Fw: OBRL - Cell Phone Hazards Are Real - New Study
Jim Shaffer, Jr. ( (no email) )
Fri, 2 Jul 1999 16:19:47 -0400
>From: OBRL-News <demeo@mind.net>
>To: obrl-news@lists.village.Virginia.EDU
>Subject:- Cell Phone Hazards Are Real - New Study
>
>Orgone Biophysical Research Lab <demeo@mind.net>
>http://id.mind.net/community/orgonelab/index.htm
>Forwarded News Item
>
>Please copy and distribute to other interested individuals and groups
>
>**********
>
>Submitted by: Wesley Watkins <omtao@pond.net>
>
>>From "Wired" On-Line Magazine
>
>Cell Phone Study: Hazards Are Real
>by Chris Oakes
>
>3:00 a.m. 21.Jun.99.PDT
>
>LONG BEACH, California -- The cellular phone industry probably didn't pay
>researchers US$27 million dollars hoping they'd produce bad news about the
>health effects of cell phones.
>
>Nonetheless, an industry-funded study has done just that.
>
>"These data are the first data that are directly relevant to the
>human-exposure situation," said Dr. George Carlo, chairman of Wireless
>Technology Research, or WTR. "Prior to this, the studies were largely
>speculative."
>
>A set of results from a variety of studies were presented at a WTR-sponsored
>colloquium Saturday and Sunday. The latest findings suggest a correlation
>between cell phone emissions and a slightly higher incidence of human brain
>tumors, cell growth in human blood micronuclei, and DNA breakage in rats.
>
>While the findings are far from conclusive, they are the first from an
>organization like the industry-supported Wireless Technology Research.
>
>"You would come to the [possible] conclusion that RF [radio frequencies]
>causes genetic damage," Carlo said. "That is a huge surprise."
>
>The findings represent a need for coordinated public health action while
>there is more investigation into the hazards, he added. "When you have 200
>million people who are being exposed to cell phones, you can't wait around
>for the slow scientific process to work."
>
>Some of the conclusions are roughly parallel to studies that have found DNA
>breakage caused by microwave emissions, which are near cell phones on the
>radio frequency spectrum.
>
>Another group of researchers funded by the industry organization suggested
>that a cell phone's "non-ionizing" radiation could cause the growth of cells
>in the micronuclei of human blood samples.
>
>Washington-based Wireless Technology Research was established in 1993 to
>address the public health risks from wireless communication technologies.
>The organization is also creating a scientific database for use in making
>public health decisions related to cell phone manufacturing and use. Its
>US$27 million budget comes from the cellular phone industry.
>
>Paul Joseph Morrissey, the head of Motorola's biological research program,
>sought to downplay the findings.
>
>"We saw both effects and no effects, and we need to replicate [the studies]
>to assess the results," said Morrissey. The findings were just a few among a
>far greater number of studies showing negative results -- or no effects --
>when examining the effects of cell phone radiation on everything from rats'
>brains to in vitro human tissue.
>
>"The results of genotoxicity studies using radio frequency exposure at
>nonthermal levels continue to be predominantly negative," Morrissey said
>during his presentation. "Any new positive genotoxic finding must be
>carefully and independently replicated by another laboratory before it can
>be considered as a genuine nonthermal effect."
>
>The findings weren't surprising to critics and activists, who've been
>pointing to studies dating as far back as 1995.
>
>DNA breaks were found in an oft-cited study conducted by University of
>Washington researchers Dr. Henry Lai and Dr. Narendra P. Singh. In 1994, the
>researchers say they tried to alert the WTR in 1994 to their experimental
>data showing DNA damage in live rats from microwave exposure. In March of
>this year, they charged in a letter published in Microwave News that these
>attempts were met with stonewalling and foot-dragging.
>
>Given this history, critics charge the WTR data is too little and too late.
>
>"You spend $25 million, and you have two reports? Where did the money go?"
>said editor Louis Slesin.
>
>He said no one knows conclusively whether or not there are negative health
>impacts of cell phones -- and that's the problem. "No one really expected to
>really know whether cell phones are safe with $25 million," he said. "But we
>should know a lot more."
>
>By now the industry and government should have implemented more conclusive
>research and precautionary public health measures, he said.
>
>In Switzerland, for example, the government recently approved precautionary
>rules for cell phone exposure. The restrictions set limits for cell phone
>power levels that are substantially lower than US standards.
>
>The WTR's Carlo was among the most vocal public health advocates at the
>colloquium, calling for immediate steps to begin tracking and coordinating
>all cell phone research. Slesin called Carlo's comments ironic, but
>nonetheless seconded his demands.
>
>Carlo admonished one panel, "This would be just a scientific issue -- but
>for the 200 million people around the world using this technology."
>
>
>**********
>
>OBRL News is a product of the non-profit
>Orgone Biophysical Research Lab
>Greensprings Research and Educational Center
>PO Box 1148, Ashland, Oregon 97520 USA
>http://id.mind.net/community/orgonelab/index.htm
>demeo@mind.net
>
>Building upon the discoveries
>of the late, great natural scientist, Dr. Wilhelm Reich
>
>To subscribe to OBRL-News, send the message:
> subscribe obrl-news
>to the following address:
> Majordomo@lists.village.virginia.edu
>
>To unsubscribe, or change to a new email address, firstly:
> unsubscribe obrl-news <your@old.email>
>to the same address above.
>Then re-subscribe with your new address.
> subscribe obrl-news <your@new.email>
>
>
>
>