|
How
Exposure to Base-station Radiation Can Adversely Affect Humans* G J Hyland February, 2002 Department of Physics
International Institute of Biophysics University of Warwick
Neuss-Holzheim, Coventry, UK
Germany The claim made by the Mobile Phone Industry that the microwave emissions
from the antennae of a GSM or TETRA Base-station are many times lower
(by at least a factor of 1000) than the limit to which the UK Government’s
Statutory Body – the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB)
– maintains it is safe for us to be exposed to, is perfectly true. The current exposure limits, set by the International Commission for Non-ionising
Radiation Protection (ICNIRP), are, however, purely thermally based
- i.e. they simply limit
the intensity of the radiation to ensure that the amount of tissue
heating by the absorption of microwaves is not in excess of what the
body can cope with. If heating were the only effect of the radiation,
existing guidelines would afford adequate protection; unfortunately,
however, this is not the case. For
microwaves are, after all, waves, and, as such, have properties other
than solely intensity. In
particular, the pulsed microwave radiation used in the GSM and TETRA
systems of mobile telephony has certain rather well defined frequencies,
which facilitate its discernment by the alive human organism, and
via which the organism can, in turn, be affected in a purely non-thermal way. This is so because the alive human organism
(and only the alive one) itself supports a variety of oscillatory
electrical biological activities, each characterised by a specific
frequency, some of which happen be close to those used
in GSM and TETRA. Thus,
the frequencies of the microwaves (particularly the higher ones used
in GSM) that carry the voice information by means of appropriate modulations
are close to those characterising the highly organised electrical
activities that are involved in the control of certain biological
processes in living organisms at the cellular level (including processes
as fundamental as cell division), whilst the somewhat lower frequencies
used in TETRA facilitate deeper penetration of this radiation.
On the other hand, the rates at which the microwaves are emitted
in distinct groups of flashes (or pulses) are close to the frequencies
of some of the brain’s own electrical and electrochemical rhythms,
which this makes them particularly vulnerable to interference (or
even entrainment) by the radiation. [The basic ‘flash rate’ is 217Hz, but the flashes
are emitted in groups of 25 at the rate of 8.34Hz. With increasing call traffic, the 217Hz pulsing
gradually disappears, leaving only the ELF pulsation at 8.34Hz, which
is in the range of the alpha brain wave activity!] It is to be stressed that unlike heating, such non-thermal influences
are possible only when the organism is alive: the Dead have no electrical
brain activity with which an external electromagnetic field can interfere! What the Industry and the various regulatory bodies (such as the NRPB and
ICNIRP) dispute is that the very weak, pulsed microwave radiation
used in GSM and TETRA can non-thermally
affect these various biological (electrical) activities in ways that
can provoke adverse health reactions.
Their difficulty in accepting this reality is due to an out-dated
‘linear’ mentality, within which forces the conclusion that exposure
to weak radiation can entail only correspondingly weak effects, and
vice versa.
Whilst this is true in the case of inanimate systems and dead
organisms, it is certainly not so either for energised electronic
equipment, or for living organisms. For the latter, in consequence of their vitality, are themselves electromagnetic
instruments of great and exquisite sensitivity, and thereby vulnerable
to interference by weak external electromagnetic fields whose frequencies
are close to those found in the alive organism.
The situation is not dissimilar to the way in which the reception
of a (turned-on) radio that is tuned to a particular frequency can
be interfered with by a signal that is slightly off-station.
In both cases, it is more a question of the ‘information’ content
of a given (interfering) signal, rather than how much energy it contains
(or equivalently, its ability to heat tissue).
Whilst the importance of ensuring non-thermal
electromagnetic compatibility between mobile phone radiation and energised
electronic equipment (in aircraft and hospitals, and with heart pacemakers,
for example) is accepted and generally respected, the same, unfortunately,
does not yet obtain in the case of the alive human organism! Despite persistent claims to the contrary by the Mobile Phone Industry,
the existence of non-thermal effects of low intensity, pulsed microwave
radiation is established beyond dispute, on the basis of many replicated
experiments that have been performed over the last 30 years on a variety
of living organisms. The results
of these experiments have been published in international, peer reviewed
scientific journals, and are endorsed by the 16 signatories (of international
standing) to the 1998 Vienna Resolution, the only non-signatory being
the head of the WHO Project on Electromagnetic Fields! Of particular relevance is the way in which this radiation affects brain function – specifically, its electrical
activity (EEG), its electro-chemistry, and the blood/ brain barrier
- and degrades the immune system. For these established influences are of a kind
that are consistent with the nature of adverse health reactions reported
both by some users of mobile phones and by some people (involuntarily)
subject to long-term exposure to the radiation from Base-stations. For example, the radiation is known to affect
the dopamine-opiate system of the brain and to increase the permeability
of the blood brain barrier, both of which are medically considered
to underlie headache – one of the most persistently reported adverse
health effects. Similarly, the duration of REM sleep is shortened
by exposure to radio-frequency radiation, whilst nocturnal secretion
of melatonin is partly inhibited, both of which are consistent with
reports of sleep disruption. Furthermore,
the fact that microwave radiation has been discovered to target the
hippocampal region of the brain is consistent with reports of memory
problems and, in some epileptic children, with an increase in the
frequency of seizures. The latter finding is not at all unreasonable,
given the known ability of a visible light (such as a stroboscope)
flashing at a rate somewhere between 15-20 times per second to provoke
seizures in the 5% minority of epileptics who are photosensitive. For visible light and microwaves are both simply
different realisations of electromagnetic radiation, and the microwave
radiation used in GSM and TETRA similarly ‘flashes’ in a way that
the brain is able to recognise, as has already been mentioned; unlike
visible light, however, pulsed microwaves can penetrate the skull
directly. Of particular concern is that the flash frequency
of the TETRA signals is not only within to the range where photoepilepsy
can be provoked, but is also very close to the frequency that causes
the maximum loss of calcium from brain cells, thereby potentially
undermining the integrity of the nervous system. It should be noted that although microwave radiation is non-ionising – i.e. does not have enough energy to break
chemical bonds, particularly in DNA – exposure can still cause interference
with the natural DNA repair
process, and produce chromosome aberrations and micronuclei. Such effects are consistent with the finding
that exposure to pulsed microwave radiation (at intensities comparable
to those realised during use of a mobile phone) promotes the development
of cancer in mice that have been genetically engineered to have a
predisposition to cancer, and also with the 2-fold increase in the
incidence of a rare form of cancer in the periphery of the human brain
(where the radiation from the handset most easily penetrates) - the
laterality of which correlates with that of handset use - which has
been found in a recent nationwide epidemiological study in the US.
