The Gift of Life
- a wake up call
and inspirational message


Links & contacts
Organic Shopping
Mobile phone dangers


Health risks of mobile phones:
DNA damage, cancer, warning to children

This alarming information has been added to the Cambridge Environmental Page
on Ra in bo w Network Cambridge on 2nd Feb.'05 - updated October '06
    Below on this page you find 6 articles & links: - Spam safe email display on this page -

  1. Use of mobile phones can damage sperm - NEWS from 24 Oct. '06
  3. Health Fears mean Young should not use Mobile Phones by David Adam, The Guardian
  4. Cellular Phones Linked to Cellular DNA Damage (USA Today) with Dr. Mercola's Comment
  5. TOWERS of BABBLE, BAGS OF GOLD: Cells, Lies and the "Wireless Revolution" by James Heddle & Mary Beth Brangan
  6. CHILDREN & MOBILES - a comment by Don Maisch
  7. general links re. mobile phones, emf, rft
  8. Cambridge links


- - - rainbow line - - -

Top of page - end of page

Heavy use of mobile phones can damage sperm
(Daily Express, Great Britain, 24th October '06, by consumer Correspondent Graham Hiscott)

Under the headline: "Superphone that will make life easier" the following news appeared at the end of the article: Read more about "Cell Phones May Affect Male Fertility" at

- - - rainbow line - - -

Top of page - end of page

By Amy Worthington ( e-mail: )     posted 24 Feb. '05

Some people appear to have an almost pathological emotional attachment to their cell phones and there is a fascinating suggestion that cell radiation pulses might actually be addictive to the human brain.. We can't save those who would rather die than switch. But ethics compelled us to ensure that all reasonable people have access to the basic scientific facts.

Your cell phone is a microwave transmitter and it should bear a cancer warning! Microwave energy oscillates at millions to billions of cycles per second. The Journal of Cellular Biochemistry reports that these frequencies cause cancer and other diseases by interfering with cellular DNA and its repairmechanisms. Microwave promotes rapid cell aging. Italian scientists have recently demonstrated that cell phone radiation makes cancerous cells grow aggressively. Cordless phones marked 900 megahertz or 2.4 gigahertz emit the same dangerous microwave radiation as cell phones.

The connection between microwave exposure and cancer has been documented for years. During the Cold War, the Soviets irradiated the U.S. Embassy in Moscow , Russia , with low level, twin-beam microwave radiation. Two successive ambassadors developed leukemia. Other staffers also developed cancer, or their blood showed DNA damage, which precedes cancer.

Research by University of Washington professor Dr. Henry Lai shows brain cells are clearly damaged by microwave levels far below the U.S. government's "safety" guidelines. Dr. Lai notes that even tiny doses of radio frequency can cumulate over time and lead to harmful effects. He warns that public exposure to ! radiation from wireless transmitters "should be limited toĉminimal."

Motorola advises consumers to avoid pointing a cellular antenna toward exposed parts of the body. But independent tests show that cell phones can also leak huge amounts of radiation from the keypad and mouthpiece. This radiation deeply penetrates brain, ear and eye tissues, which are especially susceptible to microwave damage. Belt clip cases allow cell phones to deliver radiation to the liver or kidney areas when a wired, hands-free earpiece is used.

Recent studies confirm that cell and cordless phone microwave can:

In 1993, the telecom industry committed $25 million dollars for a series of research projects designed to prove that cell phones are safe. The studies proved just the opposite! They proved that federal microwave exposure standards are dangerously inadequate. Cell damage and tumors can be easily induced in the lab at about one third of the FCC's exposure guidelines.

The telecom boys panicked. They and their lackey politicians and federal regulators decided the only lucrative thing to do was to LIE and DENY. Despite damning evidence, the FDAstill prevaricates: "There is no reason to conclude that there are health risks posed by cell phones to consumers." Meantime, the telecom industry has been pressing to INCREASE BY MORE THAN 10 TIMES the allowable human exposure to cell phone radiation!

