Mobile Phones Break DNA & Scramble Genomes

AlkalizeForHealth

 Home
 Contents
 Library

 

The information on this web site is provided for educational purposes only. Please see Disclaimer, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

"The doctor of the future will give no medicine, but will interest his patients in the care of the human frame, in diet and in the cause and prevention of disease."
- Thomas Edison

Microwaves, like those emitted from a cell phone, cause cancer cells to grow. - Dr Stephen Cleary, cancer researcher

The risk of brain tumors in humans is multiplied 2.5 times when cell phones are used. - Dr. Lenart Hardell, Cancer Specialist

"Scientists who work on the problem of biological effects of cell phones and relay stations have been made the object...of...firings, professional change, change of research topic, blockage of career, loss of collaborators, ban on speaking..." - Dr. Robert Santini

When you use a cell phone, be sure to use a Cell Phone Protector

If you want to get a good night of sleep, do not use a cell phone before going to bed.

 

 

 

The Institute

 of Science in

 Society

Science Society Sustainability http://www.i-sis.org.uk

General Enquiries sam@i-sis.org.uk Website/Mailing List press-release@i-sis.org.uk ISIS Director m.w.ho@i- sis.org.uk
 

ISIS Press Release 17/01/05

Confirmed: Mobile

 Phones Break DNA

 & Scramble

 Genomes

But No Health Risks?

New Report on EU-wide study confirms hazards of exposure to electromagnetic radiation but does not prove health risks. So what use is this research, ask Dr. Mae-Wan Ho and Prof. Peter Saunders

Sources for this article are posted on ISIS members website. Details here

Children under eight should not use mobile phones and those between eight and 14 should use them only when absolutely necessary, warns Prof. William Stewart, Chair of UK's National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB). Sir William issued the same warning 5 years ago, when he chaired an enquiry that resulted in the Stewart Report on Mobile Phones and Health. But his advice has been ignored. One in four 7-10 year olds now has a mobile phone, double the level in 2001.

In a new report published 12 January 2005, Stewart not only repeated his warning that children will be most at risk but also called for a review of the planning process for base stations. He was reported to have said new evidence suggested there might be possible health implications.

This evidence came from a large Europe-wide study lasting four years that once again failed to prove electromagnetic fields from mobile phones and other sources are health risks. Nevertheless, it made Stewart "more concerned" than five years ago, though not sufficiently to recommend more decisive action.

What science to fund?

Why do debates persist over the safety of new technologies such as genetic modification and mobile phones? Why do the issues never seem to be settled - as far as anything in science can be settled - before products are on the market? It is at least partly because we lack both explicit criteria for funding the scientific research in the first place - such as whether it is safe, ethical, and makes genuine contribution to society - and an audit system to assess the effectiveness of our research & development spending.

Consequently, research into the safety of new technologies is done long after they have reached the market, if it is done at all. By that stage, of course, industry has invested a great deal of money and there is great pressure on scientists and regulators not to put all that investment at risk. Instead of applying the precautionary principle, according to which developments should not go ahead until we are convinced beyond reasonable scientific doubt that they are safe, regulators apply the anti-precautionary principle, which demands conclusive evidence of harm before any action can be justified. It is not in the public interest to switch the burden of proof in this way, but it is all too likely to happen when there is so much money at stake.

We should be commissioning research into safety long before large amounts have been spent on product development. And the scientists we fund should be asking probing questions and conducting experiments that provide clear answers both on health risks as well as on the basic mechanisms, which are all too often not well understood.

The Europe- wide study on the biological effects of electromagnetic fields, unfortunately, satisfies neither criterion.

A major study of no consequence

The recent extensive European study, known as Reflex, found that radiation from mobile phones breaks DNA in human cells. But according to its 259 page final report, that does not mean that mobile phones are health risks.

The study involved 12 research groups in 7 European countries working from 2000 to 2004. It cost more than 3 million euros (2.059.450 from the EU, 506.774 from the Swiss government, 191.265 from the Finnish government, and 522629 from the Verum Foundation in Germany). The teams investigated electromagnetic fields (EMFs) in the extremely low frequency (ELF) region coming from the ordinary electricity supply and appliances, and in the radio frequency (RF) range emitted by mobile phones. Much attention was devoted to standardizing exposure equipment and standards and other quality control.

