Cell Phone Hazards: The End of an Era

The era when cell phones safety was taken for granted is as done as a hotdog on an unwatched backyard grill. The science confirming that pulsed digital microwave radiation from cell phones can be harmful has become stronger and clearer. In San Francisco where officials have passed a law giving people the basic right to know about cellphone risks, the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA) claims that people will become confused by referring to cell phones as two-way microwave radiating devices and insists that the more benign phrase be used to depict this radiation—radiofrequency energy. In their suit to block this new law, the CTIA claims that all phones are equally safe. The effort to spin the science on cell phones has a long industry. In 1994, long before cellphones were ubiquitous, University of Washington scientists Henry Lai and N. J. Singh showed that pulsed microwave radiation unraveled DNA in the brain of lab rats. The industry response to this inconvenient finding was straightforward. Some industry representatives sought to keep this research from seeing the light of day and asked the journal that had accepted their research paper to rescind publication. When this failed, Motorola adopted what it described as a “war-gamed” set of public relations initiatives against the results—mobilizing professional public relations experts to cast doubt on the work. In fact, many studies since then have found that cell phone radiation, whether from older or newer phones, significantly alters brain chemistry and blood flow, weakens the blood brain barrier, releases unusual proteins and causes a host of biological responses. Thus, in 2006, Finnish researchers produced evidence of altered brain energy after cell phone use and in 2002 researchers in Austria presented parallel evidence of other significant changes. Fast forward to 2011. Accusations of scientific fraud were widely publicized and leveled against a 12-laboratory European collaboration after it found further evidence that cell phone radiation induced biological damage. Yet proof that no fraud occurred has not received similar publicity. Exonerated by several internal university reviews, recently that work was further strengthened when yet another investigation found no evidence of fraud. Today, hypotheses linking pulsed microwave radiation from cell phones to various types of biological damage are moving from the rarified world of little known research to the foundation for landmark shifts in public perception and, ultimately, life-saving policies in Israel, France, Finland, and many other nations. In fact, the World Health Organization expert review of the topic in May 2011 advised that cellphone and other forms of wireless radiation should be regarded as a possible human carcinogen. Based on its own review of the matter, the President’s Cancer Panel in 2010, drawing on what it heard from experts in the field about growing rates of rare tumors that could be tied with cell phones, called for both serious research and precautionary actions on cell phones and other wireless devices. Yet the rest of the government has not received that memo. In advising that cellphones should be used cautiously with headsets and speakerphones and that children should limit use altogether, WHO experts are in accord with the authors of the Fifteen Reasons for Concern about Cell Phones and Brain Tumors (see www.radiationresearch.org) and recent reports from neurosurgeons in Australia Charles Teo and Vini Khurauna, in Britain, Kevin O’Neill and in the U.S., Santosh Kesari and Keith Black. Here’s what the FCC website says about Children and Cell phones as of February 1, 2011: “The scientific evidence does not show a danger to any users of cell phones from RF exposure, including children and teenagers.” It is time for a change.

Controversial but very likely true, even understated

Yesterday we remembered the terrible terrorist attacks that killed thousands of innocent people on Sept 11, 2001. It was easy to recognise the horror of the situation, explosions, fire, bodies and wreckage all shown live and repeated on television many times in the ten years since. A disaster with much worse consequences may now be taking place but in slow motion. Exposure to microwave radiation is likely to harm very many more people than 911, but it will not be nearly as visible, newsworthy and shocking. Cancer, various illnesses, shortened lives and slow painful deaths are likely to be the consequences of using wireless convenience devices such as cell phones, cordless telephones and Wi Fi. Who are the terrorists that are allowing this to happen? Why are Governments not taking this known threat seriously and protecting the public?

