A PLAN For Emergencies

 

Source FEMA IPAWS Video

# 6327

 

 

Today a guide for the acronym-impaired as the federal government makes ready for the launch of their new cell phone emergency alert system dubbed the Personal Localized Alert Network (aka PLAN), also known as CMAS (Commercial Mobile Alert System) or alternately as WEA (Wireless Emergency Alerts).

 

 

Emergency text messages are to be delivered via the IPAWS (Integrated Public Alert and Warning System) program, and can include localized Presidential messages, Amber Alerts, and imminent threat alerts such as severe weather warnings.

 

 

All of this is part of the larger EAS (Emergency Alert System) which broadcasts emergency warnings on radio, TV, and other media (see Emergency Alert System (EAS) Test Today).

 

 

Essentially, with PLAN,  authorized government agencies (either local, tribal, state, or federal) can send an emergency text of up to 90 characters to millions of cell phone users simultaneously, providing instant warning of a localized threat such as a tornado, tsunami, or public safety hazard.

 

The good news is this service is free to cellular customers, and will be offered to nearly all cell phone users in the United States. The bad new is older cell phones may not support this technology, and you may need to upgrade your phone in order to be able to access it.

 

Just over a year ago the FEMA BLOG  carried a detailed report on this new technology, which you can access at:

 

Emergency Alerts Delivered to Your Phone: What Our New PLAN Means to You

Posted by: Damon Penn, Assistant Administrator, National Continuity Programs

 

And from the FCC Encyclopedia, we get this Q&A FAQ on this new PLAN.

 

What is PLAN?

The Personal Localized Alerting Network (PLAN) is a new public safety system that allows customers who own an enabled mobile device to receive geographically-targeted, text-like messages alerting them of imminent threats to safety in their area.

This new technology ensures that emergency alerts will not get stuck in highly congested user areas, which can happen with standard mobile voice and texting services.

<SNIP>

FAQ

 

Q: Who will receive PLAN alerts?

A: Alerts are geographically targeted, so a customer living in downtown New York would not receive a threat alert if they happen to be in Chicago when the alert is sent.  Similarly, someone visiting downtown New York from Chicago on that same day would receive the alert.  This requires a PLAN enabled mobile device and participation by the wireless provider in PLAN.

 

Q: Do consumers have to sign up to receive alerts?

A: Customers of participating carriers are automatically signed up.  PLAN allows government officials to send emergency alerts to all subscribers with PLAN-capable devices if their wireless carrier participates in the program. Consumers do not need to sign up for this service.

 

Q: How much will consumers pay to receive PLAN alerts ?

A: Alerts Are Free. Customers do not pay to receive PLAN alerts.

 

Q: What alerts will PLAN deliver?

A: Alerts from PLAN cover only critical emergency alerts. Consumers will receive only three types of alerts:

1. Alerts issued by the President
2. Alerts involving imminent threats to safety of life
3. Amber Alerts

Participating carriers may allow subscribers to block all but Presidential alerts.

 

Q: What will consumers experience when they receive a PLAN alert?

A: PLAN uses a unique signal and vibration, and appears much like a text message.  A PLAN alert will be accompanied by a unique attention signal and vibration, which is particularly helpful to people with hearing or vision-related disabilities. The PLAN alert will appear as a pop-up text on the handset screen much like a text message.

 

Q: Are PLAN alerts text messages?

A: No, PLAN messages are not text messages. Alerts will not have to be opened like SMS text messages, but will “pop up” on the handset’s screen. PLAN alerts are transmitted using a new technology that is separate and different from voice calls and SMS text messages. This new technology that ensures emergency alerts will not get stuck in highly congested user areas, which can happen with standard mobile voice and texting services. 

 

Q:Will consumers need a new phone or a smart phone to receive alerts?

A: Some phones may require only software upgrades to receive alerts, while in other cases a subscriber may need to purchase a new PLAN-capable handset. Consumers should check with their wireless carrier regarding the availability of PLAN-capable handsets.

 

During a sudden emergency, the most important asset you can have is timely information; being aware of an impending threat, so you can deal with it.

 

Sometimes a few minutes advance warning can make all the difference in the world. 

 

As the EAS system expands and modernizes to include cell phones, Internet, and cable TV – your odds of being blindsided by a tornado, earthquake, or other disaster decreases.

 

But to be truly effective, you need to have a disaster plan already in place to deal with any alerts that the government’s PLAN delivers. 

 

To become better prepared as an individual, family, business owner, or community to deal with all types of disasters, I would invite you to visit the following preparedness sites.

 

FEMA http://www.fema.gov/index.shtm

READY.GOV http://www.ready.gov/

AMERICAN RED CROSS http://www.redcross.org/

BMJ: Another Reassuring Report On Cell Phones & Brain Cancer

 

# 5914

 

Yesterday, the British Medical Journal published the results of a follow up to large Danish cohort study that found no link between cell phone usage and an increase in brain tumors.