One might have expected that such a major, concerted effort would yield more definitive answers on safety. It didn't.

A fault in design and emphasis

The labs concentrated on studying cells and looking for acute effects on molecules after exposures to EMF for short periods of time, from 6 h up to 24 h; at most a few days. The effects of long-term exposures were not addressed. Moreover, the research focused on field intensities around current exposure limits - about 1mT for ELF region, and specific absorption rate (SAR) of 2 Watts/kg for the RF range. Many scientists consider these far too high because they are aimed at preventing excessive heating of the tissues rather than non-thermal effects such as DNA breakages.

Nevertheless, several of the teams detected significant DNA breaks in human and other animal cells at exposure levels far below the official limits. DNA breakages were observed after 15h exposure to ELF-EMFs as low as 35 microT, and after 18h exposure at 20 microT. Similarly, for the RF region, DNA breakages as well as chromosomal abnormalities were observed at the lowest SAR level investigated, 0.3W/kg.

Yet in the final report we read: "Taken together, the results of the REFLEX project were exclusively obtained in in vitro studies and are, therefore, not suitable for the conclusion that RF-EMF exposure below the presently valid safety limits causes a risk to the health of people." Exactly the same statement is made on the results of ELF-EMF exposure.

This single statement reveals the futility of the whole exercise. The experiments were carried out in vitro. We are now told that in the opinion of the experimenters no in vitro result, i.e. no conceivable outcome of their experiments, could have led them to infer that there is a risk to health. Why then did they bother carrying out the experiments? Why did they feel justified in asking the European taxpayers to fund their work as a contribution to public health?

Who benefits from such research?

While denying that the research results tell us anything about health risks, the leader of the study, Franz Adlkofer of Verum Foundation nevertheless advised against using mobile phones when fixed line phones are available, and also recommended using a headset with a mobile phone whenever possible. "We don't want to create a panic, but it is good to take precautions," he is reported to have said, commenting that additional necessary research could take another four or five years.

That's very convenient for the $100 billion a year mobile phone industry that has been insisting there is no conclusive evidence of harmful effects from electromagnetic radiation. About 1.5 billion people around the world now use mobile phones, and it was expected that about 650 million phones would be sold last year. The leader of the study is clearly concerned about possible risks, but not to the extent of suggesting the industry should do anything about it. Not even a campaign to alert the public so that they can make up their own minds.

In saying they have so far not been able to reach a conclusion, the scientists can hope for another four or five years research support. But if their research so far has told us nothing new; and was designed to tell us nothing new, why should we pay for more of it? Besides, the results are already bad enough even if all they do is confirm what we already know.

Our fears confirmed

Despite its limitations, the Reflex study has confirmed important findings already in the scientific literature. Henry Lai and Narenda Singh at the University of Washington in Seattle, USA, among others, had detected DNA breakages in brain cells of rats exposed to far weaker fields at least since the 1990s. Their results were soon confirmed in several other laboratories.

The Reflex study also finds that EMF exposure in both the ELF and RF range led to significant increases in chromosomal abnormalities in human fibroblasts (skin cells), such as gaps, breaks, rings, dicentric (two centromeres) chromosomes and fragments. Gaps increased 4- fold, breaks 2-fold, and dicentric chromosomes and acentric fragments 10-fold. RF-EMF exposure induced an even higher incidence of chromosome gaps and breaks; and dicentrics and acentric fragments increased 100-fold. These chromosomal abnormalities, too, had been observed previously (see "Non- thermal effects", SiS 17) and now considered by a substantial number of scientists to be signs of genome instability linked to cancer.

Indeed, the Reflex study finds that ELF-EMFs promoted the growth of human neuroblastoma cells, by 12% after 42h exposure at 10 microT, and 17% at 100microT; although longer exposures for 90h were without effect, possibly because the cells have reached confluence, at which point they stop growing, and are no longer sensitive to EMFs.

The growth promoting effect of EMF exposure is of especial relevance on account of epidemiological evidence linking it to childhood leukemia and other cancers (see "Electromagnetic fields double leukaemia risks" and "Non-thermal effects", SiS17; "Electromagnetic fields, leukaemia and DNA damage", SiS23). Exposing leukemia cells to RF-EMFs for 48h caused them to multiply aggressively, overriding the signals that trigger cell death (see "Mobile phones & cancer", SiS17).

