From X-rays to Cordless Phones:
Radiation Causes Brain
Tumors
Lloyd Morgan
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs2
Ionizing Radiation
Exposures are from X-rays, A-bombs,
radioactivity
Only...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs3
Ionizing Radiation
Increased risk of brain tumors
Age: Children at greate...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs4
Risk by Age, Brain Cancer:
Children “cured” of ringworm of the scalp by X...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs5
Excess Risk Increases Every Year From Exposure [1]
Excess Absolute Risk f...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs6
Ionizing Radiation
Latency time (from exposure to
diagnosis)
Brain Cancer...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs7
Small percentage of total tumors seen at 20 years [1]
40 Years After Expo...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs8
Non-ionizing Radiation: Wireless Phones
Exposures from cellphones, cordle...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs9
Non-ionizing Radiation: Wireless Phones
Increased risk of brain tumors
Ag...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs10
Wireless Phones: Risk by Age [2]
Increased Risk of Brain Tumor
0%
100%
2...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs11
Non-ionizing Radiation: Wireless Phones
Increased risk of brain tumors
P...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs12
Non-ionizing Radiation: Digital Cellphones
Latency time
Much shorter lat...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs13
Non-ionizing Radiation: Analog Cellphones
Acoustic Neuroma [4]
• 230% in...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs14
Non-ionizing Radiation: Analog Cellphones
Meningioma [4]
• 20% increased...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs15
Wireless Phones:Years of Exposure [4, 5]
Increased Risk of Brain Tumor b...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs16
Cellphone Industry’s Studies of the Risk of Brain Tumor
from Cellphone U...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs17
Scatter Plots (following slides)
Vertical axis is percentage confidence ...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs18
Scatter Plots (following slides)
Scatter plot: regions of importance
Lin...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs19
Industry studies compared to independent studies [5, 9, 11]
Excess Risk ...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs20
Industry studies compared to independent studies [4, 8, 6, 7]
Excess Ris...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs21
Industry studies compared to independent studies [4, 6, 7]
Excess Risk o...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs22
A Speculation
What is the nexus between ionizing radiation and non-ioniz...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs23
Summation
Ionizing Radiation
Young at greater risk
Latency time
• Brain ...
Conclusion: A Query
Is the non-ionizing radiation
exposure from wireless phone use a
greater risk for brain tumors than
io...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs25
References
1. Sadetzki et al. Long-Term Follow-up for Brain Tumor Develo...
Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs26
Interphone Study References
6. Christensen et al., Cellular Telephone Us...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Téléphone portable et cancer

376
-1

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
376
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
12
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Téléphone portable et cancer

  1. 1. From X-rays to Cordless Phones: Radiation Causes Brain Tumors Lloyd Morgan
  2. 2. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs2 Ionizing Radiation Exposures are from X-rays, A-bombs, radioactivity Only “known” environmental cause of brain tumors (since 1974 or earlier) Energy sufficient to break molecular bonds For example, DNA • Broken DNA creates free radicals – Free radicals cause further DNA damage thought to cause cancer
  3. 3. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs3 Ionizing Radiation Increased risk of brain tumors Age: Children at greater risk than adults Dose measured in Gray (Gy): Risk increases linearly with dose • Dose=(Radiation power)/(weight of exposed tissue) x (time) – Risk increases with power (Watts) – Risk increases with time Excess risk, 30 or more years (all ages) [1] Brain Cancer: 200+% Meningioma: 70+%
