[ RadSafe ] Bill would require health warnings on Maine cell phones

[Yoss, Robert]

STATE HOUSE

February 28 

Bill would require health warnings on Maine cell phones

During lunch in late April 1995, Lloyd Morgan collapsed on the floor and had a 45-minute seizure. Doctors later found a tumor the size of a peach in his brain. They could not operate, he said, because his brain was so swollen that it might herniate.

"The only place that your brain can go if the pressure builds up enough is down into the brain stem," Morgan said. "But that kills you."

After eight days in critical condition, doctors successfully removed the tumor. Morgan's neurologist told him electromagnetic radiation may have caused it. Since then, he has become a champion for revealing the effects this radiation -- the sort that is emitted by cell phones -- on the brain.

Tuesday, he will testify before the Legislature's Health and Human Services Committee when it hears L.D. 1706, which would make Maine the first state to put warnings on cell phones. They would say the electromagnetic radiation the phone emits could cause brain cancer and that users -- particularly kids and pregnant women -- should use caution.

It is estimated that, of Maine's 1.3 million people, 950,000 use cell phones.

"I'm not an anti-technology person," said Rep. Andrea Boland, D-Sanford, the bill's sponsor. "My concern is that we have enormously powerful industries that can scoot responsibilities because they do have so much power and they have products that we like so much."

Boland, whose husband died of cancer, said she began to ask questions about the safety of cell phones after a professional conference two and a half years ago. Since then, she has found "serious, independent, scientific studies that show danger."

The wireless industry's trade association, CTIA, says the government has regulated cell phones for safety.

"Congress has given the (Federal Communications Commission) the responsibility for setting the safe levels of radio frequency exposure," said John Walls, CTIA's vice president of public affairs. "The FCC has relied on the scientific expertise of agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration."

The relationship between these agencies on this issue, however, is unclear.

The FCC, on its Web site, includes this statement: "Working closely with federal health and safety agencies, such as the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the FCC has adopted limits for safe exposure to radiofrequency (RF) energy."

The FDA also has a statement on its Web site; it says the agency lacks the responsibility to review cell phone safety.

"Under the law, FDA does not review the safety of radiation-emitting consumer products such as cell phones and similar wireless devices before they can be sold, as it does with new drugs or medical devices. However, FDA does have the authority to take action if cell phones are shown to emit radiofrequency energy (RF) at a level that is hazardous to the user."

Supporters of L.D. 1706 said there is a difference between proving safety and not proving danger.

"The industry used to say that they met all applicable safety standards," said George Carlo, a lawyer and pathologist who taught at George Washington Medical School for 20 years. "Well, that's true. There are none."

Beginning in 1993, Carlo supervised a study sponsored by CTIA that came about, he said, after a Florida court case that attracted some national attention when David Reynard, who had sued several telecommunications companies, said on national television his wife died because of a brain tumor caused by a cell phone.

Carlo said he was asked to design and run a study that would be peer-reviewed and involve 200 doctors from around the world. It lasted for six years and cost the industry $28.5 million.

"We found genetic damage in human blood exposed to cell phone radiation," he said in an interview Friday. "We found an increased risk of tumors of the acoustic nerve. We found more than a doubling of the risk of neuroepithelial tumors."

This class of tumor affects a type of cell in the brain, and is the same kind that killed David Reynard's wife, said Carlo, the co-author of "Cell Phones, Invisible Hazards in the Wireless Age."

"Finding genetic damage in human blood is enough to prevent any product from finding its way into commerce," he said. "I made the recommendation that a warning label be put on phones, to both the industry and the government, in 1999."

Walls said that the CTIA is confident cell phones are safe.

"What we relied on is the expertise of renowned health agencies around the world who have reviewed numerous studies that have been conducted over an extended period of time, and based on their review, those organizations and agencies have concluded that there are no adverse health affects," he said.

Carlo questioned that body of science, saying that industry paid for studies that supported its claims.

"Those studies that are independent of industry funding are six times more likely to find a problem than those that are funded by industry," Carlo said.

Morgan, the victim of a brain tumor who has become an advocate for cell phone caution, published a review of the research in the peer-reviewed journal Pathophysiology.

Studies of the effects cell phone use for a few years are inconclusive, he said, but "industry studies and independent studies, when combined for more than 10 years of use, show a doubling of brain tumors."

At this point, said Carlo, the government would not ban cell phones even if it was accepted that they were dangerous.

"From a political point of view, when you have almost 200 million people using something, it isn't a good idea to take it away," he said. "The only public health step that can be taken is a warning to consumers."

Ethan Wilensky-Lanford -- 620-7016

ewlanford at mainetoday.com