Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields: evaluation of cancer hazards

Robert Baan, Yann Grosse, Béatrice Lauby-Secretan, Fatiha El Ghissassi, Véronique Bouvard, Lamia Benbrahim-Tallaa, Neela Guha,
Farhad Islami, Laurent Galichet, Kurt Straif, on behalf of the WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer Monograph Working Group

IARC Monographs on physical agents Epidemiology

Monograph Volume 75 (2000) Occupational exposure to RF-EMF: some positive but inconsistent signals
Ionizing Radiation, Part I: X- and Gamma (γ)-Radiation, and Neutrons cases/controls relative risk (95%CI)
Monograph Volume 78 (2001)
Thomas et al. 1987 435/386 1.7 (1.1–2.7) Brain cancer
Ionizing Radiation, Part II: Some Internally Deposited Radionuclides
A death-certificate-based case-control study, with job title as proxy for RF-EMF exposure. Excess risk
Monograph Volume 80 (2002) was attenuated when workers exposed to soldering fumes or lead were excluded: OR, 1.4 (0.7-3.1).
Non-ionizing Radiation, Part I: Static and Extremely Low-Frequency (ELF) Electromagnetic Fields
Grayson et al. 1996 230/920 1.39 (1.01–1.90) Brain cancer
Monograph Volume 102 (2011)
A large case-control study among US Air Force personnel exposed to equipment producing RF-EMF.
Non-ionizing Radiation, Part II, Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields (RF-EMF) Exposure assessment relied on job title and time of deployment, cancer cases were taken from hospital
discharge records, but were not confirmed.

IARC Monograph on RF-EMF cohort relative risk (95%CI)