In its latest publication ARCEP-FRANCE (Regulatory Authority Electronic Communications and Postal) mentions a very significant fact: after falling for several years, the volume of minutes used on landline telephones has recently increased spectacularly and now exceeds the minutes used by mobile phones. The respective figures show traffic of 25.5 billion minutes for mobile phones, which is the same figure as the first quarter of 2009, thus a stagnation "after years of non-stop expansion". In contrast, during the same period “the total volume of traffic for landline phones reached 30.7 billion minutes in the first quarter of 2010, a level which it had not reached since almost 10 years ago,” declared ARCEP.
Some people explain this by the economic crisis (are parents keeping a closer eye on the phone bills?), others see the dawning realisation that using a mobile phone carries a health risk. Whatever the reason, against all expectation the landline phone is gaining ground in a surprising way against the mobile.
Paradoxically average yearly revenues remain the same, in spite of the ingenuity and multiplicity of new offers from the phone companies. An ex-fan of the mobile phone…
The golden age of an investment return in double figures from mobile telephony is now in the past, and the poor return on the mobile videophone (3G, etc,) is a bitter pill for the phone companies. Whether due to the economic climate or not, the PMT (Personal Mobile Television), which the operators were so keen on and was supported by the authorities, backed up by offers from the manufacturers, has turned out to be a flop. The truth is that there is a widespread falling off of demand, especially in the northern countries, for mobile phone time. Is this a first sign of salvation for the southern European countries? [Report ABI research]
For the time being the phone companies’ revenues are still being boosted in the developing countries, particularly in Africa which is a truly limitless Eldorado, with its favourable geopolitical conditions and a public that has no awareness of any health risks. Considering the poverty in some African countries it’s even indecent, yet it is entirely possible that, in the face of the phone companies’ aggressive marketing and business methods, the demand for mobile phones will literally explode.
But beware and prepare for tomorrow, for the tide may well turn.
- Authority:

DECT telephones and mobile phones cause cancer

The Highest Regional Court in Brescia (North Italy) has now issued a final valid judgement confirming a causal connection.

The brain tumor of an employee of the INAIL (IstitutoNazionale by l' Assicurazione contro gli Infortuni sul Lavoro) the National Public Insurance Institute, has been caused by hours of use of a cordless(DECT) and/or mobile phone

The judgement is a breakthrough because this time the Judge excluded industry financed appraisals and relied on industry independent data.

This judgement makes it now possible for employees in Italy to insist on the supply of a corded phone and to advise their employer that they are legally liable for future damages should they insist on the use of a cordless phone.

The Consumer Center in South Tirol advises everyone to insist on a written declaration regarding the use of telecommunication equipment which expressly states that the employer takes all responsibility for any future medium or long term consequences

The plaintiff has now been awarded an 80% disability pension due to his ` handy damage' .and the employer INAIL is to pay all court costs.

Wireless Technologies Cause Harm to Children and Adults, Legislators and Journalists Are Told

Washington, D.C., June 30, 2009; Today The National Institute for Science, Law and Public Policy (“NISLAPP”) mailed a report on the health hazards of wireless technologies to Governors, Members of Congress, President Obama and his Administration, as well as to thousands of health and environmental journalists.
Legislators and journalists are being urged to learn about the health consequences of microwave radiation exposure from cell phones, neighborhood antennas, wireless networks, wireless routers, DECT portable phones, and the potential health consequences of further chronic exposures from wireless broadband and new wireless utility technologies.
The National Institute for Science, Law and Public Policy is encouraging all to become engaged with this important public health issue impacting adults and children, as well as animals and nature.

Co-authored by Dr. Magda Havas, Assoc. Professor of Environmental and Resource Studies at Trent University in Canada, and Camilla Rees, Founder of www.ElectromagneticHealth.org, “Public Health SOS: The Shadow Side of the Wireless Revolution” reviews the independent science on the health hazards of wireless radiation and offers recommendations to the public on how to live more safely in a wireless world.....

READ MORE: (http://sn.im/l5qf d)
Amazon.com Listing - http://sn.im/l6xgb

Are you part of the worlds largest ever health experiment?

Whilst the World Health Organisation finally agrees that the untested mobile phone technologies need looking at and there monolithic infrastructure struggles out of its red tape labyrinth and into action (apparently they started looking into this in 1996 and have no conclusions either way as of yet) are you going to wait around to become a statistic referred to in there published report or are you going to stop you and your family being exposed to lethal doses of microwave radiation today?

HERE'S WHAT THE WHO SAY WHY NOT READ BETWEEN THE LINES?