Luckily, Dr. George Carlo headed up the industry's study project. He presents the shocking facts in his book, Cell Phones: Invisible Hazards in the Wireless Age: An Insider's Alarming Discoveries About Cancer and Genetic Damage (Carroll and Graf, 2001). A summary of Dr. Carlo's book is this: Cell phones are hot, adequate protective regulations are naught, and Americans are being "fried" so that the deceitful telecom industry can rake it in! It's dirty business as usual, and the longer the industry can con the public, the more billions it collects.

On June 16, 2002 , CBS aired a Sixty Minutes segment which confirmed the telecom industry is about as grungy as it gets. CBS producers accused major phone service providers of cheating, scamming, forging signatures, switching phone service without permission and lying about charges. The attorney general of Connecticut stated that despite millions of dollars in fines each year, these companies remain incorrigible. Should we be trusting this industry with our brain tissues and our very lives?

Microwave to the head is extremely hazardous to children. Parents in some European nations are now warned to keep children away from cell phones. A University of Utah researcher found the younger the child, the more radiation is absorbed by the brain. Spanish researchers have shown that cell phones can alter electrical activity of a child's brain for hours, causing drastic mood changes and possible behavior and learning disabilities. Scientists fear that cell phone radiation could damage human embryos. Pregnant women are advised to be wary.

A cell phone must greatly increase its field strength to maintain communications within the metallic cage of an auto. Thus, the effect of microwave radiation inside a vehicle is especially intense. Volkswagen of Europe has warned that cell phone usage inside a car can be "injurious to health due to the extremely high electromagnetic ! fields generated."

Insurance studies in England showed that an average driver talking on a cell is actually more impaired in function and reaction time than a drunk. Finland 's Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority reports that one hour of exposure to mobile phone radiation can cause human cells to shrink. Researchers believe this is due to increased protein activity, an indicator of cell damage. What an unstable world needs now is a global population afflicted with incredible shrinking brains!

Brain cancer rates in USA have increased by 25% since 1975. In 2001, 185,000 Americans were diagnosed with some form of brain cancer. A grade four brain tumor can grow from the size of a grape to tennis ball size in just 4 months. Brain tumors are almost always fatal and most people die within 6-12 months after diagnosis. On April 7, 2002 , Sixty Minutes aired a fascinating report on brain cancer, explaining that scientists are unsure why incidence of the disease is growing so exponentially.

Ironically, the segment was followed by a Sprint ad, which advised parents that the best way to keep track of teenagers is to connect them to a cell phone. While researchers say that radical damage to the brain can occur within the first few minutes of conversation, telecom ads encourage customers to spend many hours on the phone each month. Those blazing, full-page cell phone ads in newspapers and magazines must be the reason cell phone dangers are almost never discussed in the mainstream media.

An excellent resource tool is Robert Kane's book Cellular Telephone Russian Roulette (Vantage Press, 2001). As a telecommunications expert, Kane presents an impressive collection of studies showing that both government agencies and cell phone manufacturers KNEW YEARS AGO that cell phone radiation at present exposure levels is dangerous to human health. He notes that cell! phones would be rendered useless if their RF emissions were reduced to safe levels.

Reports of illness from heavy cell phone usage and from living or working close to powerful RF transmitters are synchronous with numerous cancer-related lawsuits now being filed against the cell phone industry. The insurance industry sees big trouble ahead. Underwriters for Lloyd's of London refuse to insure phone manufacturers against damage to users' health. Cell phones are today what tobacco was 40 years ago.

Excellent web sites offering up-to-date scientific data on microwave and other radiation issues are:

E-mail and ask for free updates on important radiation issues and studies.
Dr. Lai's e-mail is

Powerful microwave energy directed at homes, offices and schools can flow right through windows and walls.

- - - rainbow line - - -

Top of page - end of page

Expert spells it out: Health Fears mean Young should not use Mobile Phones

David Adam, science correspondent, Wednesday January 12, 2005 - Guardian, UK

Masts on top of the Cambridge Post Office
   seen from the central bus station
Masts on roof tops in the city:
difficult to spot from the street.

