1. Dr. Sheila A. Johnston sajohnston@btinternet.com Interpreting The Science Mobile Phones Is there a Health Risk November 9th,1999

2. The Science Criteria anon peer reviewed Published in Science J. follows WHO criteria Replicated reviewed by the expert groups used to set standards -ve Bioeffects ? Cancer, 1,2,3,4 1. Epi, human effects 2. In-vivo lifetime assay 3. Promotion & mutant mice 4. in-vitro- mechanisms DNA, ODC, HSP70 human sleep, EEG, BP endocrine effects human cognition

3. 1.Measurement 2.Research 3.Exposure Limits BASE SITES measurement 1,2,3 1. reactive near field & 2. near field discussions 3. far field established. V/m, SAR, CE approved research established same limits ww * * Russia, China MOBILE PHONES measurement 1,2 1.SAR: near field draft standardising variables 2. Power emissions W, CE approval research underway 2 slightly different limits N/A vs EC

5. ICNIRP/EC STANDARDS MOBILE PHONES 1. PUBLIC EXPOSURE LIMITS 1.6 to 2 mW/g SAR 2. All EC models of mobile phones CE approved according to power class specification. The EC electrical standard for POWER EMISSION. If you feel your phones doesn’t’ comply you can complain under the Consumer Protection Act. Companies can be asked to test their phones. Testing of phones and base stations can be carried out by NRPB or Microwave Consultants in the UK.

6. 2 kinds of research, limits, dosimetry: Base sites SAR limits 0.08 W/kg whole body ex Ratio, whole body (0.08) to total heat dissipation 6 min equilibrium (1948 Pennes, Foster 1999) so far no time-course dose- effect at/below limit Mobile phones SAR limits 2 W/kg part body ex part (2) (0.08x25=2) 1:25 part heat dissipation 6 min equilibrium (‘ 87, ‘89 L& Lagendijk ‘99) so far no time-course dose- effect at/below limits

7. The 10-50x Whole Body Safety Margin THRESHOLD for Adverse Effects 4W/kg WHOLE body. Adverse human health effects, nausea, dizziness, confusion (NOT CANCER), found with whole body exposures above 4W/kg. The WORKERS limits set 10x below this at 0.4W/kg for workers the PUBLIC limits set at 50x below this at 0.08 W/kg (50 x 0.08 = 4 W/kg) NO adverse effects no t-c,d-c below the threshold

8. SAFETY MARGIN of exposure limits Whole body exposure base station exposure public limit 0.08 W/kg adverse effects above 1 o C (‘48 ‘89,’93) Typical ex factor 100x to 1000x less than limit Part body exposure mobile phone exposure public limit 2 W/kg adverse effects above 1 o C (‘99, ‘89, ‘87) at 2W GSM (.25W) brain 0.1 o C (‘99) Typical ex factor 100x to 1000x less than limit

9. Examples of peak and average power emission for class 4 GSM & class 1 GSM-1800 mobile phone Pedersen and Andersen, 1999

10. CANCER Ionizing radiation nuclear energy radiation: Xrays, gamma rays no threshold: follow precautionary approach any dose is hazardous any dose can cause mutations and cancer continuous time-course dose effect Non-ionizing radiation mobile industry radio waves: kHz- 300GHz threshold (1 o C) no dose below threshold has adverse effects no dose below threshold causes mutations or cancer there is no t-c,d-e below the threshold

11. Independent Industry Contributions to Research GSMA ‘82, MMF (25), (WTR/CTIA(38)) Motorola (39), Fifth Framework EC (9M) FGF(64), COMOBIO, ELLETRA, NRPB’74 Japan (ARIB Finland, Sweden, Australia NCI, FDA, NIEHS (USA) ? MTAG UK, DoH (1B licensing fee)

12. ? Gaps In Measurement & Research Whole body:Base stations near field measurement: workers exposure -gap public exp:far field- no gap CE measurement no gap research in vivo 2 yr assay Adey, Zook -no gap rats cogniton’99 replication promotion Pim-1’98 (replication) toxicology, ODC, DNA-no gap (replication failed) Part Body:Mobile phones near field SAR measurement-gap CE measurement- no gap research dosimetry-ear Kuster, Gandhi’99, no gap Heat measurement Lagendijk ‘99 (replication) epid‘96, IARC’03 research in vivo 2yr assay human cognition ‘98 repl EEG, Sleep, endocrine repl

13. Gap: Research scientist don’t know power class specifications-engineering physics- gap filled by Industry- expertise in experimental exposure setups- money isn’t enough Gap: NO WTR Firewalls: gap partly filled by Institutions who administer funds & Scientists carry out research & publish in indep scientific journals. Gap: Data Bases: Research, past, underway, planned & Funding, Standards, Regulations, Power Class Specifications: information is advancing faster than can be tracked- -gap partly filled by EMF project, COST, Aachem data base

14. GAP: Industry a major stakeholder may NOT be providing enough technology & research information on its products for public dissemination to avoid technology misperception CAUSES of technology misperception Rapid increases in penetration means rapid increases in antennas. Each antenna can only carry a fixed number of calls. More antennas mean ?? RF Rapid increases in research on mobile phones have occurred in every country-increases in media stories. More research studies are ?? Rapid expansion of the uses of mobile technology is underway- fax, email & electronic data transfer.??

15. SIGNS of Technology misperception Repetition of health scares in the media Governments under pressure to base standards on political pressure rather than scientific information Pressure to shut down base sites due to fear rather than scientific information Government members and local authorities, missing the information to make planning decisions. Private individuals especially the vulnerable ones afraid and lacking the information to evaluate RF risks

16. Solutions to Technology Misperception Industry funding NEUTRAL information banks on technology & research into health & mobile communications to inform governments and local authorities and stakeholders. Industry supporting the local dissemination of technology & health information by independent scientists and government Health Authorities: Video +£ 50,000 In the Air The Director, Femme Michelle Wagenaar- a communicator, base sites issues: Nokia, Netherlands

17. Dr. Sheila A. Johnston sajohnston@btinternet.com Questions Femme-Michelle Wagenaar In The Air ext-femme-michelle.wagenaar@nokia.com