“Bioelectromagnetic research reveals clear evidence of joint actions at cell membranes of chemical cancer promoters and environmental electromagnetic fields. The union of these two disciplines has resulted in the first major new approach to tumor formation in 75 years, directing attention to dysfunctions in inward and outward streams of signals at cell membranes, rather than to damage DNA in cell nuclei, and to synergic actions of chemical pollutants and environmental electromagnetic fields.” Dr. William Ross Adey (1990)
Exposure to radiofrequency (RF) radiation is classified as a Group 2B Possible Human Carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer at the WHO as of 2011. Many scientists who work in the field of EMR feel there is clear evidence of harm from long term, low level exposure to this pulsating and penetrating non-ionizing radiation which warrants an IARC upgrade to a Group 1 Known Carcinogen. Hardell and Carlsberg (2018).
Wireless Radiation and Promotion of Cancer Growth
Researchers looking at sperm cells, nerve cells and in vivo rodent studies have found that low power radio frequency (microwave) electromagnetic radiation (RF EMR) from wireless devices can alter DNA, promote cancer growth and act as a co-carcinogen. Dr. W Ross Adey (1988 and 1990) and others in the 1980’s were well aware of the non-thermal, non-linear, molecular nature of toxicity for both non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation but also for chemical interactions that cause cellular membrane alterations, leading to cancer and other chronic diseases. Dr. Adey coined the term “biological windows” to highlight specific modulation, frequency and amplitude resonance effects on biological systems. Markov (2005) Research since then has confirmed and enriched our knowledge of the mechanisms and pathways of biological harm, including complex membrane calcium channel effects. Both chemicals, which are ingested, inhaled or absorbed through the skin and non-ionizing radio frequency radiation, which passes through organisms, can broadly affect many organ systems through electrical and molecular pathways. These can thus act separately or synergistically as environmental toxins, broadly affecting human and environmental health.
Lurchi in 2015 found an increase in liver tumors, lung tumors and lymphomas in mice at low to moderate exposure at (0.04 and 0.4 W/kg SAR), and well below exposure limits for the users of mobile phones. The recent NTP study, the new Falcioni study of 2018 and an older study by Chou in 1992 found scientific evidence of carcinogenicity, demonstrating the reproducibility of this effect. There are variable results for some studies, that are felt to be due to stimulation of feedback and repair mechanisms with exposure to radio frequency radiation. Initially, exposure to RFR stimulates DNA repair mechanisms, however, over longer periods of stimulation biochemical systems are overwhelmed, the DNA damage accumulates and the carcinogenic effect becomes evident.
Occupational Exposure to RFR and Cancer
A thorough 2018 review of studies by Peleg et al (2018), looking at occupational exposure to radiofrequency (RF) and hematolymphatic (HL) cancers (leukemia, Hodgkin’s and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, multiple myeloma and plasma cell tumors) consistently revealed a highly elevated risk of cancer in military and electrical workers exposed to RF. The Israeli study looked at studies from Poland, Belgium, as well as Israel. Overall, hematolymphatic cancers were found in 40% of patients with 23% expected. A small study of employees exposed to RF in the Israeli defense industry showed a 60% frequency of hematolymphatic cancers vs 17% expected. Peleg notes, “Overall, the epidemiological studies on excess risk for HL and other cancers together with brain tumors in cellphone users and experimental studies on RFR and carcinogenicity make a coherent case for a cause-effect relationship and classifying RFR exposure as a human carcinogen (IARC group 1).”
Non- Thermal Mechanisms Found
The mechanisms more recently revealed, of how even weak radio frequency radiation can cause harm from long term exposure, are complex and do not involve heat damage. The injury is caused by membrane disruption interactions through calcium channels, reactive oxygen species, melatonin reduction or other direct or indirect mechanisms which promote cellular proliferation, angiogenesis and cancer. These can cause harmful epigenetic changes in DNA and mRNA, as well as alterations of potentially cancer causing stem cells. As noted above, chemical and heavy metal exposures work in similar non-thermal pathways.
