26/09/2007 - How did the MTHR report get so misreported?
Summary
On the 12th September the MTHR press-released their first published report
on the "Mobile Telecommunications & Health Research" programme that has
been running since 2001. The research programme covered a number of
important recent papers on mobile telecommunications and health, including the
much publicised INTERPHONE work. Sadly, the press-release did a very poor job
of explaining what the findings were and gave the national press the view
that it basically gave the all clear, with a few minor possibilities to clear up
with further research. This incorrect message was reinforced by releasing the
report through the Science Media Centre (SMC) who only invite and allow selected
national media reporters to attend and so few challenging questions are usually
asked. No-one else was allowed to see a copy of the report until after the Press
Briefing had finished. The SMC freely admit that they specifically exclude press
with strong non main-line views and those with links to groups such as Friends
of the Earth, Greenpeace and other campaigning groups.
With regards to cancer and phone exposure, there have been a number of flaws
with some of the INTERPHONE epidemiological work, as we have covered previously
(November 2006, December 2006, January 2007). It is looking
as if the increase in brain cancer risk over the first 10 years is minimal to
non-existent, but it is hardly surprisingly for a disease with a typical latency
period of 15 to 25 years. They have concluded that after 10 years the situation
is not clear, but failed to mention in their press release that some of their
own research actually found statistically significant increases for brain
tumours with of over 10 years of mobile phone use (in fairness, this is
mentioned in the report itself, with the strange caveat that despite
mathematical statistical significance the data is "not convincingly significant").
It also summarises that "The MTHR programme also investigated whether mobile
phones might affect cells and tissue beyond simply heating them. The results so
far show no evidence for this and the committee believes there is no need to
support further work in this area." This is also in stark contrast to the more
detailed summary of work to be found in the 291 page 2004 REFLEX report (10.8 MB .pdf) which found
a number of significant and replicated genetic and cellular effects from
microwave radiation. Further to this, there are a number of other peer reviewed
papers going back decades finding similar effects referenced in the rest of this
article.
It is always difficult when a programme such as this completes, and decides
to neglect most of the literature outside of the studies involved in the
programme itself when summarising the "current state of understanding". It is
hardly news that there have been a large number of studies finding serious
health effects from RF radiation exposure, a fact we pointed out on this site 9
years ago! Nevertheless, as the MTHR press release has attempted to make the
phone issue sound largely resolved, it only seems fit to attempt to bring
attention to the swathes of evidence ignored by the report.
Media coverage
The Times
Nigel Hawkes, health editor of The Times managed to give his
readers a good impression that the whole phone issue is a clear non-problem, and
comes up with a number of factually incorrect statements:
"As far as we can tell, on the experience gained so far, there is no
evidence mobile phones or the masts that broadcast signals can damage
anybody's health, and that includes children."
A strange statement considering the evidence from the MTHR programme itself on long term
phone use and brain cancer[1][2], Hardell's work on phone use and brain cancer[3][4][5][6], and all of the literature
finding "Microwave Syndrome" effects[7][8][9][10][11].
"Experience of widescale use of mobile phones is only about a decade old,
however, and children have only started using them in large numbers even more
recently. It remains just possible that longer-term studies will reveal some
link to cancer, which takes at least a decade to manifest itself."
Aside from the misleading use of language (e.g. the unnecessary use of
"remains just possible" when simply "is possible" would have done fine), it is
also wrong. Longer-term studies already have revealed a link to
cancer, and the increase has been found to be statistically significant (i.e.
with only a 5% chance of being a "non-real" increase).[1][2][3][4][5][6]
"The odds of this are very low, because the experiments so far have shown
no plausible biological mechanism by which cancer could be triggered.
Radio-frequency radiation does not damage DNA, and nor has any other effect
been found that could provide such a mechanism."
Again, this is just not true. It is fair to say there are no other accepted
biological mechanisms, but there are certainly plausible theorised mechanisms
awaiting further confirmation[12][13]. It is also wrong to claim that radio frequency
radiation can not damage DNA, as there is already peer-reviewed evidence for
this[14][15], and
other genetic and cellular effects.[16][17][18][19][20]
"The mobile phone scare has always lacked plausibility. Radio frequency
signals have been around since the invention of radio - more than a century
- without evidence of ill-effects among those who work closely with them."