Lagorio et al 1997 682 5.0 (1.3–27.9) Leukaemia/lymphoma
In May 2011, an IARC Monographs Working Group evaluated the published scientific A mortality study among workers in a plastic-ware industry, with exposure to RF-EMF (during sealing),
evidence with regards to the carcinogenic hazards from exposure to radiofrequency and to vinyl chloride monomer. The study is small, possible confounding is not addressed.
electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF). About 900 publications on RF-EMF and cancer were Degrave et al 2009 2932 7.2 (1.1–48.9) Leukaemia/lymphoma
reviewed, covering
Cause-specific mortality study among Belgian soldiers in batallions equipped with radar. Follow-up
- exposure data problematic; co-exposure to ionizing radiation suggested
- epidemiology of human cancer ------------------------------------------
- cancer in experimental animals Environmental exposure to RF-EMF: no solid data
- mechanistic and other relevant data Ecological and case-control studies have been carried out to investigate potential associations of brain
cancer with RF emissions from transmission antennas. These studies are generally limited by reliance on
The Working Group considered three sources of exposure to RF-EMF: measures of geographic proximity to the antennas as an exposure surrogate. Substantial exposure
misclassification is unavoidable. For the same reason, no conclusions can be drawn from the limited data
- environmental sources that were available on risk for leukaemia, lymphoma or a number of other cancers.
broadcast antennas, base stations, medical devices, smart meters, Wi-Fi ------------------------------------------
- occupational sources Personal exposure to RF-EMF: mobile telephone use
high-frequency dielectric and induction heaters, radar installations
Three types of study addressed the question of cancer risk and mobile-phone use
- personal devices • Ecological studies on time trends of disease rates.
cordless telephones, mobile telephones (cell phones), Bluetooth These analyses covered the period of the late 1990s and early 2000s, i.e. before mobile
phone use became widespread.
• Cohort study
A total of 257 cases of glioma were found in 420,095 subscribers to two Danish telephone
Exposure data companies, with 253.9 expected. Having a subscription was taken as a surrogate for phone
use. The study suffers from exposure misclassification.
• Case-control studies: Overall, these studies provide the strongest evidence to date.
Sources of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields 1)
Case-control studies on mobile phone use
Source Frequency Exposure Distance Time Spatial
Level features Muscat et al (2000), Inskip et al (2001), and Auvinen et al (2002) published early studies in the
(mW/cm2) period of increasing use, with exposure assessment by self-reported history or by subscription
records, and imprecise effect estimates.
Cell phone 900 MHz, 1–5 At ear During call Highly Phone type Odds ratio (95%CI) (from: Auvinen et al, 2002)
1800 MHz localized Glioma all phones 1.5 (1.0–2.4)
(n=398) digital phones 1.0 (0.5–2.0)
analog phones 2.1 (1.3–3.4) (analog wireless phones emit more RF-energy)
Cell-phone base 900 MHz, 0.000005– 50 to a few Constant Relatively
station 1800 MHz 0.002 thousand uniform INTERPHONE (Cardis et al., 2010), a multicentre case-control study of mobile-phone use
feet and brain tumours, including glioma, acoustic neuroma, and meningioma.
The pooled analysis included 2708 glioma cases and 2972 controls (2000–2004; participation
Microwave oven 2450 MHz ~50 2 inches During use Localized, rates 64% and 53%, resp.). Ever/never use of a mobile phone yielded an OR of 0.81 (0.70-0.94).
.05-0.2 2 feet non-uniform Odds ratios were uniformly below or close to unity for all deciles of exposure except for the highest
decile (cumulative call time, >1640 hrs): OR, 1.40 (1.03–1.89).
Local area 2.4–5 GHz 0.0002– 3 feet Constant Localized, Studies from Sweden (pooled analysis, Hardell et al., 2011)
networks 0.001 when non-uniform The analysis included 1148 glioma cases (ascertained in 1997–2003) and 2438 controls
(Wi-Fi) (wireless nearby obtained through cancer/population registries. Questionnaires and telephone interviews were used
router) to obtain information on use of mobile and cordless phones (response rates 85% and 84%). Those
who had used a phone for >1 year had an OR for glioma of 1.3 (95% CI 1.1–1.6), which increased
Radio/TV Wide 0.001 (top Far from Constant Relatively with longer time since first use and with total call time, to 3.2 (2.0–5.1) for > 2000 hours of use.
broadcast spectrum 1% of the source (in uniform Although both the INTERPHONE study and the Swedish studies are susceptible to bias, the
population) most Working Group concluded that the findings cannot be dismissed as reflecting bias alone, and that a
cases) causal interpretation is possible. A similar conclusion was drawn for acoustic neuroma, from these
studies and from a Japanese study. For meningioma, parotid-gland tumours, leukaemia, lymphoma,
Smart meter 900 MHz, 0.002- 3-10 feet When in Localized, and other cancers, the Working Group found the evidence insufficient to reach a conclusion.
2400 MHz 0.0002 proximity non-uniform
(1 W, 5% during The Working Group concluded: there is limited evidence in humans for the carcinogenicity of
References
duty cycle) transmission RF-EMF, based on positive associations between glioma and acoustic neuroma and
exposure to RF-EMF from wireless telephones.
1. EPRI, Electric Power Research Institute (2011) Radio-Frequency Exposure Levels from Smart Meters: A Case Study of One Model
The Working Group reviewed more than 40 studies that assessed the carcinogenicity of RF-
EMF in rodents. Exposures included 2450-MHz RF-EMF and various RF-EMF types that simulated
Exposures from a mobile telephone emissions from mobile phones. Increased cancer incidences were noted in 2/12 studies with
tumour-prone animals, in 1/18 studies with initiation-promotion protocols, and in 4/6 co-
Holding a mobile phone to the ear can result in high specific absorption-rate (SAR) values in the carcinogenesis studies after exposure to RF-EMF in combination with a known carcinogen.
brain, depending on the position of the phone and its antenna, and the quality of the connection
The Working Group concluded that there is limited evidence in experimental animals for the
with the base-station.
carcinogenicity of RF-EMF.
For children – compared with adults – the average deposition of RF-energy from a mobile phone The Working Group reviewed many studies with endpoints relevant to mechanisms of
can be up to 2-fold higher in the brain and up to 10-fold higher in the bone marrow of the skull. carcinogenesis, including genotoxicity, effects on immune function, gene and protein expression,
The use of hands-free kits lowers exposure to the brain to <10% of the value resulting from use cell signalling, oxidative stress, apoptosis, effects on the blood-brain barrier, etc. There was
evidence of an effect of RF-EMF on some of these endpoints, but the results provided only weak
at the ear.
mechanistic evidence relevant to RF-EMF-induced cancer in humans.

Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields are possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B)

Section of the IARC Monographs (IMO)
The IARC Monographs Programme staff Acknowledgements
- US National Cancer Institute
- US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
- US Environmental Protection Agency
- European Commission, DG for Employment, Social
Download poster here Robert Lamia Véronique Sandrine Elisabeth Fatiha Yann Neela Brigitte Béatrice Hélène Annick Dorothy Kurt Affairs and Equal Opportunities
Baan Benbrahim-Tallaa Bouvard Égraz Elbers El Ghissassi Grosse Guha Kajo Lauby-Secretan Lorenzen-Augros Papin Russell Straif