Stem Cell Effects from RFR at Levels Far Below Current Safety Standards
Markova(2010) Looked at effects of low power microwaves from mobile phones on human derived stem cells, which are widely dispersed in the body. He found that DNA repair foci in mesenchymal stem were significantly altered at levels 40 times less than current guidelines. He highlighted that mesenchymal stem cells are at higher risk of malignant transformation than differentiated cells. The author concludes,“Because almost all organs and tissues possess stem cells and because stem cells are more active in children, the possible relationship of chronic MW exposure and various types of tumors and leukemia—especially in children—should be investigated.”
Robust Non-Thermal Radio-frequency Scientific Literature Not Considered in Policy
A 2018 research compendium, 5G- Great Risk for EU, US and International Health by Dr. Martin Pall, highlights the threats of current 2G, 3G and 4G technology as well as proposed massive 5G technology rollout. Dr. Pall underscores how the European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR), states that the evidence is inconsistent with regards to harm from wireless technology. In a careful and well referenced review of the SCENIHR scientific policy documents, however, Dr Pall reveals that significant number of robust peer reviewed scientific articles were not considered in their deliberations.
More long term studies are needed to uncover adverse latent effects prior to any 5G deployment. Regarding current wireless communication safety, government agencies need to examine all the current scientific literature before proclaiming that no conclusions can be drawn. Disregarding science does not serve the public interest, especially as industry is developing and promoting a much more extensive worldwide wireless telecommunications system broadening the use of all frequency bands.
National Toxicology Program Study Reveals “Clear Evidence” of Carcinogenicity
The recently released 10 year $25 million United States National Toxicology Program (NTP) study which examined cell phone radiation and cancer, confirmed other epidemiological studies showing an elevation of schwannomas of the heart and gliomas in the brain of mice exposed to radio frequency radiation at non-thermal levels. NTP Study Full Report Feb 2, 2018. This was in addition to an increase in lymphoma and cancer of other organs with whole body exposure to this non-ionizing radiation which passes through the body. Based on this researchers are asking for radio frequency radiation to be upgraded to a classification as a probable (Group 2A) or known (Group 1) carcinogen, See also Scientific Literature on NTP Study on Cancer 2018.
This new research is supported by a similar long term study of effects of cell phone radiation and carcinogenicity in animals from the famed Ramazanni Institute in Italy as well as basic science research and older studies looking at occupational and military exposures.
Dr. Ron Melnick: Critical Comments on NTP Results
The NTP study had had criticism and dismissal of its’ positive results and implications for current FCC safety guidelines. Dr. Ron Melnick, a key scientist in designing the study, published a peer reviewed report in 2019 to address these unfounded criticisms of the design and results of the NTP study. Commentary on the utility of the National Toxicology Program study on cell phone radiofrequency radiation data for assessing human health risks despite unfounded criticisms aimed at minimizing the findings of adverse health effects. He notes, “This study was designed to test the (null) hypothesis that cell phone radiation at non-thermal exposure intensities could not cause adverse health effects, and to provide dose-response data for any detected toxic or carcinogenic effects.” and that the results “clearly demonstrate that the null hypothesis has been disproved.” He concluded that these criticisms were designed to “minimize the utility of the experimental data on RFR for assessing human health risks.” Another important critique by Dr. Melnick is of the ICNIRP response to the NTP study- Comments on ICNIRP by Dr. Ronald Melnick
He lists findings from the report
- Significantly increased incidences and/or trends for gliomas and glial cell hyperplasias in the brain of exposed male rats
- Significantly increased incidences of schwannomas and Schwann cell hyperplasias in the heart of exposed male rats
- Significantly increased DNA damage (strand breaks) in the brains of exposed rats and mice,
- Reduced pup birth weights in exposed pregnant dams
- Induction of cardiomyopathy of the right ventricle in male and female rats
International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC)
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) listed radio frequency radiation from cell phones and wireless devices as a Group 2B Possible Carcinogen in 2011. Many researchers currently believe that this type of non-ionizing radiation that we are increasing and unknowingly exposed to should be classified as a Group 2A or probable carcinogen or even a class 1 or known carcinogen.