It can only have lacked plausibility for those that are not aware of the evidence. Aside
from the obvious and well documented points that modern pulsed RF transmissions
are considerably different in nature to the continuous wave radio transmissions
that have been ubiquitous for so long, there has also been evidence up to 3
decades ago of possible increases in risk of adverse health effects from
microwave radiation[21][22][23][24]. More recently there is even some research finding links to
cancer with standard AM radio transmitter aerials.[25][26].
"All that remains, like the grin of a vanishing Cheshire Cat, is the tiny
hint, not reaching statistical significance, of an increased risk of some brain
cancers in long-term users. This must be followed up, clearly, but for the
moment there is no evidence that mobile phones pose any risks at all."
This is simply poor reporting. As shown above, there is more than a hint of
evidence which does in fact reach statistical significance. Summarising in this
way is simply lying to the British public in a national newspaper, on an issue
where the public is confused enough already. It is vital that science reporters
go the extra mile and put in research before commenting on areas where they are
ignorant themselves.
Other media coverage
In fairness, this is the worst of the bunch. For example, aside from the
heavily misleading titles, the Belfast Telegraph and Independant articles were
more objectively written, and only suffered from taking too much of the MTHR's
press release as fact. The Telegraph also covered the story, and is probably the
best reflection of the MTHR report in the mainstream media, and the Daily Mail
covered the story and gave due attention to the very real possibility of a long
term cancer risk, but was sadly the only one to give it prominence in its
article -- all external press links below:
Links:
[MTHR Press Release]
[Times Coverage]
[Belfast Telegraph Coverage]
[Telegraph Coverage]
[Independent Coverage]
[Daily Mail Coverage]
References:
[1] - Schoemaker MJ, Swerdlow AJ, Ahlbom A, Auvinen A, Blaasaas KG,
Cardis E, Christensen HC, Feychting M, Hepworth SJ, Johansen C, Klaeboe L,
Lönn S, McKinney PA, Muir K, Raitanen J, Salminen T, Thomsen J, Tynes T
(October 2005) "Mobile phone use and risk of acoustic neuroma: results of the
Interphone case-control study in five North European countries". Br J
Cancer. 93(7):842-8 - [View Abstract]
[2] - Lahkola A, Auvinen A, Raitanen J, Schoemaker MJ, Christensen HC,
Feychting M, Johansen C, Klaeboe L, Lönn S, Swerdlow AJ, Tynes T, Salminen
T (April 2007) "Mobile phone use and risk of glioma in 5 North European
countries". Int J Cancer. 120(8):1769-75 - [View Abstract]
[3] - Hardell L, Carlberg M, Söderqvist F, Mild KH, Morgan LL
(September 2007) "Long-term use of cellular phones and brain tumours:
increased risk associated with use for > or =10 years". Occup Environ
Med. 64(9):626-32 - [View Abstract]
[4] - Hardell L, Mild KH, Carlberg M, Söderqvist F (October 2006)
"Tumour risk associated with use of cellular telephones or cordless desktop
telephones". World J Surg Oncol. 4:74 - [View Abstract]
[5] - Hardell L, Carlberg M, Mild KH (February 2006) "Pooled
analysis of two case-control studies on the use of cellular and cordless
telephones and the risk of benign brain tumours diagnosed during 1997-2003".
Int J Oncol. 28(2):509-18 - [View Abstract]
[6] - Hardell L, Carlberg M, Mild KH (September 2006) "Pooled
analysis of two case-control studies on use of cellular and cordless telephones
and the risk for malignant brain tumours diagnosed in 1997-2003". Int Arch
Occup Environ Health. 79(8):630-9 - [View Abstract]
[7] - Al-Khlaiwi T, Meo SA (June 2004) "Association of mobile phone
radiation with fatigue, headache, dizziness, tension and sleep disturbance in
Saudi population". Saudi Med J. 25(6):732-6 - [View Abstract]
[8] - Abdel-Rassoul G, El-Fateh OA, Salem MA, Michael A, Farahat F,
El-Batanouny M, Salem E (March 2007) "Neurobehavioral effects among
inhabitants around mobile phone base stations". Neurotoxicology.
28(2):434-40 - [View Abstract]
[9] - Santini R, Santini P, Danze JM, Le Ruz P, Seigne M (July 2002)
"Investigation on the health of people living near mobile telephone relay
stations: I/Incidence according to distance and sex". Pathol Biol (Paris).
50(6):369-73 - [View Abstract]
[10] - Santini R, Santini P, Danze JM, Le Ruz P, Seigne M (September
2003) "Symptoms experienced by people in vicinity of base stations: II/
Incidences of age, duration of exposure, location of subjects in relation to the
antennas and other electromagnetic factors". Pathol Biol (Paris).
