
of wireless phones called for a 5 year research program with a $20
million budget, reported 1997. Microwave News , January/February,
1997

[back] 31. A report commissioned by New Zealand's Ministry of Health
stated that "It is imperative that the scientific issues be clarified
as soon as possible, as there is much at stake." It called for more
research to examine the potential health effects of RF radiation.
Microwave News, November/December, 1996

[back] 32. The National Health and Medical Research Council of
Australia announced its sponsorship of a 5 year, $3.5 million project
on potential health effects of mobile phone technology in 1996.
Microwave News, November/December, 1996

[back] 33. The Commonwealth Scientific Industrial Research
Organization (CSIRO) of Australia concluded in 1995 that the safety of
cellular telephones cannot be resolved "in the near future." Dr. Stan
Barnett, a principal researcher of CSIRO, states that "My goal is to
establish a national committee to approach this problem by
coordinating relevant and focused research." He estimated a budget of
$3 million over a 3 year period would be necessary.

Commonwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organization, "Status of
Research on Biological Effects and Safety of Electromagnetic
Radiation: Telecommunications Frequencies," a report prepared by Dr.
Stan Barnett, as sited in Microwave News, September/October, 1995

[back] 34. In Canada, Expert Panels are formed in response to requests
from governments and other organizations for guidance on public policy
issues where specialized knowledge is required. The Royal Society of
Canada (RSC) is the only national academic organization, encompassing
all fields of study in the sciences, arts and humanities that
provides, through its Committee on Expert Panels, a service to
Canadians by convening Expert Panels that produce publicly
disseminated, arms-length, third party reviews. The most recent
Expert Panel report addressing RF/MW radiation examines new data on
dosimetry and exposure assessment, thermoregulation, biological
effects such as enzyme induction, and toxicological effects, including
genotoxicity, carcinogenicity, and testicular and reproductive
outcomes. Epidemiological studies of mobile phone users and
occupationally exposed populations are examined, along with human and
animal studies of neurological and behavioural effects. All of the
authoritative reviews completed within the last two years have
supported the need for further research to clarify the possible
associations between RF fields and adverse health outcomes that have
appeared in some reports. See:
http://www.rsc.ca//index.php?lang_id=1&page_id=120.

Recent Advances in Research on Radiofrequency Fields and Health:
2001-2003; A Follow-up to The Royal Society of Canada, Report on the
Potential Health Risks of Radiofrequency Fields from Wireless
Telecommunication Devices, 1999

 

[back] 35. The European Union effort to address this issue is in the
study Risk Evaluation of Potential Environmental Hazards from Low
Energy Electromagnetic Field Exposure Using Sensitive in vitro Methods
(REFLEX). Exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) in relation to
health is a controversial topic throughout the industrial world. So
far epidemiological and animal studies have generated conflicting data
and thus uncertainty regarding possible adverse health effects. This
situation has triggered controversies in communities especially in
Europe with its high density of population and industry and the
omnipresence of EMF in infrastructures and consumer products. These
controversies are affecting the siting of facilities, leading people
to relocate, schools to close or power lines to be re-sited, all at
great expense. The European Union believes that causality between EMF
exposure and disease can never be regarded as proven without knowledge
and understanding of the basic mechanisms possibly triggered by EMF.
To search for those basic mechanisms powerful technologies developed
in toxicology and molecular biology were to be employed in the REFLEX
project to investigate cellular and sub-cellular responses of living
cells exposed to EMF in vitro.

 

The REFLEX data have made a substantial addition to the data base
relating to genotoxic and phenotypic effects of both ELF-EMF and
RF-EMF on in vitro cellular systems. While the data neither precludes
nor confirms a health risk due to EMF exposure nor was the project
designed for this purpose, the value lies in providing new data that
will enable mechanisms of EMF effects to be studied more effectively
than in the past. Furthermore, the REFLEX data provide new
information that will be used for risk evaluation by WHO, IARC and
ICNIRP. For further information on REFLEX see:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/research/quality-of-life
/ka4/ka4_electromagnetic_en.html

 

