Dr. Weeks’ Comment: One friend and colleague and frequent reader of Centisble Health News wrote to me when he read this article below from Joe Mercola: “Doc Weeks, you have been talking about this for years!”
Government Study Finds ‘Clear Evidence’ for Heart Tumors From Cellphone Radiation
- The International Agency for Research on Cancer classified cellphones as a Group 2B “possible carcinogen” in 2011. Since then, evidence of harm has only grown stronger
- Two major studies published in 2018 link cellphone radiation to DNA damage and cancer
- Research by the National Toxicology Program (NTP) found “clear evidence” for heart tumors in male rats. These tumors started developing around week 70, and are similar to human acoustic neuromas that previous studies have linked to cellphone use
- NTP also found “some evidence” of brain tumors and adrenal gland tumors in male rats, as well as “equivocal” or unclear evidence of tumors in female rats and mice of both genders
- Corroborating evidence published by the Ramazzini Institute also shows a clear link between cellphone radiation and Schwann cell tumors, but at a much lower power level than that used by NTP, and below the U.S. safety limits set by the Federal Communications Commission
Cellphones were classified as a Group 2B “possible carcinogen”1 in 2011 by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), an arm of the World Health Organization and the global gold standard for the classification of toxins.
This classification was based on evidence showing that nonionizing electromagnetic field (EMF) radiation from cellphones can trigger abnormal cell growth and tumors.2,3 In my view, this is a mistake and, just like smoking, I am confident it will be recategorized in the future to a 1A carcinogen.
Earlier this year, preliminary findings of two government-funded animal studies4 were published that further support the notion that cellphone radiation has carcinogenic potential.
The finalized report5 of these two studies — conducted by the National Toxicology Program (NTP), an interagency research program under the auspices of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences — was released November 1, 2018. While the preliminary report released in February 2018 significantly downplayed the findings, subsequent peer review upgraded the findings of risk.
Cellphone Radiation Linked to Brain and Heart Tumors
The NTP rates cancer risk based on four categories of evidence: “clear evidence” (highest); “some evidence;” “equivocal evidence;” and “no evidence” (lowest). According to the NTP’s final report, the two studies, done on mice and rats of both sexes, found:6
•Clear evidence for heart tumors (malignant schwannomas) in male rats. These types of tumors started developing around week 70, and are very similar to acoustic neuromas found in humans, a benign type of tumor that previous studies have linked to cellphone use
•Some evidence of brain tumors (malignant gliomas) in male rats. Glial cell hyperplasias — indicative of precancerous lesions — began developing around week 58.
(Incidentally, incidence of glioblastoma multiforme (the deadliest type of brain tumor) more than doubled in the U.K. between 1995 and 2015.7,8 According to the authors of the analysis, the dramatic increase is likely due to “widespread environmental or lifestyle factors,” which would include cellphone usage)
•Some evidence of adrenal gland tumors in male rats, both benign and malignant tumors and/or complex combined pheochromocytoma
•Equivocal or unclear evidence of tumors in female rats and mice of both genders
The studies also found evidence of:
•Low body weight in female rats and newborns exposed to high levels of radiation during pregnancy and lactation
•DNA damage and damage to heart tissue in exposed male and female rats, but not mice
•Prostate, liver and pancreatic tumors in both rats and mice
Are Humans at Risk?
According to The New York Times:9
“‘We believe that the link between radio-frequency radiation and tumors in male rats is real,’ John Bucher, a senior scientist at the National Toxicology Program, said in a statement.
But he cautioned that the exposure levels and durations were far greater than what people typically encounter, and thus cannot ‘be compared directly to the exposure that humans experience’ …
The lowest level of radiation in the federal study was equal to the maximum exposure that federal regulations allow for cellphone users … The highest level was four times higher than the permitted maximum.”
While the NTP insists the exposure — nine hours a day for two years, which is the lifetime of a rodent — is far more extensive than that of heavy cellphone users, I would strongly disagree, seeing how many, especially the younger generation, have their cellphones turned on and near their body 24/7.
Many are literally sleeping with their phone beneath their pillow. What’s more, cellphones are not the sole source of radiofrequency (RF) EMFs. Wi-Fi and Bluetooth-enabled tablets, computers, smart TVs, wireless baby monitors, cordless phones, smart appliances, smart meters and nearby cellular phone basestations are sources of similarly harmful radiation, and most of us are exposed 24/7. So, my guess is that the duration of RF-EMF exposure is actually far greater than the one tested in the study.
for the rest of the article READ HERE