Potential health effects of exposure to static and time varying electric and magnetic fields need scientific clarification. Electromagnetic fields of all frequencies represent one of the most common and fastest growing environmental influences, about which there is anxiety and speculation are spreading. EMF exposure now occurs to varying degrees to all populations of the world, and the levels will continue to increase with advancing technology. Thus, even a small health consequence from EMF exposure could have a major public health impact.
Concerns have been expressed that exposure to extremely low frequency (ELF) magnetic fields at power frequencies (50/60 Hz) could lead to an increased incidence of cancer in children and other adverse health effects. The evidence comes primarily from residential epidemiological studies. These studies suggest that children exposed to ELF magnetic fields have an associated increased risk of leukaemia.
Radio frequency (RF) fields are used to great benefits in many facets of everyday life, such as radio and TV transmission, telecommunications (eg mobile telephones), diagnosis and treatments of disease and in industry for heating and sealing materials. With the rapid introduction of mobile telecommunications devices, especially among the general public, there has been a focus on the problems associated with near field RF exposure to the head from the small radiating antenna of mobile phones. In addition, concerns persist that exposure to pulsed and amplitude modulated RF fields may cause specific health effects.
As societies develop, greater use of certain technologies leads to increasing exposure to static electric and magnetic fields. This is especially the case in industry, transport, power transmission, research and medicine. Possible health effects from static fields have never been properly assessed. Given the rapid expansion of medical devices and imminent introduction, potentially on a large scale, of magnetic levitation transport systems that use strong static magnetic fields, any health impacts need to be properly assessed.
As part of its charter to protect public health and in response to public concern over health effects of EMF exposure, the World Health Organization (WHO) established the International EMF Project in 1996 to assess the scientific evidence of possible health effects of EMF in the frequency range from 0 to 300 GHz. The EMF Project encourages focused research to fill important gaps in knowledge and to facilitate the development of internationally acceptable standards limiting EMF exposure.

12 BASIC PRECAUTIONS to minimise exposure to radiation when using a mobile phone

Limit phone calls to those that are absolutely necessary, and restrict these to 6 minutes maximum, which is the time the body needs to adjust. Use a hands-free kit and hold the phone more than 20/30cm away from your body in order to limit the impact of radiation on yourself.
2 -
Do not carry your phone directly on your body, even on stand-by, and do not use it less than one metre away from another person, in order to reduce the effect of 'passive' radiation. .
3 -
Those under 15 should not use a mobile phone at all because they are still growing. With their lighter body weight the radiation is more damaging, especially to the brain, weakening the Blood-Brain Barrier (BBB), and to the reproductive organs/ovaries, etc. .
4 -
Any elderly person should be discouraged from using a mobile phone, as well as anyone in a weakened state (the radiation will weaken their organism further), and any pregnant woman. Microwave radiation is readily absorbed by the amniotic fluid in which the embryo and then the foetus develops. .
5 -
Use the phone only in conditions of optimum reception: do not use it in a confined space such as an elevator, basement, underground station, caravan, etc. In these situations the strength of the signal both sending and receiving is much greater thus the radiation is much more intense.
6 -
Do not use the phone while you are in a moving vehicle, including the train, bus, etc, since its antenna will be constantly scanning for contact using the maximum signal strength, and the radiation from both incoming and outgoing signal will be intensified.
7 -
Do not use the phone while in any vehicle, even when stationary. An enclosed metal container produces the "Faraday cage" effect, which maximizes the damaging impact of radiation, reflecting not only on the person phoning but also on other passengers, especially children. Thus it is essential to step out of the vehicle before making a call. .
8 -
Do not keep a mobile phone beside the bed at night switched on, because even when on stand-by it is in contact with the nearest phone mast and emits radiation at regular intervals. .
9 -
Equip yourself preferably with:
- a mobile phone with the lowest possible SAR rating (= Specific Absorption Rate of microwave radiation by human body tissues). The regulation limit is 1.1W/kg for eye-sockets and cheeks.
- a phone with an external antenna, because even if it is less trendy, the omni-directional antenna broadcasts with maximum efficiency and therefore uses a weaker signal than one with an inbuilt antenna. The fashion factor matters less than the health factor. .
10 -
Use of a mobile phone should be avoided by anyone who has any metallic object in or on their head, whether magnetic or not, such as amalgam fillings and dental bridges, metal plates, screws, clips, body ornaments, earrings or metal framed glasses. The same is true for those with walking frames, wheelchairs or metal crutches, so as to avoid increasing radiation by the phenomena of reflection, amplification, resonance, passive re-emission, etc... .
11 -
Make use of protective items to shield yourself from radiation, such as a metal phone carrying case, protective anti-radiation fabric and veils, metallic foil wallpaper, anti-radiation paint, etc, all which have been proved to be effective. .
12 -
Make as many phone calls as possible using landlines which emit no radiation, and which can often be used for free and for unlimited time via the Internet, even for phone calls abroad.

