Professional Documents
Culture Documents
GE
;;.<+,L.,!
'p& 3. ;:2 :
2 The case settled as a confidential employer- ,. :v.hX:'
employee resolution
1996
SIDE-I 'R 1
KEY CELL PHONE-DISEASE CAUSATION REFERENCES
Carb GL, Schrarn MJ. Cell %oms. Invkibk Harden L, Carlkrg M, Mild, KH. 2006
Hazards in the Wireless A%. Carrc4I and Craff control Study of the Asmiation Betwe
PhHshers, Jmulry 2801; second w i n g , b e of Celular and Cordless Telephone
February 2802: Engli. French- Germ, Malignant Brain Tumors Dmenosed Durisls
FACT
Friedmw J, Kraus S, H w p t m Y,Sckiff Y,
Seger R, "Mechanism of Shwt-tarn ERE Jdohansson 0.. Elcctrohypenensitivity:State-a
Activation by Elenr-mtic Fiddr at Mabike the-Art & a Functional Impairment.
Phone Freqwncin", Biwhan J 2007; 405: 559- E k t m m k Wcgy ond Mediehe, Vdume
568 25, Issue 4 December 2006, pages 245 - 258
Ga& AG., 9-h P. 2005. M&le Phone Users: Johnasson 0. (2004).Screen Derma
Another Htgh Health Risk Group. Journal of Ekctrahvpersensitivitity:Preliminary
Observations on Hman S k i . In
THE INDUSTRY HAS
Gand'hi AG. May-August 2005. h e t i c Damage
Electmagmetics Environments and Health in
Buildings. Eds Derek J. Crooae, Derek
ESCAPED
in Mo&k Phone Users: Some Prefimiwry
FidFngs. ImcEian Journal of Human Genetics.
Ckmwnts-Croom. Taylar & Francis. ACCOUNTABILITY
11(2):s-104 Kundi M, MIW K, Hardell L, Mattsson M. 2004
Mobk Telephones and Cancer - A Review of Thus far, the cell phone industry has
Hsflberg O., Jahansso, 0. FM Emadcasting Epidemiological Evidence. Journal of Toxicology avoided accountability for the health and
Expoaure Time and Malignant Melanoma and Envirmrnmtd Health, Part B. 7:351-384
tncicknce. &kttxnmgr)~fie Edqy and k&im,
environmental damages caused by their
Vodwm 24, taue 1 January 2005, pages 1 - 8 Kundi, M. 2004.MobiC Phone Use and C; devices and supportive infrastructure,
Wupaional a d Environmental Medicine.
61:560-570. leaving the injured without recourse.
biberg O., J ~ ~ S B0. C ~ Hendsa
OMobile
Output Power and k d t h E k c
The system is not working.
W k a T, Carb GL. Wmkss Radiation in the
Wqgyand iWdick, V d m 23, Issue 3 . Et'bbgy arrd T r e a t m t of Autism: Clinical Because the FDA granted the industry
Deeembw 2004, pages 229 - 239 C%servations pnd Mechanisms. Jaurnal o" -"- a variance on the requirement for pre-
AwtrgRas'kan Cd@ of Nutritional
krdsl LH; M d KH, Sandstran, M,Car- E n v h m m t d Medicine. Nwmber 2087
market safety, it is unlikely that that the
M, kWq&t A, P&kn A. 2003. Vesribukw FDA will take further steps at protecting
Sch-, Timitus imd Celkdor Telzphms. Mafkolra E, Hillert L, Malmgren L, Persson B,
N c w ~ p & m b w22124-1 29 the public. Moreover, with respect to
& I y ~ l rI. 2005. Microwaves from GSM Mobile
Tetephanes Affect 538BP1 and g-H2AX Foci in radiation-emitting devices, the FDA has
krdzll LH, Mild, KH, Cwbwg, M, Human Lymphocytes f r m Hypersensitivl 1
March. 2004. Cefiuln and Cm&srs very narrow regulatory authority: they
Heakhy Persons. Envirm Health k s p e c t
Use and t k Assmiation wkh Emin Tumm in 1132172-1177 can require pre-market testing; they can
Different Age Gccslps. Archive of
Envirmmtd k a k h 593):432. pursue post-market surveillance; they can
Msrhevidl M, Fallemn D, Kesar A, Bwbul A,
Karmfein R, Jwby E, Avivi L. 2003. Exposun ban products if post-market surveillance
L-,Cathrt MkdKK
Mg case- of ~ u m a n~eripherd8.w~ymphocytesto identifies problems. With upwards of 280
Control Pudy on C e h k and Cw&s Ekctromagnetic F i Associated with C
Tmms the R i Sor Amwtk k r a phones Leads to ~ k o m o s o m sInstability.