[back] 36. The Swedish Radiation Protections Institute (SSI)
endeavors to ensure that human beings and the environment are
protected from the harmful effects of radiation, both in the present
and in the future. SSI has focused on epidemiological research on
cancer and exposure from mobile phones and transmitters as well as
experimental cancer research. In addition three selected topics were
also discussed, namely blood-brain barrier, heat shock proteins, and
precautionary framework. For further information on SSI see:
http://www.ssi.se/forfattning/eng_forfattlista.html

 

[back] 37. In the United Kingdom, the National Radiological
Protection Board (NRPB) was created by the Radiological Protection Act
1970. The statutory functions of NRPB are to advance the acquisition
of knowledge about the protection of mankind from radiation hazards
through research and to provide information and advice to persons
(including Government Departments) with responsibilities in the United
Kingdom in relation to the protection from radiation hazards either of
the community as a whole or of particular sections of the community.
The NFPB believes that there is a need for better occupational studies
rather than simply for more. In particular, the studies need to be of
occupational groups for whom measurements show that there is genuinely
a substantially raised exposure to RF fields. If the studies are to be
more informative than those so far, a key requirement will be for
improved exposure measurement (or improved estimation of exposure) for
individuals, or at least for occupational groups. It would be
desirable, as far as practical, that the studies should measure the
intensity and timing of RF field exposures, and also that they should
include some assessment of major RF field exposures from sources other
than the current occupation. Ideally, exposure assessment needs to be
anatomical site (organ)-specific, because some sources result in
greatly differing doses to different parts of the body. It is a
difficulty in these prescriptions, of course, that the appropriate
exposure metric is unknown. For further information on NRPB see:
http://www.nrpb.org/index.htm

 

[back] 38. On January 5, 2005, the EMF-Team Finland issued the
Helsinki Appeal 2005 to members of the European Parliament. In it
physicians and researchers call on the European Parliament to apply
the Precautionary Principle to electromagnetic fields, especially in
the radio- and microwave- frequency bands. They criticize the present
RF/MW radiation safety standards that do not recognize the biological
effects caused by non-thermal exposures to non-ionizing radiation
[i.e., RF/MW radiation.] They also call for continued refunding of
the REFLEX EMF research program. The text of the Helsinke Appeal
2005 is found at: http://www.emrpolicy.org/news/headlines/index.htm

[back] 39. On July 19, 1993 Dr. Elizabeth Jacobson, Deputy Director
for Science, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug
Administration criticized Thomas Wheeler, President of the Cellular
Telecommunications Industry Association:

"I am writing to let you know that we were concerned about two
important aspects of your press conference of July 16 concerning the
safety of cellular phones, and to ask that you carefully consider the
following comments when you make future statements to the press.
First, both the written press statements and your verbal comments
during the conference seemed to display an unwarranted confidence that
these products will be found absolutely safe. In fact, the
unremittingly upbeat tone of the press packet strongly implies that
there can be no hazard, leading the reader to wonder why any further
research would be needed at all.....More specifically, your press
packet selectively quotes from our Talk Paper of February 4 in order
to imply that FDA believes that cellular phones are "safe." ("There is
no proof at this point that cellular phones are harmful.") In fact,
the same Talk Paper also states, "There is not enough evidence to know
for sure, either way." Our position, as we have stated it before, is
this: Although there is no direct evidence linking cellular phones
with harmful effects in humans, a few animal studies suggest that such
effects could exist. It is simply too soon to assume that cellular
phones are perfectly safe, or that they are hazardous--either
assumption would be premature. This is precisely why more research is
needed."

Full text of letter can be found in Microwave News, July/August, 1993

[back] 40. In 1993 the Director of the Office of Radiation and Indoor
Air of the Environmental Protection Agency suggested that the FCC not
adopt the 1992 ANSI/IEEE standard "due to serious flaws," among them
(1) "the ANSI/IEEE conclusion that there is no scientific data
indicating that certain subgroups of the population are more at risk
than others is not supported by NCRP and EPA reports" and (2) "the
thesis that ANSI/IEEE recommendations are protective of all mechanisms
of interaction is unwarranted because the adverse effects level in the
1992 ANSI/IEEE standard are based on a thermal effect."

