20 SCIENTISTS ISSUED AN APPEAL REGARDING ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS EMITTED BY PORTABLE PHONES
JUNE 15th, 2008
French physicians included David Servan-Schreiber and Dr. Annie Sasco
In 2008 20 scientists signed onto an Appeal calling for precautionary measures in using cell phones due to the possible health risks.
Read the 2008 APPEAL ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS EMITTED BY PORTABLE PHONES (in French)
Appeal regarding the use of mobile phones
On June 15, 2008, a panel of international experts gathered by David Servan-Schreiber and Annie Sasco alerted the public about the use of mobile phones. The Appeal emphasizes that electromagnetic fields emitted by mobile phones must be taken into account in health matters. It is important to protect yourself by simple measures.
Analysis of recent studies
Electromagnetic fields emitted by mobile phones must be taken into account in health matters. It is important to protect yourself. Ten simple precautionary measures can help.
To date, existing epidemiological studies are insufficient to conclude definitively that the use of mobile phones is associated with an increased risk of tumors and other health problems.
However, there is a scientific consensus to conclude that the available studies highlight:
1 / a significant penetration of the electromagnetic fields of mobile phones into the human body, particularly in the brain, and even more so in children due to their smaller size. (Figure 1) [1, 2]
Figure 1 . Numerical simulation of the penetration of electromagnetic radiation of a mobile phone as a function of age (GSM 900 Mhz frequency) (Right, Specific Absorption Rate Colorimetric Scale, W /kg) [1] *
Due to the scarcity of mobile phones in recent years, We note that human epidemiological studies carried out to date have not involved a sufficient number of people who have used their telephone for more than 10 years intensively (several hours per week).
And it is known that even when the association of exposure with cancer is perfectly proven and the risk very high (as for tobacco and lung cancer), studies under similar conditions, namely On people who smoked for less than 10 years would find it difficult to demonstrate an increased risk of lung cancer: The risk appears mostly 15 to 35 years later. [8].
The most recent studies that include cell phone uses for more than 10 years show a probable association with some benign tumors (acoustic nerve neurinomas) and some brain cancers, more marked on the side of use of the device. ** [7, 10, 11, 12, 13]
The precautions to be taken
Given the absence of absolute proof in humans of a carcinogenic effect of electromagnetic waves emitted by mobile phones, we can not speak of the need for preventive measures (as for tobacco or asbestos). Pending final data on extended observation periods, existing results require users to be informed of the most important precautionary measures, as also suggested in several national and international reports [7, 10 , 11, 12,
13] *** These measures are also important for people who already have cancer in order to avoid any external influence that could contribute to the progression of their disease.
1. Do not allow children under 12 to use a mobile phone except in an emergency. Indeed, the developing organs (the fetus or the child) are the most sensitive to the possible influence of exposure to electromagnetic fields.
2. During your communications, Try to keep the phone away from the body as much as possible (the amplitude of the field drops four times to 10 cm, and is fifty times less than 1 m distance – see figure 2). As soon as possible, use “speaker” mode, or a handsfree, **** or bluetooth headset (less than 1 / 100th of the average electromagnetic emission of the phone). .
3. Stay away from a person in communication , and avoid using your mobile phone in public places like the metro, The train or the bus where you passively expose your neighbors close to the electromagnetic field of your device.
4. Avoid as much as possible to carry a mobile phone on you , even in standby. Do not leave it near your body at night (under the pillow or on the bedside table) and especially in the case of pregnant women – or put it in “airplane” or “offline / offline” mode Has the effect of cutting off electromagnetic emissions.
5. If you must wear it on you, Make sure that the “keypad” face is directed towards your body and the “antenna” face (maximum field strength) towards the outside.
6. Use your mobile phone only to make contact or for conversations of just a few minutes (the biological effects are directly related to the duration of exposure). It is best to recall a wired fixed phone (and not a wireless phone –DECT– which uses a microwave technology similar to that of laptops).
7. When you use your mobile phone, change sideways , and before putting the mobile phone against your ear, wait until the caller has picked up (lowered the power of the electromagnetic field emitted).
8. Avoid using the notebook when the signal strength is low or when moving quickly, such as by car or train (maximum and automatic power increase when attempting to connect to a new relay antenna or remote antenna)
9. Communicate by SMS rather than by telephone (limits the duration of exposure and proximity of the body).
10. Choose a device with the DAS as low as possible in relation to your needs (the “Specific Absorption Rate” measures the power absorbed by the body). A classification of the DAS of the contemporary telephones of the different manufacturers is available on www.guerir.fr and other websites.
