United StatesRonald B. Herberman, MD, Director Emeritus, University of PittsburghCancer Institute; United States“Based on substantial evidence, especially from industry-independent studies thatlong term exposure to radiofrequency radiation may lead to increased risk for brain tumors, I issued a precautionary advisory last year to faculty and staff of theUniversity of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute. Since then, my particular concern aboutexposure of children to radiofrequency has been supported by a report from Dr.Lennart Hardell. Some of my scientific colleagues have expressed skepticism aboutthe reported biological effects, especially DNA damage by radiofrequency radiation,because of the absence of a demonstrated underlying molecular mechanism. However,based on the precautionary principle, I believe it is more prudent to take seriously the reports by multiple investigators that radio frequency can damage DNA and increase the risk for brain tumors, and for industry-independent agencies to provide neededfunding for detailed research to ascertain the molecular basis for such effects.”
L. Lloyd Morgan, BSc, Member, Bioelectromagnetics Society and LeadAuthor, “Cellphones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern, Science, Spin andThe Truth Behind Interphone”; United States
“The largest health experiment ever undertaken, without informed consent, has some4 billion participants enrolled. To date science papers have shown an increased riskof brain tumors, eye cancer, salivary gland tumors, testicular cancer, non-Hodgkin’slymphoma, and leukemia from cellphone use. The public must be informed”
Jerry L. Phillips, PhD, Director, Science Learning Center, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs; United States“It is indisputable that exposure to radiofrequency radiation at cell telephone frequencies produces biological changes that are consistent with potential adverseeffects on human health and development. Moreover, these biological effects are consistent with recent epidemiological studies of long-term cell phone users that haveshown increased risks for tumor development. What should be a major concern forscientists and non-scientists alike is industry’s misleading and scientificallyinaccurate use of available data. Industry’s claims of studies negating one another,their misuse of “weight of evidence,” and their overt support of studies designed to produce negative data, all in the name of increasing the profit line, are shameful andshould not be tolerated.”
Paul J. Rosch, MD, FACP, Clinical Professor of Medicine and Psychiatry,New York Medical College; President, The American Institute of Stress;Emeritus Member, The Bioelectromagnetics Society; United States”If cell phones use is not curtailed or made significantly safer, particularly for children, we may be facing and unprecedented disaster that is preventable, The 15 reasons listed to support this is the tip of the iceberg. A very recent Australian reportin men who wear cell phones below their waist confirms the striking adverse effect onsperm and fertility previously suggested by animal studies. (See John Aitken’s paper published July 31 in PLoS ONE)
Bert Schou, PhD, CEO, ACRES Research; United States“The capability for biological organisms, and even humans, to be extremely sensitiveis well within the realm of biological reactions. I have witnessed one person develop sensitivities to radio frequencies and learned about many more individuals who aresensitive. The electromagnetic radiation effects are understood by motivated anddedicated scientists. Realizing and respecting risks from radiation are needed.
Narendra P. Singh,Research Associate Professor,Department ofBioengineering, University of Washington; United States“
Independent research findings, including our own, show that cell phone damages the DNA of brain cells and sperms in animal models. Research lavishly funded byindustry to counteract the results from the independent science should be taken withcaution.”
Gerd Oberfeld, Dr. (MD), Public Health Department, State GovernmentSalzburg and Speaker for Environmental Medicine for the Austrian MedicalAssociation, Vienna; Austria”The scientific data show, with a high degree of confidence, that mobile phoneexposure is associated with an increased brain tumor risk. The age group below 20years is facing the greatest risk, for malignant (deadly) brain tumors, of about 400percent, compared to non exposed. When we take the long latency period of up to some decades into account, and the fact that large parts of our society and especially more and more teenagers and even children are using mobile phones on a daily basis,we may well expect a brain tumor epidemic. From a public health perspective there isan urgent need not only for a wake-up call for our society, but for measures that areable to combat this public health threat effective now. ”
BrazilAlvaro Augusto A. de Salles, PhD, Professor, Federal University of RioGrande do Sul UFRGS; Brazil
“Due to the available health effects research results of low level long term non-ionizing radiation exposure and since more than four billion people now are usingmobile phones, the Precautionary Principle should be adopted promptly for theseissues. Otherwise later it can be too late to recover the health public damage.
People should be advised to reduce RF/MW exposure, for example using head phones andhands free kits until new technologies or new health effect research results areavailable”.
