Cancer epidemiology update, following the 2011 IARC evaluation of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (Monograph 102)

2018 · Harm · Moderate evidence

← Research stream

HarmModerate evidencePaper 1936

Study snapshot

Publicationmanual · 2018

Study typereview

Reported directionHarm

Evidence ratingModerate

Abstract

Cancer epidemiology update, following the 2011 IARC evaluation of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (Monograph 102) Miller AB, Morgan LL, Udasin I, Davis DL. Cancer epidemiology update, following the 2011 IARC evaluation of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (Monograph 102). Environmental Research. 167:673-683. Nov 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2018.06.043. Highlights • Increased risk of brain, vestibular nerve and salivary gland tumors are associated with mobile phone use. • Nine studies (2011-2017) report increased risk of brain cancer from mobile phone use. • Four case-control studies (3 in 2013, 1 in 2014) report increased risk of vestibular nerve tumors. • Concern for other cancers: breast (male & female), testis, leukemia, and thyroid. • Based on the evidence reviewed it is our opinion that IARC's current categorization of RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) should be upgraded to Carcinogenic to Humans (Group 1). Abstract Epidemiology studies (case-control, cohort, time trend and case studies) published since the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) 2011 categorization of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) from mobile phones and other wireless devices as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) are reviewed and summarized. Glioma is an important human cancer found to be associated with RFR in 9 case-control studies conducted in Sweden and France, as well as in some other countries. Increasing glioma incidence trends have been reported in the UK and other countries. Non-malignant endpoints linked include acoustic neuroma (vestibular Schwannoma) and meningioma. Because they allow more detailed consideration of exposure, case-control studies can be superior to cohort studies or other methods in evaluating potential risks for brain cancer. When considered with recent animal experimental evidence, the recent epidemiological studies strengthen and support the conclusion that RFR should be categorized as carcinogenic to humans (IARC Group 1). Opportunistic epidemiological studies are proposed that can be carried out through cross-sectional analyses of high, medium, and low mobile phone users with respect to hearing, vision, memory, reaction time, and other indicators that can easily be assessed through standardized computer-based tests. As exposure data are not uniformly available, billing records should be used whenever available to corroborate reported exposures. Synthesis and conclusions The Epidemiological studies reported since the 2011 IARC Working Group meeting are adequate to consider RFR as a probable human carcinogen (Group 2 A). However, they must be supplemented with the recently reported animal data as performed at the Ramazzini Institute and the US National Toxicology Program as well as by mechanistic studies. These experimental findings together with the epidemiology reviewed here are sufficient in our opinion, to upgrade the IARC categorization of RFR to Group 1, carcinogenic to humans. It would be useful to know more about the association of additional tumor types such as parotid gland, testicular, breast, hematopoietic malignancies and multiple primaries with RFR. Case studies should continue to be conducted in the absence of a better exposure assessment system to increase awareness and understand the relationship between exposure to RFR and disease causation, as well as trial-error experiments and interventions. In light of the evolving science concerning mobile phone and screen time exposures and the longer-term risk of cancer established by both epidemiological and toxicological studies, current evidence is strong enough to go from precaution concerning possible risk to prevention of known risks. Although the benefits of connectivity are extremely important, safety considerations demand reconciling use of information vs. risk of perceived rare outcomes. Thus, a concerted program of public and health professional education should be undertaken throughout society explaining current knowledge and devising policies to promote safer technology in partnership with designers of software and hardware. In addition, methods should be developed and validated to reduce exposures in schools, workplaces, hospitals and other workplaces. The precautionary principle should be applied now and suitable warning messages provided to adults and critically to children and their parents. Until technology has been devised that substantially lowers exposures, special efforts should be advanced to ensure that the exposures of children are limited to those deemed essential. Children should be encouraged to text to reduce their exposure to RFR, while every attempt should be made to reduce exposure to RFR in schools, as well as homes. Research has so far been performed on technologies that have already been introduced, but is critically needed on new, untested technology prior to its use. Epidemiological studies necessarily confirm the impact of past exposures, while experimental studies provide indications of future risk. Thus, experimental evaluations and modeling are essential before distributing newer systems (e.g. 5 G) for which no safety data have been obtained. The absence of systematic testing of such technologies should not be confused with proof of safety. Better modeling through anatomically based systems, such as the Virtual Family, should be encouraged. In the meantime, the evidence amassed thus far from epidemiology strengthens the case for instituting the precautionary principle with respect to exposures to RFR, especially to young children and men and women that wish to reproduce. The lack of detailed studies at this point reflects a myopic attitude toward the technology that may well prove to be wishful and dangerous thinking. Where studies have been carried out on human sperm quantity and quality there are increasing indications of serious human health impacts. To ignore those findings and subject humans to unevaluated novel RFR frequencies places current and future generations at risk. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Machine Enhanced Logic

