Use of mobile phones and cordless phones is associated with increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma

Hardell, Lennart; Carlberg, Michael; Mild, Kjell Hansson

doi:10.1016/j.pathophys.2012.11.001

Cited by 110 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 82 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In people who had started using the phone on a regular basis before they were 20 years old, the risk of ipsilateral glioma was found to be fourfold higher. [46] stress the significance of the "lifetime exposure dose." For an exposure of ≥ 1640 h, the risk of ipsilateral acoustic neuroma is 2.55 (95% CI: 1.5-4.4).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Mobile phone use and risk for intracranial tumors and salivary gland tumors – A meta-analysis

Bortkiewicz

Gadzicka

Szymczak

2017

Int J Occup Med Environ Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Results of epidemiological studies on the association between use of mobile phone and brain cancer are ambiguous, as well as the results of 5 meta-analysis studies published to date. Since the last meta-analysis (2009), new case-control studies have been published, which theoretically could affect the conclusions on this relationship. Therefore, we decided to perform a new meta-analysis. We conducted a systematic review of multiple electronic data bases for relevant publications. The inclusion criteria were: original papers, case-control studies, published till the end of March 2014, measures of association (point estimates as odds ratio and confidence interval of the effect measured), data on individual exposure. Twenty four studies (26 846 cases, 50 013 controls) were included into the meta-analysis. A significantly higher risk of an intracranial tumor (all types) was noted for the period of mobile phone use over 10 years (odds ratio (OR) = 1.324, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.028-1.704), and for the ipsilateral location (OR = 1.249, 95% CI: 1.022-1.526). The results support the hypothesis that long-term use of mobile phone increases risk of intracranial tumors, especially in the case of ipsilateral exposure. Further studies are needed to confirm this relationship. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 2017;30(1):27-43

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Mobile phone use and risk for intracranial tumors and salivary gland tumors – A meta-analysis

Bortkiewicz

Gadzicka

Szymczak

2017

Int J Occup Med Environ Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…IARC states that "In the text, the Working Group provides comments on those findings that are of greatest relevance to the evaluation, e.g., risk in the overall exposed group, patterns of change in risk with increasing exposure (such as a monotonic increase in risk with increasing exposure), and changes in risk with duration of exposure or latency." Furthermore, the Report ignores the fact that WHO considers microwave radiation to be a Class 2B carcinogen, and the Report also ignores the fact that four prominent reviews on this topic (48)(49)(50)(51) all come to the conclusion that microwave exposures can cause cancer. It is apparent therefore that the Panel of Experts on Safety Code 6 has allowed its assumptions to greatly influence its assessment here, rather than providing an objective assessment of the literature.…”

Section: What Is In the Report?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel 6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency electromagnetic field action

Pall

2015

Reviews on Environmental Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AbstractThis review considers a paradigm shift on microwave electromagnetic field (EMF) action from only thermal effects to action via voltage-gated calcium channel (VGCC) activation. Microwave/lower frequency EMFs were shown in two dozen studies to act via VGCC activation because all effects studied were blocked by calcium channel blockers. This mode of action was further supported by hundreds of studies showing microwave changes in calcium fluxes and intracellular calcium [Ca2+]i signaling. The biophysical properties of VGCCs/similar channels make them particularly sensitive to low intensity, non-thermal EMF exposures. Non-thermal studies have shown that in most cases pulsed fields are more active than are non-pulsed fields and that exposures within certain intensity windows have much large biological effects than do either lower or higher intensity exposures; these are both consistent with a VGCC role but inconsistent with only a heating/thermal role. Downstream effects of VGCC activation include calcium signaling, elevated nitric oxide (NO), NO signaling, peroxynitrite, free radical formation, and oxidative stress. Downstream effects explain repeatedly reported biological responses to non-thermal exposures: oxidative stress; single and double strand breaks in cellular DNA; cancer; male and female infertility; lowered melatonin/sleep disruption; cardiac changes including tachycardia, arrhythmia, and sudden cardiac death; diverse neuropsychiatric effects including depression; and therapeutic effects. Non-VGCC non-thermal mechanisms may occur, but none have been shown to have effects in mammals. Biologically relevant safety standards can be developed through studies of cell lines/cell cultures with high levels of different VGCCs, measuring their responses to different EMF exposures. The 2014 Canadian Report by a panel of experts only recognizes thermal effects regarding safety standards for non-ionizing radiation exposures. Its position is therefore contradicted by each of the observations above. The Report is assessed here in several ways including through Karl Popper’s assessment of strength of evidence. Popper argues that the strongest type of evidence is evidence that falsifies a theory; second strongest is a test of “risky prediction”; the weakest confirms a prediction that the theory could be correct but in no way rules out alternative theories. All of the evidence supporting the Report’s conclusion that only thermal effects need be considered are of the weakest type, confirming prediction but not ruling out alternatives. In contrast, there are thousands of studies apparently falsifying their position. The Report argues that there are no biophysically viable mechanisms for non-thermal effects (shown to be false, see above). It claims that there are many “inconsistencies” in the literature causing them to throw out large numbers of studies; however, the one area where it apparently documents this claim, that of genotoxicity, shows no inconsistencies; rather it shows that various cell types, fields and end points produce different responses, as should be expected. The Report claims that cataract formation is produced by thermal effects but ignores studies falsifying this claim and also studies showing [Ca2+]i and VGCC roles. It is time for a paradigm shift away from only thermal effects toward VGCC activation and consequent downstream effects.

show abstract

“…Authors conclude that current standard for exposure to microwaves during mobile phone use is not safe for long-term exposure and needs to be revised [16,28]. But the increased cancer risk among mobile telephone users is not detected by some investigators.…”

Section: Effects Of Exposure To Anthropogenic Emfs On Human Healthmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Th e medical applications of EMFs are reviewed by Rosch PJ, Markov MS; Andrä W, Nowak H; Markov MS [5][6][7]. Some of theoretical models proposed to explain the basic phenomena associated with cell exposure to EMF are presented in review articles [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21]. Now some new data are emerging and the approaches to the problem of the action of electromagnetic factors on cells are changing in accordance to the new developments in biology as a whole.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Main Approaches of Studying the Mechanisms of Action of Artificial Electromagnetic Fields on Cell

Shckorbatov¹

2014

J Elec Electron Syst

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Use of mobile phones and cordless phones is associated with increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma

Cited by 110 publications

References 82 publications

Mobile phone use and risk for intracranial tumors and salivary gland tumors – A meta-analysis

Mobile phone use and risk for intracranial tumors and salivary gland tumors – A meta-analysis

Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel 6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency electromagnetic field action

The Main Approaches of Studying the Mechanisms of Action of Artificial Electromagnetic Fields on Cell

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About