EMF & Cancer

EMF and Cancer Risk: A Scientific perspective
Dr.ChinnababuSunkavalliMS,Mch,PDCR,FIAGES
Robotic Surgical Oncologist, Apollo Hospitals
Copyright - Grace Cancer Foundation, 2014

Everyone is talking! People deserve the truth

AGENDA
What is EMF?
What is Cancer?
Review of Literature
Scientific Evidence
Recommendations
Myths
Conclusion

ELECTROMAGNETICFIELD/ RADIOWAVES
Radio signals (are a form of electromagnetic field) are part of everyday life, emitted both by;
Natural sources like the sun, the Earth and ionosphere
Artificial sources such as
House hold items -TV, Radio, Computer, Refrigerator etc
Broadcast towers
Radar facilities
Mobile phone base stations

BIOLOGICALEFFECTSOFRF ELECTROMAGNETICENERGY
Biological Effectis the physical alteration that occurs within an organism following an exposure that causes a measurable change in biology.
A health hazard is a biological effect that is above the normal range of the organism’s ability to respond and rectify the effect, therefore being detrimental to health.
Theinductionofelectricalcurrents,producingheatisknowntooccurfromRFfields.InveryhighfieldsofRFEME,thebodycanabsorbsufficientenergytoincreasetemperature.Healthhazardsfromoverheatingcanoccur.
Theremaybeotherathermalbiologicaleffects, however,thesehavenotbeenconclusivelyestablished.Keepingexposuresbelow“threshold” ensurespossibleadversebiologicaleffectsareavoided.

WHATCAUSESCANCER?
Cancer is caused by alterations or mutations in the genetic code
Can be induced in somatic cells by:
Carcinogens- Alcohol,tobacco,asbestos,formaldehyde
Radiation(ionizing)
Viruses
Heredity -5%

7
Hanahan and Weinberg, Cell 100: 57, 2000
Apoptosis
Oncogenes
Tumor Suppressor
Inv. and Mets
Angiogenesis
Cell cycle

Investigations on different levels: Cells andtissue
Cell-biological Investigations
Epidemiological StudiesPopulationMolecules
Biochemical and Molecular biological Investigations
Animal (and Human) ExperimentsIndividuals
BIOLOGICALEFFECTSOFRADIOWAVES

LABORATORYSTUDIES& CANCER-EMF
What has been done?
Mostly negative outcomes in bioassays
Controversy on mammary cancer
(rat genetic background important?)
No effect on spontaneous leukaemia (Mandeville, 97) and lymphomas in transgenic mice (Harris, 98)
No alteration in clinical progression of:
induced lymphocytic leukaemia (Sasser, 96)
induced acute myeloid leukaemia (Devevey)

EXPERIMENTALSTUDIESEPIDEMIOLOGICALSTUDIES
Cell lines-Cell redox state,DNA,Proliferation (Marcantonio et al., 2010 (Ivancsits et al., 2005)
Animal models-A rat leukaemia model (Bernard et al., 2008)
Chung et al 2008
Jimenez-Garcia et al., 2010
A meta-analysis on EMF and childhood brain tumours included 13 studies ,8800 cases (12 case-control studies and one cohort study) (Mezei et al., 2008).ASSOCIATION BUT NO CAUSAL RELATIONSHIP
A meta-analysis –on EMF and breast cancer (Chen et al., 2010)

PUBMEDREVIEWANDNOCEBOEFFECT
At Base station-increased incidence of Headache,Nausea,sleeplessness.
Double blind Provocation studies
Nocebo effect-headache in this situation is caused by negative expectations (nocebo).
Post hoc ergo propter hoc(Latin: "after this, therefore because of this")
The rooster crows immediately before sunrise, therefore the rooster causes the sun to rise.

INDIANDATA
Committee formed by the Government of India under the Chairmanship of Dr. N.K. Ganguly, Director General, Indian Council on Medical Research which included representatives from PGIMER, Chandigarh & AIIMS New Delhi, has also opined as
…there is not enough evidence to show direct health hazards of RF exposures from Mobile Base Stations.” Copyright - Grace Cancer Foundation, 2014

SCIENTIFICEVIDENCE
Danish trial-followed over 420,000 Danish citizens for 20 years and showed no increased risk of cancer.(2011)
A Swedish study (2005) -"the data do not support the hypothesis that mobile phone use is related to an increased risk ofgliomaormeningioma
A British study (2005) -"The study suggests that there is no substantial risk ofacoustic neuromain the first decade after starting mobile phone use. However, an increase in risk after longer term use or after a longer lag period could not be ruled out
INTERPHONE project –the largest study–was published in 2011 and did not find a solid link between mobile phones and brain tumours. At least, a short term risk can be excluded with a high degree of certainty, but uncertainty still remains regarding very intensive and long-term use.