Conclusion
The mobile phone is a remarkable invention and an important societal advance. We will not do without it. None of the members of the expert panel below have given up the use of a mobile phone. Even me (DSS), a brain cancer patient, I will not do without it. On the other hand, we all need to take the precautionary measures required of recent scientific data on their biological effects, especially if we already carry a known cancer.
Otherwise, Builders and operators must also take responsibility. It is their responsibility to provide users with devices and equipment that allow the lowest possible level of risk and to constantly develop technology in this direction. They must also encourage consumers to use their devices in the manner most compatible with preserving their health.
In the early 1980s when owners of asbestos mines were reduced to bankruptcy as a result of family lawsuits of deceased persons due to occupational exposure, Johns Manville, the most important of them, drew the lessons of his years of struggle against the medical and scientific data that involved his industry. He concluded, with regret, that more appropriate warnings for the public, more effective precautions, and more medical research “could have saved lives, and probably shareholders, industry, and Benefits of its product.
“[15, 16] This is what we want today to the mobile phone industry. It is not a question of banning this technology,
Figure 2 . Estimation of the amplitude of the electromagnetic field of a mobile telephone
as a function of the distance from the apparatus . [17]
* Researchers in the INTERPHONE study reported comparable results with 129 recent mobile phones (800-1800 MHz, PDC and GSM) on adult brain models but did not evaluate the absorption of children’s brains. [2]
** The risk for these people could be almost twice that of non-users or more.
*** Electromagnetic radiation from relay antennas and WIFI transmitters is much lower than that of mobile phones. For this reason, we limit our current recommendations to the use of telephones.
**** Hands-free kits data are still too imprecise to guarantee their effectiveness Some kits with air tube can be ordered on the internet by doing a search on “air tube headset”. They partially reduce the energy absorbed at the head.
The 20 initial signatories
- Dr Bernard Asselain, Head of the Department of Cancer Biostatistics, Institut Curie
- Pr Franco Berrino, Director of the Department of Preventive and Predictive Medicine of the National Cancer Institute, Milan, Italy
- Dr Thierry Bouillet, Director of the Institute of Radiotherapy, Avicenne University Hospital Center, Bobigny
- Prof. Christian Chenal, Professor Emeritus of Cancerology, University of Rennes 1 and former head of the CNRS research team «Radiations, Environment, Adaptation “
- Prof. Jan Willem Coebergh, Oncologist, Department of Public Health, University of Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Dr Yvan Coscas, Oncologist, Head of Radiotherapy Department, Poissy St Germain Hospital
- Pr Jean-Marc Cosset, Oncology / Radiotherapy at the Institut Curie, Paris
- Professor Devra Lee Davis, Head of the Department of Environmental Cancer, University of Pittburgh, USA
- Dr. Michel Hery, Head of Radiotherapy Department, Princess Grace Hospital,Monaco
- Pr Lucien Israel, Professor Emeritus of Cancerology, University Paris XIII, Member of the
Institute – Jacques Marilleau, Engineer SUPELEC, former physicist at the Atomic Energy Commission and CNRS Orsay - Dr Jean-Loup Mouysset, Cancerologist, Polyclinic Rambot-Provençale, Aix-en-Provence, President of the association Ressource
- Dr Philippe Presles, President Institut Moncey de Prévention Santé, Paris, Author of PREVENIR, Robert Laffont, 2006
- Pr Henri Pujol, Cancerologist
- Joël de Rosnay , Doctor of Science,Scientific writer
- Dr Simone Saez, Doctor of Science, former head of the Cancer Control Center Léon Bérard, Lyon
- Dr Annie Sasco, Doctor of Science, Director of the Epidemiology Team for Cancer Prevention – INSERM , Université Victor Segalen Bordeaux 2
- Dr. David Servan-Schreiber, Doctor of Science, Clinical Professor of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh, Author of “ANTICANCER”, Editions Robert Laffont, 2007
- Dr. Pierre Souvet, Cardiologist, Aix-en-President of the Association Santé environnement Provence
- Dr. Jacques Vilcoq, Cancerologist, Hartmann Clinic, Neuilly-sur-seine
New signatories since June 15, 2008
- Prof. Ronald Herberman, Cancerologist, Director of the Institut de Cancerologie Pittsburgh, Vice-Chancellier Associate for Cancer Research, Faculty of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh
- Prof. Dan Wartenberg, Director of the Division of Environmental Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine Robert Wood Johnson,University of Maryland
- Dr. David Carpenter, Director of the Institute for Health and Environment, University of Albany, former Dean of the Faculty of Public Health.
