|
* Study linking brain
tumors and older cell phones could be used against Motorola (13/9/02)
Tramès per Klaus Rudolph (Citizens'
Initiative Omega)
This longer version
of the AP story ran on page 2 in the Boston Globe print edition on Sept.
11, 2002 - with headline.
The
following story appeared in The Globe Online:
Headline: Study linking brain tumors and older cell phones could be used
against Motorola
Date: 9/11/2002
00:04
Byline: Gretchen Parker
"BALTIMORE (AP).- Attorneys
for a doctor who was stricken by brain cancer are hoping a new study indicating
a link between older cell phones and tumors will bolster a $800 million
lawsuit against Motorola Inc. and major mobile-phone carriers. "
Although many studies have found no cancer risk from cell phone use, research
published in the latest European Journal of Cancer Prevention said long-term
users of old-fashioned analog cell phones were at least 30 percent more
likely than nonusers to develop brain tumors.
A judge is expected to decide by month's end whether the Motorola lawsuit
should go to trial and if so, whether the study can be used as evidence.
If the case is allowed to go forward, it could open the door to other
significant lawsuits against the cell phone and wireless communication
industry. So far, no similar claims have been successful.
Motorola criticized the methodology of the new report, which was written
by Swedish oncologist Lennart Hardell, who testified against the company
in evidence hearings in February.
Hardell studied 1,617 patients with brain tumors and compared them with
a similar-sized group of people without tumors.
He found that patients who used Sweden's Nordic Mobile telephones were
30 percent more likely to have brain tumors, especially on the side of
the head that touched the phone most often. Those who used the phones
longer than 10 years were 80 percent more likely to develop tumors.
John Angelos, an attorney representing Dr. Christopher Newman of Jarrettsville,
Md., has asked U.S. District Court Judge Catherine Blake to let the study
be included as evidence in his lawsuit.
''From our perspective, and from a public health perspective, the court
should just be aware of what's out there,'' said Angelos, whose firm has
made millions suing asbestos and tobacco companies on behalf of cancer
victims.
Newman's lawsuit names Motorola, Verizon and other wireless carriers.
He claims the analog cell phones he used from 1992 to 1998 caused him
to develop a cancerous brain tumor behind his right ear. The tumor was
removed, but Newman was permanently disabled, his lawyers say.
Newman is blind in his left eye, suffers memory loss and slowed speech
and can no longer work, they claim.
Cell phones used by 97 million Americans generate radio waves at a frequency
between microwave ovens and television signals but are non-ionizing, making
them less dangerous than other types of radiation. By contrast, ionizing
electromagnetic energy, such as is found in X-rays, is known to permanently
damage tissue.
Newer digital phones emit less radiation than older analog models like
the ones in Hardell's study; Newman's attorneys say he used phones with
a similar range of radiation.
Three major studies published since December 2000, including one by the
U.S. National Cancer Institute, showed cell phones don't cause any adverse
health effects.
The Food and Drug Administration, which regulates cell phones along with
the Federal Communications Commission, declined to comment about the Hardell
study because of Newman's lawsuit.
But the agency's Web site supports more research: ''The available scientific
evidence does not show that any health problems are associated with using
wireless phones. There is no proof, however, that wireless phones are
absolutely safe.''
Motorola representatives noted another recent study on mice that found
no link between cell phones and cancer.
Company spokesman Norman Sandler and others in the industry believe the
report, published last month by an Australian team in the International
Journal of Radiation Research, quashes a different Australian study in
1997 that showed cell phones could cause tumors.
Motorola attorneys have asked the judge to dismiss Hardell's study, saying
it doesn't find a significant correlation between phones and tumors. Sandler
questioned the author's theory that tumors are more apt to develop near
the ear that touches the receiver most often.
''His testimony raises significant questions about recall bias,'' he said.
''Do people who used the phones 10 years ago really remember what side
of the head they used?''
W. Ross Adey, a professor of physiology at California's Loma Linda University
School of Medicine who is not involved in the Baltimore case, believes
there is evidence that long-term or even intermittent exposure to cell
phone radiation might damage brain tissue.
He said much more study is needed on the possible long-term effects, and
hopes the Baltimore lawsuit reignites interest in new independent research
on the subject.
Such studies not funded by the cell phone industry are almost entirely
being conducted in Europe only, he said.
One government that has decided to err on the side of caution in its cell
phone policy is Britain, where half the population uses them. It advises
that children be discouraged from using the handsets.
For its part, the U.S. wireless industry requires mobile phone makers
to disclose information on radiation levels produced by their handsets.
On the Net:
European Journal of Cancer Prevention: http://www.eurjcancerprev.com/
Link to Boston Globe page:
http://www.boston.com/dailynews/254/economy/Study_linking_brain_tumors_and:.shtml
Message
by Janet Newton, President at The EMR Network
|
