Wednesday, January 2, 2013

Cell Phones and Cancer Risk

"Cellular (cell) phones first became widely available in the United States in the 1990s, but their use has increased dramatically since then. According to the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association, there were more than 320 million cell phone subscriptions in the United States as of June 2011, which is actually more than the entire US population. Along with the large and still growing number of cell phone users (both adults and children), the amount of time people spend on their phones has also risen sharply in recent decades.  Cell phones give off a form of energy known as radiofrequency (RF) waves, so some concerns have been raised about the safety of cell phone use. With respect to cancer, concern focuses on whether cell phones might increase the risk of brain tumors or other tumors in the head and neck area."   
Source: American Cancer Society

Key Points 
  • Cell phones emit radiofrequency energy, a form of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation, which can be absorbed by tissues closest to where the phone is held.
  • The amount of radiofrequency energy a cell phone user is exposed to depends on the technology of the phone, the distance between the phone’s antenna and the user, the extent and type of use, and the user’s distance from cell phone towers.
  • Studies thus far have not shown a consistent link between cell phone use and cancers of the brain, nerves, or other tissues of the head or neck. More research is needed because cell phone technology and how people use cell phones have been changing rapidly.

Why is there concern that cell phones may cause cancer or other health problems?

There are three main reasons why people are concerned that cell phones (also known as “wireless” or “mobile” telephones) might have the potential to cause certain types of cancer or other health problems:
  1. Cell phones emit radiofrequency energy (radio waves), a form of non-ionizing radiation. Tissues nearest to where the phone is held can absorb this energy.
  2. The number of cell phone users has increased rapidly. As of 2010, there were more than 303 million subscribers to cell phone service in the United States, according to the Cellular Telecommunications and Internet Association. This is a nearly threefold increase from the 110 million users in 2000. Globally, the number of cell phone subscriptions is estimated by the International Telecommunications Union to be 5 billion.
  3. Over time, the number of cell phone calls per day, the length of each call, and the amount of time people use cell phones have increased. Cell phone technology has also undergone substantial changes.

 Cell Phone Dangers | Dr. Devra Davis @ National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS)

What is radiofrequency energy and how does it affect the body?

Radiofrequency energy is a form of electromagnetic radiation. Electromagnetic radiation can be categorized into two types: ionizing (e.g., x-rays, radon, and cosmic rays) and non-ionizing (e.g., radiofrequency and extremely low-frequency or power frequency).

Exposure to ionizing radiation, such as from radiation therapy, is known to increase the risk of cancer. However, although many studies have examined the potential health effects of non-ionizing radiation from radar, microwave ovens, and other sources, there is currently no consistent evidence that non-ionizing radiation increases cancer risk.[1].

The only known biological effect of radiofrequency energy is heating. The ability of microwave ovens to heat food is one example of this effect of radiofrequency energy. Radiofrequency exposure from cell phone use does cause heating; however, it is not sufficient to measurably increase body temperature.

A recent study showed that when people used a cell phone for 50 minutes, brain tissues on the same side of the head as the phone’s antenna metabolized more glucose than did tissues on the opposite side of the brain.[2] The researchers noted that the results are preliminary, and possible health outcomes from this increase in glucose metabolism are still unknown.

How is radiofrequency energy exposure measured in epidemiologic studies?

Levels of radiofrequency exposure are indirectly estimated using information from interviews or questionnaires. These measures include the following:

  • How “regularly” study participants use cell phones (the minimum number of calls per week or month)
  • The age and the year when study participants first used a cell phone and the age and the year of last use (allows calculation of the duration of use and time since the start of use)
  • The average number of cell phone calls per day, week, or month (frequency)
  • The average length of a typical cell phone call
  • The total hours of lifetime use, calculated from the length of typical call times, the frequency of use, and the duration of use

What has research shown about the possible cancer-causing effects of radiofrequency energy?

Although there have been some concerns that radiofrequency energy from cell phones held closely to the head may affect the brain and other tissues, to date there is no evidence from studies of cells, animals, or humans that radiofrequency energy can cause cancer.

