Mobile Phones – the Truth


Category Archives: HEALTH EFFECTS

Science-based cellphone radiation protection

There are many devices on the market sold without any tenable evidence.

Fortunately there is a science-based solution that can reduce the influence of cellphone radiation. To understand it, you need first to know how the damage works:

1. The nature of the influence

The radiation causes formation of free radicals. If the radiation generates more free radicals in the tissues than the body can neutralize so called oxidative stress occurs. There are individual differences in the ability to protect the body against oxidative stress.

Probably it is mostly those who have weaker protection against free radicals experience a negative influence from exposure to mobile phone radiations.

There are people who have been strongly exposed for many years without any symptoms and diseases. These probably have strong biochemical defenses against the radiation perhaps both through the powerful antioxidants that our cells produce and by eating powerful antioxidant foods. Also the condition of the individual, especially the level of stress probably contributes to antioxidant capacity.

I think much of the controversy regarding the effect of cellphone radiation is because there are considerable individual differences in antioxidant capacity. I think it is necessary to consider this  aspect in order to get a proper understanding. It cannot be excluded that only people with weak defenses are affected by ordinary cellphone usage to a significant extent.

2. How to reduce  the impact


These substances neutralize the free radicals. Generous daily use of antioxidants reduces the impact of cellphone radiation to an important extent.

We want to emphasize that generally, the officially recommended daily allowance for important antioxidant vitamins are generally far to low.

Below you find some of the most important antioxidants.

Vitamin C. It is a very effective and valuable antioxidant for the whole body including the brain. It appears to play an important role in the brain, and its concentration is 10 times greater there than in the blood. The stores of vitamin C in the brain are the last ones to be depleted, indicating that it plays a very important, not yet fully understood role.

The Recommended Daily intake (RDI) is in most countries 10-20 times too low for Vitamin C. It is non-toxic and can therefore be taken generously in gram-sized-doses, preferably in Slow-release tablets.

The requirement is dependent on the health and stress level of the person as well as the ability to produce own antioxidants. Therefor the dose needs to be adapted individually. For best possible protection, take the “bowel tolerance dose“. This is the dose you can take without the mild, completely harmless gastrointestinal reaction that occurs when the body gets more than it needs. Dr Sandra Goodman has written a good text about finding out the Vitamin C  dose you need. When ill, you may need tens of grams and this will have a beneficial effect.

Vitamin C was actually produced by our ancestors until about 60 million years ago, when a genetic defect occurred so that we lost the ability to produce this vitamin. All other mammals are able to produce Vitamin C except a few more mammal species. The biochemistry of other mammals is otherwise the same. So Vitamin C is a perfectly natural and necessary substance for our health, and that we may need very high doses of it when ill.

Read more about Vitamin C  here.

If you don’t take any other antioxidant, do take vitamin C , but better follow the advice below.

Selenium plays a very important role. It is required for key antioxidant enzymes as well as for DNA repair. It is a must in the parts of the world where the soils are deficient in Selenium including  parts of North and South America, parts of Central and Northern Europe including Scandinavia. Important not to take Selenium selenite or Selenium selenate, they are harmful. Take Selenium mentionate or Selenium bound to yeast or amino acids (chelates). Seaweed and Kelp are usually good sources.
Iodine is a powerful brain antioxidant. Daily intake of Seaweed and kelp is a good habit.
Vitamin E is likewise important, but not as synthetic alpha tocopherol, which is the most sold preparation in pharmacies. It is better to use the tocotrienols, especially alpha-tocotrienol according to a recent study, see “Gifted Vitamin E protects the brain against stroke..“. Red palm kernel oil is especially rich.
Antoxidant foods and spices
We go into some detail here, because there are very powerful food antioxidants, and by just improving your food habits you can increase your protection to an important extent.
Especially the colorful berries are rich in antioxidants. The Indian Amla berry is very valuable. Cranberries, blueberries, lingon berries, raspberries, blackberries, Goji berries, cherries, dark plums, dark red or violet grapes (like Concord) are all strongly antioxidant.
Among spices, Turmeric deserves special mention. It is especially rich in powerful antioxidants. Many other spices as well. Cinnamon, basil, oregano, rosemary, ginger are among the highest ranked.
Among vegetables, Artichoke Hearts are highly ranked, kale, spinach and tomatoes as well. Small red beans, Pinto beans, red kidney beans.