Scientists Push IARC to Classify as Group 1 or 2A Carcinogen
Dr. Annie Sasco, International Agency for Research on Cancer
Dr. Annie Sasco, former IARC Unit Chief and Emeritus Director of Research and Epidemiology on Cancer Prevention, discusses her reasoning for elevating the IARC classification at a symposium in 2017 sponsored by Environmental Health Trust. Dr. Annie Sasco explains why non-ionizing wireless radiation should be upgraded to a Group 2A carcinogen.
Dr. Ann Sasco presents her findings on childhood cancer prevention at the Childhood Cancer Conference in the UK 2012. Session 12 : What Positive Steps Can be Taken to Reduce the Risk of Childhood Cancer? Alliance for Prevention and Precaution for Childhood Cancer Control
Dr. Anthony Miller, Former WHO Advisor: Upgrade RF to Group 1 Carcinogen
Dr. Anthony Miller, Professor Emeritus at the University of Toronto Dali Lama School of Public Health, adviser to the World Health Organization and expert on ionizing and non-ionizing radiation feels the listing to be upgraded to a Class 1 Known Carcinogen. Dr. Miller’s research paper, Cancer Epidemiology Update, following the 2011 IARC evaluation of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, published in Environmental Research (Nov 2018), explains the new evidence. In this video he explains his reasoning. Dr. Anthony Miller on IARC Classification of RF EMR
Dr Lennart Hardell and Michael Carlberg
Well known researchers on brain tumors and cell phone use, Dr. Lennart Hardell and Michael Carlberg published a thorough examination of the NTP study results in the October 2018 issue of The International Journal of Oncology. They stated , “We conclude that there is clear evidence that RF radiation is a human carcinogen, causing glioma and vestibular schwannoma (acoustic neuroma). There is some evidence of an increased risk of developing thyroid cancer, and clear evidence that RF radiation is a multi‑site carcinogen. Based on the Preamble to the IARC Monographs, RF radiation should be classified as carcinogenic to humans, Group 1.” Their 2018 article is here- Comments on the US National Toxicology Program technical reports on toxicology and carcinogenesis study in rats exposed to whole-body radiofrequency radiation at 900 MHz and in mice exposed to whole-body radiofrequency radiation at 1,900 MHz ,
Bioinitiative Report Update Supports IARC Classification of RF as Group 1 Known Carcinogen
Dr. Lennart Hardell and Michael Carlberg have reanalyzed the epidemiological studies on brain tumors and RF EMR from cell phone radiation and they also feel it should be a Group 1 Known Carcinogen. His analysis is found in Section 11 of the BioInitiative Report .
A 2018 CDC Report indicates an increase in pediatric cancers from 2001to 2014. They found “cancer was increasing for lymphoma, thyroid, brain, kidney, and liver cancer and was decreasing for melanoma.” CDC 2018 .
Incidence Rates and Trends of Pediatric Cancer — United States, 2001–2014. Abstract
Authors: David Siegel, J. Li, S.J. Henley, R. Wilson, N. Buchanan Lunsford, E. Tai, E.A. Van Dyne
Background: Cancer is one of the leading disease-related causes of death among individuals aged <20 years in the United States. Recent evaluations of national trends of pediatric cancer used data from before 2010, or covered ≤28% of the US population. is study describes incidence rates and trends using the most recent and comprehensive cancer registry data available in the US.
Methods: 2001–2014 data from US Cancer Statistics were used to evaluate cancer incidence rates and trends among individuals aged <20 years. Data were from 48 states and covered 98% of the US population. We assessed trends by calculating average annual percent change (AAPC) using joinpoint regression (maximum of two joinpoints). Rates and trends were strati ed by sex, age, race/ ethnicity, census region, county-based economic status, rural/ urban status, and cancer type.