Masts on top of the Cambridge Post Office
seen from the central bus station
March 2005

Children should not use mobile phones because of continuing concerns over the possible health risks, a leading expert warned yesterday. Sir William Stewart of the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) urged parents not to give the phones to children under the age of eight, and said those between eight and 14 should use them only when absolutely necessary.

"I don't think we can put our hands on our hearts and say mobile phones are totally safe," Prof Stewart said. Scientists have yet to find proof that the electromagnetic radiation emitted by mobile phones and their transmitter masts could be dangerous, but Prof Stewart said new evidence suggested there might be possible health implications.

He said there was enough uncertainty about mobile phones to adopt a "precautionary approach" - particularly when it comes to children. If electromagnetic radiation poses a risk it will affect children more than adults because their skulls are thinner and their brains are still developing.

"If you have a teenager and you feel they can benefit in terms of security by having a mobile phone, it is a personal choice, it is a personal decision, although mobile phones have not always helped on that basis," Prof Stewart said. "But if mobile phones are available to three- to eight-year-olds I can't believe for a moment that can be justified.


"What about kids from eight to 14 years? I believe that is a judgment that parents have to make but they have to have the evidence available to them. My belief is that they should take a precautionary approach and that they should use them for as short a time as possible and they should use text messaging as much as possible."

A quarter of seven- to 10 year-olds now own a mobile phone, according to latest figures, double the levels in 2001. Following Prof Stewart's report, a company that launched the UK's first mobile phone specifically designed for children announced it was suspending sales. Communic8 launched the MyMo five months ago, saying it was designed to help four- to eight-year-olds contact their parents in an emergency.

The company's marketing director, Adam Stephenson, said: "We launched the product specifically because we thought it could address security concerns of parents. We absolutely do not want to damage children's health. We have decided to suspend sales of the MyMo pending a chance to look at the Stewart report in detail."

Prof Stewart, a former chief scientific adviser to the government, first warned of the possible risks to children using mobile phones in a report in 2000, which found no substantiated evidence that emissions from handsets were harmful.

Yesterday's report came to a similar conclusion: "There is no hard evidence at present that the health to the public, in general, is being affected adversely by the use of mobile phone technologies."

However, Prof Stewart admitted that new research carried out across Europe meant he was now "more concerned" about health risks than five years ago.


Last year, a study of 750 people by the Karolinska Institute in Sweden reported that using a mobile phone for 10 years or more could quadruple the risk of acoustic neuroma, a rare tumour on the nerve between the ear and the brain. Separate research in Germany linked emissions from mobile phone base stations to DNA damage, and possibly cancer.

A Dutch study in 2003 suggested that the new more powerful 3G phones can affect brain function, though Prof Stewart cautioned that the work has some limitations and needs to be repeated.

"All of these studies have yet to be replicated and are of varying quality, but we can't dismiss them out of hand," he said. "This is still a relatively new area and the divergent views show how more research is needed."

Many other research projects have failed to establish any risk to health, and scientists have yet to identify a mechanism by which electromagnetic radiation could damage biological systems and so affect health. The NRPB report warned that, because mobile phone use is a relatively recent phenomenon, no reliable long term epidemiological analysis of the risks in large enough populations is available.

A World Health Organisation project called Interphone that has followed 1,000 people for the last decade will report its findings in the next few months. A separate long term international study to assess the health of 250,000 mobile phone users will start this year, but is not expected to release any results until 2020.

Yesterday's report called for a review of the planning process that places mobile phone masts.

"The planning process on base stations needs to be revisited and updated," Prof Stewart said, adding that although exposure from masts is much lower than from phones, he believed they should not be sited near schools.

He also called for clearer information to be made available about how much energy from different types of mobile phones is absorbed by the body - known as specific energy absorption rate.

The Mobile Operators Association, representing the five UK mobile phone networks, said: "Parents need to weigh up the possibility of future unknown health effects against the tangible security benefits provided by this technology. All mobile phones sold in the UK comply with international health and safety exposure guidelines set by independent scientific experts."

The Department of Health said: "The new NRPB report concludes that there is no hard evidence at present that the health of the public is being affected by the use of mobile phone technologies. The health advice remains the same. We continue to advise a precautionary approach to mobile phone use in under-16s."