DNA damage prevention and repair

For prevention

scientists say there is reason to believe vitamin D3 is able to stabilize the structure of DNA so that it is not damaged by free radicals. Vitamin E has also been found to be able to prevent DNA damage and even repair it in some instances.

For the repair of DNA,

  • Selenium. In addition to being necessary for antioxidant enzymes, it is required for DNA repair.
  • Betacarotene Found in carrots and many other vegetables.
  • Quercetin also stimulates DNA repair. Apples and Citrus fruits are good sources. All berries likewise, especially elderberries and blueberries. It is also found in cruciferous veggies, including broccoli, cabbage and sprouts. Leafy green veggies, including spinach, kale. Onions.

This list is incomplete. I wanted just to mention some of the most common and easily available foods for this purpose.

There is not yet sufficient research to establish to what extent these substances can protect and repair the DNA, but already available knowledge indicates that the effect is substantial so there are good reasons to use these foods, also because they also have many other positive health effects. For good results it is wise to be well provided with said substances along with a high level of antioxidant protection.

For more details: see “The best natural ways to protect against radiation damage” by Dr J.S.Williams, M.D.

Mobile phones will not cause an epidemic of brain tumors, because such tumors are rare

WHO’s warning about increased brain tumor risk from mobile phone usage has scared many. But there is no cause for great concern. This is because brain tumors are rare.

For example, professor Lennart Hardell in Orebro university, Sweden, found a 390% increase in one kind of brain tumor, and of course this sounds daunting. But in absolute terms that meant an increase of only two in one thousand. Other tumors had a smaller increase.

Therefore there is no reason to have a great fear of brain tumors because you have been using a mobile phone. The risk is small even if it is increased by mobile phone radiation exposure. But it is wise to limit phone use primarily for other reasons:

It is possible to reduce the risks

Knowledge is being developed how to reduce cancer risk. Research suggests that free radicals play a key role in in the development of tumors. Therefore it is advisable to  increase your intake of antioxidants.

Also regarding the other negative effects on the brain, free radicals probably play an important role. So in any case, do increase your use of antioxidants.

Reduce the exposure

In essence, minimize the time you use the phone. Usa a land-line whenever possible.

For details, see our advice on how to reduce exposure in the article “Safety advice“.

Do not force others to be exposed

Don’t call in situations where other people cannot move away from you like in elevators, busses, trains, restaurants etc.

For more details, see “Mobile phone etiquette

Copyright PSRAST 2013. May be quoted provided you mention the URL the heading of the source and “by PSRAST”.

WHO expert found to be mobile phone lobbyist

The Chairman of WHO:s expert group for assessing the cancer hazards of mobile phones, professor Anders Ahlbom, is the founder of a lobby firm for supporting mobile phone industry interests. His brother Gunnar runs the firm. This was recently discovered by investigative journalist Mona Nilsson. Ahlbom is renowned for his active support of mobile phones in various contexts since over a decade, but not until now has his partiality been revealed.

Ahlbom chairs the expert group on epidemiolgy at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World Health Organisation (WHO). He did not disclose this conflict of interest when he was appointed as chairman. He was dismissed from the expert group, right before he was to lead the international conference of IARC on the hazards of electromagnetic radiation.

Mona Nilsson writes in her Press Release about Ahlbom, that was issued one week before said conference (our highlightings)

– The industry-loyal scientists are easy to recognize. They systematically repeat a set of policy messages that counter the results of independent scientists and coincide with the interests of the industry. This is crystal clear in the case of Professor Ahlbom, who has dismissed all studies indicating health risks or biological effects whenever he has chaired an expert panel on this subject. He even denies the results of his own research if it indicates a health risk. * There is no doubt he speaks to the benefit of the industry.

Source: Conflict of interest at the WHO Press release May 23rd 2011 by Mona Nilsson.


We have been appalled by the flat denial of the European Union and WHO of any risks of mobile phone radiation, referring to their experts. This denial comes into a new light now that it was revealed that one of the most influential scientists in the whole world is heavily biassed in favor of cellphones. As a chairman of the most important and authoritative expert group in the world on this issue, he has had ideal preconditions for suppressing and distorting the truth about the dangers of cellphone radiation.

This is a blatant case of bias, further confirming our opinion that the denial of cellphone hazards by WHO, EU, the US and others has only been possible because their scientific advisors are biassed or corrupt. This is because the evidence proving that mobile phone radiation is harmful is so strong that any competent and impartial scientists will inevitably conclude that it is hazardous. For more, see our website section “Corrupt Science“.