Mikko Ahonen, Researcher, University of Tampere, Finland—He quoteslegendary scientist, Neil Cherry”The standard based on the ICNIRP Guidelines is focused on avoiding tissueheating, not based on biological and epidemiological evidence. The maintenance of the standard is obtained by ignoring or rejecting any and all evidence that contradicts it.” —Dr Neil Cherry (2002)FranceDaniel Oberhausen, Physicist, Association PRIARTÉM; France”Today mobile phone technologies as well as WiFi, WiMAX etc. use EM radiations whose frequencies are in the 1 to 10 GHz range. Proteins and DNA showresonant absorptions in these bands indicating non-thermal effects which maydamage living matter. Independent research has to be conducted to clear up thosefacts. On Earth the cosmic noise between 1 and 10 GHz is extremely low and thereare good reasons to think living beings are adapted to that environment.”GermanyChristine Aschermann, Dr. med., Psychiatry, Psychotherapy. Originator ofDoctors’ Appeal (2002 Freiburg Appeal); Germany“I developed an interest in the risks of mobile phones and their masts as I observedthat -since 1996- an increasing number of my patients began to show organic braindisorders such as lack of concentration, memory loss, difficulty finding words,parapraxis up to personality changing- beside various somatic symptoms (e.g.headache, high blood pressure, tiredness, tinnitus, digestive troubles, soft tissuepains). In my opinion, these disorders can be attributed to the extension of the mobiletelecommunication networks. As the brain is our most important organ responsiblefor the somatic regulation and for the specific human spirit a failure will haveextremely serious consequences for our health, our lives and our civilization.Unfortunately, industry dependent science and those obviously addicted to theirmobile phones are still denying health effects. I hold the hypothesis that cancer andbrain tumors are the end of a long story of suffering, of the person himself and thoseclosely connected with him, too. I hope that, after all, “five minutes after twelve “, thegeneral public will heed the results of independent studies and take steps to ban thisfatal technology.Horst Eger, Dr med., Bavarian Ärztekammer Medical Quality No. 65143:”Elektromagnetische Felder in der Medizin Diagnostik, Therapie, Umwelt” “Our research has not especially worked on brain tumour cases. But for betterunderstanding of the already known mechanisms of cancer induction, I send you thestudies of Schmid and Schrader, which show a clear dependency of disturbed mitosisand HF radiation below the limits. Cells with lacking DNA will have a chance to getmalign cells. The increase of disturbed mitosis is up to 10 fold. Count that in relationof 10 billions or more brain cells.”Ulrich Warnke, Dr. rer. nat., Academic High Councellor, Biosciences,University of Saarland; Germany“Electromagnetic waves like that of mobile-communication-systems can causemechanisms together with magnet-fields, that damage cells and functions in humanbeings caused by activated oxidative and nitric stress and followed by inflammations.It is known that the risk of tumour-development exists as a consequence of a longlasting influence. If the population is not informed about it in detail, epidemicillnesses–also with children and teenagers – can not be excluded.”GreeceLukas H. Margaritis, PhD, Professor of Cell Biology and Radiobiology, Dept.of Cell Biology and Biophysics Faculty of Biology, University of AthensAdamantia Fragopoulou, MSc, Medical Biology, PhD (cand.),Electromagnetic Biology Research Group, Athens University; Greece“The undersigned Lukas H. Margaritis, Professor of Cell Biology and Radiobiologyand Adamantia F. Fragopoulou, BSc, MSc, doctorate student, having researchexperience with mobile phone radiation exposure on animal models, strongly supportthe above text and believe that the possible damage of brain cells following exposureto this type of radiation within the so called safety limits have been highlyunderestimated by certain studies, possibly due to wrong experimental design. It istherefore our duty as academic citizens to warn the public, through this work, as wedo in our country through the media, at every opportunity. Man-madeelectromagnetic radiation has no safety limits since it was developed long after theevolution of life in earth. The actual effects at the molecular, cellular and organismlevel are very hard to evaluate due to the complexity of the exposure conditions andthe still unknown metabolic mechanisms (signal transduction, tumor formation, cellcell interactions) taking place within a tissue”.RussiaProfessor Yury Grigoriev, Chairman of Russian National Committee onNon Ionizing Radiation Protection, a member of WHO InternationalAdvisory Committee on “EMF and Health”The members of the Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing RadiationProtection emphasize ultimate urgency to defend children’s health from the influenceof the EMF of the mobile communication systems. We appeal to the governmentauthorities, to the entire society to pay closest attention to this coming threat and to take adequate measures in order to prevent negativeconsequences to the future generation’s health. The children using mobilecommunication are not able to realize that they subject their brain to the EMF radiation and their health – to the risk. We believe that this risk is not muchlower than the risk to the children’s health from tobacco or alcohol. It is ourprofessional obligation not to let damage the children’s health by