1. Gandhi, OP, G. Lazzi, and CM Furse, Electromagnetic Absorption in the Human Head and Neck for Mobile Telephones at 835 and 1900 MHz. IEEE Transactions on Microwave Theory and Techniques, 1996. 44 (10): p. 1884-1897.
2. Cardis, E., et al., Distribution of RF energy emitted by mobile phones in anatomical structures of the brain. Physics in Medicine and Biology, 2008. 53: p. 1-13.
3. Salford, LG, et al., Nerve cell damage in mammalian brain after exposure to microwaves from GSM mobile phones. Environmental Health Perspectives, 2003. 111 (7): p. 881-3; Discussion A408.
4. Blank, M., “Health Risk of Electromagnetic Fields: Research on the Stress Response”, in The BioInitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically-Based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF), The_Bioinitiative_Working_Group, D.Carpenter, C. Sage, Editors. 2007.
5. Johannsson, O., Evidence for effects on immune function, in The BioInitiative Report: A Rationale for a Biologically-Based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF), The_Bioinitiative_Working_Group, D. Carpenter, and C. Sage , Editors. 2007.
6. Roux, D., Et al., High frequency (900 MHz) low amplitude (5 V m-1) electromagnetic Weld: a genuine environmental stimulus that affects transcription, translation, calcium and energy charge in tomato.
Planta, 2007. 7. Consumer_Security_Commission . NOTICE RELATING TO CONSUMER INFORMATION IN THE FIELD OF MOBILE TELEPHONY 02/08. 2008
8. Walker, WJ and BN Brin, US lung cancer mortality and declining cigarette tobacco consumption. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1988. 41 (2): p. 179-85.
9. Hardell, L., KH Mild, and M. Kundi, Evidence for brain tumors and acoustic neuromas, in The BioInitiative Report: A Biologically-based Public Exposure Standard for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF), The_Bioinitiative_Working_Group, D. Carpenter, and C. Sage, Editors.
10. Board_of_the_National_Radiological_Protection_Board, Mobile Phones and Health. 2004, National Radiological Protection Board: London, UK. p. 1-116.
11. Agence_Française_Secité_Sanitaire_Environmentale, Opinion of the AFSSE on mobile telephony. 2005, French Agency for Environmental Sanitary Safety: Paris, France.
12. Ministry of Health. Mobile phones: health and safety . 2008 [cited 2008 May 16];
13. CRIIREM_Centre_of_Search_and_Information_Independent_on_the_Regulations_Electromagnetic . Mobile telephony: the right reflexes! 2006 [cited 2008 May 26]; Available from:
14. Sadetzki, S., et al., Cellular phone use and risk of benign and malignant parotid gland tumors – a nationwide case-control study. American Journal of Epidemiology, 2008. 167 (4): p. 457-67.
15. European_Environment_Agency, Late Lessons from Early Warnings: the precautionary principle 1896-2000, in Environmental issue report. 2001. p.211.
16. Sells, B., What asbestos taught me about managing risk. Harvard Business Review, 1994 (March / April): p. 76-89.
17. National_Research_and_Security Institute, Electromagnetic Radiation of Mobile Phones – Measurement of Emissions from Various Devices, in Notebooks of Occupational Health and Safety – No. 176. 1999. What asbestos taught me about managing risk. Harvard Business Review, 1994 (March / April): p. 76-89. 17. National_Research_and_Security Institute, Electromagnetic Radiation of Mobile Phones – Measurement of Emissions from Various Devices, in Notebooks of Occupational Health and Safety – No. 176. 1999. What asbestos taught me about managing risk. Harvard Business Review, 1994 (March / April): p. 76-89. 17. National_Research_and_Security Institute, Electromagnetic Radiation of Mobile Phones – Measurement of Emissions from Various Devices, in Notebooks of Occupational Health and Safety – No. 176. 1999.