Is there any chance to find an increased risk for even the strongest environmental carcinogen in the short or medium term?

STATEMENTSOFSOMEAUTHORITIES
“there is no substantive or convincing evidence of biological effects that could harm a person’s health, that is, ICNIRP guidelines are reliable safeguards for all segments of the population, including children”.
(ICNIRP –International Commission in Non Ionizing Radiation Protection)
“Regarding Health Hazard: As per the information available with TRAI, there is no definite conclusive study, which confirms that health is adversely affected by radiation emitted by mobile phones
(TRAI -Telecom Regulatory Authority of India)
The strength of radiation received from base stations beyond a few meters from the base stations is considerably lower than the strength of radiation from radio and television transmitters
(FESA -French Environment and Safety Agency)
“There are no definite adverse health effects from mobile phones or their base stations.”
(BMA –British Medical Association)

WHO-IARC
Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields were classified as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), a category used when a causal association is considered credible, but when chance, bias or confounding cannot be ruled out with reasonable confidence.

IARC CLASSIFICATIONSANDEXAMPLES

ON GOING STUDIES
MOBI KIDS-EU Sponsored -RISK OF BRAIN CANCER FROM EXPOSURE TO RF EMF IN CHILDHOOD AND ADOLESCENCE
14 Countries including India,Accruelby 2014.
COSMOS-COHORT STUDY OF MOBILE PHONE USE AND HEALTH,IMPERIAL COLLEGE, LONDON
3 lakhvolunteers recruited across 6 countries

Limitations of Science
Can not prove some thing does not occur
Studies are prone to errors and bias
Well conducted studies determine the weight of evidence for risk of disease
No “one test “ for carcinogen identification
IF ALL STUDY RESULTS POINT IN ONE DIRECTION, MORE CONFIDENCE IN RISK ASSESSMENT
Long duration of exposure 30 -40yrs
Complicated research
CAN WE DO A RANDOMIZED TRIAL?

CURRENTSCIENTIFICUNDERSTANDINGNo established link between Radiation andCancer or InfertilityDespite many studies by WHO, US FDA, and other research bodies, there is no scientific evidence to establish a link between cancer and infertility and RF radiation.
23
MYTH
Mobile phones and mobile tower radiation causes various types of cancer and infertility
in humans.

CURRENTSCIENTIFICUNDERSTANDINGThere is no link between radiation and brain cancer in young peopleThere is no conclusive evidence of a rise in the occurrence of brain cancer among young people due to the increase in the number of cell towers.
24
MYTH
The cases of brain cancer in young people are increasing with more cell towers coming up in residential areas.

CURRENTSCIENTIFICUNDERSTANDINGInternational emission norms are based on scientific studiesThe exposure limits for EMF fields developed by ICNIRP were developed following reviews of all peer-reviewed scientific literature., taking into account both thermal and non-thermal effects. (WHO)
25
MYTH
The international limits are not safe as they do not take into account non- thermal or biological effects.

CURRENTSCIENTIFICUNDERSTANDINGExposure to EMF is not like being in a microwave ovenAll radiated energy from a tower cannot be directed to a single point. If it did, then if you held a cup of water long enough, it would start boiling!
26
MYTH
Living near EMF is like being cooked inside a microwave oven!

CONCLUSIONShould we be concerned?
EMF from mobile towers is non ionizing hence no proven biological effect to cause Cancer
So far no scientific data indicate the existence of CANCER risk
Association does not mean causation
Regulatory compliance must be in place from industry
Long term exposure risks need to be studied
On going Research is currently assessing the health impact of RF fields on health and cancer in particular

We need to focus on proven and known causes of cancer
Factual awareness among people should be promoted to avoid subjectivity and hype
Unbiased public funded long term research should be promoted for objective findings
Need for indigenous research
CONCLUSIONShould we be concerned?

Thank you for your patient hearing

EMF & Cancer

More Related Content

What's hot

Viewers also liked

Similar to EMF & Cancer

More from The Radiation Doctor

Recently uploaded

EMF & Cancer