on the health effects of manmade electromagnetic frequencies

Cell Phone/Microwave studies, information (includes cordless phones, all wireless)

“Exposure to electromagnetic radiation from wireless technology is causing human health problems all over the world.”

“One quarter of the people in the world are now exposing themselves to microwaes from hand-held mobile phones.” The research team in Lundt University, Sweden, led by Leif Salford, referred to this as “the largest human biologic experiment ever”. They point out that soon, microwaves will be emitted by an abundance of other appliances in the ‘cordless’ office and in the home.

As noted by Dr. Henry Lai of the University of Washington , one of the world’s leading experts on the biological effects of RFR: “In the past 30-35 years there have been somewhere between 2,000 to 3,000 scientific studies done on the biological effects of RFR. Of these studies only approximately 230 have specifically involved cellular phones and their antennae, given the relatively recent widespread adoption of this technology on a global scale. Of these in excess of 70% of the studies funded independently of the cellular phone industry identify biological effects of RFR at the low power levels typical of cell phones and cellular base station antennae.”

Dr. Lai’s research, confirmed by other researchers, has shown that ELF as well as RF/MW exposures cause a significant increase in the amount of DNA breakage in rat brain cells. (Lai H and Singh NP 1995. Acute low intensity microwave exposure increases DNA single-strand breaks in rat brain cells. Bioelectromagnetics 16. Lai H and Singh NP 1996. Single-and double-strand DNA breaks in rat brain cells after acute exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation. International Journal of Radiation Biology 69. ] Lai H and Singh NP 1997. Acute exposure to a 60 Hz magnetic field increases DNA strand breaks in rat brain cells. Bioelectromagnetics 18.)

” Most cells have a considerable ability to repair DNA strand breaks; however, some cells only have a limited ability to handle this, such as brain and nerve cells which therefore could accumulate DNA breaks. Cumulative DNA breaks may affect cell function and may be the cause of slow onset diseases such as cancer. One of the popular hypothesis for cancer development is that DNA damaging agents induce mutations in DNA leading to expression of certain genes and suppression of other genes resulting in uncontrolled cell growth. Thus, damage to cellular DNA or lack of its repair could be an initial event in developing a tumor. However, when too much DNA damage is accumulated over time, the cell will die. Cumulative damage in DNA in cells also has been shown during aging. Particularly, cumulative DNA damage in nerve cells of the brain has been associated with neurodegenerative diseases, such as Alzheimer’s, Huntington’s and Parkinson’s diseases.” (“NEUROLOGICAL EFFECTS OF RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION”, presented at the Mobile Phones and Health Symposium, October 25-28, 1998, University of Vienna, Austria)

The National Cancer Institute in the U.S. did a study of people in industries that exposed their workers to microwaves. They found that in seven industries in the Eastern U.S. there has been a tenfold increase in brain tumors among employees who have worked there for twenty years.

Alasdair Phillips of PowerWatch:

“We now receive frequent calls from regular mobile-phone users reporting headaches, loss of concentration, skin tingling or burning or twitching, eye “tics”, very poor short-term memory, buzzing in their head at night, and other less common effects. Headaches often come first and/or skin effects. Then concentration and short-term memory tends to deteriorate. At first it can be missing the turning off a motorway that you intended to take. Then it is forgetting appointments. It usually firstly affects learning or remembering NEW facts, similar to early signs of dementia. Things you learnt long ago are still usually there, but new things just don’t seem to go in to your memory any more. Users also report excessive tiredness. Many reports are from engineers who used their phone extensively and were very skeptical of EMF adverse health effects until they started to experience them.

… Unlike the earlier analogue phones , the digital—ones emit a series of short pulses at a basic repetition rate of 217Hz. Pulsed microwaves have been shown to be more biologically active than continuous radiation of the same frequency and power level.

… up to 80% of the transmitted power can be absorbed by the user’s head , which means that their brain cells are being “hit” by these radiation pulses two hundred and seventeen times every second. In addition, GSM digital phones and the new DECT cordless phones also both put high levels (several microTesla) of low frequency magnetic fields into the user’s head. These may be more responsible for the dementia (memory) effects than the pulsed microwaves.

… Low frequencies (generated by the pulsed nature of GSM cell-phone signals – 217, 32 & 2 Hz) have been previously shown to lower lymphocytes ability to “mark” cancer cells and to depress the ability of other lymphocytes to destroy the ‘marked’ aberrant cells. Low level microwaves have also been shown to alter both the immune response and EEG activity in rabbits.