The more you call the greater brain tumor risk

390% increased risk for brain tumors

Professor Lennart Hardell, Sweden has made a large study with 1251 cases of brain tumors compared to controls. The risk increased the more years and the more hours per year the phone had been used. The increased risk was 390% for mobile phones and 190% for cordless phones. The greatest risk was for Astrocytoma, the most common malignant brain tumor.

Below you find a brain scan showing a tumor at the right side (blue rounded area), close to were the mobile phone had been held.


This study that was of high scientific quality, differently from most industry-sponsored studies, showed a clear dose-response relationship between the amount of radiation and risk.

This adds importantly to the evidence that mobile phone radiation increases the risk for brain tumors. The evidence, based on a scientific interdisciplinary assessment (and not just epidemiological evidence), has actually long been strong enough to conclude that mobile phones cause brain tumors. Almost only industry-sponsored studies indicate the opposite, while almost all independent studies have reported an increased risk.

This study adds to our conviction that industry-sponsored epidemiological studies finding no tumor risk are faked and should not be considered, see also Corrupt Science at our website. Even if the methodology of professor Hardell is of high quality, epidemiology has such weakness that it cannot be used solely for assessing risk, see “Mobile phone risks are considerably underestimated“.

Cordless phones doubled the heart rate

The intensity of exposure was 200 times lower than approved by safety norms

Cordless phones impacted heart rate according to research by Professor Magda Havas of Trent University, Canada. See diagram below.

Doubling of heart rate during exposure to cordless phone radiation

“DECT” marks the period of exposition to cordless phone radiation. Immediately at the start of radiation exposure, the pulse frequency almost doubled (lower blue peaks – 122 and 129 beats per minute respectively) and returned to normal (66 BPM) immediately as the phone was turned off. The subject did not know when he was exposed.

The study was double-blind, that is, neither the subjects nor the experimenters knew when the radiation occurred.

Also, irregular heart beating occurred at exposure.

Most importantly, the radiation exposure was 200 times lower than approved for cellphones, according to federal guidelines in Canada and the US (1000 microW/cm2, 10mW/m2).

Dr Havas emphasizes that the results are relevant for mobile phones as well, because their radiation is in the same intensity and frequency range.

Link to source

Comment by PSRAST

The most important thing with this study is that it shows that normal levels of mobile phone usage can significantly affect a vital bodily function. Consequently it overthrows the notion that mobile radiation can only have thermal effects (local warming), a notion that lies at the basis of of current safety standards. This result indicates that the radiation intensity has to be lowered considerably to ensure that no adverse health effects arise from radiation.

It is conceivable that this effect occurs through the sudden large influx of calcium in the heart, as demonstrated by other research (Rao et al). Sudden calcium influx into cardiac cells has been found to trigger irregular heart beat (Bjorn Knollman, Vanderbilt University). The effect on calcium flow is instantaneous. It is striking that the heart rate increase in the study above also was instantaneous. One can speculate on the possibility that the microwave pulsation may maintain the frequencyincrease.


Rao VS, Titushkin IA, Moros EG, Pickard WF, Thatte HS, Cho MR. Nonthermal effects of radiofrequency-field exposure on calcium dynamics in stem cell-derived neuronal cells: elucidation of calcium pathways. Radiat Res. 2008 Mar;169(3):319-29.


Replication obstructed

At our website we commented in 2010:

“Further confirmation of this kind of result as planned by Dr Olle Johansson would cost the mobile phone industry billions, because all phones need to be rebuilt and the base station network will have to be adapted to the reduced radiation levels which will be extremely costly. Therefore the industry can be expected to use their huge power to “neutralize” this threat in every possible way including the usual suppression of research with obstruction of “undesirable” research, harrassment of scientists, generation of falsified research and unfounded bagatellizing statements by corrupt top scientists, see Corrupt Science“.

Unfortunately, the foreboded obstruction did happen. Professor Olle Johansson, who works at the Karolinska Institute, was prevented by the Institute to carry through the planned replication because his lab was taken away from him almost immediately after he had declared the intention to do the replication.

A coincidence? What we know is that the Institute has obtained at least one big grant from the Mobile Phone Industry. Also the Karolinska Institute is ranked among the top research institutes in the world, famous for being responsible for selecting the Nobel Prize winners in medicine. A replication from such a prestigious institute would have had especially strong weight.