inactivity. SwedenÖrjan Hallberg, MSEE, Hallberg Independent Research, Sweden “According to my own studies there is a clear trend of increasing brain cancer rates,hearing problems, increasing incidence of acoustic neuroma and also increasingmortality among people having Alzheimer’s disease in more sparsely populated areasin Sweden. This fits well with the higher average output power from mobile phonesin sparsely populated areas and should be taken seriously by responsible authorities.”United KingdomIan Dring, Dr., Independent Scientist, United Kingdom“The overwhelming weight of evidence clearly shows that people are suffering fromthe significant change to our natural environment that has been caused bymicrowave communication systems. The issue has gone beyond an academic debate.The cold fact is that you, I, your children, my children might die as a result of overexposure to microwaves. It is now time that this is recognized and that we move to amore sensible precautionary approach. It is our responsibility to protect the health ofour children.”Ian Gibson, PhD, biologist and geneticist, cancer researcher, ex-senior M.P.and Chair of Science and Technology Select Committee, UK Parliament.Trustee, Radiation Research Trust”We need more research to combat the arrogance of those scientists and politicianswho fail to see how we must continue to ask for explanations.”Jill Evans, MEP”I very much welcome this report which provides vital information needed by thoseof us campaigning to ensure new technology is safe. I know the concern amongst myconstituents in Wales about microwave radiation. Raising awareness of the problemswill ensure we address them effectively.”Andrew Goldsworthy BSc, PhD, UK, Imperial College London, Lecturer inBiology (retired); United Kingdom“As an ex-amateur radio enthusiast and a professional biologist, I do not doubt thevalue of mobile telecommunications. The ability to communicate easily is what setsus apart from the lower animals; and cell phones are an aid to this. However, aspresently configured, their radiation is potentially damaging, both to ourselves andthe environment. The main problem is not the microwaves themselves, but the sharpchanges in signal strength that occur when they are modulated to carry digitalinformation. These make cell membranes leak and give many unwanted biologicaleffects at signal levels well below current safety guidelines. The good news is that, byinvolving both biologists and engineers in the necessary research, it should bepossible to change the way in which the information is encoded to eliminate most ofthese effects. The bad news is that the mobile telecommunications industry is notprepared to do this, since it involves admitting that their present systems are unsafe,which could result in damaging litigation. We must find some compromise, or therewill be serious consequences for human health and fertility, and the damage to thehuman genome may be irreparable.”MaeWan Ho, PhD, FRSA, Founder and Director Institute of Science inSociety“Ban wireless from your home and neighborhood if you have small children. Thisincludes wireless installations in you home computers and cordless phones. Nonthermal effects from electromagnetic radiation are irrefutable. This important reportshould be read and acted on by policy-makers worldwide.”Dr Caroline Lucas, Green Party MEP for SE EnglandRadiation Research Trust trustee “This report raises further concern about the health and other risks of mobile phonetechnology, especially for children. Government action to protect us from the dangersof electromagnetic radiation is long overdue, so I hope this new evidence of the linkbetween brain tumors and mobile phone use is given the serious attention itdeserves.”Andrew Mitchell, Member of Parliament, Shadow Secretary of State forInternational Development, United Kingdom”I welcome the scientific debate about cell phones and brain tumours and aserious discussion of any design flaws of the Interphone study.”Philip Parkin, General Secretary, Voice, union for education professionals;United Kingdom“I have become increasingly concerned about the general public’s lack of awareness ofthe HPA advice on the use of mobile phones and children; and where it is known it isoften being ignored. I was amazed and appalled recently when the government’s ownTraining and Development Agency was advocating, through an article in its ownmagazine for schools, the use of mobile phones in the classroom as an aide to teachingand learning. This study of the available evidence on Cellphones and Brain Tumoursis a sharp reminder to all of the care that needs to be taken in the introduction of newtechnologies and strengthens the case for the Precautionary Principle in using them.I would endorse it as essential reading for all parents and all frequent, long-termusers of mobile phones.”Chris Woollams, M.A. Biochemistry (Oxon), Editor, Integrated Cancer andOncology News (icon magazine), CEO CANCERactive; United Kingdom“In a world where a drug cannot be launched without proof that it is safe, whereherbs and natural compounds available to all since early Egyptian times are nowquestioned, their safety subjected to the deepest scrutiny, where a new food cannot belaunched without prior approval, the idea that we can put up mobile telephony mastsand introduce Wi-Fi willy-nilly around our 5 year olds is double-standards gonemad. And I speak, not just as an editor and scientist that has looked in depth at allthe research, but as a father that lost his beloved daughter to a brain tumour.
