How do you respond to the International EMF Collaborative report claims that INTERPHONE is flawed and that there is evidence of a substantial risk of brain tumours from mobile phone use?
This is an advocacy statement not a scientific review. Independent reviews from more than 30 countries and the WHO have concluded that present international safety recommendations are protective for all persons against all established health risks. Several of the studies relied upon in the statement have been criticised for scientific weaknesses, for example, the Hardell studies were described by ICNIRP as ‘…particularly problematic…’ due to the way the results have been reported. In other cases (for example, the studies of Lai and Salford) independent research groups have failed to confirm the findings. INTERPHONE began in 2000 and most of the included subjects have up to 10 years of mobile phone use. The published INTERPHONE studies to date show no overall evidence of an increased risk for up to 10 years of use. The researchers recommend further study due to uncertainties related to small numbers of long-term users. The COSMOS study plans to follow the health of 250,000 European
Related Questions
- How do you respond to the International EMF Collaborative report claims that INTERPHONE is flawed and that there is evidence of a substantial risk of brain tumours from mobile phone use?
- Can international medical graduates request a confirmation or status report for themselves?
- How did the international community respond to the Israeli occupation?