  4. 4. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs4 Risk by Age, Brain Cancer: Children “cured” of ringworm of the scalp by X-rays [1] Excess Relative Risk (ERR) per Gray (Gy) for Malignant Brain Tumors by Age at Exposure from Ionizing Radiation Exposure 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 300% 350% 400% <5 5-9 10+ Age at Exposure ERR/GY Mean estimated dose: 1.5 Gy (range 1.0 to 6.0 Gy) Source: Sadetzki et al., Long-Term Follow-up for Brain Tumor Development after Childhood Exposure to Ionizing Radiation for Tinea Capitis; RADIATION RESEARCH 163, 424–432 (2005)
  5. 5. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs5 Excess Risk Increases Every Year From Exposure [1] Excess Absolute Risk for Malignant Brain Tumor and Non-malignant Meningioma from Exposure to Ionizing Radiation 14% 37% 74% 55% 203% 18% 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% <20 20-29 30+ Excess Absolute Risk Malignant Meningioma Years from Exposure to Diagnosis (Latency Time) Source: Sadetzki et al., Long-Term Follow-up for Brain Tumor Development after Childhood Exposure to Ionizing Radiation for Tinea Capitis; RADIATION RESEARCH 163, 424–432 (2005)
  6. 6. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs6 Ionizing Radiation Latency time (from exposure to diagnosis) Brain Cancer: 20 to 30 years Meningioma: 30-40 years
  7. 7. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs7 Small percentage of total tumors seen at 20 years [1] 40 Years After Exposure: Cumulative % of Malignant Brain Tumors from Ionizing Radiation by Years to Diagnosis (Latency Time) 100% 45.2% 25.8% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% <20 <20-29 20-40 Latency Time for Tumor Diagnosis (Years) Mean Age at Exposure: 7.1 years (range <1 to 15 years) Source: Sadetzki et al., Long-Term Follow-up for Brain Tumor Development after Childhood Exposure to Ionizing Radiation for Tinea Capitis; RADIATION RESEARCH 163, 424–432 (2005)
  8. 8. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs8 Non-ionizing Radiation: Wireless Phones Exposures from cellphones, cordless phones, walkie-talkies, baby monitors Risk of brain tumors Energy cannot break molecular bonds Creates free radicals; increases lifetime of free radicals
  9. 9. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs9 Non-ionizing Radiation: Wireless Phones Increased risk of brain tumors Age: Younger have higher risk [2] • Greater than 5 years of cellphone use – 700+% for 20-29 years olds (7 cases, 94.8% confidence) – 35% for all ages, 20-80 years (160 cases, 97% confidence) Dose measured in Gray (Gy) • Dose=(Radiation power)/(weight of exposed tissue) x (time) – Risk increases with power (Watts) – Risk increases with time Tumor on same side of head as where digital cellphone was used [5] • 260+% increased risk of brain cancer (97 cases, 99.91% confidence)
  10. 10. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs10 Wireless Phones: Risk by Age [2] Increased Risk of Brain Tumor 0% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500% 600% 700% 800% 20-80 years 20-29 years 20-80 years 20-29 years Analog cellphone Cordless phone
  11. 11. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs11 Non-ionizing Radiation: Wireless Phones Increased risk of brain tumors Power: Increase risk with higher wattage (phone type or distance from cell tower) • Rural cellphone users have 740% higher risk of brain cancer than urban users after 5 years of digital cellphone use (10 cases, 95.6% confidence) [3] Time: Ten years after first use, increased risk of brain cancer with greater hours of use [5] • Cordless phone use (median hours of use=243 hours) – 30% increased risk for less than median hours of use (5 cases, 35% confidence) – 310% increased risk for more than median hours of use (25 cases, 99.996% confidence)
  12. 12. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs12 Non-ionizing Radiation: Digital Cellphones Latency time Much shorter latency time than ionizing radiation (1st tumor after X-ray for ringworm was 7 years) • Brain cancer [5] – 60% increased risk, 1 to 5 years of digital cellphone use – 100 cases, 98% confidence – 120% increased risk, 5 to 10 years – 79 cases, 99.96% confidence – 260% increased risk, more than 10 years – 19 cases, 99.94% confidence
  13. 13. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs13 Non-ionizing Radiation: Analog Cellphones Acoustic Neuroma [4] • 230% increased risk, 1 to 5 years of cellphone use – 16 cases, 99.3% confidence • 340% increased risk, >5 to 10 years – 33 cases, 99.99996% confidence • 310% increased risk, >10 years – 19 cases, 99.98% confidence • 380% increased risk, >15 years – 6 cases, 99.3% confidence