… Microwaves at only 1 mW/cm2 (one-tenth of the NRPB Guidance level) have been shown to affect cAMP-independent kinase activity, and calcium ion (Ca2+) efflux from chick cerebral hemispheres. Continuous digital GSM phone operation near fertilised chicken eggs kill most of the embryos.

Most environmental cancers in adults take longer than ten years from initiation to detection. Asbestos has been strictly controlled since 1970, and the use of most dangerous types banned. Despite this, deaths from mesothelioma (an asbestos induced cancer of the pleura/lungs) are rising consistently and the U.K. death rate is not expected to peak until about 2020. The time between the first exposure and death is now accepted as often being between 20 and 50 years”.

[end Phillips’ quote]

“If there are cancer connections with the use of mobile phones, they are most likely to be expressed in adult leukaemias which typically take between 10 and 30 years to appear and be diagnosed.” Alasdair Philips, Director, UK Powerwatch EMC Engineer and EMF-bioeffects researcher.

” The hypersensitivity of the alive human organism to ultraweak microwave radiation is amply borne out by the ways in which this kind of radiation has been found to affect a wide variety of brain functions – such as electrical activity (EEG), electrochemistry and the permeability of the blood/brain barrier – and to degrade the immune system. Although the precise way in which these influences actually provoke adverse health reactions is at present unclear, there is, as already noted, an undeniable consistency between some of these non-thermal influences and the nature of many of the health problems reported, such as headache, sleep disruption, impairment of short term memory, and, more seriously, significant increases in the frequency of seizures in some epileptic children when exposed to Base-station radiation, and of brain tumours amongst users of mobile phones.

Thus, for example, the reports of headache are consistent with the fact that microwaves are known to non-thermally affect the dopamine-opiate system of the brain and to increase the permeability of the blood-brain barrier, since both of these have been medically connected with headache. The reports of sleep disruption, on the other hand, are consistent with the effect of GSM radiation on rapid eye movement (REM) sleep (see fourth reference of ) and on melatonin levels – the latter being found also epidemiologically, in the case of RF exposure – whilst memory impairment is consistent with the finding that microwave radiation targets the hippocampus. Furthermore, since there is no reason to suppose that the seizure inducing ability of a flashing visible light does not extend to (invisible) microwave radiation (which can access the brain directly through the skull) flashing at a similarly low frequency, together with the fact that exposure to this kind of radiation is known to induce epileptic activity in certain animals, reports of increased seizure activity in some children that already suffer from epilepsy are perhaps not surprising. Finally, the statistically significant increase (by a factor of between 2 and 3) amongst users of mobile phones in the incidence of a rather rare kind of tumour (epithelial neuroma) in the periphery of the brain (where the radiation has the greatest access), the laterality of which correlates with cellphone use, which has been found in a nationwide epidemiological study in the USA as part of the WTR Programme, is consistent both with the genotoxicity of low intensity microwave radiation, as indicated by the increased number of DNA strand breaks and the formation of chromosome aberrations and micronuclei in human blood (the latter being corroborated in the case of GSM radiation by the WTR Programme), and with the promotional effect of GSM radiation in the case of transgenic mice that had been genetically engineered to have a predisposition to develop cancer.” (“The Existing Microwave Safety Guidelines are Inadequate” by Dr Gerard Hyland, University of Warwick , International Institute of Biophysics, Coventry , UK )

” When the cell phone signal is held next to the brain there are changes in the brainwaves in 70% of people. This test was done at a level of about 2 microwatts per sq. cm., which is only a fraction of the actual exposure experienced from the cell phone. It is the level which is experienced at a cell phone site. In this, as in most aspects, people are not all the same. Some are more electro-sensitive. People who sleep with a cell phone by the bed have poor REM sleep, leading to impaired learning and memory. This is related to melatonin reduction.” ( “The Electromagnetic Radiation Health Threat – Part I”, Interview with Dr. Neil Cherry, 8/5/97)

“Startled by billion a year in extra claims among cellphone-wielding drivers, North American insurers…found simply juggling ‘cell phones is not causing a 600% increase in accidents over other drivers busy shaving, applying makeup, tuning radios— pouring coffee, retrieving dropped cigarettes, talking and gesturing to passengers—

Instead of just another dangerous distraction, tests conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy found that using a cell phone severely impairs memory and reaction times. “Hands-free” mobile-speaker phones cause even more crashes because they typically emit 10-times more brainwave interference than handheld units.