As you can see from the graph RFR levels have gone exponetial in the last 3 years as more and more phone masts go up more and more people go wireless at home all of which are probably having a cumalitive effect on health!

Brain tumours are the leading cause of childhood cancer deaths in Britain, with half as many more children dying from the illness as from leukaemia. Figures from the Office of National Statistics show that in 2007 there were 47% more deaths from brain tumours among under-15s than from leukaemia. Yet that is not reflected in the money spent on research, say campaigners. This week sees the launch of Brain Tumour Research, a national coalition of 14 charities, which believe that research is "woefully underfunded". It is backed by celebrities including the actress Sheila Hancock, whose grandson survived a tumour, and actor Martin Kemp and opera singer Russell Watson, who were both treated successfully.
Hancock, 76, the widow of actor John Thaw, saw her grandson Jack diagnosed with a rare tumour aged four. "It is terrible to watch a grandchild go through the diagnosis and treatment of a brain tumour. You feel so helpless." Jack was successfully operated on. Kevin O'Neill, a consultant neurosurgeon at Imperial College London, said: "Brain tumours are on the increase, reportedly in the region of 2% per year. But in my unit we have seen the number of cases nearly double in the last year."

THE MOBILE PHONE LINK
30.04.09, 12:14pm
The increase in brain tumours coincides with the increase in use of mobile phones.All independent research shows and increased risk of brain tumour on the side of the head where you hold the phone.See this recent report from Australian brain surgeons on TVhttp://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=797215Australian TV 60 Minutes2 top brain surgeons say prolonged use of mobile phones could double the risk of malignant brain tumours.DR CHARLIE TEO: I'm incredibly worried, concerned, depressed at the number of kids I'm seeing coming in with brain tumours. Malignant brain tumours.Just in the last three or four weeks I've seen nearly half a dozen kids with tumours which really should have been benign and they've all been nasty, malignant brain tumours. We are doing something terribly wrong.For more information see the new site soon to be launched at www.wiredchild.org