Letter from Margo T. Oge, Director, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air
to Thomas Stanley, Chief Engineer, Office of engineering and
Technology, FCC, dated Nov 9, 1993

[back] 41. A brief sampling of the CSIRO report:

Problems in studies of human populations published to date include
imprecise estimates of exposure. As a result, such epidemiological
studies may underestimate any real risk. The likelihood of
epidemiological studies providing useful information is questionable,
particularly if the biological end point cannot be predicted. Its
value in the short term (less than 10 years) must be negligible unless
there was an enormous increase in the rate of cancer growth.
Interestingly, the incidence of brain tumors in the EC countries has
increased substantially in recent years.

RF safety cannot be assessed in the absence of reported serious
effects when so little research has been aimed at the problem. It is
somewhat surprising, and rather disappointing, to find that although
the literature contains many hundreds of publications, there are very
few areas of consensus....At low levels the absence of clear
thresholds and [the] presence of intensity and frequency windows have
created questions rather than provided answers.

There is no doubt that the interpretation of bioeffects data has been
clouded by a preoccupation with thermally mediated processes. In fact,
development of the ANSI/IEEE standard is based only on
well-established thermal effects, and ignores the more subtle
non-thermal processes that are more difficult to interpret and apply
to human health.

Commonwealth Scientific Industrial Research Organization, "Status of
Research on Biological Effects and Safety of Electromagnetic
Radiation: Telecommunications Frequencies," a report prepared by Dr.
Stan Barnett, as sited in Microwave News, September/October, 1995

[back] 42. Statement from the October 25-28, 1998 "Symposium of Mobile
Phones and Health - Workshop on Possible Biological and Health Effects
of RF Electromagnetic Fields" held at the University of Vienna,
Austria.

The preferred terminology to be used in public communication: Instead
of using the terms "athermal", "non-thermal" or "microthermal"
effects, the term "low intensity biological effects" is more
appropriate.

Preamble: The participants agreed that biological effects from
low-intensity exposures are scientifically established. However, the
current state of scientific consensus is inadequate to derive reliable
exposure standards. The existing evidence demands an increase in the
research efforts on the possible health impact and on an adequate
exposure and dose assessment.

 

Base stations: How could satisfactory Public Participation be ensured:
The public should be given timely participation in the process. This
should include information on technical and exposure data as well as
information on the status of the health debate. Public participation
in the decision (limits, siting, etc.) should be enabled.

 

Cellular phones: How could the situation of the users be improved:
Technical data should be made available to the users to allow
comparison with respect to EMF-exposure. In order to promote prudent
usage, sufficient information on the health debate should be provided.
This procedure should offer opportunities for the users to manage
reduction in EMF-exposure. In addition, this process could stimulate
further developments of low-intensity emission devices.

[back] 43. Statement from the June 7-8, 2000 International Conference
on Cell Tower Siting Linking Science and Public Health, Salzburg,
Austria. The full report can be found at: www.lan
d-sbg.gv.at/celltower

· It is recommended that development rights for the
erection
and for operation of a base station should be subject to a permission
procedure. The protocol should include the following aspects:

o Information ahead and active involvement of the local public

o Inspection of alternative locations for the siting

o Protection of health and wellbeing

o Considerations on conservation of land- and townscape

o Computation and measurement of exposure

o Considerations on existing sources of HF-EMF exposure

o Inspection and monitoring after installation

 

· It is recommended that a national database be set up on a
governmental level giving details of all base stations and their
emissions.

· It is recommended for existing and new base stations to
exploit all technical possibilities to ensure exposure is as low as
achievable (ALATA-principle) and that new base stations are planned to
guarantee that the exposure at places where people spend longer
periods of time is as low as possible, but within the strict public
health guidelines.

· Presently the assessment of biological effects of
exposures
from base stations in the low-dose range is difficult but
indispensable for protection of public health. There is at present
evidence of no threshold for adverse health effects.

o Recommendations of specific exposure limits are prone to
considerable uncertainties and should be considered preliminary. For
the total of all high frequency irradiation a limit value of 100
mW/m²
(10 µW/cm²) is recommended.

o For preventive public health protection a preliminary
guideline level for the sum total of exposures from all ELF pulse
modulated high-frequency facilities such as GSM base stations of 1
mW/m² (0.1 µW/cm²) is recommended.