51(7):412-5 - [View Abstract]
[11] - Oberfeld Gerd, Navarro A. Enrique, Portoles Manuel, Maestu
Ceferino, Gomez-Perretta Claudio (August 2004) "The Microwave Syndrome -
Further aspects of a Spanish Study". Conference Proceedings - [View Summary and Download Report]
[12] - Irmak MK, Fadillioglu E, Gülec M, Erdogan H, Yagmurca M,
Akyol O (December 2002) "Effects of electromagnetic radiation from a cellular
telephone on the oxidant and antioxidant levels in rabbits". Cell Biochem
Funct. 20(4):279-83 - [View Abstract]
[13] - Leszczynski D, Joenväärä S, Reivinen J, Kuokka R
(May 2002) "Non-thermal activation of the hsp27/p38MAPK stress pathway by
mobile phone radiation in human endothelial cells: molecular mechanism for
cancer- and blood-brain barrier-related effects". Differentiation. 70(2-3):120-9 - [View Abstract]
[14] - Lai H, Singh NP (1995) "Acute low-intensity microwave
exposure increases DNA single-strand breaks in rat brain cells".
Bioelectromagnetics. 16(3):207-10 - [View Abstract]
[15] - Lai H, Singh NP (April 1996) "Single- and double-strand DNA
breaks in rat brain cells after acute exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic
radiation". Int J Radiat Biol. 69(4):513-21 - [View Abstract]
[16] - Nylund R, Leszczynski D (May 2004) "Proteomics analysis of
human endothelial cell line EA.hy926 after exposure to GSM 900 radiation".
Proteomics. 2004 4(5):1359-65 - [View Abstract]
[17] - Nylund R, Leszczynski D (September 2006) "Mobile phone
radiation causes changes in gene and protein expression in human endothelial
cell lines and the response seems to be genome- and proteome-dependent".
Proteomics. 6(17):4769-80 - [View Abstract]
[18] - Yurekli AI, Ozkan M, Kalkan T, Saybasili H, Tuncel H, Atukeren
P, Gumustas K, Seker S (2006) "GSM base station electromagnetic radiation and
oxidative stress in rats". Electromagn Biol Med. 2006;25(3):177-88. - [View Abstract]
[19] - Remondini D, Nylund R, Reivinen J, Poulletier de Gannes F,
Veyret B, Lagroye I, Haro E, Trillo MA, Capri M, Franceschi C, Schlatterer K,
Gminski R, Fitzner R, Tauber R, Schuderer J, Kuster N, Leszczynski D, Bersani
F, Maercker C (September 2006) "Gene expression changes in human cells after
exposure to mobile phone microwaves". Proteomics. 6(17):4745-54 - [View Abstract]
[20] - Sarimov R, Malmgren LOG, Markova E, Persson BRR, Belyaev IY
(2004) "Nonthermal GSM Microwaves Affect Chromatin Conformation in Human
Lymphocytes Similar to Heat Shock". IEEE Trans Plasma Sci 32:1600-1608 - [View Abstract]
[21] - Silverman C (April 1973) "Nervous and behavioral effects of
microwave radiation in humans". Am J Epidemiol. 97(4):219-24 - [View Reference]
[22] - Adey WR, Bawin SM, Lawrence AF (1982) "Effects of weak
amplitude-modulated microwave fields on calcium efflux from awake cat cerebral
cortex". Bioelectromagnetics. 3(3):295-307 - [View Reference]
[23] - Milham S Jr (January 1988) "Increased mortality in amateur
radio operators due to lymphatic and hematopoietic malignancies". Am J
Epidemiol. 127(1):50-4 - [View Reference]
[24] - Szmigielski S (February 1996) "Cancer morbidity in subjects
occupationally exposed to high frequency (radiofrequency and microwave)
electromagnetic radiation". Sci Total Environ. 180(1):9-17 - [View Abstract]
[25] - Park SK, Ha M, Im HJ (August 2004) "Ecological study on
residences in the vicinity of AM radio broadcasting towers and cancer death:
preliminary observations in Korea". Int Arch Occup Environ Health.
77(6):387-94 - [View Abstract]
[26] - Ha M, Im H, Lee M, Kim HJ, Kim BC, Gimm YM, Pack JK (August
2007) "Radio-frequency radiation exposure from AM radio transmitters and
childhood leukemia and brain cancer". Am J Epidemiol. 166(3):270-9 - [View Abstract]
|