Why is WHO hiding evidence that cell phone radiation has already been shown to reduce melatonin, damage DNA and chromosomes

In 1995 a New Zealand Environment Court (as the Planning Tribunal) decided to set a public exposure limit of 2

m W/cm² for from a BellSouth GSM cell site. This was based on evidence of biological effects, including calcium ion efflux, enhanced ODC activity and EEG change down to 2.9m W/cm². There was also epidemiological evidence of childhood leukaemia at 2.4m W/cm². The primary expert witness for BellSouth was WHO staff member Dr Michael Repacholi from Australia. He stated that there was no evidence of adverse effects below the international guideline of SAR = 0.08W/kg because the only effect of RF/MW was tissue heating. The Court's decision rejected this position and set the exposure level of 1% of the standard. The decision also stated that this should be revised with new evidence. Subsequently two Australian studies were carried out to assure the public that both cell phones and cell sites were safe. Both of these studies, Hocking et al. (1996) and Repacholi et al. (1997), showed that leukaemia/lymphoma was more than doubled for people and mice.

It is now clear that the results of both of these were quite predicable from earlier human and rodent studies. This includes studies that are claimed by ICNIRP, WHO and Dr Repacholi (both in reviews and in the Environment Court) to show that there were no adverse effects. To this day cell phone companies and some government bodies, such as the U.K independent expert committee, chaired by Sir William Stewart, that included Dr Repacholi, still claims that there is no evidence that cell phone radiation is harmful.

There is a large and growing body of published scientific studies that show that this is not true. This includes Dr Repacholi's own research. Over forty cell phone radiation studies are cited here. They show that cell phone radiation mimics the biological and epidemiological studies for EMR over the past 4 decades. This includes DNA strand breakage, chromosome aberrations, increased oncogene activity in cells, reduced melatonin, altered brain activity, altered blood pressure and increased brain cancer.

Analogue cell phones use FM RF/MW signals and digital cell phones use pulsed microwaves that are very similar to radar signals. FM radio, TV signals and radar exposures cause significant and dose response increases in brain cancer, leukaemia and other cancers, and cardiac, neurological and reproductive health effects. Hence it is highly probable that cell sites and cell phones are causing many adverse health effects. Already cell phone radiation has been shown to significantly increase all these effects.

Public health surveys of people living in the vicinity of cell site base stations should be being carried out now, and continue progressively over the next two decades. This is because prompt effects such as miscarriage, cardiac disruption, sleep disturbance and chronic fatigue could well be early indicators of the adverse health effects. Symptoms of reduced immune system competence, cardiac problems, especially of the arrhythmic type and cancers, especially brain tumour and leukaemia are probable. However, since cell phone radiation has already been shown to reduce melatonin, damage DNA and chromosomes, surveys should look for a very wide range health effects and not be limited to a narrow set. In carrying out health surveys, the researchers must be mindful of the actual and realistic radiation patterns from cell sites and not to make the mistake of assuming a simple, uniform radial pattern.

Broadcast Tower Conclusions:
The Swiss researchers in the Schwarzenburg Study concluded that there was a causal relationship with sleep disruption and exposure to RF radiation. This shows the exquisite sensitivity of the brain to RF radiation, reduction in a vital neurohormone, melatonin, which is related to sleep quality, chronic fatigue and cancer. The Schwarzenburg study also identified a suite of symptoms that they referred to as Chronic Fatigue. In the U.K., Australia, San Francisco, Hawaii and Italy residential studies above show significant increases in adult and childhood leukaemia and multiple significant dose response relationships for a range of cancers, especially leukaemia and brain tumour and all cancer at residential exposure levels.
This forms a coherent, consistent, integrated set of studies showing a causal relationship between sleep disturbance, chronic fatigue and cancer in association with extremely low mean RF exposure levels experiences in residential situations in the vicinity of radio and TV transmission towers. 
  
  
  
  
  

Biological Mechanisms:
Some suggest that these epidemiological studies should be rejected because they claim that there are no known biological mechanisms. This to wrong on two counts. Firstly, epidemiological evidence is the strongest evidence of human health effects and dose-response relationships are indicative of a causal effect, Hill (1965). Biological mechanisms are limited by current knowledge and therefore should not diminish the epidemiological conclusions. Secondly, there is a large and coherent body of evidence of biological mechanisms that support the conclusion of a plausible, logical and causal relationship between EMR exposure and cancer, cardiac, neurological and reproductive health effects.
Neurological Interactions:
König (1974) and Wever (1974) prove that ELF EMR interacts with and interferes with human brains at extremely low field intensities.
Calcium Ion Homeostasis:
Blackman (1990) concludes that there is overwhelming evidence that EMR alters cellular calcium ion homeostasis, down to 0.08m W/cm², Schwartz et al. (1990).
Chromosome Aberrations:
Fourteen studies show that RF/MW causes significant chromosome damage, four with dose response relationships and one recorded a dose related cell death rate; Heller and Teixeira-Pinto (1959), Tonascia and Tonascia (1996) [cited in Goldsmith (1997b)], Sagripanti and Swicord (1986), Garaj-Vrhovac et al. (1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1998), Maes et al. (1993), Timchenko and Ianchevskaia (1995), Balode (1996), Haider et al. (1994), Vijayalaxmi et al. (1997), Tice, Hook and McRee (1999).
DNA strand breakage:
Four independent laboratories observe significant DNA damage, including two for cell phone radiation, down to 1 m W/cm², Phillips et al. (1998). Lai and Singh (1995, 1996, 1997), Sarkar, Ali and Behari (1994), Verschave et al. (1994), including a dose response relationship, Lai and Singh (1996).
Neoplastic Transformation of Cells:
Balcer-Kubiczek and Harrison (1991) observed a significant dose response in cells exposed to microwaves.
Oncogene Activity:
Two laboratories show that cell phone radiation significantly alters proto oncogene activity; Ivaschuk et al. (1997) and Goswami et al. (1999).
Melatonin Reduction:
Fourteen studies show that EMR across the spectrum from ELF to RF/MW reduces melatonin in people.