Radiation from mobile phones genererates cancer-inducing free radicals

It has been established beyond reasonable doubt by several scientific studies that microwave radiation, including that from mobile phones, can generate free radicals (FR). These are  chemically aggressive substances that can damage the genes, thereby increasing the risk of cancer,  infertility and birth defects.
Several high quality experimental studies have confirmed that such damage does occur.
The great strength of this research is that several different methods have been used by different scientists, all arriving at the same conclusion.
Consequently, there is no doubt whatsoever that mobile phone radiation brings about damage to the genes of such a kind that causes cancer, infertility and birth defects.

The positive aspect of these findings is that they indicate a way how we can reduce the risk of damage by mobile radiation, namely by preventing and reducing the generation of free radicals. This can be done by increasing our free radical defenses, by improving the body’s own defenses and by consuming substances that neutralize free radicals (antioxidants).
Below, we will present a thorough review of the research on the connection between cell phone radiation, free radicals and male sterility (by Nisarga et al, see reference below). It also reviews the mechanisms of carcinogenesis (development of cancer) due to radiation.
In brief, the conclusion is that there is strong evidence that free radicals are generated by mobile phone radiation. It is a well established fact that free radicals can cause cancer. The reviewer presents  multiple mechanisms how exactly this can occur due to the effects of mobile radiation.
A serious consequence of repititive exposure to mobile radiation, such as occurs in frequent daily usage of the phone, is that it can exhaust the body’s protective mechanisms against free radicals (this ).
The man’s testicles are particularly sensitive to mobile phone radiation because there is an especially great risk for oxidative stress in them. Sperm DNA damage has been the consequence of this vulnerability. This entails a risk of infertility and an increased rate of miscarriage and what is much worse, morbidity in the offspring, including birth defects and childhood cancer.

Summary of the article:

“Pathogenic mechanisms of cell phone radiation: oxidative stress and cancer generation, focusing on the male reproductive system.”

(Abbreviations: FR = free radicals)

Research has recently found that mobile phone radiation may result in the formation of the very powerful free radical supeoxid that can cause cancer.


Friedman et al. reported that cellphone radiation stimulates the enzyme NADH oxidase in cell walls (in HeLa cells – a special type of cells suitable for cell culture) and the co-production of superoxide (Friedman 2007). This effect of the radiation on the NADH oxidase can cause oxidative stress and carcinogenesis [cancer formation].Also another research group (Rao et al), have found evidence that the radiation affects the cell wall. They studied the impact of the cellphone radiaton on calcium and found that this substance increased significantly when cells were exposed to non-thermal radition, that is so weak radiation that there was no heating of the tissues. This indicates that the radiation influences the cell wall as calcium increase in the cell occurs through increased influx of calcium through the cell wall.

This would explain, among other things, the significant increase in heart rate (see Cordless phones doubled the heart rate) that mobile phone radiation can cause./PSRAST

During the last decade, animal studies demonstrated that oxidative stress is created by the mobile phone radiation, (eg Ozguner). This can occur either by increasing the formation of FR and/or reduction of the enzymes that neutralize FR. Studies have also shown that various antioxidants, including vitamins C and E, reduce the oxidative stress caused by cellpone radiation.
Chronic exposure to mobile phone radiation has been found to reduce the body’s most powerful defense mechanisms against free radicals (Catalase, Superoxide Dismutas (SOD) and glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px)), see Agarwal et al.

Recently, increased FR production in sperm cells from humans has been found as a result of the radiation. Furthermore, a damage to the sperm cells as a result of oxidative stress was demonstrated (Agarwal et al).

Other scientists have noted that sperm cells are particularly vulnerable to oxidative stress because of the large accumulation of substances that are especially vulnerable to free radicals while there is a shortage of space for protective enzymes, see Iuliis et al .


In addition, oxidative stress in these cells disturbs not only their capacity for fertilization but also contributes to DNA damage in sperm. The latter has in turn been associated with poor fertility, an increased incidence of miscarriage and morbidity in the offspring, including childhood cancer.

The review also discusses the formation mechanisms of cancer due to mobile phone radiation and present several different mechanisms by which cancer can arise from mobile radiation.

Comment by PSRAST

The fact that researchers using different methods of investigation, all arrive at the same result has strong evidential power. The following elements are necessary for conclusive scientific proof of a harmful effect of any kind:

  • That it can be theoretically explained how the damage occurs.
  • That the presence of the damaging factor has been confirmed.
  • That the predicted damage does occur.
  • That the effect has been confirmed by different scientist and the proof is especially strong when different methods have been used

All these criteria are amply fulfilled in the case of mobile phone radiation.

