For a long time it has already been discussed the possibility that radiation from cell phones could be responsible for some types of cancer and tumors, particularly in the brain. However, until now no study has been conclusive in this sense. It has been said, for example, that the radiation phone is non-ionizing which they indicate, does not seem to be harmful, against ionizing radiation such as that seen in X-rays, ct scans and nuclear plants, among others, that we know, can have obvious adverse effects on the health. To put it in a nutshell: if the radiation does not modify the DNA, then there can be mutations in the cells and, therefore, can’t have cancer.
However, a couple of studies of the National Toxicology Program of the united States, found “clear evidence” that exposure to radiation causes tumors in the heart in male rats and found “some evidence” that it causes tumors in the brains of male rats. It should be noted that this national program tag with “clear evidence”, “evidence”, “equivocal evidence” and “no evidence” as labels valid to reach conclusions.
The tumors are to meet in female rats, also, but were not sufficient to be considered significant at a statistical level and in this case we used the label “equivocal evidence”. This simply means that the researchers were not able to have enough evidence to associate radiation with cancer.
But one thing is to study the rats and other humans. However, the articles were submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), who is responsible for determining the risk in humans, and to give in any case a series of guides to the public about it. Also, sent the studies to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), who develops security measures for mobile m viles. The FDA was part of the group of federal agencies that were commissioned to do the studies at the beginning of the year 2000.
Ronald Melnick, the senior toxicologist who designed the study (and who retired from the agency in 2009), says that you don’t see that in the future can be concluded contrary to the studies presented, namely, that there is no risk of using cell phones. “I don’t see any possibility of reaching a negative test in future studies,” says Melnick.
The toxicologist added: “I Think that it would be irresponsible not to put directions to the public. keep a safe distance from these devices to the children. Do not sleep with your phone near your head. Use headphones with wires, that is something that should be recommended to the agency now.”
It is indicated that when he showed the draft of the articles, at the beginning of this year, all the results were “equivocal”, what that means is that the data were not considered sufficiently clear to determine the radiation and the possibility of health effects. But the panel of the following reviewers, including those who were pathologists of heart and brain, toxicologists, bioestadísticos and engineers, re-evaluated the data and updated the conclusions “some evidence” and “clear evidence”.
This type of revision is a vital part of any scientific study, and makes the items have more rigor. Melnick states that “change the labels in the conclusions is something unusual and this is very significant in the end.” Normally the reviewers will hardly change its position, and in this case it is something that must be taken into account. Maybe yes, there is enough evidence to think that the phone radiation is not as innocent as it seems.
However, the reviewers indicated that they wished that the experiments should last more time, for example, to put the rats to the exposure to radiation for two years, because it is known that, while more lives for a rodent, the more prone it is to developing cancer, with or without radiation phone. Other reviewers would have expected that disecaran the brains of rats so as to find more physical evidence of tumors in the brain of the same. However, analysts noted that the study is far from perfect, but this is better than nothing, and in addition, finally it is a study dedicated to this controversial topic specifically.
The articles really showed that, in male rats, there was “clear evidence” that the exposure of radiation phone of cell phones increases the risk of a rare type of tumor called a “schwannoma” in the tissues that connect the ribs with the heart. This was not sufficiently significant in the female rats. Also the studies found “some evidence” that the radiation caused a type of brain cancer in male rats.
There is, however, a further study on the radiation of the cell in the human, the INTERPHONE study, which was published in 2011 and which was conducted under the coordination of researchers from 16 institutions in 13 countries. In this study we found that users who use too often their phones, they are more prone to this type of brain cancer, the same that found the above studies. Melnick says that “there is a concordance between the human data and animals”, as if to say that those studies do show a truth about the radiation cell and its dangers.
But there are some problems with the data of the INTERPHONE study. On the one hand, was based on interviews with people who already had cancer in the brain and this, of course, there is a clear bias in the information and the conclusions. But Melnick says that i there is this bias, how it is possible to explain that is found the same type of cancer that was found in the rats?
Now the next move in what has the FDA, who must determine the risks of radiation cell phone to the human and how to interpret this information.