Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Canadian Journal of Public Health = Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique logoLink to Canadian Journal of Public Health = Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique
. 1999 Sep 1;90(5):325–329. doi: 10.1007/BF03404521

Are Wireless Phones Safe? A Review of the Issue

Michele L Masley 111,✉, Brian F Habbick 211, Walter O Spitzer 311, Maria A Stuchly 411
PMCID: PMC6979774  PMID: 10570577

Abstract

Most wireless phones and their corresponding base stations operate at a very low power output and in the radiofrequency range of 800 to 2000 Megahertz. Current international guidelines protect against thermal biological effects in terms of the local or whole-body specific absorption rate (SAR). Potential non-thermal bio-effects resulting from the use of wireless phones are not established and laboratory (i.e., in vitro, in vivo) studies have shown conflicting results. Epidemiological studies of potential human health effects are few but are expected to emerge in the near future. Challenges to epi-demiological research include difficult exposure assessment, selection of appropriate controls, potential confounding bias, and validation of outcome. Scientists, community advocacy groups, and public health professionals must be equipped to critically analyze the emerging evidence within a benefit/risk assessment framework.

Footnotes

This study was supported by Microcell Telecommunications Inc., Canada.

References

  • 1.Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA). Online: http://www.wow-com.com
  • 2.Industry Canada. Let’s Talk Towers-Radiocommunications in Canada [pamphlet] Ottawa: Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada; 1997. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection ICNIRP. Health issues related to the use of hand-held radiotelephones and base transmitters. Health Phys. 1996;70:587–93. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Stuchly MA. Biomedical concerns in wireless communications. Crit Rev Biomed Engineering. 1998;26:117–51. doi: 10.1615/CritRevBiomedEng.v26.i1-2.20. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.World Health Organization WHO. Electromagnetic fields (300 Hz - 300 GHz): Environmental Health Criteria #137. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1993. [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Repacholi MH. Low-level exposure to radiofre-quency electromagnetic fields: Health effects and research needs. Bioelectromagnetics. 1998;19:1–19. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-186X(1998)19:1<1::AID-BEM1>3.0.CO;2-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection ICNIRP. Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric, magnetic, and electromagnetic fields (up to 300 GHz) Health Phys. 1998;74:494–522. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.HealthWelfare Canada. Safety Code 6: Limits of exposure to radiofrequency fields at frequencies from 10 kHz to 300 GHz. Ottawa: Health & Welfare Canada; 1991. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Stuchly MA. Proposed revision of the Canadian recommendations on radiofrequency-exposure protection. Health Phys. 1987;53:649–65. doi: 10.1097/00004032-198712000-00008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Royal Society of Canada RSC. A Review of the Potential Health Risks of Radiofrequency Fields from Wireless Telecommunication Devices. 1999. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Thansandote A, Gajda G, Lecuyer D. Cellular Transmitter Towers and Hand-Held Telephones: Are They Hazardous? [paper] Ottawa: Health Canada, Radiation Protection Bureau; 1996. [Google Scholar]
  • 12.McCann J, Kheifets L, Rafferty C. Cancer risk assessment of extremely low frequency electric and magnetic fields: A critical review of methodology. Environ Health Perspect. 1998;106:701–17. doi: 10.1289/ehp.106-1533493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.de Juutilainein J, Seze R. Biological effects of amplitude-modulated radiofrequency radiation. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1998;24:245–54. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.317. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Valberg PA. Radiofrequency radiation (RFR): The nature of exposure and carcinogenic potential. Cancer Causes and Control. 1997;8:323–32. doi: 10.1023/A:1018449003394. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Lai H, Singh NP. Single- and double-strand DNA breaks in rat brain cells after acute exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation. Int J Radiat Biol. 1996;69:513–21. doi: 10.1080/095530096145814. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Sarkar S, Ali S, Behari J. Effect of low power microwave on the mouse genome: A direct DNA analysis. Mutat Res. 1994;320:141–47. doi: 10.1016/0165-1218(94)90066-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Malyapa RS, Ahern EW, Straube WL, et al. Measurement of DNA damage after exposure to 2450 MHz electromagnetic radiation. Radiat Res. 1997;148:608–17. doi: 10.2307/3579737. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Malyapa RS, Ahern EW, Straube WL, et al. Measurement of DNA damage following exposure to electromagnetic radiation in the cellular phone communication frequency band (835.62 and 847.74 MHz) Radiat Res. 1997;148:618–27. doi: 10.2307/3579738. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Maes A, Collier M, Slaets D, Verschaeve L. 954 MHz microwaves enhance the mutagenic properties of mitomycin C. Environ Mol Mutagen. 1996;28:26–30. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1098-2280(1996)28:1<26::AID-EM6>3.0.CO;2-C. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Fritze K, Wiessner C, Kuster N, et al. Effect of global system for mobile communication microwave exposure on the genomic response of the rat brain. Neuroscience. 1997;81:627–39. doi: 10.1016/S0306-4522(97)00228-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Cain CD, Thomas DL, Adey WR. Focus formation of C3H/10T1/2 cells and exposure to a 836.55 MHz modulated radiofrequency field. Bioelectromagnetics. 1997;18:237–43. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-186X(1997)18:3<237::AID-BEM6>3.0.CO;2-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Stagg RB, Thomas WJ, Jones RA, Adey WR. DNA synthesis and cell proliferation in C6 glioma and primary glial cells exposed to a 836.55 MHz modulated radiofrequency field. Bioelectromagnetics. 