Mechanism still not understood

By its own admission the Reflex study has contributed little towards defining the health risks of EMFs. Has it contributed towards understanding the basic mechanism of non-thermal biological effects of EMFs? Not really. The genome-wide scans and the protein profiling found many genes and proteins "up-regulated" or "down-regulated", the significance of which will remain unknown until and unless the normal range of variation could be established.

The report highlights (p.194) that, "The mechanism of action induced by ELF-EMF exposure of living cells is not yet known." For RF-EMF, it suggests that "increased formation and activity of free radicals" is responsible for damaging DNA. That suggestion, too, is nothing new, and has been made previously by many other researchers. Furthermore, it does not really address the question of how EMFs could increase the formation and activity of free radicals, which requires the research input of physics and physical methods not included in the Reflex study (see "Mobile phones turn enzyme solution into gel", this series).

A failure of education and market- driven research

Interestingly, the Reflex report is prefaced by a contribution from Prof. William Ross Adey who died on 20 May 2004, having "made fundamental contributions to the emerging science of the biological effects of electromagnetic field".

Adey aptly summed up why there has been so little progress in research into the biological effects of electromagnetic fields: "The history of bioelectromagnetics epitomises a range of problems that arise whenever a community of sciences is confronted with a frontier that delves deeply into the established orthodoxies of biology, the physical sciences and engineering. These conflicts have become even more sharply defined when emerging new knowledge in bioelectromagnetics research has challenged the conventional wisdom in each part of this trinity.

"At no point in the last 20 years has public school education ensured that a majority of citizens has even a basic understanding of sophisticated communication devices and systems, such as telephones, radio and television. Similarly, automotive engineering remains a sea of vast ignorance for most users. Nor is such knowledge considered appropriate or necessary. In summary, we have become superstitious users of an ever-growing range of technologies, but we are now unable to escape the web that they have woven around us."

The remedy he recommended is that there should be formal instruction in physics, theoretical and applied, for those entering a career in medical research. He could have added that physicists should be taught something about biology. It took far too long before most physicists realised that EMFs can do more to cells than just heat them up a bit.


 


This article can be found on the I-SIS website at http://www.i- sis.org.uk/CMPBDASG.php
 
If you like this original article from the Institute of Science in Society, and would like to continue receiving articles of this calibre, please consider making a donation or purchase on our website. ISIS is an independent, not-for-profit organisation dedicated to providing critical public information on cutting edge science, and to promoting social accountability and ecological sustainability in science.
 
 
  • If you would prefer to receive future mailings as plain text please let us know.

The Institute of Science in Society, PO Box 32097, London NW1 OXR
telephone:  [44 1994 231623]    [44 20 8452 2729]   [44 20 7272 5636]

General Enquiries sam@i-sis.org.uk - Website/Mailing List press-release@i-sis.org.uk - ISIS Director m.w.ho@i- sis.org.uk

MATERIAL ON THIS SITE MAY BE REPRODUCED FOR ANY PROFIT FREE PURPOSES WITHOUT PERMISSION, ON CONDITION THAT IT IS ACCREDITED ACCORDINGLY AND CONTAINS A LINK TO http://www.i-sis.org.uk/.
ANY COMMERCIAL USE MUST BE AGREED WITH ISIS


 

The Institute of

 Science in

 Society

Science Society Sustainability http://www.i-sis.org.uk

General Enquiries sam@i-sis.org.uk Website/Mailing List press-release@i-sis.org.uk ISIS Director m.w.ho@i- sis.org.uk
 

ISIS Press Release 14/01/05

Mobile Phone Turns

 Enzyme Solution into

 A Gel

A highly reproducible non-thermal effect of mobile phones depends on interaction between protein and water. Dr. Mae-Wan Ho says it brings us closing to understanding the biophysics involved in how weak electromagnetic radiation can have biological effects.

Sources for this article are posted on ISIS members' website. Details here

Serious brain damage unaccounted for

The most striking effect of exposure to the radio- frequency (RF) radiation from mobile phones is damage to the brain and brain cells of rats (see "Mobile phones & brain damage" SiS24), which were found at levels of exposure far below the current safety limits. After just two hours of such exposure, blood albumin leaked into the brain causing brain cells to die; and the effects lasted for at least 50 days after a single exposure. But no clear mechanism has emerged to explain this or other 'non-thermal' effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) even after a concerted, Europe-wide research programme (see "Confirmed: mobile phones break DNA and scramble genomes", this series).

