# 5588
It was just over a year ago that the the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) released their long-delayed INTERPHONE report, which was unable to establish a link between cell phone use and brain tumors (see The IARC Cell Phone Report) .
For a number of years some scientists have expressed concerns that prolonged exposure to cell phone RF (radiofrequency) electromagnetic fields might cause certain types of head and neck cancers.
And researchers worried that children, teenagers, and young adults, who rank among the most fervent users of cell phones, could be at particular risk.
While reassuring, the 2010 INTERPHONE report wasn’t exactly an `All Clear’ on cell phone dangers. The study, the authors admitted, had limitations. And some scientists were less than mollified by their findings.
At the time, Dr Christopher Wild, Director of IARC warned that additional studies were warranted. From the IARC press release of May, 2010:
"An increased risk of brain cancer is not established from the data from Interphone.
However, observations at the highest level of cumulative call time and the changing patterns of mobile phone use since the period studied by Interphone, particularly in young people, mean that further investigation of mobile phone use and brain cancer risk is merited."
Earlier this year we also saw a major report in the Journal of the American Medical Association that looked at the effects of RF signal exposure on brain activity (see JAMA: Cell Phone Use Stimulates Brain Activity).
Using PET scans researchers were able to prove that areas of the brain in close proximity to the antennas of activated cell phones demonstrated increased glucose uptake, indicating increased localized brain activity in response to the RF (radio frequency) emissions.
This study indicates that the prolonged use of a cell phone does affect brain activity. What all this might mean in regards to human health remains unknown for now.
Fast forward to today, and the IARC has released a new statement (IARC Press Release N° 208) that lists mobile phone use in same carcinogenic hazard category as exposure to gasoline, engine exhaust and lead.
Given the popularity of (and our societal reliance upon) cell phones, this report – which classifies radio-frequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B) - is likely to spur a good deal of news coverage.
Group 1 carcinogens are those that are most strongly associated with cancer, like smoking and asbestos, and are considered the most dangerous.
Group 2a carcinogens are considered probably carcinogenic based on limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals.
Group 2b carcinogens – where cell phones have now been ranked – are considered possibly carcinogenic, but evidence is limited in both humans and experimental animals.
For now, the evidence supporting a link between cell phones and certain types of brain cancer is limited. However, Dr Jonathan Samet, the overall chairman of the working group states :
“ . . . the evidence, while still accumulating, is strong enough to support a conclusion and the 2B classification. The conclusion means that there could be some risk, and therefore we need to keep a close watch for a link between cell phones and cancer risk.”
None of this proves that cell phones cause brain cancer. Only that there is enough evidence to suggest a link to a specific type of cancer (glioma), and that more studies must be done.
Since it can take years – or even decades – for brain cancers to develop, the true health impacts from the stratospheric rise in cell phone use over the past decade may be difficult to accurately gauge for some time.
A full report on the IARC’s findings will be published over the next few days in The Lancet Oncology.