… University of Toronto investigators report that the heightened probability of cracking up your car persists for up to 15-minutes after completing a call. That’s comparable to the risk of crashing while driving dead drunk exclaims Dr. Chris Runball, chairman of the B.C. Medical Association’s emergency medical services committee.

… A study by Dr. Peter Franch found unequivocally that “cells are permanently damaged by cellular phone frequencies.” This cellular damage, Franch [sic] noted, is maximized at low dosage – and “inherited unchanged, from generation to generation.”

Attempting to explain a 25% increase in asthma and a 5% increase in asthma-related death rates throughout rapidly “mobilizing” metropolitan Sydney, Franch [sic] found that the production of histamine, which triggers bronchial spasms, is nearly doubled after exposure to mobile phone transmissions. Cellphones also reduce the effectiveness of anti-asthmatic drugs, and retard recovery from illness. (“More Grave Cell Phone Dangers Revealed”, Will Thomas, 2-28-5)

The British medical journal The Lancet reported a study that radiation from cell phones causes an increase in blood pressure and directly alters cell function in the human body.

The UK’s National Radiological Protection Board confirms significant absorption of microwave energy in the eyes and their sockets, brain, nose, tongue and surrounding muscles.

Salford et al (1994) showed leakage through the blood-brain barrier. …At least ten other scientific papers cited in his reference list also show blood-brain barrier effects of RFR.

Salford’s continuing research has now shown brain cell destruction of up to two percent. Some of the damaged rats were only exposed to 0.1 watt of microwave transmission, much less than the peak 0.6 watt microwave output of a typical cellphone.

Many animal studies have shown biological effects. For instance, observation of white stork nesting sites have shown that microwaves are interfering with their reproduction. (“The White Stork Ciconia” by Alfonso Balmori Vallodolid, Spain is published in Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine, 24: 109-119, 2005.)

Significant repeatable changes in the behavior of advanced mammals (cats and monkeys) have been demonstrated to be induced by oscillating EMFs ( Adey WR, 1979. “Neurophysiologic effects of radiofrequency and microwave radiation.” Bulletin New York Academy of Medicine 55

Animal studies are of great importance as biological effects cannot be put down to psychological effects.

“An invaluable indicator of the potential noxiousness of the pulsed microwave fields emitted by Base-stations is the increasing number of reports – some published, some as yet anecdotal – of adverse effects on the health and well-being of various animal species, specifically cattle, dogs, birds and bees. In the case of the affected cattle reported in one particular study, the cattle (which were found to line up, all facing away from the mast) displayed a variety of problems, including severely reduced milk yields, emaciation, spontaneous abortions, and still births. Especially relevant are the following facts: (i) the condition of the cattle was found to improve dramatically when they were removed to pastures well away from the mast, only to deteriorate again once they were brought back, (ii) the adverse effects appeared only after GSM microwave antennae had been erected on a tower that had formerly been used to transmit only (analogue) TV and radio signals, associated with which there had, in this case, been no evident health problems. It should be noted that this is not an isolated occurrence, similar problems with cattle being reported from elsewhere. In the case of domestic canine pets, there are several instances of their the immune systems being adversely affected, again in a reversible way. Finally, there are reports of declines in bird and bee populations following the commissioning of new Base-station masts.

Given that animals are often more highly electrosensitive than are humans, the serious nature of the health problems they have manifested over such a relatively short period of time could well portend a correspondingly serious noxiousness in the case of long-term exposure of humans, and constitute a valuable early-warning system, similar to the ‘canary down the mine’!” (“The Existing Microwave Safety Guidelines are Inadequate”, Dr Gerard Hyland, University of Warwick , International Institute of Biophysics, Coventry , England )

Earlier studies look at significantly smaller groups of cell phone users and/or users who have used their phones for significantly shorter periods of time in comparison to the Hardell study subjects. One expert witness characterized these differences by saying that the earlier studies are like looking for gray hair on a third grader. (“Mobile Phones & Brain Tumors”, Ingrid Newkirk of EMR Network.)

