The interpretation and subsequent publication of the results of the Interphone study, a major international study on the use of mobile phones, almost immediately prompted significant disagreement among certain scientists, and then openly expressed reservations, which led to the publication of the results being repeatedly postponed. However these were officially published, in a very discreet manner but almost in totality, on International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC – WHO web site) on 8 October 2008. As far as we know, this publication was suppressed shortly afterwards, but having being taught by experience to be wary, we immediately saved it [PDF integral] On 28 may 2009 in a laconic press release Dr Christopher Wild, director of IARC, strangely enough mentioned the imminent partial publication (without giving the name of the journal) of the study results only on cerebral tumours of the glioma Comparative irradiation P. Gandhi ZOOM
type and meningiomas linked to the use of a mobile phone. He failed to mention acoustic neurinomas and tumours of the parotid gland, and added that further papers would be published at a later date. As a matter of fact, an analysis of the Interphone saga reveals deep disagreement among the scientists from the participating countries, which has led to the authorities dragging their feet on publishing the final overall results. Ironically these are already known in outline: the overall results confirm a significant and proven increase in tumours, which means that "using a mobile phone causes cancer".
To add to this (carefully maintained?) confusion, on 10 June 2009, at a public hearing in the Assemblée Nationale organised by the UMP member for the Somme, Alain Gest, Dr Martine Hours, the coordinator for France of the Interphone study, presented a broad outline of the results . . . (which we already know about), without forgetting its potential imperfections such as a bias in one direction or another. She declared that in general, for those who have used a mobile phone for less than 10 years no proven effect had been found from exposure to radiation from nearby fields of artificial HF microwaves (let us stick to the text), but that with longer usage "there might be something around the neurinoma (tumour of the nerve), glioma (tumour of the central nervous system) and to a lesser extent the parotid gland (the largest of the salivary glands)". Dr Martine Hours Interphone France
"We are still uncertain … without decisive evidence one way or the other," she explained. According to her the study is "somewhat premature", considering the short time that mobile phones have been in use, whereas cancer can take 10 to 20 years to develop. Roselyne Bachelot-Narquin, ministre de la Santé a conclu cette audition en affirmant que "les conséquences de la téléphonie mobile sur la santé sont incertaines", et rappelé la nécessité de l’application du principe de précaution (bémol # d’attention).
So that's nothing new, apart from the appearance like a spanner in the works of the very controversial and well known negationist Dr Bernard Veyret (Fr] who has a personal interest in the situation, and who declared during the hearing that "there is no foreseeable health risk from wireless telephony". We had concluded that this character (right-hand man of the no less appealing fixer M. Repacholi) had disappeared from the scène, having seriously sullied his reputation. But it's now obvious that he has not after all given up his usual negationist line, sweeping aside in a single sentence the conclusions of the dozens of internationally known scientists involved in the Interphone research. There is no point wasting time wondering how B. Veyret got involved in the Interphone situation, but he ought to realise that millions of people, and me most of all, have not forgotten the part he has played in the health catastrophe that we are in the midst of. Serge Sargentini, director for publication of Next-up Organisation.
Dr Bernard Veyret
Editor's note: You can make your own mind up about the value of the Interphone study simply by considering the parameter which Dr Martine Hours carefully avoids mentioning: the study's definition of "major users" (who show an increased cancer risk) refers to people who have used a mobile phone for more than 46 months, who spend more than 5 minutes per call, and who spend more than 260 hours on the phone, ie. 11 minutes 30 seconds per day..
National WorkerRF Safety Crisis Video Our nations’ workers and the welfare of their families
are at risk! Watch the video to see how.
The Interphone story – it’s gone on long enough!
Source: Next-up Organisation
Date: 06/24/2009