It is generally accepted that damage to DNA is necessary for cancer to develop. However, radiofrequency energy, unlike ionizing radiation, does not cause DNA damage in cells, and it has not been found to cause cancer in animals or to enhance the cancer-causing effects of known chemical carcinogens in animals.[3–5]

Researchers have carried out several types of epidemiologic studies to investigate the possibility of a relationship between cell phone use and the risk of malignant (cancerous) brain tumors, such as gliomas, as well as benign (noncancerous) tumors, such as acoustic neuromas (tumors in the cells of the nerve responsible for hearing), most meningiomas (tumors in the meninges, membranes that cover and protect the brain and spinal cord), and parotid gland tumors (tumors in the salivary glands).[6]

In one type of study, called a case-control study, cell phone use is compared between people with these types of tumors and people without them. In another type of study, called a cohort study, a large group of people is followed over time and the rate of these tumors in people who did and didn’t use cell phones is compared. Cancer incidence data can also be analyzed over time to see if the rates of cancer changed in large populations during the time that cell phone use increased dramatically. The results of these studies have generally not provided clear evidence of a relationship between cell phone use and cancer, but there have been some statistically significant findings in certain subgroups of people.

Findings from specific research studies are summarized below:

  • The Interphone Study, conducted by a consortium of researchers from 13 countries, is the largest health-related case-control study of use of cell phones and head and neck tumors. Most published analyses from this study have shown no statistically significant increases in brain or central nervous system cancers related to higher amounts of cell phone use. One recent analysis showed a statistically significant, albeit modest, increase in the risk of glioma among the small proportion of study participants who spent the most total time on cell phone calls. However, the researchers considered this finding inconclusive because they felt that the amount of use reported by some respondents was unlikely and because the participants who reported lower levels of use appeared to have a reduced risk of brain cancer.[7–9] Another recent study from the group found no relationship between brain tumor locations and regions of the brain that were exposed to the highest level of radiofrequency energy from cell phones.[10]
  • A cohort study in Denmark linked billing information from more than 358,000 cell phone subscribers with brain tumor incidence data from the Danish Cancer Registry. The analyses found no association between cell phone use and the incidence of glioma, meningioma, or acoustic neuroma, even among people who had been cell phone subscribers for 13 or more years.[11–13]
  • Early case-control studies in the United States, Europe, and Japan were unable to demonstrate a relationship between cell phone use and glioma or meningioma.[14]
  • Some case-control studies in Sweden found statistically significant trends of increasing brain cancer risk for the total amount of cell phone use and the years of use among people who began using cell phones before age 20.[15] However, another large, case-control study in Sweden did not find an increased risk of brain cancer among people between the ages of 20 and 69.[16] In addition, the international CEFALO study, which compared children who were diagnosed with brain cancer between ages 7 and 19 with similar children who were not, found no relationship between their cell phone use and risk for brain cancer.[17]
  • NCI's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program, which tracks cancer incidence in the United States over time, found no increase in the incidence of brain or other central nervous system cancers between 1987 and 2007, despite the dramatic increase in cell phone use in this country during that time.[18,19] Similarly, incidence data from Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden for the period 1974–2008 revealed no increase in age-adjusted incidence of brain tumors.[20,21] A 2012 study by NCI researchers, which compared observed glioma incidence rates in SEER with projected rates based on risks observed in the Interphone study,[8] found that the projected rates were consistent with observed U.S. rates. The researchers also compared the SEER rates with projected rates based on a Swedish study published in 2011.[15] They determined that the projected rates were at least 40 percent higher than, and incompatible with, the actual U.S. rates.
  • Studies of workers exposed to radiofrequency energy have shown no evidence of increased risk of brain tumors among U.S. Navy electronics technicians, aviation technicians, or fire control technicians, those working in an electromagnetic pulse test program, plastic-ware workers, cellular phone manufacturing workers, or Navy personnel with a high probability of exposure to radar.[6]

Why are the findings from different studies of cell phone use and cancer risk inconsistent?