 

Although evidence for it has been scant, for a number of years some scientists have expressed concerns that prolonged exposure to cell phone RF (radio frequency) electromagnetic fields might cause certain types of head and neck cancers.

 

In 2010, the 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).

 

Despite that initial finding, a year later (May 2011) the IARC released a statement (IARC Press Release N° 208) that listed mobile phone use in same `possibly’ carcinogenic hazard category as exposure to gasoline, engine exhaust and lead.

 

For details on this statement, you may wish to revisit IARC: Cell Phones `Possibly Carcinogenic’.

 

A couple of months later we saw a study that appeared in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute (see Reassuring Study On Cell Phones & Brain Cancer Risks) that found no link between cell phone use and brain tumors in children and adolescents.

 

While it is unlikely to be the final word on the subject, the study published yesterday in the BMJ follows up on the largest cohort study on mobile phone users to date.

 

And once again, the news is reassuring; long-term subscribers to cellular phone services showed no increase in brain or central nervous system tumors over non-subscribers. 

 

 

Use of mobile phones and risk of brain tumours: update of Danish cohort study

OPEN ACCESS

BMJ 2011; 343:d6387

Patrizia Frei, Aslak H Poulsen, Christoffer Johansen,  Jørgen H Olsen, Marianne Steding-Jessen,  Joachim Schüz

ABSTRACT

Participants All Danes aged ≥30 and born in Denmark after 1925, subdivided into subscribers and non-subscribers of mobile phones before 1995.

 

Main outcome measures Risk of tumours of the central nervous system, identified from the complete Danish Cancer Register. Sex specific incidence rate ratios estimated with log linear Poisson regression models adjusted for age, calendar period, education, and disposable income.

 

Results 358 403 subscription holders accrued 3.8 million person years. In the follow-up period 1990-2007, there were 10 729 cases of tumours of the central nervous system. The risk of such tumours was close to unity for both men and women. When restricted to individuals with the longest mobile phone use—that is, ≥13 years of subscription—the incidence rate ratio was 1.03 (95% confidence interval 0.83 to 1.27) in men and 0.91 (0.41 to 2.04) in women. Among those with subscriptions of ≥10 years, ratios were 1.04 (0.85 to 1.26) in men and 1.04 (0.56 to 1.95) in women for glioma and 0.90 (0.57 to 1.42) in men and 0.93 (0.46 to 1.87) in women for meningioma. There was no indication of dose-response relation either by years since first subscription for a mobile phone or by anatomical location of the tumour—that is, in regions of the brain closest to where the handset is usually held to the head.

 

Conclusions In this update of a large nationwide cohort study of mobile phone use, there were no increased risks of tumours of the central nervous system, providing little evidence for a causal association.

 

 

While this study was subject (as are all studies) to some limitations, In an accompanying BMJ editorial (Mobile telephones and brain tumours) professors Anders Ahlbom and Maria Feychting called the evidence in this report `reassuring’.

 

They cautioned, however, that `continued monitoring of health registers and prospective cohorts is still warranted.’

Reassuring Study On Cell Phones & Brain Cancer Risks

 

 

Photo Credit – Wikipedia

 

# 5822

 

Two months ago the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) issued 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.

 

For details on this announcement, you may wish to revisit IARC: Cell Phones `Possibly Carcinogenic’.

 

For a number of years some scientists had expressed concerns that prolonged exposure to cell phone RF (radiofrequency) electromagnetic fields might cause certain types of head and neck cancers.

 

And many researchers worried that children, teenagers, and young adults - who rank among the most fervent users of cell phones - could be at particular risk.

 

While it probably won’t settle the debate, today we’ve a new study that appears in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute that reassuringly found no link between cell phone use and brain tumors in children and adolescents.

 

 

Mobile Phone Use and Brain Tumors in Children and Adolescents: A Multicenter Case–Control Study

Denis Aydin, Maria Feychting, Joachim Schüz, Tore Tynes, Tina Veje Andersen, Lisbeth Samsø Schmidt, Aslak Harbo Poulsen, Christoffer Johansen, Michaela Prochazka, Birgitta Lannering, Lars Klæboe, Tone Eggen, Daniela Jenni, Michael Grotzer, Nicolas Von der Weid, Claudia E. Kuehni and Martin Röösli

 

The authors examined the medical records of 352 children aged 7-19  from Norway, Denmark, Sweden, & Switzerland with brain tumors. They conducted interviews with them to determine their cell phone usage, and compared this data to 646 control subjects.

 

The researchers found no statistically significant increase in the incidence of brain tumors among children and adolescents who were exposed to cell phone radiation, compared to those who were not.