  14. 14. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs14 Non-ionizing Radiation: Analog Cellphones Meningioma [4] • 20% increased risk, 1-5 years of cellphone use – 32 cases, 63% confidence • 20% increased risk, 5 to 10 years – 47 cases, 63% confidence • 60% increased risk, more than 10 years – 34 cases, 96% confidence
  15. 15. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs15 Wireless Phones:Years of Exposure [4, 5] Increased Risk of Brain Tumor by Year of Wireless Phone Use 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 300% Brain Cancer Brain Cancer Brain Cancer Meningioma Meningioma Meningioma Acoustic Neuroma Acoustic Neuroma Acoustic Neuroma Anaog Digital Cordless Anaog Digital Cordless Anaog Digital Cordless Wireless Phone Type Increased risk 1 to 5 years >5 to 10 years >10 years >15 years
  16. 16. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs16 Cellphone Industry’s Studies of the Risk of Brain Tumor from Cellphone Use “Interphone” studies rarely find a risk of brain tumors from cellphone use 13 participating countries • Increased risk has been found – 4 of 7 studies found increased risk for more than 10 years of use [7, 8, 10, 12] Major funding received from cellphone industry • Funding “was governed by agreements that guaranteed complete scientific independence” – The researchers knew where the funding had come from – “Don’t bite the hand that feeds you,” is the psychological reality – Doesn’t mean that the researchers are dishonest
  17. 17. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs17 Scatter Plots (following slides) Vertical axis is percentage confidence of a finding Horizontal axis is excess (or decrease) risk of a brain tumor of a finding Risk overview If no risk • About half of all findings will show increased risk and • About half of all findings will show decreased risk
  18. 18. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs18 Scatter Plots (following slides) Scatter plot: regions of importance Line of "Statistical Significance“ • Indicates 95% confidence – When confidence is 95% or more, it is said to be “statistically significant” (pale yellow region) Area of Little to No Statistical Meaning (reddish region) • Zero percent confidence to 90% confidence Area of Marginal Statistical Meaning (orange region) • 90% to 95% confidence Region where study bias may explain increased/decreased risk (bright yellow region) • Increase risk and decreased risk between up to 100% – Epidemiologists’ rule of thumb where bias or confounding problems may explain a finding
  19. 19. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs19 Industry studies compared to independent studies [5, 9, 11] Excess Risk of Glioma with 5 Years or More and/or Cellphone Use on Same Side of Head as Tumor Location Combinations of Wireless Phone Use: Results from Hardell et al. and Interphone Studies 0.0000001 0.0000010 0.0000100 0.0001000 0.0010000 0.0100000 0.1000000 1.0000000 -700% -600% -500% -400% -300% -200% -100% 0% 100% 200% 300% 400% 500% 600% 700% p-value (% Confidence) Line of "Statistical Significance" (99.999%) (99%) (99.9999%) (99.99999%) (99.99%) (99.9%) (90%) Increasing Risk of Glioma From Cellphone UseDecreasing Risk of Glioma From Cellphone Use Substantial Cellphone Industry Funding of Study Study Funding Independent of Cellphone Industry Increased Risk of Glioma Relative to Non-Cellphone UsersDecreased Risk of Glioma Relative to Non-Cellphone Users Region where study bias may explain increased/decreased risk Area of Little to No Statistical Meaning Area of Marginal Statistical Meaning 120% increased risk, 94% confidence
  20. 20. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs20 Industry studies compared to independent studies [4, 8, 6, 7] Excess Risk of Acoustic Neuroma with with 5 Years or More and/or Wireless Phone Use on Same Side of Head as Tumor Location or Combinations of Wireless Phone Use: Results from Hardell et al. and Interphone Studies 1.000000E-08 1.000000E-07 1.000000E-06 1.000000E-05 1.000000E-04 1.000000E-03 1.000000E-02 1.000000E-01 1.000000E+00 -400% -350% -300% -250% -200% -150% -100% -50% 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% 300% 350% 400% p-value (% confidence) (90%) (99%) (99.9%) (99.99%) (99.999%) Line of "Statistical Significance" Substantial Cellphone Industry Funding of Study Study Funding Independent of Cellphone Industry Decreased Risk of Acoustic Neuroma Relative to Non-Cellphone Users Decreasing Risk of Acoustic Neuroma From Cellphone Use Increased Risk of Acoustic Neuroma Relative to Non-Cellphone Users Increasing Risk of Acoustic Neuroma From Cellphone Use Region where study bias may explain increased/decreased risk Area of Little to No Statistical Meaning Area of Marginal Statistical Meaning (99.9999%) (99.999999%) (99.99999%) Strong "protective" effect