I have suggested that phase changes in cell water triggered by EMFs may be involved in causing many biological effects, but there has been a complete lack of support for research in that area (see "Electromagnetic fields, leukaemia and DNA damage", SiS24).

Now, new research findings make that suggestion a great deal more plausible.

A 'breakthrough' in identifying mechanisms?

Researchers at the University of Rome in Italy led by Mario Barteri in the Chemistry Department report striking changes in a solution of an enzyme after exposure to RF radiation from mobile phones. This is the first time such a simple, reproducible, in vitro system has been devised to study the effects of EMFs.

The enzyme, acetylcholine esterase, involved in transmitting nerve signals from the brain to the skeletal muscle, has been purified and studied in great detail and commercial preparations are readily available. The researchers chose to study the acetylcholine esterase from the electric eel.

The enzyme was dissolved in a buffer solution in water and identical samples were exposed to RF radiations within the range of 915-1822 megahertz for 1 to 50 minutes, while the control (unexposed) was wrapped securely in aluminium foil to screen the RF radiations. A commercial cellular phone was used as the source of RF radiation at a specific absorption rate (SAR) of 0.51W/kg, with the mobile phone operating in the receiving mode.

After exposing the enzyme solution, the researchers used a range of physical measurement techniques to characterise the changes.

First they passed the solutions down a gel filtration column, which separates protein molecules by size. At short irradiation times between 1 to 10 min, no difference from the unexposed control was found; a single protein peak was identified, representing the enzyme in its usual 'dimeric' form consisting of two protein units associated together. However, after 20 min or more, a new peak was formed in addition to the old; the new peak representing the monomeric or dissociated form of the protein. This profile remained stable after one day at room temperature, showing that irreversible change had taken place in the solution.

Measurements on the rate constants of the enzyme activity similarly indicated that up to 10 min of RF radiation exposure had no effect, but after 20 min or more, the rate constants changed dramatically, which was consistent with previous findings from another laboratory reporting increase in the enzyme activity in mice after twenty minutes exposure to mobile phone radiation.

This change in the kinetic properties of the enzyme was apparently not accompanied by change in the three- dimensional shape (conformation) of the protein, at least as measured by circular dichroism (a technique for characterising the shape of molecules based on measuring the unequal absorption of right and left plane-polarized light).

Measurement by X-ray scattering, however, revealed a drastic change in the collective organisation of the protein in solution, which suggested that a phase of 'hydrogel' had separated out from the main solution. This hydrogel was made up of monomeric protein molecules associated with lots of water molecules to form a collective phase.

Finally, the researchers took a scanning electron micrograph of the control and the exposed sample, which showed up the marked difference. The native, unexposed sample appeared as a random suspension of enzyme molecules; whereas the irradiated sample appeared as a highly oriented sample with a regular periodic pattern.

RF radiation trigger interaction of enzyme protein with water

The enzyme protein has a very strong negative charge near the entrance to the 'gorge' containing the active site (where the substrate is bound), which gives a strong dipole (separated positive and negative electric charges) oriented along gorge. This makes the protein sensitive to fluctuations of the electric field generated by the RF radiation from the cellular phone; which in turn perturbs the dipoles of the water molecules, resulting in the formation of the hydrogel.

As a further check, the researchers carried out nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) measurements on the proton spin relaxation times (T1) of the water molecules. For bulk water, the relaxation time was 2983+27; for native enzyme dissolved in water, it was 470+25; for enzyme exposed to RF radiation for 20 min, it was 260+32, and exposed for 50 min, 220+38. The results, once again, are consistent with the increased interaction of enzyme protein with water molecules that one would find in a hydrogel.

The researchers said, rightly, that the results "cannot be used to conclude whether exposure to RF during the use of cellular phone can lead to any hazardous health effect"; but "they may be a significant model to verify these effects on other biological systems."

I believe however that these results are important in contributing to our understanding of 'non-thermal' effects: they are mediated through the collective structure of water, especially as conceived by a number of key researchers in biological water.

Collective structure of water important

The phenomena observed by Barteri and co- workers depend on the collective structure of water, which effectively sums and amplifies the effect of weak EMFs. It provides the mechanism for non-thermal effects that conventional scientists find so "inconceivable", largely out of ignorance.

