Towards a Platform for Widespread Embedded Intelligence - ERCIM

R&D AND TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
Electromagnetic Radiation
Cell Phone Danger
by Martin Röösli and Harry Rudin
As we become more and more keen on cell phones there remains the open
question of what effect these cell phones have on our health and well being. Some
recent work in Switzerland sheds some light on these issues.
Our dependence on and investment in
cell phones rise steadily. The annual sale
of cell phones is approaching 1 billion
units. Is the result of all the accompanying
electromagnetic radiation going to
have an effect on our health? Almost
everyone has heard some 'anecdotal evidence'
where there have been some
undesirable effects on people: headache,
concentration problems, irritability,
insomnia, etc. But, can anything be said
on a scientific basis? Some recent
research from Switzerland has shed
some light on the subject. More light is
needed and some is coming.
The topic is difficult in itself and made
more difficult by the enormous financial
interests involved. Ideally, in a cold, scientific
experiment, one should find a
group of humans, some of whom would
be subjected to the electromagnetic radiation
produced by cell phones and their
base stations for several years and some
of whom in the group would not be
exposed. All of them would be blind to
exposure and they would not differ in
terms of other factors influencing their
58 ERCIM News No. 67, October 2006
health. One could carefully measure
their health status and their well being,
distinguishing between those exposed
and those not exposed. Obviously this
has not been done nor will it be done in
the future.
While much material has been published
with the objective of shedding light on
the problem, many of the published
studies have serious methodological limitations
- leading to doubts concerning
What effect have
cell phones on
our health and
well being?
their validity. Reference [1] summarizes
studies on mobile phone radiation and
health-related quality of life, concluding,
"The results are contradictory and the
greater part of these studies is not able to
address the issue of causality between
exposure and outcome."
One of the first studies dealing with
radio frequency electromagnetic field
exposure was about the shutdown of the
Swiss Schwarzenburg short-wave radio
transmitter. While this took place back in
1998, a recently published paper [2]
reports of measurements in the change in
the melatonin produced by 54 volunteers
living in the vicinity. The measurements
showed that in the week after the shutdown,
sleep quality improved and melatonin
excretion increased by 15 percent,
on average. (Melatonin plays an important
role in regulating sleep-wake cycles
because its production is inhibited by
light and permitted by darkness.
Melatonin is sometimes prescribed when
suffering from jetlag.) However, the shut
down date was known to the study participants.
Thus, the authors state that
"blinding of exposure was not possible
in this observational study and this may
have affected the outcome measurements
in a direct or indirect (psychological)
way."
In September, 2003, the Dutch TNO
Physics and Electronic Laboratory
announced the results of a study. They
wrote: "The present study contributes to
the research on finding a relation
between electromagnetic fields and brain
functions." Further, "Exposure to GSM-
900 or GSM-1800 electromagnetic fields
had no effect on well-being in either
experimental group. However, exposure
to a UMTS-like signal resulted in a
small, but statistically significant impairment
of well-being. Interestingly this
effect was not only observed in individuals
with self-reported health complaints
attributed to daily life EMF exposures
but also in a reference group without
such complaints. This effect was found
after only about half an hour's exposure
to what, by everyday standards, was a
relatively high environmental field
strength (1 V/m). In practice, while individuals
in the vicinity of operational
UMTS antennas will be subject to continuous
exposure, the field strengths in
question will be lower." Thus, the transferability
of the 'TNO'-results to normal
day-to-day environmental exposure is
questionable. [3]
There was considerable criticism of the
circumstances of this study including
that by its authors themselves. These
authors and others recognized the need
to make a more careful repeat of the