A limited number of studies have shown some evidence of statistical association of cell phone use and brain tumor risks, but most studies have found no association. Reasons for these discrepancies include the following:
  • Recall bias, which may happen when a study collects data about prior habits and exposures using questionnaires administered after disease has been diagnosed in some of the study participants. It is possible that study participants who have brain tumors may remember their cell phone use differently than individuals without brain tumors. Many epidemiologic studies of cell phone use and brain cancer risk lack verifiable data about the total amount of cell phone use over time. In addition, people who develop a brain tumor may have a tendency to recall using their cell phone mostly on the same side of their head where the tumor was found, regardless of whether they actually used their phone on that side of their head a lot or only a little.
  • Inaccurate reporting, which may happen when people say that something has happened more or less often than it actually did. People may not remember how much they used cell phones in a given time period.
  • Morbidity and mortality among study participants who have brain cancer. Gliomas are particularly difficult to study, for example, because of their high death rate and the short survival of people who develop these tumors. Patients who survive initial treatment are often impaired, which may affect their responses to questions. Furthermore, for people who have died, next-of-kin are often less familiar with the cell phone use patterns of their deceased family member and may not accurately describe their patterns of use to an interviewer.
  • Participation bias, which can happen when people who are diagnosed with brain tumors are more likely than healthy people (known as controls) to enroll in a research study. Also, controls who did not or rarely used cell phones were less likely to participate in the Interphone study than controls who used cell phones regularly. For example, the Interphone study reported participation rates of 78 percent for meningioma patients (range 56–92 percent for the individual studies), 64 percent for the glioma patients (range 36–92 percent), and 53 percent for control subjects (range 42–74 percent).[9] One series of Swedish studies reported participation rates of 85 percent in people with brain cancer and 84 percent in control subjects.[16]
  • Changing technology and methods of use. Older studies evaluated radiofrequency energy exposure from analog cell phones. However, most cell phones today use digital technology, which operates at a different frequency and a lower power level than analog phones. Digital cell phones have been in use for more than a decade in the United States, and cellular technology continues to change.[6] Texting, for example, has become a popular way of using a cell phone to communicate that does not require bringing the phone close to the head. Furthermore, the use of hands-free technology, such as wired and wireless headsets, is increasing and may decrease radiofrequency energy exposure to the head and brain.

What do expert organizations conclude?

  • The International Agency for Research on Cancer Exit Disclaimer (IARC), a component of the World Health Organization, has recently classified radiofrequency fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” based on limited evidence from human studies, limited evidence from studies of radiofrequency energy and cancer in rodents, and weak mechanistic evidence (from studies of genotoxicity, effects on immune system function, gene and protein expression, cell signaling, oxidative stress, and apoptosis, along with studies of the possible effects of radiofrequency energy on the blood-brain barrier).
  • The American Cancer Society Exit Disclaimer (ACS) states that the IARC classification means that there could be some risk associated with cancer, but the evidence is not strong enough to be considered causal and needs to be investigated further. Individuals who are concerned about radiofrequency exposure can limit their exposure, including using an ear piece and limiting cell phone use, particularly among children.
  • The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) states that the weight of the current scientific evidence has not conclusively linked cell phone use with any adverse health problems, but more research is needed.
  • The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), which is responsible for regulating the safety of machines and devices that emit radiation (including cell phones), notes that studies reporting biological changes associated with radiofrequency energy have failed to be replicated and that the majority of human epidemiologic studies have failed to show a relationship between exposure to radiofrequency energy from cell phones and health problems.
  • The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) states that, although some studies have raised concerns about the possible risks of cell phone use, scientific research as a whole does not support a statistically significant association between cell phone use and health effects.
  • The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) concludes that there is no scientific evidence that proves that wireless phone use can lead to cancer or to other health problems, including headaches, dizziness, or memory loss.

What studies are under way that will help further our understanding of the health effects of cell phone use?

A large prospective cohort study of cell phone use and its possible long-term health effects was launched in Europe in March 2010. This study, known as COSMOS Exit Disclaimer, will enroll approximately 250,000 cell phone users ages 18 or older and will follow them for 20 to 30 years. Participants in COSMOS will complete a questionnaire about their health, lifestyle, and current and past cell phone use. This information will be supplemented with information from health records and cell phone records.

The challenge of such ambitious studies is to maintain the completeness of their cohorts over many decades. Researchers will need to determine whether participants who leave are somehow different from those who remain throughout the follow-up period.

Another case-control study, called Mobi-Kids Exit Disclaimer, is under way to examine health effects among children.

Although recall bias is minimized in case-control studies that link to cell phone records, such studies face other problems. For example, it is impossible to know who is using the listed cell phone or whether that individual also places calls using other cell phones. To a lesser extent, it is not clear whether multiple users of a single phone will be represented on a single bill.

The NIEHS, which is part of the National Institutes of Health, is carrying out a study of risks related to exposure to radiofrequency energy (the type used in cell phones) in highly specialized labs that can specify and control sources of radiation and measure their effects on rodents.