~
million Americans using cell phones, a
or @wmd 90Ba- Bjoehrarn~netics24:82-90 cell phone ban is politically infeasible.
20
Perssen €3, Salford LC, Brun A: Blood-brr:-
Consumers cannot look to the FDA,
k h f l , t,Carbra, M, KH. 2004 of hni, W m e a H i ~ in at^ ~~~d to which is not directly involved in the safe-
Cefhhr Tekpkorws a d Brain Tumor Risk in ~ hFielde Used~ in Wireless ~ = ~ of cell phones
~ ~
U r h and Rurd Areas. Oceup. Erwbn. M. ty regulation at all.
c-M~&~~. wiWlessktworb 3:
62:W-394. 455-MI. 1997. What about the Federal
L7 Carkg Ma KH.
Communications Commission (FCC)?
Mford LG, &runBE,Ekhat-dt JL, Malrragren K,
Analpis of Two Case-Control S t d e s on Use of
knu#l & t2m) Mrve hmage in
The wireless industry controls it. The
CeYLJw & Cordkss Telephones and the Rik revolving door between the FCC and the
kmlp h& AfterExpowe to Micrmws
for Marinant Bram Tumwrs l3iagws-dm
1997-2003. I n t m i a w l Arcfilms of
frol
Hei
-"" ' loMe P h
.... ,.
Envirmmmtal
.
,&ctiws 1I . -31-883.
wireless industry has not stopped. Indeed,
Ckeupsltional and Environmerwal Health. both industry and the FCC cite the over-
T H E CAUSAL MECHANISM
I cI&-alkwvl@gmhn b w- r ~ k P k r
5.s.qcfi
-
Rr~sBFHdrlu.M ' i f i : ~ l k l W krWr;r
~ et CnlwK ?4FW,
lap between the two as a major reason for the routinely misrepresents as safety standards" the
tremendous growth and "success" of the wireless emission guidelines for wireless radiation promulgat-
communications. They look after each other's back. ed under the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and
In a recent cell phone-brain cancer suit in the District administered through the FCC. The FCC has no safe-
of Columbia Superior Court, the FCC entered an ty authority. Thus, no safety standards exist to pro-
amicus brief in support of the cell phone industry's tect consumers from the dangers of cell phones and
motion for dismissal. The FCC had never before other wireless devices.
become involved in state or federal court proceed- To date, the cell phone industry has responded to
ings regarding cell phone dangers; the amicus brief litigation by raising the shield of federal preemption,
signals a new level of bold interference by the federal preventing fact finders from hearing scientific and
agency to advance the agenda of an industry it is medical causation testimony based on data generat-
suppose to oversee. Further, the cell phone industry ed after 1999.
SIDE-BAR "
act PHONE-RELATEDDISEASE- wrl
EARLY WARNING SYMPTQMS
M m than 1,000 peew=cwMd,published studiis
f m the k e i s for establishing the link between rnobik
use and a variety of M t h pmblm%
FACT
LEGAL AND LEGISLATIVE
ising efficacy of necessary ACTIONS ARE NECESSARY
" In matters of public policy involving consumer pro-
E Warning Symptm:
tection, litigation and legislation has sometimes
fatigue, shortness of breath and lethargy lagged in addressing rapid technological advances.
difficulty sleeping including restless leg and other Such is the case with wireless technology. To date,
fluisance syndromes remedial options short of these "last resorts" have
*difficulty keeping fsm md attention d e f i ~ i ~ failed.
a short term memory lapses For half a century, questions have been raised
# daydreaming and staring off into space about the safety of wireless devices, and for the
'-rdizziness and tingling in extremities past fifteen years, the debate has occurred in public.
r loss of appetite or persistent diarrhea The passage of time has only exacerbated the
u unusually severe allergic r~~ public health threat, as exposure to dangerous
' $ intolerance to alcohol
electromagnetic fields has dramatically increased
'?i extreme sensitivity to sunlight and noise
+
, impotence and sexual dysfunction
the risks with no corresponding mitigation. Instead,
many consumers now face mounting medical bills,
'@ ineffectiveness of prescription remedie
z
lost wages, pain and suffering attributable to wireless
1
.
