Cell Phones On The Brain
Daily News
By Bill Egbert
August 27, 2000
Feds decide how much
radiation is too much.
There will soon be a new
number besides price to consider when shopping for a cell phone — one that
will tell you how much radiation is being absorbed by your brain.
Nokia, QualComm, Motorola and
other big-name makers of the ever-growing number of wireless phones will be
required to detail radiation emissions on the new ones they produce.
The Cellular
Telecommunication Industry Association, which is mandating the disclosure,
says consumers should start seeing the new labeling on store shelves in three
to six months.
The disclosure plan is
intended to ease growing concern over health risks after several recent
studies — and a striking about-face by the scientist leading the industry's
research program — have called into question whether the devices 100 million
Americans use every day are safe.
Experts, however, point out
that the bulk of the research from dozens of studies has concluded the
radiation given off by cell phones is safe or has found few signs of risk.
Last month, Maryland
neurologist Chris Newman filed an $800 million lawsuit against Motorola and
Verizon, blaming his cell phone for his brain cancer.
The case joins more than a
dozen suits filed over the last eight years alleging that exposure to
cell-phone signals caused or aggravated brain tumors.
The charges have been fueled
by several studies expressing concern over the potential for danger.
The industry labels that
consumers will start seeing will detail how much radiation is absorbed by your
body while you are using a cell phone.
The Federal Communications
Commission's specific absorption rate, or SAR, a benchmark of what level is
considered safe, is being questioned by some experts.
A Daily News survey of the
radiation numbers for several popular phones shows that many of the models
come in just inside the FCC safety limit.
Weird Science
Shortly after the first brain-tumor suit was filed in 1992, the industry
association pledged $25 million to study cell phone safety and hired Dr.
George Carlo, an epidemiologist and lawyer, to head up the research under an
independently run entity called Wireless Technology Research.
Carlo had a controversial
history of working with industries trying to clean up their images. In the
early 1990s, he worked for the Chlorine Institute in its effort to downplay
the dangers of dioxin, and he did a study for tobacco giant Philip Morris
showing how personal biases among scientists could cause them to overestimate
the hazards of secondhand smoke.
After $25 million and six
years of work, Wireless Technology Research closed in December when the
industry funding dried up. Carlo went public to say that he saw some "red
flags." "When we say the jury's still out," Carlo said of the
debate in the scientific community over cell phone dangers, "it doesn't
mean that they're neutral. There are definite red flags. We just don't know
whether it's a big problem or a little problem."
He turned up the heat on the
industry in an interview with ABC's "20/20" in October in which he
said he no longer had confidence that cell phones are safe.
Days before, Carlo wrote to
AT&T's chief executive officer, Michael Armstrong, outlining some of his
unpublished findings, including, he said, a higher brain-cancer death rate and
double the rate of a rare type of brain tumor in cell phone users compared
with nonusers.
Carlo also told The News he
found persuasive evidence of genetic damage in human cells exposed to cell
phone radiation.
Industry spokesman Travis
Larson challenged Carlo to publish his findings in scientific journals.
"What scientists need to see is the data behind it," Larson said,
"and try to replicate it in their own laboratories."
Carlo countered that peer
review takes years and said people would be wise to take precautions now, as
he has done with his own family: "I gave everyone headsets for Christmas
two years ago."
Heated Debate
The FCC specific-absorption-rate safety limit is based on the amount of
radiation required to heat tissue. But a growing body of research suggests
that cell phone radiation can do more than raise tissue temperature.
Dr. Henry Lai, a researcher
at the University of Washington at Seattle, said a number of studies show
biological effects in experiments in which heating is not a factor. Others
measured effects at intensity levels too low to cause heating. A recent
British study suggested that a radiation level 80 times lower than the FCC
limit could damage cells and upset chemical reactions.
Lai and Carlo pointed to
evidence that cell phone radiation below the FCC limit may damage DNA,
interfere with protein synthesis and change brain chemistry.
Larson said the FCC gave the
cell phone industry its stamp of approval — and that's good enough:
"The government has looked at this and said, ‘We've looked at more than
200 scientific studies and come up with this benchmark, and that any phone
that meets this, meets our standards.'"
But in February, the Food and
Drug Administration's Center for Device and Radiological Health wrote to the
FCC to suggest a review of the benchmark. The guidelines, said the FDA, are
based only on radiation's heating effects, not other possible dangers.
The FDA report cited several
studies — including one that found double the rate of lymphoma in mice
exposed to cell phone radiation.
Carlo does not think the FDA
should wait for more data.
"We have never in our
history," he said, "had a consumer product where we've had 100
million people exposed so quickly and we don't understand whether it's
safe."
Gauging the Juice
To find the Specific Absorption Rate of your cell phone, look on the back
of the phone under the battery for the FCC ID code. Enter that code, including
hyphens, on the FCC Internet search page — www.fcc.gov/oet/fccid/.
Then click "View
Exhibits" and download the SAR test results — usually labeled
"Test Report" or "SAR Results."
The SAR shows the amount of
radiation your body absorbs as you use the phone, measured in watts per
kilogram (w/kg).
To be licensed by the FCC, a
phone must deliver an SAR of no higher than 1.6 w/kg at maximum power — a
standard that is being called into question.
The position of the phone,
the distance from a base station and obstructions interfering with the signal
affect a phone's SAR. Phone makers are quick to say that the SARs filed with
the FCC are at maximum power and don't represent the average SAR during normal
use.
Tips for Safe Cell-Phoning
Try to limit the power of the signal the phone is sending out, and to keep
the phone away from your body when it is on.
Avoid using your phone inside
buildings or wherever your phone says the signal is weak, because it will have
to send out a more powerful signal to work.
Extend the antenna if your
phone has one.
Never touch the antenna when
the phone is in use, because that disrupts the signal.
Get an external antenna for
your car if you use your phone on the road a lot.
Use a hands-6.00 headset and
leave your phone in a belt clip — or better yet, a purse or bag — to keep
it away from your body.
Don't use your cell phone for
long chats, and discourage use by young children.
Emissions From Top Models
The Federal Communications Commission has set a safety benchmark of
1.6 watts per kilogram (w/kg) for radiation emissions from cell phones. Here
are the top-level specific absorption rates (SARs) for some popular models:
