💾 Archived View for gemini.spam.works › mirrors › textfiles › phreak › CELLULAR › doomed.txt captured on 2022-06-12 at 17:29:09.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
IS CELLULAR DOOMED? by Ira Brodsky As published in Pen Magazine, Issue 12, Mar/Apr 1993. Entire contents (c) 1993 by PenWorld, Inc. Recent reports linking the use of portable cellular telephones with brain tumors have created anxiety among users, manufacturers, and service providers. Is the wireless revolution about to come to a screeching halt? Probably not. In fact, I suspect that the emotional stress produced by these reports will prove more injurious to people's health than the (allegedly) offending electromagnetic waves. What are the facts? There are ten million cellular telephone subscribers in the US. Perhaps as many as two million own portable phones. Two cases of brain tumors have been reported. Of course, additional cases may be disclosed in the next few months. 11,800 people in the US are expected to die from brain cancer this year; 146,000 are expected to die from lung cancer. We can expect 84 portable cellular telephone users to die from brain cancer this year even if it is proven that there is no connection between the use of portable cellular telephones and getting brain cancer. We also know that the number and scope of studies in this field have been inadequate. While there have been many studies regarding the potential health hazards or physiological effects of radio frequency energy, few if any have been modeled after portable cellular telephone's frequency (800 mHz band), power level (maximum: 600 milliWatts), and proximity between antenna and living tissue. To my knowledge, the only proven physiological effect of microwave radio is heating. (The 800 mHz cellular telephone band, however, is well below the microwave oven band which is located at 2400 mHz). It has been suggested that microwave energy could have other effects, particularly on cell membrane function, but I don't believe this has been proven. One scientist, physiologist Stephen Cleary of the Medical College of Virginia, conducted a study showing that the growth of cancerous cells is accelerated when exposed to radio waves. But even Cleary says he doesn't believe portable cellular phones cause cancer. The gap between a statistical correlation and proof of cause and effect is a longstanding problem faced by all scientific researchers. At this point, not enough brain tumor cases have been reported to even raise a statistical red flag. For all we know, the incidence of brain cancer among portable cellular telephone users is lower than among the population at large. If this turns out to be the case, it would make just as much sense to purchase a portable cellular telephone to help prevent brain cancer... Another thing wrong with this episode: if cellular radio waves pose a health hazard then the risk should increase with exposure (power level, daily usage, and number of years used), services adjacent to cellular telephone's frequency band should run similar risks: specialized mobile radio (SMR), private two-way radio, and the upper UHF-TV channels. Why have we not heard from these quarters? The signals emitted from TV transmitters (decades of use) are thousands of times stronger than those emitted from portable cellular telephones. Health Hazards & The Wireless Industry A big part of this dilemma hinges on perception. People are quicker to object to risks they feel they have been subjected to involuntarily. Like the video display terminal (VDT), wireless LANs and PBXs could become a new center of controversy for office workers. But it's my impression that most portable cellular telephone customers use their phones voluntarily. The wireless industry needs to get on top of the safety issue. Credable studies must be commissioned and the results must be publicly disclosed. Once a link between specific wireless products and health hazards is even hinted at, the industry finds itself in the unenviable position of trying to prove a negative. The fact that researchers are having a hard time proving that low power radio signals pose a health hazard doesn't make it any easier to prove that they do not. I suggest this "Industry Action Plan." First, data should be compiled on the number of cases expected in each related market based on the background rate of illnesses that might be linked to environmental causes. Second, the public needs to be made more fully aware of the types of electromagnetic radiation to which our bodies are already exposed-and how long this exposure has been going on. Third, we need to catalog the various studies that have been, or are being, conducted. Fourth, existing standards for maximum exposure should be publicized; most people are not aware that the power output of portable cellular telephones is already subject to safety restrictions. And finally, studies must be commissioned to fill in knowledge gaps in those areas likely to be of concern to the public. As for the emerging personal communications industry, the maximum power output of handheld personal communicators and personal digital assistants will generally be lower that that of portable cellular phones. Therefore, the risks will be lower. Wireless manufacturers have no excuse for being caught off guard by the brain tumor scare. This episode was foreseeable. Nevertheless, cellular telephone use will continue much as before. The fact is that people are willing to accept small risks as long as they know they have a choice. About The Author: Ira Brodsky is President of Wilmette, Illinois- based Datacomm Research Company, a market research firm specializing in emerging wireless communications. Brodsky is Chairman of Wireless User '93 Conference & Exposition which will be held March 29 - April 1, 1993 at Walt Disney World Village near Orlando, Florida. Readers can reach Dr. Wireless via radio at his Internet address: <brodsky@radiomail.net>. ___________________________________________________________ Who Started This? On Thursday, January 21, 1993, a group of guests on CNN's Larry King Live, claimed that they contracted brain cancer from their hand-held cellular phones. This group based their claims on the warnings issued in manuals accompanying cellular phones. For instance, the manual for the NEC P201 portable phone, which one of the guests used, cautions: "Radio Frequency Injury. Your phone is a power transmitting device. When the phone is in use, radio frequency with a power output level ranging from 0.6 to 3.0 watts of radio frequency energy radiates from the antenna. Avoid direct contact with the phone antenna and/or direct exposure to the radio frequency energy radiated from the antenna at high-level radiation periods. How can you avoid contact with the antenna when it's right by your ear? Furthermore, how do you avoid exposure with radiowaves which you cannot detect? Hence the controversey. What is or was really meant by the "caution" placed on packages by manufacturers? Although NEC (named in one suit) declined to comment, Motorola's Senior Vice President said that their warning was only for the car phone antenna, which one wouldn't be close to, and it was only because of the heat generated during operation that the warning is listed. Dr. Mays Swycord of the FDA has stated that studies indicate that cellular phone radio waves accelerate cancer growth, but do not cause the disease. And Dr. Thomas Stanley of the FCC issued a statement reassuring the public that devices using less than 0.7 watts of power are considered safe by the government. Cellular phones use only 0.63 watts. Relax, you probably have nothing to worry about. ___________________________________________________________ If you want to keep-up with the fast-paced world of pens, PDAs, Communicators and related technologies, subscribe to 'PEN: The Magazine of Pen-based Computing' and save $$. 12 issues: $36 U.S., $44 Canada/Mexico, $62.50 Int'l Airmail Money-Back Guarantee. Mastercard/Visa Accepted. Call 800/ 383-PENS, fax 310/ 377-8218, or email 71333,124