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.
If you don’t take any other antioxidant, do take vitamin C , but better follow the advice below.
DNA damage prevention and repair
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.
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“.
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“.
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 = https://mobilephonetruth.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/radiation-from-mobile-phones-cancer-birth-defects/
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.