Oncologist Lennart Hardell and his colleagues have been researching this association for about 10 years and have published numerous papers covering their findings. Starting with preliminary work at the turn of the century where they found a statistically significant 1.4-fold increase in risk for brain tumours (not sub-categorised) on the same side of the head as the mobile phone was used.
In 2002, looking at 1617 patients histopathologically diagnosed with brain tumours, they found that use of analogueue mobile phones was associated with a significant 30% increase in risk for brain tumours (overall). This increased to 80% when only looking at patients who had used their phone for over 10 years, and further to 150% (2.5 times as likely to develop a brain tumour) when side of the head was taken into account. For acoustic neuromas, the increase in risk was 250%.This was followed in 2003 by a separate analysis that found that Astrocytomas also had a significantly increased risk of 80% and a subsequent paper finding a 3.5-fold risk of Acoustic Neuroma from mobile phone use (CI 1.77-6.76)
By 2005 most papers generally sub-categorised brain tumour risk from mobile phone usage into acoustic neuromas, meningiomas and gliomas. Hardell produced a paper in 2005 analysing the increase in risk for acoustic neuromas and meningiomas. With a very good response rate (85%) he found that, for a mobile phone usage of greater than 10 years, the odds ratio for meningiomas was 2.1 (CI 1.1-4.3) and for acoustic neuromas this was split further into digital mobile phones (2.0 - CI 1.05-3.8) and analogue mobile phones (4.2 - CI 1.8-10) By this stage his results were consistently pointing towards a possible doubling in risk and this for mobile phone users who had not used their phone for as long as the typical latency period for the tumours! Hardell also published one of the only papers to date looking at risk of non-hodgkin's lymphoma, finding a 6-fold increase for over 10 years of use. He did highlight however that there were very few cases and that the results should be interpreted with a fair degree of caution.
In February 2006 Hardell published a paper using more recent diagnoses (patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2003), and found that the increase in risk was steadily strengthening in magnitude and statistical significance as the length of phone usage was increasing. For malignant tumours he found that the OR for analogue phone use was 2.6 (CI 1.5-4.3), for digital phone use was 1.9 (CI 1.3-2.7), and for cordless phone use was 2.1 (CI 1.4-3.0). Looking at patients who had used their phones for 10 years or more this increased to 3.5 (CI 2.0-6.4), 3.6 (CI 1.7-7.5) and 2.9 (CI 1.6-5.2) respectively. This work was followed up in October 2006 looking specifically at acoustic neuromas (a benign form of brain tumour), astrocytomas and non-hodgkin's lymphomas. He found acoustic neuromas and the higher grades of astrocytoma (Grades III and IV) to have significant increases from all forms of mobile and cordless phone usages (around 50% increase in risk in each case), which increased further for those who had used their phone greater than 10 years. However, he found no increase for lower grade astrocytomas (Grade I and II), and no increase for non-hodgkin's lymphomas in contrast to his paper from the previous year.
Hardell's published a meta-analysis in September 2007 of the existing literature to date (2 cohort studies and 16 case-control studies). His findings were a 140% increase in risk for benign acoustic neuromas (CI 1.1-5.3) and a 100% increase in risk for malignant gliomas (CI 1.2-3.4), with further increased risks when looking at ipsilateral exposure. His summary so far on all the work (including work from other researchers) is that "Results from present studies on use of mobile phones for > or =10 years give a consistent pattern of increased risk for acoustic neuroma and glioma. The risk is highest for ipsilateral exposure.
You may not realize it, but throughout life, everyone on the planet is being exposed to electromagnetic fields (often abbreviated as EMFs). The earth naturally produces its own electromagnetic field, as does the human body. These natural EMFs are very low in intensity, and research has shown that the body’s EMFs may contribute to good health.
Artificial EMFs Can Harm the Body
On the other hand, artificial EMFs that is emitted from modern gadgets—ranging from hair dryers to personal Wi-Fi hubs to electrical wires—has been shown to disturb the body’s natural energy field. Even worse, they may be a factor in why people battle neurological disorders. Many of the body’s natural functions are regulated with bioelectrical impulses, and man-made EMFs can disrupt those processes.
It’s also hard to tell for sure how often you’re getting exposed to EMFs. Both the natural and artificial kinds are invisible and silent, making them impossible to detect with the five senses. If you used a cell phone today, typed an e-mail on the computer or heated something in the microwave, however, you can know that your body has come in contact with artificial EMFs.
Neurological Problems Linked to EMF ExposureThe body’s neurological system is related to nerves. When problems occur, people can suffer symptoms that make it nearly impossible to do tasks that were likely previously performed without thinking. For example, chronic headaches are categorized as neurological problems, and if they are intense enough, activities like reading a newspaper or watching TV can become miserable. Some neurological issues may affect a person so severely that he or she cannot lift a cup of coffee without experiencing tremors and weakness. Neurological problems can also be related to attitude. Depression, hyperactivity and irritability are some neurological issues that can initially present themselves, or worsen, after exposure to EMFs. |
What Causes Variation in Symptoms?
Healthcare practitioners who have studied the adverse effects of EMF exposure and how they relate to neurological problems say there are several things that help determine how severe a person’s symptoms are. Biology is one factor, but two others are related to things that can be directly controlled. Specifically, scientists say the length of time and the intensity of EMF exposure help tell the story of what symptoms a person might have, and how life-altering they could be.
Reducing Your EMF Exposure Risk
Even though EMF exposure is something to be concerned with, there’s no need to feel helpless. By doing things like unplugging and turning off your mobile phone when it’s not in use and making sure to keep cordless phone base stations well away from areas in your home where people sleep, you can easily cut down on your exposure level.
Since there’s no way to easily avoid electromagnetic radiation in today’s world, the only sane solution is getting EMF protection. MHT offers a product that have been tested and proven effective. Click on PRODUCT to learn more to protect you and your family.