 

Their conclusion:

 

The absence of an exposure–response relationship either in terms of the amount of mobile phone use or by localization of the brain tumor argues against a causal association.

 

 

Today’s study has some limitations. 

 

It is based primarily on self-reported data, the subjects had been using cell phones for an average of only 4 years, and much of this usage was likely text messaging -as opposed to voice calls – which would reduce radiation exposure to the head and neck.

 

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.

 

While today’s results are encouraging, the authors believe that it is important to continue to study the issue and be on the lookout for potential negative health effects related to cell phone use in children.

IARC: Cell Phones `Possibly Carcinogenic’

 

 

# 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.

JAMA: Cell Phone Use Stimulates Brain Activity

 

 

 

# 5334

 

 

Concerns over the potential health ramifications of long-term & frequent cell phone use continues despite a number of studies that have yielded inconsistent results.

 

In May of 2010, the 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)

 

Of course, it can sometimes take years – or even decades – of research before the full effect of a new technology like cellular communications can be adequately established.

 

Today we’ve a new study that looks at how cell phone radiation affects brain activity, which is published in the February 23rd issue of JAMA.

 

The short version is: Prolonged exposure to cell phone radiation has now been shown to increase brain activity, but the clinical significance (if any) of such increases are unknown.

 

First a link and some excerpts from the abstract, followed by links to a video, press release, after which I will return.

 

 

Effects of Cell Phone Radiofrequency Signal Exposure on Brain Glucose Metabolism

Nora D. Volkow, MD; Dardo Tomasi, PhD; Gene-Jack Wang, MD; Paul Vaska, PhD; Joanna S. Fowler, PhD; Frank Telang, MD; Dave Alexoff, BSE; Jean Logan, PhD; Christopher Wong, MS

(EXCERPTS)

Objective To evaluate if acute cell phone exposure affects brain glucose metabolism, a marker of brain activity

Conclusions In healthy participants and compared with no exposure, 50-minute cell phone exposure was associated with increased brain glucose metabolism in the region closest to the antenna. This finding is of unknown clinical significance.

The link to the press release, embargoed until yesterday afternoon, follows:

 

Cell Phone Use May Have Effect on Brain Activity, But Health Consequences Unknown

FOR RELEASE: 3 P.M. (CT) TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 22, 2011

Media Advisory: To contact Nora D. Volkow, M.D., call the NIH press office at 301-496-5787 or email

nmb@od.nih.gov.

To contact editorial co-author Lennart Hardell, M.D., Ph.D., email lennart.hardell@orebroll.se.

Cell Phone Use May Have Effect on Brain Activity, But Health Consequences Unknown

CHICAGO – In a preliminary study, researchers found that 50-minute cell phone use was associated with increased brain glucose metabolism (a marker of brain activity) in the region closest to the phone antenna, but the finding is of unknown clinical significance, according to a study in the February 23 issue of JAMA.

 

“The dramatic worldwide increase in use of cellular telephones has prompted concerns regarding potential harmful effects of exposure to radiofrequency-modulated electromagnetic fields (RF-EMFs). Of particular concern has been the potential carcinogenic effects from the RF-EMF emissions of cell phones. However, epidemiologic studies of the association between cell phone use and prevalence of brain tumors have been inconsistent (some, but not all, studies showed increased risk), and the issue remains unresolved,” according to background information in the article. The authors add that studies performed in humans to investigate the effects of RF-EMF exposures from cell phones have yielded variable results, highlighting the need for studies to document whether RF-EMFs from cell phone use affects brain function in humans.

(Continue . . . )

 

 

This study basically used PET scans (Positron emission tomography) to chart the brain’s activity via it’s uptake of F-FDG, a radioactive pharmaceutical used for imaging the heart, lungs, and brain.

 

Participants underwent PET Scans with cell phones placed on their left and right ears; once with the right cell phone `on’ (with sound muted) for 50 minutes and once with both cell phones `off’.

 

Areas of the brain in close proximity to the antennas of the 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 is unknown for now.

 

In an accompanying editorial, Cell Phone Radiofrequency Radiation Exposure and Brain Glucose Metabolism, Henry Lai, PhD & Lennart Hardell, MD, PhD write:

 

“Although the biological significance, if any, of increased glucose metabolism from acute cell phone exposure is unknown, the results warrant further investigation. An important question is whether glucose metabolism in the brain would be chronically increased from regular use of a wireless phone with higher radiofrequency energy than those used in the current study. Potential acute and chronic health effects need to be clarified. Much has to be done to further investigate and understand these effects.”

 

These authors also question whether the changes to brain function detected in this study could adversely affect other physiological functions of the body.

 

Admittedly, not many answers from this study. 

But it raises a lot of questions.

The IARC Cell Phone Report

 

 

 

# 4576

 

 

During my `back to the land’ phase - where I tried to tame 24 acres of Missouri wilderness (starting in 1995) - I lived in a remote area of the country where cell phone coverage was spotty at best.  