National Research Centre Bologna report on mobiles and cancer

Mobile Phones & Cancer... more
spate of reports during 2002 is confirming links between electromagnetic radiation from mobile phones and cancer. Dr. Mae-Wan Ho reports.
The complete document with references, is available in the ISIS members site. Full details here
In October, 2002, cell biologist Fiorenzo Marinelli and his team at the National Research Council in Bologna, Italy, reported that radio waves from mobile phones could promote the growth of cancer cells.
The team exposed leukaemia cells to 900-megahertz radio waves at a power density level of 1 milliwatt per squared centimetre (mW/cm2).
After 24 hours of continuous exposure to the radio waves, the researchers found that certain ‘suicide genes’ were turned on in far more leukaemia cells than in a control cell population that had not been exposed, and 20 per cent more exposed cells had died than in the controls.
But after 48 hours exposure to the radio waves, the apparently lethal effect of the radiation went into reverse. Instead of more cells dying, the exposed cells were replicating furiously compared to the controls. Three genes that trigger cells to multiply were turned on in a high proportion of the cells. The cancer, although briefly beaten back, had become more aggressive.
Marinelli presented the results at the International Workshop on Biological Effects of Electromagnetic Fields on the Greek island of Rhodes.
He suspects that the radiation may initially damage DNA, and that this interferes with the biochemical signals in a way that ultimately triggers the cells to multiply more rapidly.
Meanwhile, a research team in the University of Florence reported that normal human skin fibroblasts, placed over an active cell phone for 1 h, also showed significant changes. The fibroblasts shrivelled up, and several genes indicative of stress response became expressed, that are involved in cell proliferation, growth inhibition and cell death. There was a significant increase in DNA synthesis and in key molecules that signal cell division. These findings are similar to those reported earlier from yet another laboratory.
Dariusz Leszczynski at the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority in Helsinki found that one-hour exposure to mobile phone radiation caused cultured human cells to shrink.
Leszczynski believes this happens when a cell is damaged. In a person, such changes could destroy the ‘blood-brain barrier’ that normally prevents harmful substances in the bloodstream from entering the brain and damaging it.
Radiation-induced changes in the cells could also interfere with normal cell death when the cell is damaged. If cells that are ‘marked’ to die do not, tumours can form.
This research is particularly important, Leszczynski said, because it demonstrates that mobile phone radiation too weak to heat up the cells can still affect them.
David de Pomerai, molecular toxicologist at the University of Nottingham, provided the first clear evidence on such non-thermal effects of mobile phone radiation. He found that nematode worms exposed to radio waves had an increase in fertility - the opposite effect from what would be expected from heating.
De Pomerai also insisted that a consensus is emerging that electromagnetic waves such as those used in mobile phones can indirectly damage DNA by affecting its repair system without heating the cell. "Cells with unrepaired DNA damage are likely to be far more aggressively cancerous," he said.
Non-thermal effects due to weak electromagnetic radiation are at the heart of the debate on the health hazards of mobile phones and other electrical installations in the environment.
These recent results should be seen in the light of the report released in March 2002 by the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB), which concluded that children exposed to high levels of electromagnetic radiation in the home could be doubling their risk of leukaemia (see "Electromagnetic fields double leukaemia risk". This series).
One doesn’t have to be a cell-phone user to become exposed to the radiation. You could be living near a base-station that’s beaming the radio waves at you (see Box 1). Or you could be exposed as a passenger on a crowded train full of mobile phone users.
Tsuyoshi Hondou, a physicist from Tohoku University in Sendai, Japan, currently working at the Curie Institute in Paris, calculated that in a typical Japanese railway carriage with mobile phone users surfing the net, the radio waves rebounding from the metal wall of the carriage would give an electromagnetic field that could exceed the maximum exposure level recommended by the International Committee for Non-Ionising Radiation (ICNIRP), even when the train is not crowded.
Hondou’s calculations show that it is possible to exceed ICNIRP exposure limit if 30 people, each with a mobile phone that emits radio waves at a power of 0.4 watts, all use their phones at the same time.
The ICNIRP limits have already been severely criticised for being set far too high, and are aimed at protecting people from acute heating effects only, and take no account of non-thermal effects.
An inquiry in April 2000 by the British government found no evidence of any health risks from mobile phones. But the report nevertheless recommended a precautionary approach until further evidence emerged. In particular, it suggested children should not use mobile phones excessively.
Box 1
How do mobile phones work?
Mobile telephony is based on radio communication between a portable handset and the nearest base-station. Every base-station serves a ‘cell’, varying in radius from hundreds of metres in densely populated areas to kilometres in rural areas, and is connected both to the conventional landline telephone network, and by tightly focused microwave links to neighbouring stations. As the mobile-phone user moves from cell to cell, the call is transferred from one base-station to the next without interruption.
The radio communication depends on microwaves at 900 or 1800 megahertz (MHz) (a million cycles per second) to carry voice information via small modulations of the wave’s frequency. A base-station antenna typically radiates 60W and a handset between 1 and 2 W (peak). The antenna of a handset radiates equally in all directions, but a base-station produces a beam that is much more directional. In addition, the stations have subsidiary beams called side-lobes, into which a small fraction of the emitted power is channelled. Unlike the main beam, the side-lobes are located in the immediate vicinity of the mast, and, despite their low power, the power density can be comparable with that of the main beam much further away from the mast. At 150 to 200m, the power density in the main beam near the ground level is typically tenths of microWatt/cm2.
A handset in operation also has a low-frequency magnetic field associated, not with the emitted microwaves, but with surges of electric current from the battery that’s necessary to implement ‘time division multiple access’, the system used to increase the number of people who can simultaneously communicate with the base-station. Every communication channel has 8 time slots (thus the average power of a handset is 1/8 of the peak values, ie, beween 0.125 and 0.25W), which are transmitted as 576 microsecond bursts. Together, the 8 slots define a frame, the repetition of which is 217 Hz. The frames transmitted by both handsets and base-stations are groups into ‘multi-frames’ of 25 by the absence of every 26th frame. This results in an additional low frequency pulsing of the signal at 8.34Hz, which, unlike that at 217 Hz, is unaffected by call density, and is thus a permanent feature of the emission. With handsets that have an energy-saving discontinuous transmission mode (DTX), there is an even lower frequency pulsing at 2 Hz, which occurs when the user is listening but not speaking.
Thus, the fields to which users are exposed can be quite complex.
A review published in The Lancet the same year by Gerard Hyland, physicist at Warwick University, listed numerous studies over the past 30 years that showed microwaves do have a range of non-thermal effects (see Box 1 and Box 2).
Some of the findings, such as increases in chromosome aberrations, DNA single- and double-strand breaks, promotion of cancer in cells, and in transgenic mice, are all consistent with the recent reports. Hyland is extremely critical of the current exposure limits set by the ICNIRP.
Box 2
In vitro nonthermal effects of microwaves
· Elicits epileptic activity in rat brain slices in conjunction with certain drugs.
· Affects cell division of yeast and on the genome conformation of E. coli.
· Synchronises cell division in yeast, S. carisbergenis.
· Switches on l-phage and colicin synthesis in bacteria.
· Alters ornithine decarboxylase activity in cultured cell line.
· Reduces T lymphocyte cytotoxicity.
· Increases permeability of red blood cell membrane.
· Affects calcium efflux in brain cells.
· Increases chromosome aberrations and micronuclei in human blood lymphocytes.
· Promotes cancer synergistically with cancer-promoting drugs such as phorbol esters.