- - - rainbow line - - -

Top of page - end of page

Who likes to live next to a radio mast?
     Photo from Chalmers Road 
towards Perne Road / The Paddox
Who likes to live next to a radio mast?
Over 150 masts in Cambridge alone transmit signals
to and from mobile phones 24 hours/day.
Photo from Chalmers Road, towards Perne Road / The Paddox
Cambridge, February 2005

Cellular Phones Linked to Cellular DNA Damage

Over 1.5 billion people around the world use a cellular phone; however, chances are most of these users are unaware of the damage they may be doing to their bodies. According to a four-year research project focused on studying the effect of radiation on human and animal cells, researchers found that the radio waves emitted from a cellular phone may harm body cells and damage DNA in laboratory conditions.

Although the study did not prove that mobile phones are a risk to one's health, it did indicate that cells exposed to electromagnetic fields, similar to those of mobile phones, showed a significant increase in single and double-strand DNA breaks. This damage could be permanent, not to mention that remaining damage could set the stage for future degeneration of cells. Additional research could take another four or five years. In the meantime, researchers recommend against using a mobile phone when a fixed line phone is available, as well as using a headset connected to a cell phone whenever possible.

USA Today, December 21, 2004

Dr. Mercola's Comment: You may recall a study I posted on the risks of using cellular phones for more than a decade, specifically, growing acoustic neuromas -- benign tumors on the auditory nerve -- near the ear that is used most often. It is due to studies like these (and the one above) that the use of cellular phones and the issue of electromagnetic fields (EMF) has become such a controversial topic. According to the World Health Organization, some harmful effects EMFs can have on your body include: Headache Fatigue Stress Sleep disturbances Skin symptoms like prickling, burning sensations and rashes Muscle pains and aches.

While I once discouraged the use of cell phones because of these EMF concerns, new technological innovations, such as the headset, have all but eliminated my worries. You see, I am in no way opposed to cell phones. In fact, I have one myself. However, it is important to understand that cell phones have the potential to cause your great harm and as such you should use them as little as possible. Fortunately, the radiation decreases quite dramatically (exponentially) the further the phone is from your body.

When you use a headset, make sure the ENTIRE PHONE is away from your body, as wearing the phone on your belt will cause the radiation to go into your abdomen. While radiating your abdominal organs is far safer than radiating your brain, ideally they should both be spared the potential damage.

Also, it is incredibly dangerous to use a cell phone while driving, as it will increase your chances of getting into a car accident by up to 400 percent -- if you are young and healthy this may be your highest risk of death. Even though your eyes may be on the road while you are on the phone, your full concentration level isn't there, so be safe and don't use cell phones while you're driving!


- - - rainbow line - - -

Top of page - end of page FROM:

Cells, Lies and the "Wireless Revolution"
by James Heddle & Mary Beth Brangan

"I have no doubt in my mind that, at the present time, the greatest polluting element in the earth's environment... more serious even than global climate change and chemical pollution... is the proliferation of electromagnetic fields." Robert O. Becker, M.D.


From 1953 to 1976 the Russians irradiated the U.S. embassy in Moscow with a steady 24 hour-a-day bombardment of radio frequency radiation. The embassy staff members experienced loss of ability to think, to concentrate and to sleep. The American ambassador came down with leukemia and had to be replaced. Then the second ambassador came down with leukemia and also had to be replaced. Staff blood samples sent back home for analysis showed DNA damage and a loss of ability to repair it. Staff dysfunctions continued.

The Russians knew what they were doing. They had reproduced in the embassy staff the same symptoms they had previously identified under experimental conditions as "Radio Frequency Sickness Syndrome." They had proven that radio frequency radiation - RFR - can be used as a weapon against either a specific target group or against the general population.

The irony is, this same technology is now being touted as an aid to public safety.


The electromagnetic spectrum stretches from so-called "ionizing" forms of radiation like x-rays, gamma rays and other nuclear radiation, down through visible light to the so-called "non-ionizing" frequencies now associated with TV, microwave communication technologies, cell phones, radar, AM & FM radio and electric power transmission lines.