In 1999, Swedish cancer specialist Dr. Lennart Hardell looked at brain tumor sufferers and found a connection between cell phone use and cancer. He found right-handed people had a two-and-a-half times higher risk of a brain tumor in the right-hand side of the brain, whereas left-handed people had nearly the same elevated risk of a left-hand side brain tumor. (Hardell L Nasman A Pahlson A Hallquist A and Mild KH, 1999. Use of cellular telephones and the risk for brain tumors: a case-control study. International Journal of Oncology)

” The Hardell study demonstrates that— for the overall use of analog cell phones, there was a 30% greater risk of developing a brain tumor compared to a person who did not use a cell phone. For subjects who used analog cell phones for 10 years or more, the risk increased to almost 80 per cent.

In the “Discussion” portion of the study Hardell notes: ‘Furthermore, digital cellular phones have not been in use for as long as the analogue ones, which would be of importance for carcinogenesis. This was exemplified in our study with median time of use (tumor induction period) of 7 years for analogue phones, 3 years for digital phones, and 5 years for cordless phone.’ ” (Janet Newton, news release for EMR Network).

In analogue cellphones there is a very high frequency FM radio. (FM is used for radio and television signals.) [Digital cellphones and cordless phones are similar to radar, using pulses carried by microwaves —Shivani]

As stated by Alasdair Phillips of PowerWatch:

” Investigations of thousands of cases of brain tumours and mobile phones of all types has found up to a 50% increased risk of a brain tumour after five years, which doubles after ten years.

This new paper is an update of their previous published study and was based on the analysis of 1,600 tumour victims who had been using mobile phones for up to 10 years before being diagnosed. Prof Mild now states: ‘The evidence for a connection between phone use and cancer is clear and convincing. The more you use phones and the greater the number of years you have them, the greater the risk of brain tumours.’

An earlier study by Mild, a cancer specialist, linked brain tumours to the use of analogue mobile phones. The new research repeated this and included digital (GSM) mobiles and DECT cordless phones. It showed that all three types were linked with increased tumour rates. The extra tumours only start to really show up after about 5 years use, but there is increasing dose-related-response with minutes of use per month and number of years of use.

The increase in tumours for cordless phone use only become significant after about 10 years, but all the evidence is mounting up to show that people should only use wireless phones of any sort when there is no alternative.”

Tumours, dementia and chronic fatigue syndrome are three of the devastating outcomes for which increases in risk have now been indicated. (“Further aspects on cellular and cordless phones and brain tumours”. Lennart Hardell, Kjell Hansson Mild and M Carlberg International Journal of Oncology, 22:399-407, 2003.)

The Wireless Technology Research (WTR), a research body sponsored by the cell phone industry, announced in May, 1999 that a study performed at Integrated Laboratory Systems in Triangle Park , North Carolina , on human blood cells showed a tripling in chromosome damage caused by cell phone radiation. According to Dr. Carlo, the chairman of WTR, this is a strong link to cancer.

In 1997, Dr. Miguel Penafiel and his team of the Catholic University of America in Washington, DC, found that cell phone radiation increased the activity of a cancer-related enzyme called ornithine decarboxylase (ODC).

Scientists at Aarhus University in Denmark have in 1997 shown that cell phone radiation accelerates the proliferation rate of human cells.

Scientists at the Department of Life Sciences, University of Nottingham, UK, have shown that transgenic nematodes, used to monitor toxic pollutants, become stressed by cell phone EMFs in the same way as they do by toxic chemicals.

DePomerai et al (2000) reported an increase in hsp or heatshock protein equivalent to that produced with a 3 degree Centigrade rise in temperature with low-level microwave irradiation at a SAR of only 0.001 W/Kg. Non-thermal microwave radiation disruption of weak bonds that maintain the active form of protein folding at 750 MHz continuous wave may increase free radicals causing DNA damage and interfere with cell signaling that controls cell growth.

“A study carried out by Professor Om Ghandi, head of electrical engineering at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, found that 10 year-olds absorbed 10 per cent more radiation than adults when making a call, and five-year-olds 50 per cent more. “The handsets are logically closer to the brain and the brain cells than with adults,” he said.

” Absorption of microwaves of the frequency used in mobile telephony is greatest in an object about the size of a child’s head – the so-called ‘head resonance’ – whilst, in consequence of the thinner skull of a child, the penetration of the radiation into the brain is greater than in an adult.

….The still developing nervous system and associated brain-wave activity in a child (and particularly one that is epileptic) are more vulnerable to aggression by the pulses of microwaves used in GSM than is the case with a mature adult.