Box 3
In vivo non-thermal effects of microwaves
· Causes epileptic activity in rats, in conjunction with certain drugs.
· Depresses chicken immune systems (melatonin, corticosterone and IgG levels).
· Increases mortality of chick embryos.
· Affects brain electrochemistry (dopamine, opiates).
· Increases DNA single- and double-strand breaks in rat brain.
· Promotes lymphomas in transgenic mice.
· Synergeistic effects with certain psychoactive drugs.
· A delayed increase in spectral power density (particularly in the alpha band) corroborated in the awake EEG of adults exposed to mobile phone radiation. Influences on the asleep EEG include a shortening of rem sleep during which the power density in the alpha band increases, and effects on non-REM sleep.
· Exposure to mobile phone radiation also decreases the preparatory slow potentials in certain regions of the brain and affects memory tasks.
· Resting blood pressure was found to increase during exposure to radiofrequencies.
Dr Zenon Sienkiewicz, a radiation biologist at the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB), told BBC News Online that there was still no hard evidence that showed mobile phones causing harm in real humans, rather than human cells in a test tube.
He said: "The bottom line is there are no known mechanisms by which mobile phone radiation can increase the risk of cancer."
Hyland disagrees. He points out that mobile phone radiation has been found to affect a wide variety of brain functions - such as electrical activity (EEG) electrochemistry and the permeability of the blood/brain barrier - and to undermine the immune system.
Although the precise mechanisms are unclear, Hyland pointed to an "undeniable consistency between some of these non-thermal influences and the nature of many of the health problems reported", such as headache, sleep disruption, impairment of short term memory, increases in the frequency of seizures in some epileptic children when exposed to Base-station radiation, and of brain tumours amongst users of mobile phones.
Thus, reports of headache are consistent with the effect observed on the dopamine–opiate system of the brain, and the increase in permeability of the blood-brain barrier, both of which have been medically connected with headache. The reports of sleep disruption are consistent with the observed effect of the radiation on rapid eye movement (REM) sleep and on melatonin levels; whilst memory impairment is consistent with the finding that microwave radiation targets the hippocampus. Epileptic seizures are known to be induced by visible light flashing at a certain low frequency, and there is no reason to suppose that microwave radiation, which can access the brain directly through the skull, flashing at a similar frequency, cannot cause the effect. Indeed, exposure to such microwave radiation is known to induce epileptic activity in certain animals; and there have been reports of increased seizures in some children suffering from epilepsy that were exposed to base-station radiation.
Finally, mobile phone users show statistically significant increase (by a factor of between 2 and 3) in the incidence of a rather rare kind of tumour (epithelial neuroma) on the side of the brain nearest the mobile phone.
What then is the appropriate exposure limit? Hyland points out that some experiments are indicating non-thermal thresholds for biological effects of the order of microwatt/cm2. Adverse effects have been reported, however, at power densities a few tenths of that value at distances of 150-200m from a typical 15m high Base-station mast and within the range of the more localised side-lobes in the immediate vicinity of a mast. Incorporating a further safety factor of 10 to allow for the possibility of long-term exposure, the power densities should not exceed 10 nanoW (billionth of a Watt)/cm2.