The relevance of these disturbing findings to the less intense,
but often more prolonged, exposure to Base-station radiation is at
present unknown, but the increasing number of reports of serious adverse
effects in animals exposed to such radiation could well be valuable
warning portents that should not be ignored. It is essential to appreciate, however, that because the possibility of
non-thermal influences is dependent on the organism being alive, it
necessarily follows that not
everyone will be equally susceptible,
even under the same exposure conditions - susceptibility depending
on the physiological state of the individual when irradiated, such
as the stability of the brain’s electrical activity and the person’s
level of stress prior to exposure. Whilst this admittedly makes the occurrence
of non-thermal effects more difficult to predict than is the case
with thermal effects – and hence to regulate against – it
does not mean that they can be safely ignored, or that they cannot
provoke adverse health reactions in some people, the severity
of which will again vary from person to person, according to the robustness
of their immune system. It
is probably true to say that if the same degree of risk and uncertainty
as to subjective noxiousness obtained in the case of a new drug or
foodstuff, they would never be licensed.
In connection with the biological noxiousness of low intensity
microwave radiation, it should not be forgotten that during the ‘Cold
War’, such radiation was used (rather successfully) by the Soviets
to induce serious adverse health effects in the staff of Western Embassies
in Eastern bloc countries, as well as in their children! Quite apart from
their weaker immune systems, children are particularly vulnerable
because of the increased rate at which their cells divide (which makes
them more susceptible to genetic damage) and their still developing
nervous system - the size of their heads and the thinness of their
skulls causing them to absorb more radiation than do adults. Particularly vulnerable to interference by
the pulses of microwaves, is their electrical brain-wave activity,
which does not settle into a stable pattern until about the age of
11 or 12 years. The use of mobile phones by pre-adolescent
children is thus to be strongly discouraged, and the siting of Base-station
masts in the vicinity of schools and nurseries resisted: financial
gain must not be allowed to be the overriding consideration! It must be appreciated that whilst the intensity
to which the Public is normally exposed in the vicinity of a Base-station
is indeed very much lower than that encountered during use of a mobile
phone, the information
content of the signals is the
same, so that they are equally potentially noxious.
To cite the examples of radio and television transmission in an attempt
to support the claim that exposure to the (much less intense) radiation
used in mobile telephony is flawed, on account of (i)
the occurrence, in any case, of certain health problems that correlate
with exposure to the radiation from these installations, (ii) the fact that, unlike the
radiation used in GSM and some TETRA installations, this radiation
is not emitted as pulses, in patterns that
the brain can recognise, and (iii)
the fact that the lower frequency carriers used in radio and TV are
somewhat less biologically active than are higher microwave carrier
frequencies used in GSM. In conclusion, it can hardly be disputed that to enjoy an acceptable quality
of life requires more than simply an absence of terminal disease. Adverse health effects in humans of the kinds
already consistently reported worldwide – such as headaches, sleep
disruption, impairment of short–term memory, etc. - whilst maybe not life-threatening in themselves, do nevertheless
have a debilitating effect that undoubtedly undermines the general
well-being of those affected, and which in the case of some children
could well undermine their neurological and academic development. It should, of course, be stressed that the
apparent absence to date of life threatening adverse effects on a
global scale attributable to exposure to GSM or TETRA Base-station
radiation is no guarantee of immunity in the long-term.
For exposure to this kind of radiation is still in its ‘early
days’ in comparison to the much longer (10-15 years) latency period
of the kinds of cancers that could well be promoted or initiated in
certain people. REFERENCE: G.J. Hyland, ‘On the Inadequacy of Existing Safety Guidelines’ – ww.tassie.net.au/emfacts/mobiles/hyland2.html The GSM and TETRA systems
deployed in Europe are similar to PCS/Digital in the United States. In the U.S. human exposure
to RF/MW radiation is regulated by the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC) based on standards developed by the private organizations American
National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the Institute of Electrical
and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
The status of the non-ionzing radiation committee at the National
Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP), |