 

[back] 44. Scientists attending the September 13-14, 2002
International Conference "State of the Research on Electromagnetic
Fields – Scientific and Legal Issues," organized by ISPESL
(National
Institute for Prevention and Work Safety, Italy), the University of
Vienna, and the City of Catania, held in Catania, Italy, agreed to the
following:

 

· Epidemiological and in vivo and in vitro experimental
evidence demonstrates the existence for electromagnetic field (EMF)
induced effects, some of which can be adverse to health.

· We take exception to arguments suggesting that weak (low
intensity) EMF cannot interact with tissue.

· There are plausible mechanistic explanations for
EMF-induced
effects which occur below present ICNIRP and IEEE guidelines and
exposure recommendations by the EU.

· The weight of evidence calls for preventive strategies
based
on the precautionary principle. At times the precautionary principle
may involve prudent avoidance and prudent use.

· We are aware that there are gaps in knowledge on
biological
and physical effects, and health risks related to EMF, which require
additional independent research.

 

[back] 45. The Freiburger Appeal is a German based appeal by mainly
medical practitioners who are concerned about the effects, they
believe, from mobile phone technology including masts that are
appearing in their patients. It started in Oct 2002 and with very
little international publicity has got 50,000 signatories with at
least 2000 medical signatures from across the world. Mast These
physicians and scientists agreed to establish an international
scientific commission to promote research for the protection of public
health from EMF and to develop the scientific basis and strategies for
assessment, prevention, management and communication of risk, based on
the precautionary principle.

 

Excerpt:

 

On the basis of our daily experiences, we hold the current mobile
communications technology (introduced in 1992 and since then globally
extensive) and cordless digital telephones (DECT standard) to be among
the fundamental triggers for this fatal development. One can no
longer evade these pulsed microwaves. They heighten the risk of
already-present chemical/physical influences, stress the
body–immune
system, and can bring the body–still-functioning regulatory
mechanisms
to a halt. Pregnant women, children, adolescents, elderly and sick
people are especially at risk.

Statement of the physicians and researchers of Interdisziplinäre
Gesellschaft für Umweltmedizin e. V. (Interdisciplinary Association
for Environmental Medicine) IGUMED, Sackingen, Germany, September 19,
2002. The Freiburger Appeal can be found at:
http://www.mastsanity.org/doctors-appeals.html.

 

[back] 46. Report of the European Union's REFLEX Project (Risk
Evaluation of Potential Environmental Hazards from Low Frequency
Electromagnetic Field Exposure Using Sensitive in vitro Methods),
November 2004. The Project studied ELF and RF exposures to various
animal cell types. The report is found at:
http://www.itis.ethz.ch/downloads/REFLEX_Final%20Report_171104.pdf

from the Summary: [t]he omnipresence of EMF's in infrastructures and
consumer products have become a topic of public concern. This is due
to the fear of people that based on the many conflicting research data
a risk to their health cannot be excluded with some certainty.
Therefore, the overall objective of REFLEX was to find out whether or
not the fundamental biological processes at the cellular and molecular
level support such an assumption. For this purpose, possible effects
of EMF's on cellular events controlling key functions, including
those
involved in carcinogenesis and in the pathogenesis of
neurodegenerative disorders, were studied through focused research.
Failure to observe the occurrence of such key critical events in
living cells after EMF exposure would have suggested that further
research efforts in this field could be suspended and financial
resources be reallocated to the investigation of more important
issues. But as clearly demonstrated, the results of the REFLEX
project show the way into the opposite direction.

