At last week's Congressional hearing on cell phone cancer risks, Dr. Ronald Herberman testified that the incidence of brain cancer has been increasing over the last ten years, particularly among 20-29 year-olds. This could have major implications for the cell phone health controversy.
Read our coverage of Congressman Dennis Kucinich's hearing at: http://www.microwavenews.com/kucinich.html
Louis Slesin, PhD Editor, Microwave News A Report on Non-Ionizing Radiation Phone: +1 (212) 517-2800; Fax: +1 (212) 734-0316 E-mail: <mwn@pobox.com> Internet: <http://www.microwavenews.com> Mail: 155 East 77th Street, Suite 3D New York, NY 10075, U.S.A.
September 30, 2008
Striking Increase Cited at Congressional Hearing
Download a pdf of this news and comment
In
many ways, last Thursday's Congressional hearing on cell phone
cancer risks, called by Rep. Dennis
Kucinich (D-OH), brought few surprises. David
Carpenter and Ronald
Herberman made the case for precaution, especially for children,
while National
Cancer Institute's Robert
Hoover countered that he is not persuaded that there's anything
to worry about.
One piece of compelling news did emerge,
however —though it never made it into the mainstream press:
Brain cancer appears to be on the rise among young adults. Herberman
testified that, on looking at government statistics, he was "struck"
by the fact that the incidence of brain cancer has been increasing
over the last ten years, particularly among 20-29 year-olds. If the
latency for brain tumors is more than ten years and cell phone are
in fact responsible for the increase, cancer rates might not peak
for at least another five years, according to
Herberman.
Herberman's analysis stands in sharp contrast to
Hoover's assessment of the same data. Government statistics show no
increase from 1987 to 2005, Hoover said at the hearing. If Herberman
is right, he would puncture a central, albeit indirect, argument in
favor of the safety of cell phone. The NCI, among others, argues
that brain cancer rates are stable, and therefore that cell phones
are not doing any harm. "Thus far, brain cancer incidence
trends in the U.S. are unrelated to patterns of cell phone use,"
Hoover told Kucinich. In response to Herberman, Hoover offered to
provide the subcommittee with the most recent government cancer
statistics.
Herberman, the director of the University of
Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, and his colleague Devra
Davis have prepared a paper on their interpretation of the
cancer data. "We're submitting it for publication," Davis
told Microwave
News.
"We're looking at increasing trends in brain tumors among those
under the age of 39, between 1995 and 2005," she said.
An
uptick in brain cancer among 20-29 year-olds would also add weight
to the findings of Sweden's Lennart
Hardell. At a conference
held in London earlier this month, Hardell reported that those who
started using cell phones before the age of 20 were five times more
likely to develop a glioma, a type of brain tumor. The U.K. press
had a field day. The Independent
warned of a looming brain cancer "epidemic" while the
Telegraph
reported that the country was facing a "health time bomb."
In their prepared statements, both Carpenter and Herberman
cited Hardell's new finding. "This observation is consistent
with a large body of scientific studies that demonstrate that
children are more vulnerable than adults to carcinogens,"
Carpenter said. When Kucinich asked what should be done, Carpenter
replied that "the evidence is certainly strong enough for
warnings that children should not use cell phones." He warned
that, "The failure to take [strong preventive action] will lead
to an epidemic of brain cancer." Carpenter is the director of
the Institute for Health and Environment in Albany, NY.
Herberman
criticized the NCI and Hoover for failing to cite the Hardell
studies. He called this omission in the NCI
Cancer Bulletin,
released just before the hearing, a "major lapse" (see
September
23).
"Certainly Dr. Hardell's studies have made
important contributions," Hoover said. But he then went on to
assert that Hardell had left out many cases of brain tumors in his
early studies. "To Dr. Hardell's credit, he attempted to do
something very fast, [but] he used a method…that effectively
ended up eliminating everybody who died quickly." As a result,
Hoover said, Hardell's first study included "less than 30% of
the total number of cases."
When asked about this,
Hardell told Microwave
News
that he does not know where the 30% figure comes from. "It is
not correct," he said. "We have published all the numbers
in different papers."