Research on the biological and human health effects of non-ionizing frequencies began in the second world war with the introduction of radar. Studies of military personnel showed evidence of affects on blood count, mutation, cell reproduction, the occurrence of cataracts in the eyes, headaches, fatigue and increase in the occurrence of some cancers.

But there was a war going on. RFR exposure was seen as just another risk of war and few details of the research results reached the general public. The "safety" standards developed for military personnel were based on the so-called "thermal" effects of RFR - the heating of living tissue in the same way a microwave oven cooks food. Current U.S. standards of "safe" RFR exposure for the general public are still based on this "thermal effects" level.

However recent research indicates serious biological and human health effects at very low, "non-thermal" exposures. The now documented bio-effects of low level RFR exposure include: infertility, memory loss, childhood leukemia, adult leukemia, lowered reaction time, DNA damage, immune system dysfunction, weakened blood-brain barrier and sleeplessness.

Furthermore, the work of researchers like Dr. Henry Lai, Dr. Ross Adey and Dr. Jerry Phillips show that such effects as DNA strand breaks are produced not only by short-term exposure at high intensity, but also by long-term, chronic exposure to low intensities - like that increasingly experienced by growing numbers of people from cell phone towers and microwave communication facilities.


For millions of years, life evolved on earth where the natural background level of radio frequency radiation has been very low. Then starting only a hundred years ago, the explosion in wireless technologies like radio, TV radar and microwave has boosted our everyday RFR exposure levels by at least ten thousand times.

Our bodies - and each of the cells within them - are like antennas: exquisitely sensitive receivers AND transmitters of electro-magnetic radiation. Now, they must function in a new electro-magnetic environment that already has ten thousand times more RFR than the one in which they - and we - evolved. And today, a new wireless revolution is in progress, with the number of cell phones, communication satellites, microwave antennas and cell phone towers multiplying daily. That means even more RFR exposure for all of us.


In order to grasp the truly staggering implications of this burgeoning wireless industry "build-out" you have to understand what the "cell" in cell phone means. Each cell phone tower emits its signal in "lobes" - a circular "flower petal" pattern with a limited radius spreading 360 degrees around the tower. This circle of radiation around the tower is called a "cell." If you're in a cell, your phone gets good reception. If you're not, it doesn't.

In order to provide "total coverage" for cell phone users, antenna towers must be positioned throughout the landscape so that their "cells" essentially overlap - like a tabletop covered with plates. Cellular One's slogan - "wherever you go, there we are" - takes on ominous overtones when you realize that no community - rich or poor, ghetto or gated - will be free of cell towers, which are now going up in California almost as fast as old growth redwoods are coming down.

Add to this the knowledge that more than 2000 communications satellites are raining down a constant shower of radiation on our heads round the clock. Plus military projects like ELF, HAARP and PAVE-PAWS - designed to control weather patterns, send longwaves through the earth to nuclear-armed submarines at sea, and even influence the physical, emotional and mental states of entire target populations - and you begin to get a sobering picture of the huge and escalating amount of electromagnetic pollution with which we are deluging ourselves, our children and the entire biosphere.

Do we know for sure what the effects have been, are, or will be? We do not. But, despite ongoing, mostly successful efforts by industry, government and military to confuse, distort, spin and suppress emerging research data, scientific studies from brave, independent, honest investigators like Drs. Robert Becker, Lai, Adey and Phillips continue to raise red flags of danger. New Zealand researcher Dr. Neal Cherry's recent world survey of recent research studies documents far more than enough evidence to convince any reasonable, responsible person that a "precautionary approach" is indicated. More than enough evidence to support an international call for halting the lemming-like rush over the cliff of the "wireless revolution" until we know for sure what we're doing to ourselves - not to mention all the planet's life forms.

Is it "The Economy, Stupid?" Or the Stupid Economy?