)
,'.,,r technology.
In the absence of sound federal guidelines or vig-
"IN the ABSENCE of sound ilant regulation, litigation is the only option to com-
pensate victims and deter the continued disingenu-
FEDERAL GUIDELINES ous and dangerous behavior of the wireless industry.
or vigilant regulation, Medical science supports personal injury litiga-
LITIGATION is the ONLY tion for cell phone-related brain tumors, parotid
option to COMPENSATE gland tumors, acoustic neuroma, eye cancer,
neurological disorders, electro-hypersensitivity
victims and deter the and autism.
continued disingenuous and Product liability actions will achieve several
DANGEROUS behavior goals: compensate injured consumers; stop detri-
of the WIRELESS industry." mental industry practices that victimize consumers;
and put an end to fraudulent promotion of products
that do not protect consumers from various types
of electromagnetic radiation.
In addition to compensating victims, there is
an urgent need to apply political pressure to the
legislative and executive branches of government,
which will result in long term solutions that ensure
the health and safety of future generations.
Laws should be enacted to place health warn-
ings on cell phones and wireless devices, as well as es which featured
call from a fellm who
warning signs in public spaces that carry WiFi and
k W as J.G. W y . During the call, M
other wireless signals.
t kc waa mrired rni&my>art$ that he hsd
The TelecommunicationsAct must be amend- mwy for the U.S. Ssirzt OW of SM.Me M m t
ed to include victims' compensation provisions; o m. I WBS nat abbe to take the call,
incentives for the development and commercial- the infcwwth ta us in a letter.
ization of technologies to promote users from
harmful electromagnetic radiation; and civil rights We mehrd his 17-page lmer two days lear,but regretfully I I
provisions to promote environmental and health no^ read it until dns f i r s af Ikxemk. After mading the first
risk protection for homeowners in communities page, I attempted to cd Mr. W y on the g h . The phone
where cell phone base stations and other wireless number he gare in the d ' i n e d . As I continued
infrastructure are constructed. to read the letter, I was y its contents, page after me.
Harry Houdini did not tell his secrets for fear We t M to reach way.s at our diqmsal: the letter
that the magical illusion would be gone. Rest n closed a week earli-
tk,Washington, where the
assured, Harry.. .there are no illusions here.. ..
ther family in Seattle,
as we attempd to ' l i d In the tekpbm
b k . I later gzve h e letter &I the Minutes news rmga-
un&~de to find Mr. W y . I later pabed
A K News reparm W Wake- who
SIDE-BAR 4 was fist a& to find Mr. k d y , but indead was tablie to confirm
the vWlity of ztre conmts through interviews with
a number of retired m l w
government agency.
SIDE-BAR 6
THE CELL PHONE INDUSTRY PLAYBOOK:
CONTROLLING ILLUSION
The mobile telephone industry has been successful in
manipulating scientific data, public opinion and public
information to protect their interests, promote the unbri-
dled sale of their technologies and create the illusion of SIDE-BAR 7
safety - all to the detriment of pubrii health.
DATA MANIPULATION: THUMBS ON THE
Q SCALES OF SCIENCE
Here is how they do it.
Studies funded by the mobile phone industry are more than
Public relations "hit squads'hare permanently in place in
six times more likely to find "no problem" than studies funded
trade associations and corporate offices to monitor scien-
by independent sources. This difference is statistically signifi-
tific, medical and consumer information for consistency
cant - suggesting the occurrence is not by chance. The follow-
with industry i n t m s .
ing is an example.
When "problems" are identifkd, the public impact of
In 1995, a young epidemiology student was working as an
detrimental information is altered first through public
assistant to a senior scientist when their organization was con-
statements and written press &ass.
tracted by an independent group to conduct a case-control
The media are 'managed' by Eweraging advertising do]-
study of brain tumors and cell phone use. When the lead inves-
lars
tigator passed away before the study was completed, the work
Second level 'management' is a c h i v d through control
continued with the student and was completed in the fall of
of scientific research an61 scientific organizational chan-
1998. The results were peer-reviewed and the report submitted
neb.
Key watch words that signal industry manipulation: I in compliance with the research contract revealed a statistically
significant doubling in risk of rare neuro-epithelial brain tumors
o Expert pawl reports say.. ...
among cell phone users.
o Third party opinions are....
