It was a beautiful scene. A young mother was walking along the beach with her baby in a snugly sling on her chest. Interrupting this scene was the ring of a cell phone, which the woman answered, holding the phone next to her head-only inches from her baby's head as well. She obviously had no clue that she was exposing her child to dangerous electromagnetic radiation. 

If she did have a clue and had she asked regulators, she would have been told that a close cell phone was ­perfectly safe. Of course, Canadian regulations don't differentiate between the electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure to a small, developing child and that of a fully grown six-foot adult male, upon which safety regulations are based. No differentiation is made for the unique susceptibility of the elderly, pregnant women or those with an illness either. In addition, the regulations are based on acute, short-term exposure, not the chronic exposure to which most people on the planet are now ­exposed, ­either voluntarily or not. 

While regulations continue to be based solely on the adverse effects of heating of tissue, thousands of published, peer-reviewed studies demonstrate that this approach is incorrect. In fact, some negative health effects occur at levels hundreds of thousands of times below the so called safety limits, where tissue heating is impossible. As a result, the mother chatting on her cell phone is not an uncaring parent, but simply unknowing.

A precautious approach
Parents on cell phones is a common sight. They endanger their children by talking on cell phones while driving, for example, while their children are strapped into car seats for safety. Many police ­departments are understandably ­lobbying to ban the use of phones while driving ­because of increased risk of accidents, but they are mainly unaware of radiation ­dangers as well.

British Columbia, Ontario, Nova Scotia and Yukon provincial governments have passed legislation to ban smoking in a car carrying children under the age of 16 because of the proven damaging effects of second-hand smoke. Quebec may follow suit. The same authorities do not, however, make the same connection with cell phones and second-hand radiation.

Because of their size and growing status, children are more susceptible than adults to environmental insults of any kind. As their bodies grow, their cells are dividing more often than those of an adult, giving greater risk of DNA damage and the development of ­chronic disease such as cancer. Children living near high voltage power lines have ­increased risk of cancer development, particularly leukemia.

Early awareness
Concerns about adverse reactions are not new. As far back as the 70s, secretaries were expressing concern that monitors of the first desktop computers gave off strong electromagnetic fields. Some of the women reported feeling unwell while ­using the new equipment. Pregnant ­employees even wore lead aprons to protect their unborn children. Management dismissed their concerns, but they were being intelligently prudent-better safe than sorry.

As time passed, office and home ­environments became more contaminated by new EMF-emitting technology. Numerous epidemiological studies have demonstrated that breast cancer risk has increased in the past two decades with exposure to residential and occupational EMFs.  Four different laboratories around the world have found that breast cancer cells grow faster when exposed to EMFs (Journal of Pineal Research, 1993). There also is an increased risk of miscarriages due to even intermittent exposure.

Hormonal effects
Most women still don't know that ­numerous studies show that EMFs block the protective effects of the hormone ­melatonin, a known cancer ­fighter. ­According to the Bioinitiative report (www.bioinitiative.org), at least five labs have found this same result. Then, if a woman is fighting breast cancer and using Tamoxifen to prevent recurrence, studies suggest that Tamoxifen loses its protective effect with EMF exposure, also at ­environmental levels.

As if this isn't enough to cause concern, a study titled "Prenatal and postnatal exposure to cell phone use and ­behavioral problems in children" (Epidemiology, 2008) showed that EMFs actually change the human genome. Children born of mothers who used a cell phone while pregnant had higher overall behaviour problems than those of mothers who did not. In ­other words, cell phone use can have a lasting ­effect on future ­generations.

The lesson in all of this is that ­safety regulations always lag behind science, sometimes by a decade or more. This is particularly so when industry funding controls the majority of the science. It is further complicated when our government is in business or partnership with the industry that it is regulating. In the past year, the Canadian government auctioned off wireless airwaves for $4.2 billion and collected hundreds of millions in fees, while Export Development Canada recently guaranteed a $300 million loan for Nokia to buy a ­division of Nortel. 

Meanwhile, the sight of a mother walking on the beach with her baby can be both beautiful and, if a cell phone is involved, very concerning.

Milt Bowling is president of the Clean ­Energy Foundation (www.cleanenergycanada.com), which works with the public, ­industry and government for better regulations and ­safer technology.

Want to search for other articles that may interest you?

Readers of this article also enjoyed...