Results: We identifed 196,200 cases of pediatric cancer during 2001–2014. e overall cancer incidence rate was 173.0 per
1 million; incidence rates were highest for leukemia (45.6), brain tumors (30.8), and lymphoma (26.0). Rates were highest among males, aged 0–4 years, non-Hispanic whites, the Northeast US Census region, the top 25% of counties by economic status, and metropolitan counties. Overall pediatric cancer incidence rate increased (AAPC=0.7, 95% CI, 0.5–0.8) during 2001–2014 and contained no joinpoints. Rates increased across sex, age, race/ethnicity, region, economic status, and rural/urban status. Rates of brain, renal, hepatic, and thyroid cancers increased, and rates of melanoma decreased.
Conclusions: This study documents increased rates of pediatric cancer during 2001–2014. Increased overall rates of brain and hepatic cancer and decreased rates of melanoma are novel ndings using data since 2010. Next steps in addressing changing rates could include investigation of diagnostic and reporting standards, host biologic factors, or environmental exposures. Increasing rates may necessitate changes related to treatment and survivorship care capacity.
Page 108 of From Epidemic Intelligence Service (EIS) Conference sponsored by the CDC, April 16-19, 2018 (page 108) https://www.cdc.gov/eis/downloads/eis-conference-2018-508.pdf#page=120
Published Literature on Cancer and Radiofrequency Radiation
Below is published scientific literature on cancer and wireless radio frequency electromagnetic radiation (RF EMR) from cell towers and other wireless devices, as well as co-carcinogenic effects. Other brain cancer studies, DNA and RNA damage from RF EMR exposure and reproductive studies can be found on our website at:
- Brain Cancer Studies: Cell Phones and Brain Cancer.
- DNA and RNA Research: DNA and RNA effects of RF EMR
- DNA Human Effects: DNA Human Studies
- Sperm and Ovarian Studies: Reproductive Health Effects
- Mechanisms of Action Research: Cellular Mechanisms EMR: Calcium Channels and Cellular Mechanisms Oxidation
- NTP Study on Cell Phones and Cancer 2018 NTP Study Cell Phones and Cancer-PST
Reviews on Cancer and RF EMR
1) Non-ionizing radiation, part 2: radio frequency electromagnetic fields. WHO IARC. Volume 102. 2011. https://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol102/mono102.pdf
- Extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields and cancer: How source of funding affects results. (2019) Carpenter DO. Environmental Research. 2019 Aug 24;178:108688. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31476684
- Commentary on the utility of the National Toxicology Program study on cell phone radiofrequency radiation data for assessing human health risks despite unfounded criticisms aimed at minimizing the findings of adverse health effects. (2019) Melnick RL. Environmental Research. 2019 Jan;168:1-6. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30243215
- Comparing DNA damage induced by mobile telephony and other types of man-made electromagnetic fields. (2019) Dimitri Panagopoulos. Mutation Research/Reviews in Mutation Research. March 2019. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331661949_Comparing_DNA_Damage_Induced_by_Mobile_Telephony_and_Other_Types_of_Man-Made_Electromagnetic_Fields
- The carcinogenic potential of non‐ionizing radiations: The cases of S‐50 Hz MF and 1.8 GHz GSM radiofrequency radiation/ (2019) Soffritti, M. and Giuliani, L. Basic & Clinical Pharmacology & Toxicology. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bcpt.13215
- Health effects associated with exposure to low-frequency electromagnetic fields: Possible association between exposure to low-frequency electromagnetic fields and the long-term risk of childhood leukaemia. (2019) June 21, 2019. French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety. https://www.anses.fr/en/content/health-effects-associated-exposure-low-frequency-electromagnetic-fields
- Comments on the US National Toxicology Program technical reports on toxicology and carcinogenesis study in rats exposed to whole-body radiofrequency radiation at 900 MHz and in mice exposed to whole-body radiofrequency radiation at 1,900 MHz. (2018) Lennart Hardell and Michael Carlberg. International Journal of Oncology. Oct 24, 2018. Pg 111-127. https://www.spandidos-publications.com/10.3892/ijo.2018.4606