[back] 47. From the Discussion section of the December 20, 2004 Second
Annual Report of Sweden's Radiation Protection Board (SSI) entitled:
Recent Research on Mobile Telephony and Health Risks: Second Annual
Report from SSI's Independent Expert Group on Electromagnetic Fields.
The complete report is available at:
http://www.ssi.se/english/EMF_exp_Eng_2004.pdf

 

To date, little is known about the levels of radiofrequency radiation
exposure in the general population from sources such as mobile phones
being used by oneself or other people, mobile phone base stations, and
radio and television transmitters. Measurements that have been
performed have usually been made as a result of public concern about
base station exposures or other specific sources, and have therefore
been made at locations that could be assumed to have higher fields
than would be the case if measurement locations were selected
randomly. Furthermore, all measurements have been stationary, and
there is today no knowledge about the level of exposure that an
individual will have throughout the day.

There is need for information about the personal exposure to RF fields
in the general population, to enhance the understanding of the
relative importance of exposure from base stations close to the home,
from radio and television transmitters, and from the use of mobile
phones . . . Studies with personal RF exposure measurements of
randomly selected samples of the general population are strongly
encouraged.
[back] 48. Released January 11, 2005, Mobile Phones and Health 2004:
Report by the Board of NRPB Documents of the NRPB: Volume 15, No. 5.
See:
http://www.nrpb.org/publications/documents_of_nrpb
/abstracts/absd15-5.htm
from the Executive Summary:
The Board notes that a central recommendation in the Stewart Report
was that a precautionary approach to the use of mobile phone
technologies be adopted until much more detailed and scientifically
robust information on any health effects becomes available.
The Board considers that it is important to understand the signal
characteristics and field strengths arising from new
telecommunications systems and related technologies, to assess the RF
exposure of people, and to understand the potential biological effects
on the human body.

[back] 49. The ICNIRP exposure guidelines are only designed to protect
against "known adverse health impacts," according to Dr. Jürgen
Bernhardt, ICNIRP's chairman. Bernhardt reviewed the updated limits,
which cover the spectrum from 1 Hz to 300 GHz, in a presentation at
the 20th Annual Meeting of the Bioelectromagnetics Society in St. Pete
Beach, FL, on June 10. The limits protect against "short-term,
immediate health effects" such as nerve stimulation, contact shocks
and thermal insults, according to the guidelines, which appear in the
April issue of Health Physics (74, pp.494-522, 1998). Despite
"suggestive" evidence that power frequency magnetic fields can be
carcinogenic, ICNIRP has concluded that this and other non-thermal
health effects have not been "established." ICNIRP has long followed
this approach to standard-setting. In his talk, Bernhardt noted that
the guidelines include "no consideration regarding prudent avoidance"
for health effects for which evidence is less than conclusive.

Microwave News, July/August 1998

Additional References and Studies

 

The following references reporting biological effects of
radiofrequency radiation (RFR) at low intensities through January 2005
were compiled on 12/27/04 by Henry C. Lai PhD, Research Professor of
Bioengineering, University of Washington, Seattle, WA

Balode Sci Total Environ 180(1):81-85, 1996 - blood cells from cows
from a farm close and in front of a radar installation showed
significantly higher level of severe genetic damage.

Boscol et al. Sci Total Environ 273(1-3):1-10, 2001 - RFR from radio
transmission stations (0.005 mW/cm2) affects immune system in women.

Chiang et al. J. Bioelectricity 8:127-131, 1989 - people who lived and
worked near radio antennae and radar installations showed deficits in
psychological and short-term memory tests.

de Pomerai et al. Nature 405:417-418, 2000. Enzyme Microbial Tech
30:73-79, 2002 - reported an increase in a molecular stress response
in cells after exposure to a RFR at a SAR of 0.001 W/kg. This stress
response is a basic biological process that is present in almost all
animals - including humans.

de Pomerai et al. (FEBS Lett 22;543(1-3):93-97, 2003 - RFR damages
proteins at 0.015-0.020 W/kg.

D'Inzeo et al. Bioelectromagnetics 9(4):363-372, 1988 - very low
intensity RFR (0.002 – 0.004 mW/cm2) affects the operation of
acetylcholine-related ion-channels in cells. These channels play
important roles in physiological and behavioral functions.

Dolk et al. Am J Epidemiol 145(1):1-91997- a significant increase in
adult leukemias was found in residents who lived near the Sutton
Coldfield television (TV) and frequency modulation (FM) radio
transmitter in England.

