1. From X-rays to Cordless Phones: Radiation Causes Brain Tumors Lloyd Morgan

2. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com2 Ionizing Radiation Exposures are from X-rays, A-bombs, radioactivity Only “known” environmental cause of brain tumors (since 1974 or earlier) Energy sufficient to break molecular bonds For example, DNA Broken DNA creates free radicals –Free radicals cause further DNA damage thought to cause cancer

3. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com3 Ionizing Radiation Increased risk of brain tumors Age: Children at greater risk than adults Dose measured in Gray (Gy): Risk increases linearly with dose Dose=(Radiation power)/(weight of exposed tissue) x (time) –Risk increases with power (Watts) –Risk increases with time Excess risk, 30 or more years (all ages) [1] Brain Cancer: 200+% Meningioma: 70+%

4. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com4 Risk by Age, Brain Cancer: Children “cured” of ringworm of the scalp by X-rays [1]

5. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com5 Excess Risk Increases Every Year From Exposure [1]

6. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com6 Ionizing Radiation Latency time (from exposure to diagnosis) Brain Cancer: 20 to 30 years Meningioma: 30-40 years

7. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com7 Small percentage of total tumors seen at 20 years [1]

8. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com8 Non-ionizing Radiation: Wireless Phones Exposures from cellphones, cordless phones, walkie-talkies, baby monitors Risk of brain tumors Energy cannot break molecular bonds Creates free radicals; increases lifetime of free radicals

9. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com9 Non-ionizing Radiation: Wireless Phones Increased risk of brain tumors Age: Younger have higher risk [2 ] Greater than 5 years of cellphone use –700+% for 20-29 years olds (7 cases, 94.8% confidence) –35% for all ages, 20-80 years (160 cases, 97% confidence) Dose measured in Gray (Gy) Dose=(Radiation power)/(weight of exposed tissue) x (time) –Risk increases with power (Watts) –Risk increases with time Tumor on same side of head as where digital cellphone was used [5] 260+% increased risk of brain cancer (97 cases, 99.91% confidence)

10. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com10 Wireless Phones: Risk by Age [2]

11. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com11 Non-ionizing Radiation: Wireless Phones Increased risk of brain tumors Power: Increase risk with higher wattage (phone type or distance from cell tower) Rural cellphone users have 740% higher risk of brain cancer than urban users after 5 years of digital cellphone use (10 cases, 95.6% confidence) [3] Time: Ten years after first use, increased risk of brain cancer with greater hours of use [5] Cordless phone use (median hours of use=243 hours) –30% increased risk for less than median hours of use (5 cases, 35% confidence) –310% increased risk for more than median hours of use (25 cases, 99.996% confidence)

12. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com12 Non-ionizing Radiation: Digital Cellphones Latency time Much shorter latency time than ionizing radiation (1 st tumor after X-ray for ringworm was 7 years) Brain cancer [5] –60% increased risk, 1 to 5 years of digital cellphone use –100 cases, 98% confidence –120% increased risk, 5 to 10 years –79 cases, 99.96% confidence –260% increased risk, more than 10 years –19 cases, 99.94% confidence

13. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com13 Non-ionizing Radiation: Analog Cellphones Acoustic Neuroma [4] 230% increased risk, 1 to 5 years of cellphone use –16 cases, 99.3% confidence 340% increased risk, >5 to 10 years –33 cases, 99.99996% confidence 310% increased risk, >10 years –19 cases, 99.98% confidence 380% increased risk, >15 years –6 cases, 99.3% confidence

14. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com14 Non-ionizing Radiation: Analog Cellphones Meningioma [4] 20% increased risk, 1-5 years of cellphone use –32 cases, 63% confidence 20% increased risk, 5 to 10 years –47 cases, 63% confidence 60% increased risk, more than 10 years –34 cases, 96% confidence

15. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com15 Wireless Phones:Years of Exposure [4, 5]

16. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com16 Cellphone Industry’s Studies of the Risk of Brain Tumor from Cellphone Use “Interphone” studies rarely find a risk of brain tumors from cellphone use 13 participating countries Increased risk has been found –5 of 7 studies found increased risk for more than 10 years of use [7, 8, 10, 11, 12] Major funding received from cellphone industry Funding “was governed by agreements that guaranteed complete scientific independence” –The researchers knew where the funding had come from –“Don’t bite the hand that feeds you,” is the psychological reality –Doesn’t mean that the researchers are dishonest

17. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com17 Scatter Plots (following slides) Vertical axis is percentage confidence of a finding Horizontal axis is excess (or decrease) risk of a brain tumor of a finding Risk overview If no risk About half of all findings will show increased risk and About half of all findings will show decreased risk

18. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com18 Scatter Plots (following slides) Scatter plot: regions of importance Line of "Statistical Significance“ Indicates 95% confidence –When confidence is 95% or more, it is said to be “statistically significant” (pale yellow region) Area of Little to No Statistical Meaning (reddish region) Zero percent confidence to 90% confidence Area of Marginal Statistical Meaning (orange region) 90% to 95% confidence Region where study bias may explain increased/decreased risk (bright yellow region) Increase risk and decreased risk between up to 100% –Epidemiologists’ rule of thumb where bias or confounding problems may explain a finding

19. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com19 Industry studies compared to independent studies [5, 9, 11]

20. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com20 Industry studies compared to independent studies [4, 8, 6, 7]

21. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com21 Industry studies compared to independent studies [4, 6, 7]

22. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com22 A Speculation What is the nexus between ionizing radiation and non-ionizing radiation and tumors? Many physicists argue that non-ionizing radiation cannot cause tumors because non-ionizing radiation cannot break the molecular bonds of DNA. It is true that non-ionizing radiation cannot break DNA bonds. But the paradigm posited by many physicists assumes that only the breaking of DNA bonds can cause tumors. Both ionizing radiation and non-ionizing radiation creates free radicals. Perhaps the nexus is the creation of free radicals?

23. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com23 Summation Ionizing Radiation Young at greater risk Latency time Brain cancer, 20-30 years –Increased risk 55% Meningioma, 30-40 yrs –Increased risk 37% Power Increasing risk with increasing power Dose measure in Gray Non-ionizing Radiation Young at greater risk Latency time Brain cancer, 1-5/> 10 years –Increased risk 60%/260% Meningioma, >10 years –60% Power Increasing risk with increasing power Dose measure in Gray

24. Conclusion: A Query Is the non-ionizing radiation exposure from wireless phone use a greater risk for brain tumors than ionizing radiation?

25. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com25 References 1. Sadetzki et al. Long-Term Follow-up for Brain Tumor Development after Childhood Exposure to Ionizing Radiation for Tinea Capitis; RADIATION RESEARCH 163, 424– 432 (2005) 2. Hardell et al., Cellular and Cordless Telephone Use and the Association with Brain Tumors in Different Age Groups; Arch Environ Health. 2004 Mar;59(3):132-7 3. Hardell et al, Use of cellular telephones and brain tumour risk in urban and rural areas; Occup Environ Med 2005;62:390–394. 4.Hardell et al., Pooled analysis of two case-control studies on the use of cellular and cordless telephones and the risk of benign brain tumours diagnosed during 1997-2003; INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY 28: 509-518, 2006 5.Hardell et al., Case–control study of the association between the use of cellular and cordless telephones and malignant brain tumors diagnosed during 2000–2003; Environ Res. 2006 Feb;100(2):232-41

26. Revised 14 March 2006 Lloyd Morgan email: bilovsky@aol.com26 Interphone Study References 6. Christensen et al., Cellular Telephone Use and Risk of Acoustic Neuroma; Am J Epidemiol 2004;159:277–283 7.Lönn et al., Mobile Phone Use and the Risk of Acoustic Neuroma; Epidemiology Volume 15, Number 6, November 2004: 653-659 * 8.Schoemaker et al., Mobile phone use and risk of acoustic neuroma: results of the Interphone case–control study in five North European countries; British Journal of Cancer (2005), 1 –7 * 9.Christensen et al., Cellular telephones and risk for brain tumors, A population-based, incident case-control study; NEUROLOGY 2005;64:1189–1195 10.Hepworth et al., Mobile phone use and risk of glioma in adults: case-control study; BMJ. 2006 Jan 20 * 11.Lönn et al., Long-Term Mobile Phone Use and Brain Tumor Risk; Am J Epidemiol 2005;161:526–535 * 12.Schüz et al., Cellular Phones, Cordless Phones, and the Risks of Glioma and Meningioma (Interphone Study Group, Germany); Am J Epidemiol. 2006 Mar 15;163(6):512-20 * * Study found increased risk of brain tumor