Hardell first published his
finding that the young have higher brain tumor risks from cell
phones back in 2004. Writing in the Archives
of Environmental Health,
he reported
that those who started using cell phones before they were 18 had
more than five times the expected rate of brain tumors. At the time,
he warned that this finding should be "interpreted with
caution" because it is based on a small number of cases and is
not statistically significant.
In London, Hardell presented
an updated estimate of the risk. This time, he looked at those who
started using phones before reaching the age of 20: They had a
5.2-fold increased risk of developing a glioma. This new result is
based on 15 cases and is statistically significant. Hardell said
that a paper with these new results is "in the pipeline."
NCI on Interphone
In
his prepared remarks, Hoover offered his views of the Interphone
results published to date. The individual studies have found "no
evidence of an overall increase in the risk of any type of brain
tumor associated with the first ten years of cell phone use,"
he said. "A somewhat increased risk has been found in some
studies for tumors diagnosed on the same side of the head that the
cell phone was used for those with more than ten years of cell phone
use." But, Hoover continued, "these are based on small
numbers, generally less than 5% of the cases under study, and are
not consistently seen across all studies." He called these
"isolated findings" that need to be replicated with
different study designs "to sort out the roles of chance and
bias."
The combined Interphone analysis, he concluded,
with a larger number of long-term users will hopefully provide
"statistically stable estimates" of the risk that will
"bring some clarity to the current state of the science."
With respect to possible risks to children, Hoover
acknowledged that, "We do know that cell phone use is
increasing rapidly among children and adolescents. They are a
potentially sensitive group because of their small head size and
[this] could result in a higher RF exposure, and the young brain may
be more sensitive." He said there are at present "no
published studies in the peer-reviewed literature" but that a
European study should be available "soon."
Hoover
was referring to the CEFALO
project, a study of brain tumors in children and adolescents being
carried out in Denmark, Norway, Sweden and Switzerland. He predicted
that some results would be available by the middle of next year.
That may be a bit optimistic. The end of 2009 is more realistic,
Switzerland's Martin Röösli, a member of the CEFALO team,
told Microwave
News.
Few observers believe these findings, like those of Interphone, will
settle the question of whether there are long-term health risks.
Are There RF Non-Thermal Effects?
In
the later part of the hearing, Kucinich asked whether cell phone
radiation could cause non-thermal effects. Carpenter responded that
"there are literally hundreds of experimental studies in
animals and cells that show effects without heating." But, he
said, the strongest evidence comes from epidemiology, specifically
the increase in brain cancer after ten years of use.
Herberman
agreed that there are "quite a number of studies" that
show effects and damage. "[What] struck me the most,"
Herberman said, "are several reports from very experienced
credible scientists of damage to the DNA, which we know is the
central mechanism for developing tumors and malignant
cancer."
Kucinich followed up by asking, "How would
that happen?… How could RF radiation conceivably change or
damage DNA?" Herberman, who acknowledged that this was indeed
"surprising," responded that his "favorite
hypothesis" was that the RF signal generates reactive oxygen
species, which can damage DNA.
When Hoover was asked to
comment, he raised concerns as to the reliability of the papers on
RF-induced DNA breaks. "I know that very recently there have
been reports of the ability to do genetic damage," he said.
"Some of them, I guess, are currently under scrutiny, as to
whether they might be withdrawn or not. So, I think the area is
actually still evolving."
Julius
Knapp of the FCC,
who also testified at the hearing, said that he does not have an
opinion on the adequacy of radiation standards because no one at the
agency has the competence to evaluate the biology. "Our focus
is on implementation," he told the subcommittee.
Kucinich
closed the hearing by saying that the cell phone industry "will
be given another opportunity to testify." CTIA,
the industry trade group, had declined his invitation to appear.
Instead it issued a statement,
citing NCI's view that there is no scientific basis for any concern
over brain cancer.
Kucinich said that he plans to continue
his investigation into cell phone health risks. "We are not
going to let this matter rest," he said.
A video
of the entire hearing, called by the Domestic Policy Oversight
Subcommittee, can be viewed on its Web site. The prepared
statements of all the witnesses, except NCI's Hoover, are also
posted on the Web. Kucinich pressed Hoover to submit a written copy
of his testimony.
©
Copyright Microwave News 2008. All Rights Reserved.
[ http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Congress