1997;18:230–36. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-186X(1997)18:3<230::AID-BEM5>3.0.CO;2-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Imaida K, Take M, Yamaguchi T, et al. Lack of promoting effects of the electromagnetic near-field used for cellular phones (929.2 MHz) on rat liver carcinogenesis in a medium-term liver bio-assay. Carcinogenesis. 1998;19:311–14. doi: 10.1093/carcin/19.2.311. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Litovitz TA, Krause D, Penafiel M, et al. The role of coherence time in the effect of microwaves on ornithine decarboxylase activity. Bioelectromagnetics. 1993;14:395–403. doi: 10.1002/bem.2250140502. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Penafiel LM, Litovitz T, Krause D, et al. Role of modulation on the effect of microwaves on ornithine decarboxylase activity in L929 cells. Bioelectromagnetics. 1997;18:132–41. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-186X(1997)18:2<132::AID-BEM6>3.0.CO;2-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Salford LG, Brun A, Persson B, Eberhardt JL. Experimental studies of brain tumour development during exposure to continuous and pulsed 915 MHz radiofrequency radiation. Bioelectrochem Bioenerg. 1993;30:313–18. doi: 10.1016/0302-4598(93)80090-H. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Repacholi MH, Basten A, Gebski V, et al. Lymphomas in E mu-Pim1 transgenic mice exposed to pulsed 900 MHz electromagnetic fields. Radiat Res. 1997;147:631–40. doi: 10.2307/3579630. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Salford LG, Brun A, Eberhardt JL, Persson B. Permeability of the blood brain barrier induced by 915 MHz electromagnetic radiation; continuous wave and modulated at 8, 16, 50 and 200 Hz. Bioelectrochem Bioenerg. 1993;30:293–301. doi: 10.1016/0302-4598(93)80088-C. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Jensh RP. Behavioural teratologic studies using microwave radiation: Is there an increased risk from exposure to cellular phones and microwave ovens? Reprod Toxicol. 1997;11:601–11. doi: 10.1016/S0890-6238(97)89179-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Röschke J, Mann K. No short term effects of digital mobile radio telephones on the awake human electroencephalogram. Bioelectromagnetics. 1997;18:172–76. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-186X(1997)18:2<172::AID-BEM10>3.0.CO;2-T. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Mann K, Roschke J. Effects of pulsed high-frequency electromagnetic fields on human sleep. Neuropsychobiology. 1996;33:41–47. doi: 10.1159/000119247. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.De Seze R, Fabbro-Peray P, Miro L. GSM radio-cellular telephones do not disturb the secretion of antepituitary hormones in humans. Bioelectromagnetics. 1998;19:271–78. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-186X(1998)19:5<271::AID-BEM1>3.0.CO;2-Z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Dolk H, Shaddick G, Walls P, et al. Cancer incidence near radio and television transmitters in Great Britain. Am J Epidemiol. 1997;145:1–9. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Dolk H, Elliott P, Shaddick G, et al. Cancer incidence near radio and television transmitters in Great Britain. Am J Epidemiol. 1997;145:10–17. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Hocking B, Gordon IR, Grain HL, Hatfield GE. Cancer incidence and mortality and proximity to TV towers. Med J Aust. 1996;165:601–5. doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.1996.tb138661.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.McKenzie DR, Yin Y, Morrell S. Childhood incidence of acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and exposure to broadcast radiation in Sydney—a second look. Aust N Z J Public Health. 1998;22(3suppl):360–67. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-842X.1998.tb01392.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Rothman KJ, Chou CK, Morgan R, et al. Assessment of cellular telephone and other radio frequency exposure for epidemiological research. Epidemiology. 1996;7:291–98. doi: 10.1097/00001648-199605000-00013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Rothman KJ, Loughlin JE, Funch DP, Dreyer NA. Overall mortality of cellular telephone customers. Epidemiology. 1996;7:303–5. doi: 10.1097/00001648-199605000-00015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Funch DP, Rothman KJ, Loughlin JE, Dreyer NA. Utility of telephone company records for epidemiologic studies of cellular telephones. Epidemiology. 1996;7:299–302. doi: 10.1097/00001648-199605000-00014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Mild KH, Oftedal G, Sandström M, et al. Comparison of analogue and digital mobile phone users and symptoms: A Swedish-Norwegian epidemiological study. National Institute for Working Life: Sweden, 1998. Online: http://www.niwl.se/default_en.htm
  • 41.International Agency for Research on Cancer IARC. International study on health effects of mobile (cellular) phones to go ahead. 1998. [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Boice JD, Morrissey JJ. Epidemiologic studies related to cellular telephone communications. 1997. [Google Scholar]
  • 43.National Radiological Protection Board NRPB. Electromagnetic Fields and the Risk of Cancer: Report of an Advisory Group on Non-ionizing Radiation. United Kingdom: NRPB Doc; 1992. pp. 1–138. [Google Scholar]
  • 44.McKinlay AF. Radiological Protection Bulletin. 1997. Possible health effects related to the use of radiotelephones. Proposals for a research program by European Commission Expert Group (ECE) pp. 9–16. [Google Scholar]
  • 45.World Health Organization WHO. Electromagnetic fields and public health: Mobile telephones and their base stations. 1998. [Google Scholar]
  • 46.National Radiological Protection Board NRPB. NRPB Response Statement-Mobile Phones and Memory Loss. United Kingdom: NRPB; 1998. [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Canadian Wireless Telecommunications Association CWTA. Usage and attitudes toward wireless communications in Canada. 1998. [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Chapman S, Schofield WN. Lifesavers and samaritans: Emergency use of cellular (mobile) phones in Australia. Accid Anal Prev. 1998;30:815–19. doi: 10.1016/S0001-4575(98)00034-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Canadian Journal of Public Health = Revue Canadienne de Santé Publique are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES