Why the wireless telecom industry can't admit irradiation causes health problems, like brain tumors:
.
Last year, I was asked to edit a translation of a scientific report about effects of cell phone radiation in studies at a research institute in Russia. European nations have taken a cautious approach. To better understand the dangers of cell phone radiation, I read another book by Dr. George Carlo, an epidemiologist who has written extensively about the subject. I now use a headset whenever I use the wireless phone, and I cringe when I see anyone holding a cell phone against his or her skull.

I recorded an interview with Dr. Carlo that I'm now transcribing for publication. He’s an epidemiologist and forensic scientist who has worked on several major health cases, such as the infamous, "Love Canal". He's also the Chairman of the nonprofit Science and Public Policy Institute, which publishes www.safewireless.com.

Dr. Carlo has a reputation for objective, rigorous, forensic science. He was hired by the Cell Telephone Industry Association to direct a $28.5 million series of studies to investigate any and all potential dangers from cell phone use.

There were 56 studies completed by scientists working in credentialed institutions around the world, and results were subject to peer review. Many of the studies showed that cell phone radiation can be extremely dangerous—and much more so to younger people than to older people.

There has been some confusion about this because the cell industry is very concerned about a number of lawsuits that have been filed against them. If they admit there is danger and warn people, they admit to liability in the lawsuits and the stakes are high. As a result, they have countered each report of danger with a press release that characterizes the danger as minimal or even non-existent. For instance, since there have been no studies that indicated that human tissue had been harmed by the heating effects of radiation, they have used that particular measure to say there is no danger at all.

Unfortunately, many studies indicated that exposure to cell phone radiation produced adverse affects, and even that some of these effects have led to DNA damage—but not from heating.

Effects other than heating are occurring when human or animal tissue is exposed to cell phone radiation, greater in proportion to length of use, and related to the proximity of the transmitting source. Moreover, there is evidence that tumors are occurring with greater frequency on the side of the head in the portion of the brain and inner ear that lies within the radius of the plume of highest radiation from cell phones.

Another approach intended to deflect public concern about reports of radiation danger has been to suggest that reporters are accusing the telecom industry of conspiring to hide the fact that cell phone use can be very harmful.

Conspiracy implies an intent to deny some public or private right or interest as if the collaboration is at fault rather than looking at the damaging action. However, the issue is not about collaboration, but simply about the fact that cell phones, held against your skull, transmit 900mhz radiation into your brain.

Collaboration is required in the telecom industry just to accomplish standardization, sharing of bandwidth and interconnectivity. To attack this collaboration raises the question of intent. I have never heard Dr. Carlo say, nor seen anything he wrote that suggested conspiracies.

Motorola and Qualcomm and the FDA appear to just be doing business as usual. In the U.S., we’re not required to look into areas of concern where we are not presumed or supposed to have knowledge of dangers to the public. However, we may be held accountable for even non-intended results of our actions, which is what these lawsuits seem to be about.

After I reviewed the cell phone health effect studies in three books, and heard a brief summary of some cases in pending litigation, and after looking up the subject on the National Institute of Health website (www.pubmed.gov) and reading a number of reports about recent studies, I concluded that 1) there is a danger from cell phone radiation, and 2) that both the cell phone industry and the US government (which has a fiduciary relationship with the industry) are in a bind.

If litigation the cell phone industry is now contesting is found in the plaintiff's favor, there are serious business consequences. If they admit to the possibility of harmful effects from the use of cell phones, and that they are putting people at risk of tumors and other health effects, the cases already on the docket will hurt the industry and cause a reaction on Wall Street, because there are so many cases possible even if cell phones were outlawed.

In other words, it is impossible for the industry to admit of the danger and make appropriate warnings and take appropriate steps to protect people without admitting responsibility in the pending lawsuits. Therefore, in prematurely ending its support of the study Dr. Carlo headed, and in constantly spinning news stories to give the impression that cell phones are harmless, the industry is acting rationally in terms of a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders.

The wireless telecom industry represents a huge part of the global economy. The US government is making billions from the sale of bandwidth and this income has been mortgaged--the fees come in over ten years but they are booked now. An upset in the stock market would be critical. There are an enormous number of jobs and billions of investment capital at stake. Telecom technology underpins the American economy.

Based on what I've read so far, the epidemiological science appears correct. Findings of the studies are not being contested with any rigor. As time goes on, if prophylactic measures are not applied, health costs will be astronomically high, not to mention the litigation costs, and in view of the global economic impact on one of the world's major businesses, these costs and litigation costs will likely be passed on to the public along with the tumors and other health effects.

Is it a conspiracy? The question is rrelevant in terms of how we must protect our interests.

Dr. George Carlo said that it is a dangerous mistake to conclude that cell phones are safe based on "incomplete information". The $28.5 million study conducted by the scientists in the program he oversaw showed links between genetic damage and cell phone usage, which have been acknowledged by the FDA, for instance, in an FDA report at http://cryptome.org/fda102099.htm the FDA staff say there is danger and then they go on to waffle about it, but the waffling does not change the accuracy of the findings.

I understand there have been two Worker's Comp settlements already. There's a line of pending litigation queued up that will be heard later this year. The cell phone industry has been stalling the legal process through a number of procedural motions, however, as a result of a Supreme Court decision last October, the log jam is broken and these cases are moving forward. The outcome should be interesting

What should you do about it? USE A HEAD-SET.

Michael Winn
http://thedelmarnews.blogspot.com