Dutta et al.Bioelectromagnetics 10(2):197-202 1989 - reported an
increase in calcium efflux in cells after exposure to RFR at 0.005
W/kg. Calcium is an important component of normal cellular functions.

Fesenko et al. Bioelectrochem Bioenerg 49(1):29-35, 1999 - reported a
change in immunological functions in mice after exposure to RFR at a
power density of 0.001 mW/cm2.

Hallberg O, Johansson O, ( 2004) concluded that continuous disturbance
of cell repair mechanisms by body-resonant FM electromagnetic fields
seems to amplify the carcinogenic effects resulting from cell damage
caused e.g. by UV-radiation.

Hjollund et al. Reprod Toxicol 11(6):897, 1997 - sperm counts of
Danish military personnel, who operated mobile ground-to-air missile
units that use several RFR emitting radar systems (maximal mean
exposure 0.01 mW/cm2), were significantly lower compared to
references.

Hocking et al. Med J Aust 165(11-12):601-605, 1996 - an association
was found between increased childhood leukemia incidence and mortality
and proximity to TV towers.

Ivaschuk et al. Bioelectromagnetics 18(3):223-229, 1999 - short-term
exposure to cellular phone RFR of very low SAR (26 mW/kg) affected a
gene related to cancer.

Kolodynski and Kolodynska, Sci Total Environ 180(1):87-93, 1996 -
school children who lived in front of a radio station had less
developed memory and attention, their reaction time was slower, and
their neuromuscular apparatus endurance was decreased.

Kwee et al. Electro- and Magnetobiology 20: 141-152, 2001 - 20
minutes of cell phone RFR exposure at 0.0021 W/kg increased stress
protein in human cells.

Lebedeva et al. Crit Rev Biomed Eng 28(1-2):323-337, 2000 - brain wave
activation was observed in human subjects exposed to cellular phone
RFR at 0.06 mW/cm2.

Magras and Xenos Bioelectromagnetics 18(6):455-461, 1999 - reported a
decrease in reproductive function in mice exposed to RFR at power
densities of 0.000168 - 0.001053 mW/cm2. Irreversible sterility was
found in the fifth generation of offspring.

Mann et al. Neuroendocrinology 67(2):139-144, 1998 - a transient
increase in blood cortisol was observed in human subjects exposed to
cellular phone RFR at 0.02 mW/cm2. Cortisol is a hormone involved in
stress reaction.

Marinelli et al. J Cell Physiol. 198(2):324-332, 2004 - exposure to
900-MHz RFR at 0.0035 W/kg affected cell's self-defense responses.

Michelozzi et al. Epidemiology 9 (Suppl) 354p, 1998 - leukemia
mortality within 3.5 km (5,863 inhabitants) near a high power
radio-transmitter in a peripheral area of Rome was higher than
expected.

Michelozzi et al. Am J Epidemiol 155(12):1096-1103, 2002 - childhood
leukemia higher at a distance up to 6 km from a radio station.

Navakatikian and Tomashevskaya "Biological Effects of Electric and
Magnetic Fields, Volume 1," D.O. Carpenter (ed) Academic Press, San
Diego, CA, pp.333-342. 1994 - RFR at low intensities (0.01 - 0.1
mW/cm2; 0.0027- 0.027 W/kg) induced behavioral and endocrine changes
in rats. Decreases in blood concentrations of testosterone and insulin
were reported.

Novoselova et al. Bioelectrochem Bioenerg 49(1):37-41, 1999 -low
intensity RFR (0.001 mW/cm2) affects functions of the immune system.

Park et al. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental
Health 77(6):387-394, 2004 - higher mortality rates for all cancers
and leukemia in some age groups in the area near the AM radio
broadcasting towers.

Persson et al. Wireless Network 3:455-461, 1997 - reported an increase
in the permeability of the blood-brain barrier in mice exposed to RFR
at 0.0004 - 0.008 W/kg. The blood-brain barrier envelops the brain and
protects it from toxic substances.