- Cancer epidemiology update, following the 2011 IARC evaluation of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (Monograph 102). (2018) Miller AB et al. Environ Res. 2018 Nov;167:673-683. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30196934
- Radio frequency radiation-related cancer: assessing causation in the occupational/military setting. (2018) Peleg M. Environ Res. 2018 May;163:123-133. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29433020
Published Articles on Cancer and RF EMR
- Effect of cell-phone radiofrequency on angiogenesis and cell invasion in human head and neck cancer cells. (2018) Alahmad YM. Head Neck. 2018 May 13. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29756334
- TOXICOLOGY AND CARCINOGENESIS STUDIES IN Hsd:SPRAGUE DAWLEY SD RATS EXPOSED TO WHOLE-BODY RADIO FREQUENCY RADIATION AT A FREQUENCY (900 MHz) AND MODULATIONS (GSM AND CDMA) USED BY CELL PHONES. (2018). National Toxicology Program, National Institute of Health (NIH). March 26-28, 2018. NTP Technical Report- TOXICOLOGY AND CARCINOGENESIS STUDIES OF GSM- AND CDMA-MODULATED CELL PHONE RADIO FREQUENCY RADIATION AT 900 MHz IN Hsd:SPRAGUE DAWLEY SD RATS 2018
- Report of final results regarding brain and heart tumors in Sprague-Dawley rats exposed from prenatal life until natural death to mobile phone radiofrequency field representative of a 1.8 GHz GSM base station environmental emission. (2018) Ramazzani Institute. Falcioni L, et al.Environmental Research. March 7, 2018/ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935118300367?via%3Dihub
- Radio frequency radiation-related cancer: Assessing causation in the occupational/military setting. (2018). Peleg M et al. Environ Research. 2018 May;163:123-133. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29433020 or. https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/10913296696567/Radio%20frequency%20radiation-related%20cancer%3A%20assessing%20causation%20in%20the%20occupational%3Amilitary%20setting.pdf
- Report of Partial findings from the National Toxicology Program Carcinogenesis Studies of Cell Phone Radiofrequency Radiation in Hsd: Sprague Dawley® SD rats (Whole Body Exposure). (2016) BioRxiv. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. http://biorxiv.org/content/early/2016/05/26/055699
- Some Effects of Weak Magnetic Fields on Biological Systems: RF fields can change radical concentrations and cancer cell growth rates. (2016) Barnes F. IEEE Power Electronics Magazine. Volume 3. Issue 1. 2016. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7425396/?arnumber=7425396
- Tumor promotion by exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields below exposure limits for humans. (2015) Lerchi et al. Biochem Biophys Res Commun.2015 Apr 17;459(4):585-90. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25749340 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006291X15003988
- Positive correlation between ELF and RF electromagnetic fields on cancer risk. (2015) Mahdavi M et al. J Paramed Sci 6(3), ISSN 2008-4978. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/281579026_Positive_correlation_between_ELF_and_RFelectromagnetic_fieldon_cancer_risk
- Mobile phone radiation causes brain tumors and should be classified as a probable human carcinogen (2A). (2015) Morgan et al. Int J Oncol 46(5): 1865-1871. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273150433_Mobile_phone_radiation_causes_brain_tumors_and_should_be_classified_as_a_probable_human_carcinogen_2A_Review
- Scientific evidence contradicts findings and assumptions of Canadian Safety Panel 6: microwaves act through voltage-gated calcium channel activation to induce biological impacts at non-thermal levels, supporting a paradigm shift for microwave/lower frequency electromagnetic field action. (2015) Pall M. Rev Environ Health. 2015;30(2):99-116. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25879308
- Membrane potential modulates plasma membrane phospholipid dynamics and K-Ras signaling. (2015) Zhou,Y et al. Science August 21, 2015. 2015 Aug 21;349(6250):873-6. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Membrane+potential+modulates+plasma+membrane+phospholipid+dynamics+and+K-Ras+signaling
- Spin Biochemistry Modulates Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) Production by Radio Frequency Magnetic Fields. (2014) Usselman RJ et al. Plos One. March 28, 2014. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0093065