….The increased mitotic activity in the cells of developing children makes them more susceptible to genetic damage.

A child’s immune system, whose efficiency is, in any case, degraded by radiation of the kind used in mobile telephony, is generally less robust than is that of an adult, so that the child less able to ‘cope’ with any adverse health effect provoked by (chronic) exposure to such radiation.” (“The Existing Microwave Safety Guidelines are Inadequate”, Dr. Gerard Hyland, University of Warwick , International Institute of Biophysics)

Dr Kjell Hansson Mild reported on an extensive survey of ten thousand cell phone users in Norway and Sweden conducted because of the concern about symptoms such as dizziness, discomfort, concentration problems and memory loss experienced by people using cellphones. Even larger responses included fatigue and headache and a sense of warmth on and behind the ear along with a tingling sensation and burning of the skin. These symptoms were of particular significance because the ordinary use of the telephone does not produce the sense of warmth. It is the microwave radiation from cellphones, at sufficient intensity to produce warming, which, in this research, is associated with neurological symptoms.

In the extremely large sample in the report , when the data was ordered by the number of calls per day and by the number of minutes per day on average spent on the cellphone every symptom showed an increase with usage.

“….Reiser et. al., demonstrated that the extensive exposure to microwave radiation has been found to affect a wide variety of brain functions such as electrical activity (EEG), electrochemistry, 7-8 permeability of the blood/brain barrier and to degrade the immune system. 10Becker and Marini, and Frhlich et al reported that headache is consistent with the fact that microwaves are known to non-thermally affect the dopamine-opiate system of the brain and to increase the permeability of the blood-brain barrier since both of these have been medically connected with headache. On the other hand, the reports of sleep disruption are consistent with the effect of GSM radiation on rapid eye movement (REM) sleep and on melatonin levels whereas, memory impairment is consistent with the finding that microwave radiation targets the hippocampus. Hermann and Hossmann, reported the adverse health effects of mobile phones and found that the use of mobile can cause sleep disturbance, memory problems, headaches, nausea, dizziness, promote cancer and high blood pressure.

….Nakamura, et. al., demonstrated that exposure to high-density microwaves can cause detrimental effects on the eyes, testis and other tissues and induce significant biologic changes through thermal actions.

….Khudnitskii et al, studied the influence of ultrahigh frequency radiation caused by cellular phones on functional state of central nervous system, cardiovascular systems and local temperature changes in cellular phones users. The head area near the phone antenna appeared to be under the most intensive heating. Ultrahigh frequency radiation induces significant changes in local temperature and in physiologic parameters of central nervous and cardiovascular systems.” (“Association of mobile phone radiation with fatigue, headache, dizziness, tension and sleep disturbance in Saudi population”, Thamir Al-Khlaiwi, Sultan A. Meo)

As recognised in the recently published Report of the UK Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones:

“….The multi-frame repetition frequency of 8.34Hz and the 2Hz pulsing that characterises the signal from a phone equipped with discontinuous transmission (DTX), lie in the range of the alpha and delta brain wave activities, respectively. The fact that these two particular electrical activities are constantly changing in a child until the age of about 12 years when the delta-waves disappear and the alpha rhythm is finally stabilised means that they must both be anticipated to be particularly vulnerable to interference from the GSM pulsing.”

The results of a the study by the Spanish Neuro Diagnostic Research Institute in Marbella have demonstrated that a call lasting just two minutes can alter the natural electrical activity of a child’s brain for up to an hour afterwards . And they also found for the first time how radio waves from mobile phones penetrate deep into the brain and not just around the ear.

Dr Michael Klieeisen, who conducted the study, said: “We were able to see in minute detail what was going on in the brain. “We never expected to see this continuing activity in the brain. “We are worried that delicate balances that exist – such as the immunity to infection and disease – could be altered by interference with chemical balances in the brain.”

Doctors fear that disturbed brain activity in children could lead to psychiatric and behavioural problems or impair learning ability.

The ELF output from the body of digital phones usually is around 10-20 mG with peak values up to around 50 mG, well above the 2 mG level believed by many scientists, and the Swedish authorities as well, to be the limit above which the health risks compared to non-exposed conditions become significantly increased.