Between 1999 and 2000, the student forged a relationship
o The 'weight of scientific ev*nce7 indicates.....
with a cell phone industry epidemiologist who had been hired
o The studies need to be 'replicated' before.....
to assist in 'peer review' of studies prior to publication.
o The 'safety guidelines' are being met
In late 2000, a paper describing the case-control study was
o More research is needed before.. ...
submitted to the prestigious Journal of the American Medical
o kimtistr around the world agree that .....
Association (JAMA). In that paper, three cases of cancer that
Industry institutio~lcollaboratws:
had been part of the previous analyses had been eliminated.
o The Wodd Wealth Organization
That change in the number of cancer cases included in the
o The American National Standards Institute
study - a breach of the protocols that had been in place since
o The IEEE - Institute for Electronics and Electrical
the study began in 1995 -- eliminated the statistical significance
Engineers
o The International C~mmisdonon Non-Ionizing of the link between brain tumors and cell phones.
Radbtion Protection In the original peer-reviewed report, he also detailed a sta-
tistically significant correlation between the side of the head
o The American C a m M i y
where tumors were located and the side of the head where
k i e t y - BEMS
o The B i a k c t r o ~ n e t b c %
people reported using their cell phones. Another study from
o The Federal Cornmunicat'wns Commission
Sweden that same year showed a similar significant risk
o The Food and Drug Administration
increase with ipsilateral phone use. The new finding was very
Industry consulrants who publicly support industry
damaging to the mobile phone industry, especially since there
positions:
was another corroborative study.
o Dr. William Balky - Exponent Consultants
With the three cases of cancer eliminated the statistically
o Dr. Linda Erdreich - Exponent C~nsultants
significant correlation between the side of the head where the
o Dr. John MwMer - University of Wisconsin
phone was used and the side of the head where the tumor was
o Dr. Mickwl Repachioli - University of Rome (Italy)
located also conveniently disappeared. The peer-reviewers at
o Dr. Bernard Veyret - University of Bourdeax (France)
JAMA had no way of knowing about the data manipulation.
o Dr. Michael Thun - American Cancer Society
In the end, manipulated data were published in a highly
o Dr. Joseph Roti Roti - Washington University (St. Louis)
reputable peer-reviewed journal. The industry was able to use
o Dr. John Boice - Internatimal Epkkmidogy Institute
the paper as a public relations tool. Today, the paper remains
o Dr. h d o Vmchia - International Committee on Non-
prominent in the data package the industry uses advance its
ionizing Radiation Protection
position that cell phones pose no health risk.
SIDE-BAR 8
WORKERSTOMPENSATION CASES
YEAR
I COMMENTS
-
~ a l l ~ o r n l relllale
~ r ~rl~~~mmunications
e r i l p ~ u y r UI
phones 8 hours per day in closed environment
company who tested cell
SIDE-BAR 9
KEY LEGAL CITATIONS AND PRECEDENTS
CASE PRECEDENTS
Cellular Phone Task Force v. FCC, 205 F.3d 82 (2nd Cir. Addressed thermal versus non-thermal effects from RF emissions
Plaintiff's loss expanded subject matter jurisdiction of the FCC to include
health effects in those who are electro-sensitive and hypersensitive
Decision used to validate the process whereby the FCC establishes emission
standards based on input from the American National Standards Institute
and the IEEE
E M R Network ".FCC, 364 U.S. App. D.C. 20,22-25,391 :- Challenged FCC process of issuing permits for infrastructure expansion
F. 3d 269,271 -74 (2004) without complying with EIS provisions of the National Environmental Policy
Act.
Plaintiff's loss established that the FCC procedures are "functionally"
compliant with NEPA
Re-enforced the FCC position on RF emissions by establishing presumption
that FCC has "occupied the fieldn of RF emissions under two statutes: NEPA
and the Federal Communication Act.
In re Wireless Tel. Radio Frequency Emission Prods. Liab. Series of decisions addressing the issues of pre-emption regarding the
Litig., 216 F. Supp. 2d 474 (D. Md. 2002); In re Wiretess FCC's authority over RF emissions
Tel. Radio Frequency Emission Prods. Liab. Litig., 248 F. Distinguished differences between personal injury claims and economic
Supp. 2d 452 (D. Md. 2003), rev'd, Pinney v. Nokia, Inc., claims
402 F. 3d 430 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, Nokia, Inc. v.
Naquin, 546 U.S. 998 (2005); In re Wireless Tel. Radio
Frequency Emission Prods. Lib. Litig., 327 F. Supp. 2d
554 (D. Md. 2004)