Do children have a higher risk of developing cancer due to cell phone use than adults?

In theory, children have the potential to be at greater risk than adults for developing brain cancer from cell phones. Their nervous systems are still developing and therefore more vulnerable to factors that may cause cancer. Their heads are smaller than those of adults and therefore have a greater proportional exposure to the field of radiofrequency radiation that is emitted by cell phones. And children have the potential of accumulating more years of cell phone exposure than adults do.

So far, the data from clinical studies in children do not support this theory. The first published analysis came from a large case-control study called CEFALO, which was conducted in Denmark, Sweden, Norway, and Switzerland. The study included children who were diagnosed with brain tumors between 2004 and 2008, when their ages ranged from 7 to 19. Researchers did not find an association between cell phone use and brain tumor risk in this group of children. However, they noted that their results did not rule out the possibility of a slight increase in brain cancer risk among children who use cell phones, and that data gathered through prospective studies and objective measurements, rather than participant surveys and recollections, will be key in clarifying whether there is an increased risk.[18]

Researchers from the Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology in Spain are conducting another international study—Mobi-Kids Exit Disclaimer—to evaluate the risk associated with new communications technologies (including cell phones) and other environmental factors in young people ages 10 to 24.

What can cell phone users do to reduce their exposure to radiofrequency energy?

The FDA and FCC have suggested some steps that concerned cell phone users can take to reduce their exposure to radiofrequency energy:[1,22]

  • Reserve the use of cell phones for shorter conversations or for times when a landline phone is not available.
  • Use a hands-free device, which places more distance between the phone and the head of the user. Hands-free kits reduce the amount of radiofrequency energy exposure to the head because the antenna, which is the source of energy, is not placed against the head.

Where can I find more information about radiofrequency energy from my cell phone?

The FCC provides information about the specific absorption rate (SAR) of cell phones produced and marketed within the last 1 to 2 years. The SAR corresponds with the relative amount of radiofrequency energy absorbed by the head of a cell phone user.[23 Consumers can access this information using the phone’s FCC ID number, which is usually located on the case of the phone, and the FCC’s ID search form.

What are other sources of radiofrequency energy?

  • The most common exposures to radiofrequency energy are from telecommunications devices and equipment.[1] In the United States, cell phones currently operate in a frequency range of about 1,800 to 2,200 megahertz (MHz).[6] In this range, the electromagnetic radiation produced is in the form of non-ionizing radiofrequency energy.
  • Cordless phones (phones that have a base unit connected to the telephone wiring in a house) often operate at radio frequencies similar to those of cell phones; however, since cordless phones have a limited range and require a nearby base, their signals are generally much less powerful than those of cell phones.
  • Among other radiofrequency energy sources, AM/FM radios and VHF/UHF televisions operate at lower radio frequencies than cell phones, whereas sources such as radar, satellite stations, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) devices, industrial equipment, and microwave ovens operate at somewhat higher radio frequencies.[1]

How common is brain cancer? Has the incidence of brain cancer changed over time?

Brain cancer incidence and mortality (death) rates have changed little in the past decade. In the United States, 22,910 new diagnoses and 13,700 deaths from brain cancer are estimated for 2012.

The 5-year relative survival for brain cancers diagnosed from 2002 through 2008 was 35 percent.[24] This is the percentage of people diagnosed with brain cancer who will still be alive 5 years after diagnosis compared with the survival of a person of the same age and sex who does not have cancer.

The risk of developing brain cancer increases with age. From 2005 through 2009, there were fewer than 5 brain cancer cases for every 100,000 people in the United States under age 65, compared with approximately 19 cases for every 100,000 people in the United States who were ages 65 or older.[24] 

Fact Sheet "Cell Phones and Cancer Risk" courtesy of the National Cancer Institute. 