- Human disease resulting from exposure to electromagnetic fields. (2013) Carpenter DO. Rev Environ Health 2013;28:159-172.gj https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24280284
- Swedish review strengthens grounds for concluding that radiation from cellular and cordless phones is a probable human carcinogen. (2013) Davis DL et al. Pathophysiology 20:123-129. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236690284_Swedish_review_strengthens_grounds_for_concluding_that_radiation_from_cellular_and_cordless_phones_is_a_probable_human_carcinogen
- Use of mobile phones and cordless phones is associated with increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma. (2013) Hardell L et al. Pathophysiology 2013;20(2):85-110. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233974476_Use_of_mobile_phones_and_cordless_phones_is_associated_with_increased_risk_for_glioma_and_acoustic_neuroma
- Cancer induction molecular pathways and HF-EMF irradiation. (2013) Ledoigt G and Belpomme D. Adv Biol Chem 3:177-186. http://www.ehs-mcs.org/fichiers/1368798016_publication_ABC.pdf
- Multifocal Breast Cancer in Young Women with Prolonged Contact between Their Breasts and Their Cellular Phones. (2013) West JG1, Kapoor NS, Liao SY, Chen JW, Bailey L, Nagourney RA. Case Rep Med. 2013;2013:354682 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24151509
- Biointiative Working Group. (2012) David Carpenter and Cindy Sage (eds). 2012 Bioinitiative 2012: A rationale for biologically-based exposure standards for electromagnetic radiation. http://www.bioinitiative.org
- Cellular neoplastic transformation induced by 916 MHz microwave radiation.(2012) Yang L Cell Mol Neurobiol. 2012 Aug;32(6):1039-46. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22395787
- Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. (2011) Baan R et al. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(7):624-6. http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanonc/article/PIIS1470-2045(11)70147-4/fulltext
- Non-ionizing radiation, part 2: radio frequency electromagnetic fields. (2011) WHO IARC. Volume 102. 2011. https://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol102/mono102.pdf
- Long Term Exposure to Microwave Radiation Provokes Cancer Growth: Evidences from Radars and Mobile Communication Systems. (2011) Kyrylenko S et al. Experimental Oncology. March 2011. http://exp-oncology.com.ua/article/1845/long-term-exposure-to-microwave-radiation-provokes-cancer-growth-evidences-from-radars-and-mobile-communication-systems
- International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). IARC Classifies Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields as Possibly Carcinogenic to Humans. (2011) May 2011. See Reviews on Cancer above for studies. http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2011/pdfs/pr208_E.pdf
- Electromagnetic fields and cancer: the cost of doing nothing. (2010) Carpenter DO Rev Environ Health 25:75-80. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20429163
- NON-THERMAL EFFECTS AND MECHANISMS OF INTERACTION BETWEEN ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AND LIVING MATTER. (2010) RAMAZZINI INSTITUTE. Giuliani L and Soffriti M (Eds). J. ONCOL. LIBRARY Volume 5, National Institute for the Study and Control of Cancer and Environmental Diseases “Bernardino Ramazzini” Bologna, Italy 2010, 400 page monograph. https://www.ramazzini.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/03/Non-thermal-effects-and-mechanisms-of-interaction-between-electromagnetic-fields-and-living-matter_2010.pdf
- Epidemiological evidence for a health risk from mobile phone base stations. (2010) Khurana VG et al. J. Occup. Environ. Health 16, 263-267. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20662418
- Microwaves from Mobile Phones Inhibit 53BP1 Focus Formation in Human Stem Cells More Strongly Than in Differentiated Cells: Possible Mechanistic Link to Cancer Risk.(2010) Markovà E et al. Environ Health Perspect. 2010. 118:394-399. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2854769/
- Indication of cocarcinogenic potential of chronic UMTS-modulated radiofrequency exposure in an ethylnitrosourea mouse model. (2010) Tillmann T. Int J Radiat Biol. 2010 Jul;86(7):529-41. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20545575