  • It is well known how free radicals cause DNA damage
  • It has been proven that microwave radiation generates free radicals
  • The predicted DNA damage has been amply confirmed at exposure to mobile phone radiation
  • Different measurement methods used by different scientists confirm the same effect

It has been established by a very large body of scientific studies,  beyond any reasonable doubt, that DNA damage is associated with cancer, birth defects and childhood cancer. This is an established truth that all scientists agree about.

Therefore, it can be concluded beyond any doubt that microwave radiation from mobile phones increases the cancer risk, and in addition causes other serious consequences of radiation damage including childhood cancer and birth defects.

Only researchers who have a very narrow perspective, and thus are incompetent to assess the mobile phone risks, or are corrupt can deny this. Unfortunately such scientists have obviously dominated the expert bodies assessing the mobile phone radiation risks. This includes WHO:

One of the most influential experts in the world on assessment of radiation risks, Anders Ahlbom, Chairman of the WHO expert group on radiation damage , has been revealed as a covert mobile industry lobbyist (and therefore he was dismissed from his position).

His great influence explains why WHO has long denied any hazard from mobile phones in spite of ample evidence of the opposite. It is satisfactory to find that immediately after Ahlbom was shamefully dismissed from WHO, the expert group changed its position and confirmed that mobile phone radiation may be carcinogenic. For more, see my blog about the Ahlbom case.


Review: Nisarg R Desai, Kavindra K, Kesari, Ashok Agarwal. Pathophysiology of cell phone radiation: oxidative stress and carcinogenesis with focus on male reproductive system. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2009; 7: 114.

Agarwal A, Desai NR, Makker K, Varghese A, Mouradi R, Sabanegh E, Sharma R. Effects of radiofrequency electromagnetic waves (RF-EMW) from cellular phones on human ejaculated semen: an in vitro pilot study.  Fertil Steril. 2009 Oct;92(4):1318-25.

De Iuliis GN, Newey RJ, King BV, Aitken RJ.
Mobile phone radiation induces reactive oxygen species production and DNA damage in human spermatozoa in vitro. PLoS One. 2009 Jul 31;4(7):e6446.

Friedman J, Kraus S, Hauptman Y, Schiff Y, Seger R. Mechanism of short-term ERK activation by electromagnetic fields at mobile phone frequencies. Biochem J. 2007 Aug 1;405(3):559-68.

Rao VS, Titushkin IA, Moros EG, Pickard WF, Thatte HS, Cho MR. Nonthermal effects of radiofrequency-field exposure on calcium dynamics in stem cell-derived neuronal cells: elucidation of calcium pathways. Radiat Res. 2008 Mar;169(3):319-29.

Ozguner F, Bardak Y, Comlekci S. Protective effects of melatonin and caffeic acid phenethyl ester against retinal oxidative stress in long-term use of mobile phone: a comparative study. Mol Cell Biochem. 2006 Jan;282(1-2):83-8.

Copyright PSRAST 2011. You may quote parts or the whole of this article if you include a reference to the source =

WHO admits cellphones may cause brain tumors

WHO now admits that mobile phones may increase the risk for brain tumors

While formerly declaring that cellphones are innocous, referring to the Interphone study (that actually was inconclusive due to severe weaknesses, see here), now WHO has changed its stance after a meeting of 31 scientists from 14 countries (the IARC expert committee).

(Reuters) – Using a mobile phone may increase the risk of certain types of brain cancer in humans and consumers should consider ways of reducing their exposure, World Health Organisation WHO.L cancer experts said on Tuesday. A working group of 31 scientists from 14 countries meeting at the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer IARC.L said a review of all the available scientific evidence suggested cell phone use should be classified as “possibly carcinogenic”.
Source: Reuters press release May 31, 2011.

Comment by PSRAST

What a relief, this was long overdue. Could this change be a consequence of the recent discovery that the chairman, Anders Ahlbom of the IARC expert committee who made this statement has been found to be a mobile phone lobbyist and so lost his influence (see the next news item immediately below this one)?

So far, WHO has based its opinon on the Interphone study that we and other scientists have critisized heavily for its numerous flaws. Through the new position, regarding mobile radiation, the IARC expert group discredits the Interphone study, evidently acknowledging its inconclusiveness. More about the flaws of the interphone study.