Investment in the telecommunications industry has increased from $20 billion in 1996 to $475 billion in 2000 - an increase of 2,200%. Big money. Money that can buy politicians and legislation favorable to industry - like the industry-crafted Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996, which actually attempts to forbid local regulation of cell tower placement on the basis of human health or environmental concerns!

Big money that allows the industry giants like Motorola to spin the scientific research to confuse or misinform the public and to discredit, defund and ruin the careers of scientists whose research shows "negative effects." Big money that enables the industry to come into local communities bearing gifts to support legitimate community needs - like new fire engines, schools and health clinics.

Big influences that can deliberately misinform and confuse good, beloved people into making unfortunate decisions with nothing but the highest intentions for the welfare of their community at heart.

Our experiences in researching and producing our new independent investigative documentary, PUBLIC EXPOSURE: DNA, Democracy and the 'Wireless Revolution' makes us very troubled about the plan to add new antennas to the existing ones already on the two towers at our local firehouse. Right next to the village playground. Right over the site for a projected local health clinic!

It makes us dubious of the Marin Emergency Radio Authority's plan to site 17 new transmission towers at locations around Marin county - which already has the highest rates of breast and prostate cancer in the country - all in the name of "public safety!" It makes us cringe when ill-informed, but influential opinion-makers dismiss the growing fact-based popular resistance to the wireless buildout as, "public hysteria."

And - given the facts documented Henry Lai that RFR like that from cell towers causes DNA damage, and by O. Ghandi, et al, that the radiation from a cell phone penetrates further into a child's small, growing head even more than into our own adult brains - it makes us alarmed at the fact that gullible, uninformed people are buying cellphones worldwide at the rate of 25 thousand a day and succumbing to PR campaigns like the one that shows a picture of a crib and bears the legend: "No Member of the Family Should Be Without One..."

Award-winning Bay Area documentary producers James Heddle and Mary Beth Brangan
are co-founders of E.O.N, the Ecological Options Network. (415) 868-1900 (US)

For More Information, Contact : The Council on Wireless Technology Impacts:

- - - rainbow line - - -

Top of page - end of page Subject: [emfacts] (Message # 921) The Telcos and "The Banality of Evil"
Reply-To: - Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005


Reading how the Telcos are not in the least taking note of the continuing calls to cease flogging their wares to children (Message# 919) because of their corporate imperative reminds me of somewhat of Edward S Herman's comments on normalization in his landmark essay, "The Banality of Evil".

"Doing terrible things in an organized and systematic way rests on 'normalization'," wrote Herman. "There is usually a division of labour in doing and rationalizing the unthinkable, with the direct brutalizing and killing done by one set of individuals . . . others working on improving technology (a better crematory gas, a longer burning and more adhesive napalm, bomb fragments that penetrate flesh in hard-to-trace patterns). It is the function of the experts, and the mainstream media, to normalize the unthinkable for the general public."

I will be accused of overstating the case with such a comparison but think of the consequences for future society if the warnings about children's use of cell phones prove to be true, considering that 70%-90% of children in the Western world now use a mobile.

The telcos have normalized the public to accepting cell phones by infiltrating expert decision making bodies, such as Motorola has done in Australia and the US. They employ International PR firms to spin science and mount massive advertising campaigns and web sites, such as , to convince parents and children that cell phones are an indispensable lifestyle and safety item.

The Telcos have been extremely successful in normalizing the public to cell phones and they are here to stay, whether we like it or not. What they hope now is that the 'bad news' health hazard stories in the media will be quickly forgotten and things will get back to business as usual.

Now that is what I would call evil.

Don Maisch - FROM:

- - - rainbow line - - -

Top of page - end of page


General links re. mobile phones, emf, rft, TETRA masts etc

- - - rainbow line - - -

Top of page

Cambridge Links

- - - rainbow line - - -

[ this page is ]

top of page | contact Ralph on

Selected links on R a i n b o w Network Cambridge:
Cambridge Environmental Page | Special Events around Cambridge | World Peace Pages Cambridge | Healing and Health Page Cambridge | Spiritual Web Page Cambridge | ABOUT the R a i n b o w Network

View Stats Rainbow Network Cambridge - - View Stats Environmental Page Cambridge