 

The only internet access was dial-up, and slow dialup at that.  On a good dry day, I might get 28.8K.  If it had rained recently . . . well, forget about it. 

 

So I missed out on a good deal of the technological revolution of the late 1990s, including cell phones.

 

When I finally returned to Florida (the statue of limitations having expired), I bought my first cell phone.  I don’t use it much, less than 90 minutes a month . . . but I’d hate to be without it. 

 

At age 56, I consider my cell phone a tool, even a bit of a luxury. 

 

But for my teenage grandnieces, they are practically implants. As necessary to them as oxygen or internet access. They burn more cell phone minutes in an average day than I do most months, along with sending hundreds of text messages every week.   

 

To them, cell phones are an integral part of their lives.   But as with almost everything, there’s a catch.  

 

Some scientists have concerns that prolonged exposure to cell phone RF (radiofrequency) electromagnetic fields could cause certain types of head and neck cancers. And researchers worry that children, teenagers, and young adults, who rank among the most fervent users of cell phones, could be at particular risk.

 

Yesterday, the 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. 

 

Which isn’t quite the same as saying that `no risk’ exists. The study, the authors admit, had limitations.

And some scientists are less than mollified by their findings.

 

This study leaves us with a good many unanswered questions.  From the Press Release:

Dr Christopher Wild, Director of IARC said: "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."

 

First the IARC reports: a link to the (subscription) Journal article, the audio to yesterday’s press conference,  and the press release.

 

 

WHO Press Conference - Interphone Study

18/05/2010 -
17 May 2010 16:00 - 16:45, WHO Headquarters, Geneva
Interphone study reports on mobile phone use and brain cancer risk
- Dr Christopher Wild, Director, IARC
- Dr Vincent Cogliano, Head, IARC Monographs Program
- Dr Elisabeth Cardis, Centre for Research in Environnement Epidemiology (CREAL)

Listen to the WHO Press Conference [mp3 28Mb]

 

 

Interphone Study Results published

17/05/2010 -
Brain tumour risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the INTERPHONE international case–control study
International Journal of Epidemiology 2010;1–20. doi:10.1093/ije/dyq079
The INTERPHONE Study Group
 IARC Press Release No. 200

 

We also have this release from the FDA.

 

 

The 4-year delay in presenting this data, the participation in the study by the cell phone industry, the methods used, and some aspects of this data’s presentation have caused some observers to view this study as frustratingly flawed.

 

From Reuters, we get this report calling into question the methods used in the study.

 

Cell phone cancer study shows problems with method

 

Kate Kelland, Health and Science Correspondent – Analysis

LONDON (Reuters) - The frustratingly inconclusive results from the world's biggest study so far into possible links between mobile phone use and cancer are symptomatic of problems that can dog scientific research like this.

 

Campaigners, cancer doctors and mobile phone manufacturers have been waiting for a decade to see if the findings of the study led by the respected International Agency for Research into Cancer (IARC) would finally provide an answer.

 

It didn't and experts say the biases and potential errors that rendered the study unreliable are difficult to avoid, yet very hard to adjust for.

(Continue . . . )

 

 

Time Magazine’s coverage of this report is even less reassuring.

 

 

Cell Phones and Cancer: a Study's Muddled Findings

By Bryan Walsh Monday, May. 17, 2010

It has become one of the most controversial questions in cancer medicine: can using a cell phone cause brain tumors? The federal government and the mobile industry have maintained there is no conclusive data to support a link between cell-phone radiation and cancer, but a growing band of scientists are skeptical, suggesting that the evidence that does exist is enough to raise a warning for consumers — before mass harm is done.

(Continue . . )

 

As then there’s this from New York Times. 

 

May 18, 2010, 7:03 am

Questions About Cellphones and Brain Tumors

By TARA PARKER-POPE

A long-awaited study of cellphone use and brain health has finally been released, but the data are raising more questions than answers.

The report is called Interphone, a 13-country study that amounts to the largest and longest study of whether extensive cellphone use increases risk for brain tumors. The study results, published in The International Journal of Epidemiology, were delayed by four years, reportedly after researchers disagreed over how to present the results.

(Continue . . .)

 

For now, the good news is there is no firm evidence linking cell phone use to an increased risk of cancer.  The bad news is, if such a link does exist, it could be another 10 years or more before a spike in head and neck tumors becomes measurable.

 

In the meantime, the FDA suggests that people who are worried about about cell-phone cancer risks should consider:

Minimizing RF Exposure

Although evidence shows little or no risk of brain  tumors  for most  long-term users of cell phones, FDA says people who want to reduce their RF exposure can:

•   reduce the amount of time spent on the cell phone
•   use speaker mode or a headset to place more distance between the head and the cell phone