Wang (1989) who found that workers who were more highly exposed to RF/MW had a dose-response increase in serotonin, and hence indicates a reduction in melatonin. Abelin (1999) reported significant reductions from SW radio exposure, Burch et al. (1997) with a combination of 60 Hz fields and cell phone use and Arnetz et al. (1996) with VDTs.ELF exposure reduced melatonin in Wilson et al. (1990), Graham et al. (1994), Wood et al. (1998), Karasek et al. (1998), and Burch et al. (1997, 1998, 1999a), Juutilainen et al. (2000) and Graham et al. (2000); Pfluger et al. (1996)[16.7 Hz] and geomagnetic activity, Burch et al. (1999b). 
  
 Immune system impairment by EMR
Impairment of the immune system is related to calcium ion efflux, Walleczek (1992) and to reduced melatonin, Reiter and Robinson (1995). Cossarizza et al. (1993) showed that ELF fields increased both the spontaneous and PHA and TPA- induced production of interleukin-1 and IL-6 in human peripheral blood. Rats exposed to microwaves showed a significant reduction in splenic activity of natural killer (NK) cells, Nakamura et al. (1997).
Quan et al. (1992) showed that microwave heating of human breast milk highly significantly suppressed the specific immune system factors for E.Coli bacteria compared with conventional heating. Dmoch and Moszczynski (1998) found that microwave exposed workers had decreased NK cells and a lower value of the T-helper/T-suppressor ratio was found. Moszczynski et al. (1999) observed increased IgG and IgA and decreased lymphocytes and T8 cells in TV signal exposed workers.
Chronic, 25 year, exposure to an extremely low intensity (<0.1m W/cm²) 156-162 MHz, 24.4 Hz pulse frequency, radar signal in Latvia produced significant alterations in the immune system factors of exposed villagers, Bruvere et al. (1998).
Biological Mechanism Conclusions:
EMR is shown to alter cellular calcium ions, significantly increase chromosome aberrations, DNA strand breakage, neoplastic transformation of cells, reduce melatonin, enhance oncogene activity and impair the immune system. This is a coherent, consistent and overwhelming set of evidence to show that EMR is genotoxic.
When coupled with the epidemiological evidence of cancer, there is compelling evidence that EMR is genotoxic, and hence is carcinogenic and teratogenic. 
  

Effects shown for electromagnetic radiation, especially radio and radar signals:
Such signals have been shown to:

• Alter brain activity, including EEG and reaction times, memory loss, headaches, fatigue and concentration problems, dizziness (the Microwave Syndrome), Gordon (1966), Deroche (1971), Moscovici et al. (1974), Lilienfeld et al. (1978), Shandala et al. (1979), Forman et al. (1982), Frey (1998).

• Impair sleep and learning, Altpeter et al. (1995), Kolodynski and Kolodynska (1996)

• Increase permeability of the blood brain barrier (a mechanism for headache), Frey et al. (1975), Alberts (1977, 1978) and Oscar and Hawkins (1977).

• Highly significant Increased permeability of the blood brain barrier for 915 MHz radiation at SAR =0.016-0.1 (p=0.015) and SAR = 0.1-0.4 (p=0.002); Salford et al. (1994).

• Alter GABA, Kolomytkin et al. (1994).

• Increase neurodegenerative disease including Alzheimer's Disease, Sobel et al. (1995, 1996), Savitz et al. (1998a,b)

• Alter blood pressure and heart rhythm (heart rate variability) and Heart Disease, Forman et al. (1986), Hamburger, Logue and Silverman (1983), Bortkiewicz et al. (1995, 1996, 1997) and Szmigielski at al (1998), Savitz et al. (1999)

• Increase the Suicide Risk, Baris and Armstrong (1990), Perry et al. (1991), Van Wijngaarden et al. (2000).

• Impair the immune system Quan et al. (1992), Dmoch and Moszczynski (1998), Bruvere et al. (1998)

• Reduce sperm counts, Weyandt et al. (1996)

• Increase miscarriage and congenital abnormalities, Kallen et al. (1982), Larsen et al. (1991), Ouellet-Hellstrom and Stewart (1993). Ouellet-Hellstrom and Stewart found a a significant dose-response, p<0.005.

