Interphone Study underestimates risk of brain cancer, says International EMF Collaborative

Authors of the report, "Cellphones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern, Science, Spin and the Truth Behind Interphone" have released a technical analysis of the long-awaited Interphone Study published today in the International Journal of Epidemiology. Download Report: www.radiationresearch.org

“Cellphones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern, Science, Spin and the Truth Behind Interphone”

Despite the Interphone Study Group's long-awaited acknowledgment of increased risk of brain cancer among long-term, heavy users of cell phones, the International EMF Collaborative says the study's design results in serious underestimation of risk of brain cancer.

The 11 key design flaws were fully detailed in the group's landmark report last August (http://snurl.com/wdgbd). One example was that individuals using cordless phones but not cellphones were considered 'unexposed' for purposes of the Interphone analysis, though exposed to the same radiation as cell phones.

The results published today appear to show that in many cases use of a cellphone protects users from brain tumors, but this is a reflection of the design flaws, according to Lloyd Morgan, B.Sc., lead author of "Cellphones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern." Other issues with the Interphone study, he says, include:

  • Results were only provided for brain cancers (gliomas) and meningiomas, but not tumors within the 20% of the brain's volume irradiated by cell phones.
  • Risk was not broken down by gender, which may have obfuscated even higher risk of meningiomas in women.
  • The 5-year old results are woefully inadequate as a gauge of risk today, as adults and children now speak on cell phones many hours a day compared to only 2-2½ hours a month at that time.

Eileen O'Connor, Director of the Radiation Research Trust and member of the International EMF Collaborative, says "Four billion people own mobile phones worldwide, many of those users are children. Responsible governments must advocate for public transparency of risks so that an informed public may have more options to exercise precaution."

Comments

The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News Medical.
Post a new comment
Post

While we only use edited and approved content for Azthena answers, it may on occasions provide incorrect responses. Please confirm any data provided with the related suppliers or authors. We do not provide medical advice, if you search for medical information you must always consult a medical professional before acting on any information provided.

Your questions, but not your email details will be shared with OpenAI and retained for 30 days in accordance with their privacy principles.

Please do not ask questions that use sensitive or confidential information.

Read the full Terms & Conditions.

You might also like...
AI models redefine TIL scoring in breast cancer but face challenges in real-world validation