Phillips et al. Bioelectrochem. Bioenerg. 45:103-110, 1998 - reported
DNA damage in cells exposed to RFR at SAR of 0.0024 - 0.024 W/kg.

Polonga-Moraru et al. Bioelectrochemistry 56(1-2):223-225, 2002 -
change in membrane of cells in the retina (eye) after exposure to RFR
at 15 µW/cm2.

Pyrpasopoulou et al. Bioelectromagnetics 25(3):216-227, 2004 -
exposure to cell phone radiation during early gestation at SAR of
0.0005 W/kg (5 µW/cm2) affected kidney development in rats.

Salford et al. Environ Health Persp Online January 29, 2003 - Nerve
cell damage in mammalian brain after exposure to microwaves from GSM
mobile phones signal at 0.02 W/kg.

Santini et al. Pathol Biol (Paris) 50(6):369-373, 2002 - increase in
complaint frequencies for tiredness, headache, sleep disturbance,
discomfort, irritability, depression, loss of memory, dizziness,
libido decrease, in people who lived within 300 m of mobile phone base
stations.

Sarimov et al. IEEE Trans Plasma Sci 32:1600-1608, 2004 - GSM
microwaves affect human lymphocyte chromatin similar to stress
response at 0.0054 W/kg.

Schwartz et al. Bioelectromagnetics 11(4):349-358, 1990 - calcium
movement in the heart affected by RFR at SAR of 0.00015 W/kg. Calcium
is important in muscle contraction. Changes in calcium can affect
heart functions.

Somosy et al. Scanning Microsc 5(4):1145-1155, 1991 - RFR at 0.024
W/kg caused molecular and structural changes in cells of mouse
embryos.

Stagg et al. Bioelectromagnetics 18(3):230-236, 1997- glioma cells
exposed to cellular phone RFR at 0.0059 W/kg showed significant
increases in thymidine incorporation, which may be an indication of an
increase in cell division.

Stark et al. J Pineal Res 22(4):171-176, 1997 - a two- to seven-fold
increase of salivary melatonin concentration was observed in dairy
cattle exposed to RFR from a radio transmitter antenna.

Tattersall et al. Brain Res 904(1):43-53, 2001 - low-intensity RFR
(0.0016 - 0.0044 W/kg) can modulate the function of a part of the
brain called the hippocampus, in the absence of gross thermal effects.
The changes in excitability may be consistent with reported behavioral
effects of RFR, since the hippocampus is involved in learning and
memory.

Vangelova et al. Cent Eur J Public Health 10(1-2):24-28, 2002 -
operators of satellite station exposed to low dose (0.1127 J/kg) of
RFR over a 24-hr shift showed an increased excretion of stress
hormones.

Velizarov et al. Bioelectrochem Bioenerg 48(1):177-180, 1999 - showed
a decrease in cell proliferation (division) after exposure to RFR of
0.000021 - 0.0021 W/kg.

Veyret et al. Bioelectromagnetics 12(1):47-56, 1991 - low intensity
RFR at SAR of 0.015 W/kg affects functions of the immune system.

Wolke et al. Bioelectromagnetics 17(2):144-153, 1996 - RFR at
0.001W/kg affects calcium concentration in heart muscle cells of
guinea pigs.

 

Return to Top of Document

The International Association of Fire Fighters recognizes IAFF Local
3368, Carpinteria-Summerland, California, who brought this issue to
the attention of our membership through the Resolution 15, submitted
through our biennial convention in August 2004. Additionally, the
following local affiliates provided support for the passage of the
resolution: Brookline, Massachusetts, San Diego, California, San
Francisco, California and Vancouver, British Columbia. We also
acknowledge the efforts of Dr. Henry C. Lai, University of Washington,
Seattle, Washington; Dr. Magda Havas of Trent University,
Peterborough, Ontario; Janet Newton, President of the EMR Policy
Institute; and Susan Foster Ambrose for their technical support and
continued passion to protect the health and safety of fire fighters
and emergency medical personnel. Finally, we thank Dr. Leslie Plachta
and the Safe Ossining Schools for their research efforts and their
battle to stop siting cell towers on Ossining, New York schools.

RMD; 3/2005