  21. 21. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs21 Industry studies compared to independent studies [4, 6, 7] Excess Risk of Meningioma with 5 Years or More and/or Cellphone Use on Same Side of Head as Tumor Location or Combinations of Wireless Phone Use: Results from Hardell et al. and Interphone Studies 0.00100 0.01000 0.10000 1.00000 -250% -200% -150% -100% -50% 0% 50% 100% 150% 200% 250% p-value (% confidence) (90%) (99%) (99.9%) Substantial Cellphone Industry Funding of Study Study Funding Independent of Cellphone Industry Region where study bias may explain increased/decreased risk Increased Risk of Meningioma Relative to Non-Cellphone UsersDecreased Risk of Meningioma Relative to Non-Cellphone Decreasing Risk of Meningioma From Cellphone Use Increasing Risk of Meningioma From Cellphone Use Area of Little to No Statistical Meaning Area of Marginal Statistical Meaning Line of "Statistical Significance"
  22. 22. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs22 A Speculation What is the nexus between ionizing radiation and non-ionizing radiation and tumors? Many physicists argue that non-ionizing radiation cannot cause tumors because non-ionizing radiation cannot break the molecular bonds of DNA. It is true that non-ionizing radiation cannot break DNA bonds. But the paradigm posited by many physicists assumes that only the breaking of DNA bonds can cause tumors. Both ionizing radiation and non-ionizing radiation creates free radicals. Perhaps the nexus is the creation of free radicals?
  23. 23. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs23 Summation Ionizing Radiation Young at greater risk Latency time • Brain cancer, 20-30 years – Increased risk 55% • Meningioma, 30-40 yrs – Increased risk 37% Power • Increasing risk with increasing power Dose measure in Gray Non-ionizing Radiation Young at greater risk Latency time • Brain cancer, 1-5/> 10 years – Increased risk 60%/260% • Meningioma, >10 years – 60% Power • Increasing risk with increasing power Dose measure in Gray
  24. 24. Conclusion: A Query Is the non-ionizing radiation exposure from wireless phone use a greater risk for brain tumors than ionizing radiation?
  25. 25. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs25 References 1. Sadetzki et al. Long-Term Follow-up for Brain Tumor Development after Childhood Exposure to Ionizing Radiation for Tinea Capitis; RADIATION RESEARCH 163, 424– 432 (2005) 2. Hardell et al., Cellular and Cordless Telephone Use and the Association with Brain Tumors in Different Age Groups; Arch Environ Health. 2004 Mar;59(3):132-7 3. Hardell et al, Use of cellular telephones and brain tumour risk in urban and rural areas; Occup Environ Med 2005;62:390–394. 4. Hardell et al., Pooled analysis of two case-control studies on the use of cellular and cordless telephones and the risk of benign brain tumours diagnosed during 1997-2003; INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY 28: 509-518, 2006 5. Hardell et al., Case–control study of the association between the use of cellular and cordless telephones and malignant brain tumors diagnosed during 2000–2003; Environ Res. 2006 Feb;100(2):232-41
  26. 26. Revised 22 March 2006Lloyd Morgan email: bilovs26 Interphone Study References 6. Christensen et al., Cellular Telephone Use and Risk of Acoustic Neuroma; Am J Epidemiol 2004;159:277–283 7. Lönn et al., Mobile Phone Use and the Risk of Acoustic Neuroma; Epidemiology Volume 15, Number 6, November 2004: 653-659 * 8. Schoemaker et al., Mobile phone use and risk of acoustic neuroma: results of the Interphone case–control study in five North European countries; British Journal of Cancer (2005), 1 –7 * 9. Christensen et al., Cellular telephones and risk for brain tumors, A population-based, incident case-control study; NEUROLOGY 2005;64:1189–1195 10. Hepworth et al., Mobile phone use and risk of glioma in adults: case-control study; BMJ. 2006 Jan 20 * 11. Lönn et al., Long-Term Mobile Phone Use and Brain Tumor Risk; Am J Epidemiol 2005;161:526–535 * 12. Schüz et al., Cellular Phones, Cordless Phones, and the Risks of Glioma and Meningioma (Interphone Study Group, Germany); Am J Epidemiol. 2006 Mar 15;163(6):512-20 * * Study found increased risk of brain tumor
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×