“….The MW output from the antenna of the phones vary somewhat, usually it is within the region of 0.5-1.0 W, giving specific absorption rates (SAR) of up to 0.5 W/Kg. This is well below the official “safety” standards which vary somewhat from one country to another

….the US ANSI/IEEE applicable standard is 1.6 W/Kg. However, the problem is that these safety standards are meaningless according to the latest research, showing that the induction of biological effects from EMFs have little to do with energy absorption. Research has shown significant induced effects at energy absorption rates tens of thousands of times below the ‘safety’ limits.”

“….Changes induced …. by EMFs are able to trigger a cascade of different effects ranging from gene translation/transcription, enzyme activities, hormonal secretions, neurotransmitter secretions, repair mechanisms, immune system responses, heart functioning, brain functioning, cell proliferation, cell apoptosis (programmed death), cell transformation, tumor suppression, tumor induction, and tumor promotion, among others. Which response particular cells or bodies show will depend on the actual situation in the system: genes, strength of homeostatic balance (health), situation, other stressors, etc. No one knows the exact long term effect in a certain organism until it is too late.” (text found at ICS/EMF Issues )

WASHINGTON, Feb. 20, 2002 (AP)

“(CBS) Some shields touted as protecting cell phone users from radiation don’t work as advertised and may cause the wireless devices to emit even more energy, the Federal Trade Commission said Wednesday.

The agency announced it had filed charges against two companies for promoting the shields with unsupported claims such as “prevents electromagnetic waves from penetrating the brain” and “blocks up to 99 percent of the radiation” emitted from cell phones that some fear could cause brain cancer.”

Independent testing of several products supposed to protect cell phone users from radiation yielded discouraging results. Some did nothing whatsoever, some yielded less protection than claimed and only in certain phone positions, and some actually increased the amount of radiation absorbed. They found that the “earpiece wire on the hands-free kits we tested acts as an aerial – and channels three times as much radiation to your head.” (“The Ring of Truth,” Which magazine, April 2000)

“Consumers are advised to shop wisely and to purchase only what they understand. Fake technology claiming protection that is hidden in mysterious disks and crystals have been marketed as “radiation shields” by their peddlers but more accurately called “superstitious pacifiers” by objective analysts. Worse, it has been shown that “radiation shields” may in fact increase danger! In early 2002, The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) filled a lawsuit against two “cellphone shield” makers. The FTC claims that the targeted shields don’t work as advertised and may actually increase unwanted exposure to microwave transmission .

Further many people mistakenly think that they avoid microwave exposure from their cellphones by using the standard electric earphone. Little do they realize that by using an electric earphone they have actually increased the electric circuitry that can bring the unwanted microwaves directly into their ear and head and around their body. Multiple independent tests have measured up to four times the radiation coming out of the earpiece of a cellular phone, than out of the antenna.

….In a test performed by IMST in Germany, for the October 20, 1999 ABC News 20/20 segment on Cellphone Safety, they found that four out of five of the phones they tested exceeded the standard in at least one testing position. They determined that a phone would pass or fail the safety standard based upon what angle the phone was held at during the test. The standard was reportedly entirely ambiguous in this respect, allowing phone manufacturers to simply re-orient their phone until it passes the test. One popular model exceeded the standard in both positions tested, and would only pass when a remote earpiece was used. (http://www.wave-guide.org/library/cellphones.html) [Remember that the “safety standard” was only designed to prevent physical heating of your head, and does not protect you at all from frequency-related effects. However, you are apparently not being protected from heating, either. Others have found similar discrepancies between listed SAR and actual phone SAR. —Shivani]

Insurers Balk at Risks of Phones

By Sarah Ryle, Consumer Affairs Correspondent Sunday April 11, 1999
The Observer, London

“Concern about the safety of mobile phones has prompted a leading Lloyd’s underwriter to refuse to insure phone manufacturers against the risk of damage to users’ health. The move comes amid mounting concern about the industry’s influence on research into the long-term effects of using a mobile. The London market provides insurance for everything from aircraft to footballers’ legs. But fears that mobile phones will be linked to illnesses such as cancer and Alzheimer’s disease have prompted John Fenn, of underwriting group Stirling, to refuse to cover manufacturers against the risk of being sued if mobiles turn out to cause long-term damage.

….Fenn said: ‘there are people in the insurance market who close their eyes to the issue because they say there is no scientific proof of a problem. If you go back to asbestos, it “wasn’t a problem” at one time either.’ ”

[page 8]