AI evidence extraction

Structured fields below were generated from the paper’s abstract and metadata to make the evidence easier to inspect. Automated extraction may be incomplete or incorrect; verify important details against the original paper.

Study typereview

Effect directionharm

PopulationNot supplied

Sample sizeNot supplied

Exposureradiofrequency

Evidence strengthModerateConfidence: 70% · Peer reviewed: yes

Main findings

Epidemiological studies since 2011 indicate increased risks of brain tumors including glioma and vestibular nerve tumors associated with mobile phone use. Animal studies and mechanistic data support upgrading radiofrequency radiation (RFR) to Group 1 carcinogen. Evidence suggests concern for other cancers such as breast, testis, leukemia, and thyroid. Precautionary measures and further research on new technologies like 5G are recommended.

Outcomes measured

brain cancer
glioma
vestibular nerve tumors
acoustic neuroma
meningioma
parotid gland tumors
testicular cancer
breast cancer
hematopoietic malignancies
multiple primaries
hearing
vision
memory
reaction time

Limitations

Exposure data are not uniformly available
Need for better exposure assessment systems
Lack of safety data on newer technologies such as 5G
Current epidemiological studies confirm past exposures but cannot predict future risks
Some tumor types require further study

View raw extracted JSON

{
  "study_type": "review",
  "exposure": {
    "band": "radiofrequency",
    "source": "mobile phone and other wireless devices",
    "frequency_mhz": null,
    "sar_wkg": null,
    "duration": null
  },
  "population": null,
  "sample_size": null,
  "outcomes": [
    "brain cancer",
    "glioma",
    "vestibular nerve tumors",
    "acoustic neuroma",
    "meningioma",
    "parotid gland tumors",
    "testicular cancer",
    "breast cancer",
    "hematopoietic malignancies",
    "multiple primaries",
    "hearing",
    "vision",
    "memory",
    "reaction time"
  ],
  "main_findings": "Epidemiological studies since 2011 indicate increased risks of brain tumors including glioma and vestibular nerve tumors associated with mobile phone use. Animal studies and mechanistic data support upgrading radiofrequency radiation (RFR) to Group 1 carcinogen. Evidence suggests concern for other cancers such as breast, testis, leukemia, and thyroid. Precautionary measures and further research on new technologies like 5G are recommended.",
  "effect_direction": "harm",
  "limitations": [
    "Exposure data are not uniformly available",
    "Need for better exposure assessment systems",
    "Lack of safety data on newer technologies such as 5G",
    "Current epidemiological studies confirm past exposures but cannot predict future risks",
    "Some tumor types require further study"
  ],
  "evidence_strength": "moderate",
  "confidence": 0.7,
  "peer_reviewed_likely": "yes",
  "keywords": [
    "radiofrequency radiation",
    "mobile phone",
    "brain cancer",
    "glioma",
    "vestibular schwannoma",
    "carcinogenicity",
    "IARC",
    "epidemiology",
    "precautionary principle",
    "5G"
  ],
  "suggested_hubs": [
    {
      "slug": "who-icnirp",
      "weight": 0.9,
      "reason": "Discusses IARC classification and carcinogenicity of RFR"
    },
    {
      "slug": "5g-policy",
      "weight": 0.7,
      "reason": "Calls for research and safety evaluation of new technologies such as 5G"
    }
  ]
}

AI can be wrong. Always verify against the paper.

AI-extracted fields are generated from the abstract and metadata and may be incomplete or incorrect. This material is for informational purposes and is not medical advice.

Identifiers and source

DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2018.06.043
PubMed: Not supplied

Read the original paper →

Related papers

← Back to the Research Library