External Links

Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) for Cellular Telephones - Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Radiation-Emitting Products: Cell Phones - U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
EWG's Guide to Safer Cell Phone Use - Environmental Working Group (EWG).
Cell Phone Radiation Damages Sperm, Studies Show: Phones Carried on Belt or in Pants Pocket May Harm Reproductive Health -  Environmental Working Group (EWG).
Cell Phone Radiation Science Review: Executive Summary - Environmental Working Group (EWG).
The World in 2011: ICT Facts and Figures - International Telecommunication Union (ITU).
EMF Fact Sheets: Mobile phones - Federal Department of Home Affairs (DHA), Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH).
IARC Classifies Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields as Possibly Carcinogenic to Humans - WHO/International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).
Cell Phone Radiation Scams - Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
EHT Releases Worldwide Cell Phone Radiation Safety Recommendations and Policies - Environmental Health Trust (EHT).
NIEHS | Cell Phones - The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS).
Consumer Update on Cell Phones - U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
FAQs on Cell Phones - Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Electromagnetic fields and public health: mobile phones - World Health Organization (WHO).
Reduce Exposure to Cell Phone Radiation: About cell phone radiation - SF Environment.
Latest science shows mobile phone radiation can damage sperm and affect the adult brain and behavior of animals prenatally exposed - Environmental Health Trust (EHT).

Electric and Magnetic Fields (EMFs)
Electric & Magnetic Fields - The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS).
EMF (Electric and Magnetic Fields) - Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Radiofrequency Background: What is radiofrequency energy (RF)? - U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
Magnetic Field Exposure and Cancer: Questions and Answers - National Cancer Institute.
Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) Radiation - United States Department of Labor,
WHO | Electromagnetic fields (EMF)>Publications and information resources>Extremely Low Frequency Fields: Environmental Health Criteria Monograph No.238 - World Health Organization (WHO).

Research Studies
Electromagnetic Fields EMF: EMF Research - Federal Department of Home Affairs (DHA), Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH).
Cell Phone Radiation, Pregnancy, and Sperm - National Press Club, Washington, DC, November 12, 2012.
Cell Phone Radiation Research - Environmental Working Group (EWG).
JAMA Study shows cell phone usage increases brain glucose metabolism - Brookhaven National Laboratory, Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).
Cell Phone Radiofrequency Radiation Studies - National Toxicology Program, National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences NIH-HHS.
NTP Associate Director's Statement - National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIH/NIEHS).
International Agency for Research on Cancer 2011 Press Release - WHO/International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC).
The effect of pulsed 900-MHz GSM mobile phone radiation on the acrosome reaction, head morphometry and zona binding of human spermatozoa - Department of Biomedical Sciences, Tshwane University of Technology, Pretoria, South Africa.
EMF Risk Assessment: Exposure Assessment and Compliance Testing in Complex Environments - SVEN KUHN Dipl. Ing., TU Chemnitz, born 31 12 1979, citizen of Germany. accepted on the recommendation of Prof. Dr. W. Fichtner, examiner, Prof. Dr. N. Kuster, Prof. Dr. L. Martens, co-examiner

In The News
WHO: Cell phone use can increase possible cancer risk - CNN News.
Vienna Medical Association Calls for Cell Phone Free Zones in Public Spaces (12/22/2012) - Electromagnetic Health News, 
Cell-Phone Safety: What the FCC Didn't Test (October 26, 2010) - Time Magazine, Time, Inc. 
Congressman: Time to update cellphone radiation rules - NBC News. 
How Science Can Deceive You about Your Cell Phone (December 20, 2012) - Dr. Joseph Mercola,
Cell Phone Radiation May Alter Brain, DNA (November 26, 2012) -
Cell phone radiation levels (October 29, 2012) - C|Net, CBS Interactive, Inc.
Just how dangerous is cell phone radiation? (September 26, 2012) -, Turner Broadcasting System, Inc.
WHO: Cell phone use can increase possible cancer risk (May 31, 2011) -CNN Health, Cable News Network.
Cellphone Radiation May Cause Cancer, Advisory Panel Says (May 31, 2011) - The New York Times.