- Risks of carcinogenesis from electromagnetic radiation and mobile telephony devices. (2010) Yakymenko I and Sidorik E. Exp Oncol 32:729-736. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20693976
- Microwaves from UMTS/GSM mobile phones induce long-lasting inhibition of 53BP1/gamma-H2AX DNA repair foci in human lymphocytes. (2009) Belyaev IY et al. 2009 Feb;30(2):129-41. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18839414
- Long-term exposure to magnetic fields and the risks of Alzheimer’s disease and breast cancer: Further biological research. (2009) Davanipour Z and Sobel E. Pathophysiology. 2009, Vol 16:149-156. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19278839
- Pathophysiology of cell phone radiation: oxidative stress and carcinogenesis with focus on the male reproductive system. (2009) Desai NR, Kesari KK, Agarwal A. Reproduct Biol Endocrinol. 7:114. doi: 10.1186/1477-7827-7-114. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2776019/
- Epidemiological evidence for an association between use of wireless phones and tumor diseases. (2009)Hardell, Carlberg, et al. PathoPhysiology 16(2-3):113-122. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0928468009000091
- Cell phones and brain tumors: a review including the long-term epidemiologic data. (2009) Khurana VG et al. Surg Neurol 72:205-214. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19328536
- Meta-analysis of long-term mobile phone use and the association with brain tumors. (2008) Hardell et al. Int J Oncol 32:1097-1103. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18425337
- Study on potential effects of “902-MHz GSM-type Wireless Communication Signals” on DMBA-induced mammary tumours in Sprague-Dawley rats. (2008) Hruby R et al. Mutation Research 649(1-2):34-44. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17981079
- A new electromagnetic exposure metric: high frequency voltage transients associated with increased cancer incidence in teachers in a California school. (2008) Milham S1, Morgan LL.. Am J Ind Med. 2008 Aug;51(8):579-86. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18512243
- Biomarkers of induced electromagnetic field and cancer. (2007) Behari J and Paulraj R. Indian J Exp Biol 45:77-85. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17249331
- Cell type specific redox status is responsible for diverse electromagnetic field effects. (2007) Simkó M. Curr Med Chem. 2007;14:1141–52. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17456027
- “Biological Windows”: A Tribute to W. Ross Adey. (2005) Marko Markov. The Environmentalist. 25:67-74, 2005. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10669-005-4268-8
- Use of cellular or cordless telephones and the risk for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.(2005) Hardell L. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2005 Sep;78(8):625-32. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16001209
- The Influence of Being Physically Near to a Cell Phone Transmission Mast on the Incidence of Cancer. (2004) Egger H et al. January 2004. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/241473738_The_Influence_of_Being_Physically_Near_to_a_Cell_Phone_Transmission_Mast_on_the_Incidence_of_Cancer
- Mobile telephones and cancer – a review of the epidemiological evidence. (2004) Kundi M et al. J Toxicol Env Health, Part B 7:351-384. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15371240
- Increased Incidence of Cancer Near a Cell Phone Transmitter Station. (2004) Wolf and Wolf. Kaplan Medical Center, Israel. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.527.1036&rep=rep1&type=pdf
- Non-thermal activation of the hsp27/p38MAPK stress pathway by mobile phone radiation in human endothelial cells: molecular mechanism for cancer- and blood-brain barrier-related effects. (2002) Leszczynski D. Differentiation. 2002 May;70(2-3):120-9. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=12076339
- Cancer in radar technicians exposed to radiofrequency/microwave radiation: sentinel episodes. (2000) Richter E. Int J Occup Environ Health. 2000 Jul-Sep;6(3):187-93. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10926722
- The effects of radiofrequency fields on cell proliferation are non-thermal. (1999) Velizarov S et al.Bioelectrochemistry and Bioenergetics. Vol.48, issue 1, Feb 199. Pg 177-180. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0302459898002384