Figure 21: Microwave exposure associated miscarriage for pregnant physiotherapists, Ouellet-Hellstrom and Stewart (1993). 
  
 Figure 21 was calculated based on 3 minutes exposure per treatment to 600m W/cm², a peak exposure level near the middle of the reported range. This gives 0.042m W/cm² per treatment per month, to give a month mean dose response based on treatments per month. Lindbohm et al. (1992) found a dose-response for miscarriage for women using computers.

Figure 22: ELF/RF/MW exposure from VDT usage increases miscarriage in a dose-response manner, Lindbohm et al. (1992). 
  
 

• Reduce melatonin and alter calcium ions, Abelin (1999), Burch et al. (1997, 1999) Bawin and Adey (1976), Blackman et al. (1988, 1989, 1990).

• Enhances heat shock proteins at extremely low exposure levels in a highly reproducible manner showing that they are not stimulated by heat but in reaction to a 'toxic' protein reaction, Daniells et al. (1998), and down to 0.001W/kg (0.34m W/cm²) using 750MHz microwaves, de Pomerai (2000).

• Break DNA strands, damage chromosomes, alter gene transcription activity, and neoplastically transform cells. Lai and Singh (1995, 1996, 1997), Garaj-Vrhovac et al. (1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1999), Vijayalaxmi et al. (1997), Phillips et al. (1992, 1993), and Balcer-Kubiczek and Harrison (1991).

• Enhances cell death in a dose response manner for signal intensity and exposure time, Garaj-Vrhovac et al. (1992).

• Enhances cell proliferation in a dose-response manner for exposure time, Mattei et al. (1999).

• Enhances Ornithine Decarboxylase (ODC) activity, a measure of cell proliferation rate, Byus et al. (1988), Litovitz et al. (1997).

• Enhances free radicals, Phelan et al. (1992)

• Increase the incidence of many types of cancer, including leukaemia, brain tumor, testicular cancer, genitourinary and breast cancer, Robinette et al. (1980), Milham (1985, 1988), Szmigielski (1996), Hocking et al. (1996), Dolk et al. (1997 a, b), Beall et al. (1996), Grayson (1996), Thomas et al. (1987), Lilienfeld et al. (1978), Zaret (1989), Davis and Mostofl (1993), Hayes et al. (1990), Tynes et al. (1996), Cantor et al. (1995).

These biological and health effects are consistent with the biological understanding that brains, hearts and cells are sensitive to electromagnetic signals because they use electromagnetic signals for their regulation, control and natural processes, including those processes monitored by the EEG and ECG. There is overwhelming evidence that EMR is genotoxic, alters cellular ions, neurotransmitters and neurohormones, and interferes with brain and heart signals, and increases cancer.
Cell Phone Radiation Research:
For years the cell phone companies and government authorities have assured us that cell phone are perfectly safe. They state that the particular set of radiation parameter associated with cell phones are not the same as any other radio signal and therefore earlier research does not apply. They also mount biased review teams who falsely dismiss any results that indicate adverse biological and health effects and the flawed pre-assumption that the only possible effect is tissue heating. There is a very large body of scientific research that challenges this view. Now we have published research, primarily funded by governments and industry that shows that cell phone radiation causes the following effects:

• Alters brain activity including EEG, Von Klitzing (1995), Mann and Roschkle (1996), Krause et al. (2000).

• Disturbs sleep, Mann and Roschkle (1996), Bordely et al. (1999)

• Alters human reaction times, Preece et al. (1999), Induced potentials, Eulitz et al. (1998), slow brain potentials, Freude et al. (1998), Response and speed of switching attention (need for car driving) significantly worse, Hladky et al. (1999). Altered reaction times and working memory function (positive), Koivisto et al. (2000), Krause et al. (2000).

• Weakens the blood brain barrier, BBB (p<0.0001) with a dose above 1.5 J/kg. For a 2 minute exposure the SAR = 0.013 W/kg and 10 minutes, SAR - 0.0025W/kg: Persson, B.R.R., Salford, L.G. and Brun, A., (1997).

• A Fifteen-minute exposure, increased auditory brainstem response and hearing deficiency in 2 kHz to 10 kHz range, Kellenyi et al. (1999).

• While driving, with 50 minutes per month with a cell phone, a highly significant 5.6-fold increase in accident risk, Violanti et al. (1996); a 2-fold increase in fatal accidents with cell phone in car, Violanti et al. (1998); impairs cognitive load and detection thresholds, Lamble et al. (1999).

• Significant changes in local temperature, and in physiologic parameters of the CNS and cardiovascular system, Khdnisskii, Moshkarev and Fomenko (1999).

• Causes memory loss, concentration difficulties, fatigue, and headache, in a dose response manner, (Mild et al. (1998)). Headache, discomfort, nausea, Hocking (1998).

Figure 23: Prevalence of symptoms for Norwegian mobile phone users, mainly analogue, with various categories of length of calling time per day, Mild et al. (1998).Ref
http://www.feb.se/emfguru/CellPhone/probable-health/Probable-health.htm