1.U.S. Food and Drug Administration (2009). Radiation-Emitting Products: Reducing Exposure: Hands-free Kits and Other Accessories. Silver Spring, MD. Retrieved June 18, 2012.
2.Volkow ND, Tomasi D, Wang GJ, et al. Effects of cell phone radiofrequency signal exposure on brain glucose metabolism. JAMA 2011; 305(8):808–813.
3.Hirose H, Suhara T, Kaji N, et al. Mobile phone base station radiation does not affect neoplastic transformation in BALB/3T3 cells. Bioelectromagnetics 2008; 29(1):55–64.
4.Oberto G, Rolfo K, Yu P, et al. Carcinogenicity study of 217 Hz pulsed 900 MHz electromagnetic fields in Pim1 transgenic mice. Radiation Research 2007; 168(3):316–326.
5.Zook BC, Simmens SJ. The effects of pulsed 860 MHz radiofrequency radiation on the promotion of neurogenic tumors in rats. Radiation Research 2006; 165(5):608–615.
6.Ahlbom A, Green A, Kheifets L, et al. Epidemiology of health effects of radiofrequency exposure. Environmental Health Perspectives 2004; 112(17):1741–1754.
7.Cardis E, Richardson L, Deltour I, et al. The INTERPHONE study: design, epidemiological methods, and description of the study population. European Journal of Epidemiology 2007; 22(9):647–664.
8.International Agency for Research on Cancer (2008). INTERPHONE Study: latest results update—8 October 2008. Lyon, France. Retrieved June 18, 2012.
9.The INTERPHONE Study Group. Brain tumour risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the INTERPHONE international case-control study. International Journal of Epidemiology 2010; 39(3):675–694.
10.Larjavaara S, Schüz J, Swerdlow A, et al. Location of gliomas in relation to mobile telephone use: a case-case and case-specular analysis. American Journal of Epidemiology 2011; 174(1):2–11.
11.Johansen C, Boice J Jr, McLaughlin J, Olsen J. Cellular telephones and cancer: a nationwide cohort study in Denmark. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2001; 93(3):203–207.
12.Schüz J, Jacobsen R, Olsen JH, et al. Cellular telephone use and cancer risk: update of a nationwide Danish cohort. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2006; 98(23):1707–1713.
13.Frei P, Poulsen AH, Johansen C, et al. Use of mobile phones and risk of brain tumours: update of Danish cohort study. British Medical Journal 2011; 343:d6387.
14.Muscat JE, Malkin MG, Thompson S, et al. Handheld cellular telephone use and risk of brain cancer. JAMA 2000; 284(23):3001–3007.
15.Hardell L, Carlberg M, Hansson Mild K. Pooled analysis of case-control studies on malignant brain tumours and the use of mobile and cordless phones including living and deceased subjects. International Journal of Oncology 2011; 38(5):1465–1474.
16.Lönn S, Ahlbom A, Hall P, Feychting M. Long-term mobile phone use and brain tumor risk. American Journal of Epidemiology 2005; 161(6):526–535.
17.Aydin D, Feychting M, Schüz J, et al. Mobile phone use and brain tumors in children and adolescents: a multicenter case-control study. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2011; 103(16):1264-1276.
18.Inskip PD, Hoover RN, Devesa SS. Brain cancer incidence trends in relation to cellular telephone use in the United States. Neuro-Oncology 2010; 12(11):1147–1151.
19.Little MP, Rajaraman P, Curtis RE, et al. Mobile phone use and glioma risk: comparison of epidemiological study results with incidence trends in the United States. British Medical Journal 2012; 344:e1147.
20.Deltour I, Johansen C, Auvinen A, et al. Time trends in brain tumor incidence rates in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden, 1974–2003. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 2009; 101(24):1721–1724.
21.Deltour I, Auvinen A, Feychting M, et al. Mobile phone use and incidence of glioma in the Nordic countries 1979–2008: consistency check. Epidemiology 2012; 23(2):301–307.
22.U.S. Federal Communications Commission (2010). Wireless. Washington, D.C. Retrieved June 18, 2012.
23.U.S. Federal Communications Commission. (n.d.). FCC Encyclopedia: Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) for Cellular Telephones. Retrieved June 18, 2012.
24.Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, et al. (2012). SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2009 (Vintage 2009 populations). Bethesda, MD: National Cancer Institute. Retrieved June 18, 2012.

Holistic Lifestyle Community Blog Disclaimer: 
The Holistic Lifestyle Community Blog does not provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. The information contained on the Holistic Lifestyle Community Blog are for general information and education purposes only. The information is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. Always seek the advice of a licensed physician or other qualified health care professional with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition. Never disregard professional medical advice or delay in seeking it because of something you have read on the Holistic Lifestyle Community Blog! If you think you may have a medical emergency, call your doctor or 9-1-1 immediately! Holistic Lifestyle Community Blog does not recommend or endorse any specific tests, physicians, products, procedures, opinions, or other information that may be mentioned on the Holistic Lifestyle Community Blog. Reliance on any information provided by Holistic Lifestyle Community Blog is solely at your own risk.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.