- Epidemiologic evidence relevant to radar (microwave) effects. (1997) Goldsmith JR. Env Health Perspect 105(Suppl 6):1579-1587. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1469943/
- Epidemiological studies of radio-frequency radiation: current status and areas of concern. (1996) Goldsmith JR. Science of the Total Environment. Volume 180, Issue 1,2. February 1996 , Pages 3-8. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0048969795049142
- Cancer morbidity in subjects occupationally exposed to high frequency (radiofrequency and microwave) electromagnetic radiation. (1996) Stanislaw Szmigielski. Science of the Total Environment. Volume 180, Issue 1,2. 2 February 1996 , Pages 9-17. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0048969795049150
- Electromagnetic field interactions with biological systems. (1993) Frey AH F FASEB J. 1993 Feb 1;7(2):272-81. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8440406
- Long-Term Low-Level Microwave Radiation of Rats. (1992) Bioelectromagnetics. 13:469-496. 1992. C.-K. Chou et al. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1482413 https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/60002060833.pdf
- Joint actions of environmental nonionizing electromagnetic fields and chemical pollution in cancer promotion. (1990) Adley WR. Environ Health Perspect 86:297-305. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1567752/
- Cell membranes: The electromagnetic environment and cancer promotion. (1988) Adey WR. Neurochem Res. July 1988, Vol 13:671-677. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00973286
- A Current Literature Report on the Carcinogenic Properties of Ionizing and Nonionizing Radiation. (1978) Dwyer M J and Leeper D B, Department of Health Education and Welfare (DHEW) Publication (NIOSH) 78-134, March 1978. https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/nioshtic-2/00080942.html
- Electromagnetic Fields, Pulsed Radiofrequency Radiation, and Epigenetics: How Wireless Technologies May Affect Childhood Development. Sage C. Child Dev. 2017 May 15https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28504324
- Tumor promotion by exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields below exposure limits for humans. Lerchl A. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2015 Apr 17;459(4):585-90. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25749340
- Cellular neoplastic transformation induced by 916 MHz microwave radiation. Yang L1. Cell Mol Neurobiol. 2012 Aug;32(6):1039-46. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22395787
- Combined Toxic Exposures and Human Health: Biomarkers of Exposure and Effect.(2011) Sillons,I. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2011 Mar; 8(3): 629–647 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3083662/
- Indication of co-carcinogenic potential of chronic UMTS-modulated radiofrequency exposure in an ethylnitrosourea mouse model. Tillmann T. Int J Radiat Biol. 2010 Jul;86(7):529-41. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20545575
Related Articles Oxidation/Antioxidants and Cocarcinogenicity
- Combined Toxic Exposures and Human Health: Biomarkers of Exposure and Effect. (2011) Sillons I, Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2011 Mar; 8(3): 629–647. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3083662/
- Free Radicals, Antioxidants in Disease and Health. (2008) Lien Ai Pham-Huy et al.. Int J Biomed Sci. 2008 Jun; 4(2): 89–96. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3614697/
Related Articles on Mechanisms of Injury Ionizing Radiation
- Radiation interactions with biological systems. (2017) Islam MT. Int J Radiat Biol. 2017 May;93(5):487-493. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28117624
- Effects of Ionizing Radiation on Biological Molecules—Mechanisms of Damage and Emerging Methods of Detection. Antioxid Redox Signal. (2014) Reisz JA et al. 2014 Jul 10; 21(2): 260–292. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4060780/
- Plasma membrane signaling induced by ionizing radiation. (2010) Corre I et al. Mutat Res. 2010 Apr-Jun;704(1-3):61-7. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20117234
- Molecular Mechanisms of Ultraviolet Radiation-Induced DNA Damage and Repair. (2010) Rastogi RP et al. J Nucleic Acids. 2010; 2010: 592980. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3010660/