The results also appear to be consistent with the work of researchers who made pioneering discoveries on water in the cell. Gilbert Ling, in particular, first proposed that water molecules form polarised multi-layers over extended protein surfaces inside the cells (see "Strong medicine for cell biology" SiS 24). This proposal received remarkable confirmation recently in an in vitro system (see "Water forms massive exclusion zones", SiS23) and in the cell (see "What's the cell really like?" SiS24); and is also consistent with findings in my own laboratory that the water in living organisms is an intrinsic part of the liquid crystalline continuum of the body (see The Rainbow and the Worm, the Physics of Organisms).

The hydrogel created by Barteri and colleagues after exposing the enzyme solution to RF radiation are very likely to consist of multilayers of polarised water molecules on extended protein surfaces. The RF radiation acts as a trigger to dissociate the protein dimers into monomers and to interact with water; without however, destroying enzyme activity; if anything it appeared to have increased enzyme activity.

The findings of Barteri's team are also consistent with the proposals of Martin Chaplin and Frank Mayer, that water switches between a low-density and a high- density phase with very different interactions between proteins and water molecules that change enzyme activities and cell function (see "the importance of cell water" and "What's the bacterium really like?", SiS24).

Martin Chaplin expresses surprise at the result, as did the authors of the research paper. "The jellification would seem to be very specific to the properties of that particular enzyme. The process by which the radiation increases the hydration of the protein and causes its dissociation can be explained, but [is possibly] an extreme case of what can occur." He adds, "The work does show how the power of water to hydrate molecules increases when the 'normal' hydrogen bonding is disrupted; and also that the change in hydration may not be readily reversible. I doubt if any present computer model of water could reproduce this phenomenon."

We can no longer accept the mantra that there is no "conceivable" mechanism that could explain non- thermal effects of EMFs, and that the current EMF exposure limits may well be harmful.


This article can be found on the I-SIS website at http://www.i- sis.org.uk/MPTESIG.php
 
If you like this original article from the Institute of Science in Society, and would like to continue receiving articles of this calibre, please consider making a donation or purchase on our website. ISIS is an independent, not-for-profit organisation dedicated to providing critical public information on cutting edge science, and to promoting social accountability and ecological sustainability in science.
 
 
  • If you would prefer to receive future mailings as plain text please let us know.

The Institute of Science in Society, PO Box 32097, London NW1 OXR
telephone:  [44 1994 231623]    [44 20 8452 2729]   [44 20 7272 5636]

General Enquiries sam@i-sis.org.uk - Website/Mailing List press-release@i-sis.org.uk - ISIS Director m.w.ho@i- sis.org.uk

MATERIAL ON THIS SITE MAY BE REPRODUCED FOR ANY PROFIT FREE PURPOSES WITHOUT PERMISSION, ON CONDITION THAT IT IS ACCREDITED ACCORDINGLY AND CONTAINS A LINK TO http://www.i-sis.org.uk/.
ANY COMMERCIAL USE MUST BE AGREED WITH ISIS

 


 Home Contents Library

 

 
44 Lbs of Azomite - Organic Trace Mineral Soil Additive Fertilizer - 67 Trace Minerals

  • 67 major and trace elements
  • Organic
  • Perfect for Gardens
  • We buy a bag each spring (the shipping is free) and sprinkle it on our lawn and garden with a sifter.
  • See our page on Better Farms.

 

 
Refractometer RF15 with Automatic Temperature Compensation (0-32 Brix)

Ade Advanced Optics RHB-32ATC (0-32% Brix scale) Hand Held Refractometer in a CLEAR case. This unit is great for the testing of Fruits, Vegetables and Grasses, Wine or Beer makers.

See our Refractometer page.

 

In 1904 there was very little cancer. Now there is an abundance of cancer. What has changed? Can this be reversed? If you have cancer or do not want to get cancer the information you and your family need is on this web site.

 

Note: there are two ways to navigate this site. You can follow the pages in their logical sequence, or you can access every page from "Contents".

 

For your assistance, there are Google search boxes on each page that will allow you to search this web site or the entire Internet for more information.

 

Alkalize For Health Site Search 

Custom Search

Search the Internet with Google

 

 

Copyright 2000 - 2017 AlkalizeForHealth
All rights reserved.

Home               Contents               Library