CORRECTED: Cell phone use may cause cancer: WHO

Afp
Wednesday 01 June 2011 00:00
Comments

[CORRECTION: In 7th to last graph "glass wool" dropped, as IARC reclassifed from "possibly carcinogenic" to "not classifiable"] Mobile phone users may be at increased risk from brain cancer and should use texting and hands-free devices to reduce exposure, the World Health Organisation's cancer experts said.

Radio-frequency electromagnetic fields generated by such devices are "possibly carcinogenic to humans," the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) announced at the end of an eight-day meeting in Lyon, France, on Tuesday.

Experts "reached this classification based on review of the human evidence coming from epidemiological studies" pointing to an increased incidence of glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, said Jonathan Samet, president of the work group.

Two studies in particular, the largest conducted over the past decade, showed a higher risk "in those that had the most intensive use of such phones," he said in a telephone news conference.

Some individuals tracked in the studies had used their phones for an average of 30 minutes per day over a period of 10 years.

"We simply don't know what might happen as people use their phones over longer time periods, possibly over a lifetime," Samet said.

There are about five billion mobile phones registered in the world. The number of phones and the average time spent using them have both climbed steadily in recent years.

The IARC cautioned that current scientific evidence showed only a possible link, not a proven one, between wireless devices and cancers.

"There is some evidence of increased risk of glioma" and another form of non-malignant tumour called acoustic neuroma, said Kurt Straif, the scientist in charge of editing the IARC reports on potentially carcinogenic agents.

"But it is not at the moment clearly established that the use of mobile phones does in fact cause cancer in humans," he said.

The IARC does not issue formal recommendations, but experts pointed to a number of ways consumers can reduce risk.

"What probably entails some of the highest exposure is using your mobile for voice calls," Straif said.

"If you use it for texting, or as a hands-free set for voice calls, this is clearly lowering the exposure by at least an order of magnitude," or by tenfold, he said.

A year ago the IARC concluded that there was no link between cell phones and brain cancer, but that earlier report was criticised as based on out-of-date data.

The new review, conducted by a panel of 31 scientists from 14 countries, was reached on the basis of a "full consensus," said Robert Baan, in charge of the written report, which is yet to be released.

"This is the first scientific evaluation of all the literature published on the topic with regard to increased risk of cancer," he said.

But the panel stressed the need for more research, pointing to incomplete data, evolving technology and changing consumer habits.

"There's an improvement in the technology in terms of lower emissions but at the same time we see increased use, so it is hard to know how the two balance out," Baan noted.

The IARC ranks potentially cancer-causing elements as carcinogenic, probably carcinogenic, possibly carcinogenic or "probably not carcinogenic". It can also determine that a material is "not classifiable".

Cigarettes, sunbeds and asbestos, for example, fall in "Group 1", the top threat category.

Cell phones now join lead, chloroform and gasoline exhaust in Group 2B as "possibly carcinogenic".

Industry groups however played down the findings.

Global industry group CTIA-The Wireless Association said the UN agency "conducts numerous reviews and in the past has given the same score to, for example, pickled vegetables and coffee".

It said that "limited evidence from statistical studies can be found even though bias and other data flaws may be the basis for the results."

The French Federation of Telecoms said the health ministry there already took a precautionary approach, but no danger had been conclusively established and more research was needed.

Some consumer advocacy groups however said the new classification was overdue.

"As of today, no one can say the risk does not exist, and now everyone - politicians, telecoms, employers, consumers and parents - have to take this into account," said Janine Le Calvez, head of PRIARTEM, a consumer advocacy group concerned with cell phone safety.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in