The WHO report neither establishes nor quantifies the risk that mobile phones can produce cancer

30/11/2011

The Scientific Advisory Committee on Radio Frequencies and Health (CCARS) has analysed the review document prepared by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), which forms part of the World Health Organisation (WHO), on the current state of scientific knowledge regarding the possible carcinogenicity of radio frequencies, and has concluded that it does not either establish or quantify the degree of risk whilst recommending further research to confirm this hypothesis. This conclusion is in accordance with that reached by the CCARS in its report on the interim results of the Interphone study of May 2010, entitled “CCARS Position Document: Results of the Interphone Study and its Report on Radio Frequencies and Health 2009/2010”. Although publication of the monograph's full text must be awaited before a complete and rigorous evaluation can be carried out, it can be deduced from the press release and associated press conference that some studies suggest that intensive mobile phone use may increase the risk of suffering from certain types of brain tumour (glioma), although it should be noted that the Agency has evaluated more than 900 agents (substances) over the past 40 years. On the basis of this initial assessment, the research teams provide a more in-depth view of the causes and biological mechanisms that could explain the relationship between a specific agent and the disease it may be responsible for causing. The risk that this effect may occur is then evaluated and measures to prevent or restrict it are proposed. The IARC supports the opinion of the CCARS whereby analysis of the current scientific literature does not allow either occupational exposure or the environmental exposure associated with the transmission of radio, television and wireless telecommunication signals (antennae) to be classified as possibly or probably carcinogenic, and that further research is required. The CCARS will analyse the contents of the Monograph in great detail once it is published. On the basis of this risk analysis, it will then make available to the relevant public health authorities the knowledge and evidence required to assess the need to adopt informational and preventive measures regarding the use of RF. In order to undertake this evaluation, and as is normal for IARC procedures, the relevant experts analyse the scientific literature regarding the effects of various types of radio frequency, grouping them into three categories: - occupational exposure (workers) to radar and microwaves - environmental exposure associated with the transmission of radio, television and wireless telecommunication signals (antennae) - personal exposure associated with the use of wireless (mobile) phones. The CCARS considers that, in light of the long latency periods for this type of tumour, the long-term studies concerning the effects of exposure to mobile phones should continue in order to be able to reject or confirm the association observed in the intensive-user group. The WHO should coordinate the scientific work required to translate this 2b classification into specific, viable, efficient and effective measures that allow the benefits provided by mobile telecommunications to be combined with a safe use of mobile phones. DATA OF INTEREST The IARC establishes the carcinogenic ability of an agent on the basis of the damage this substance may cause under specific circumstances. The IARC criterion for assessing an agent is that there are indications of potential damage and that humans are known to be exposed to said agent. I n accordance with the scientific evidence, the IARC classifies the agent (product, substance, activity,...) into one of four groups: Group 1: Carcinogenic to humans: There is enough evidence to conclude that it can cause cancer in humans. For example: alcoholic drinks, asbestos, tobacco, etc. Group 2A: Probably carcinogenic to humans: This category is used when there is some evidence that it can cause cancer in humans and sufficient evidence in experimental animals. For example, vehicle exhaust fumes, sun lamps, PCBs, etc. Group 2B: Possibly carcinogenic to humans: This category is used when there is some evidence that it can cause cancer in humans but insufficient evidence in animals. For example, coffee, petrol, chloroform, ELF, etc. Group 3: Unclassifiable Agents. This category is used when the evidence that it can cause cancer in humans and experimental animals is insufficient. For example, caffeine, mercury, saccharine, etc. Group 4: Probably not carcinogenic to humans: There is strong evidence that it does not cause cancer in humans. The only agent in this list is caprolactam (a precursor of nylon)