Industry opposition to Microshield launch

The following article was sent to Electromagnetics Forum by Joseph Prasada, director of Microshield Australia. This newsletter has a general policy of not promoting products, and as such does not include advertising. However exception is taken in this case because, even though the Microshield has been shown to significantly reduce the level of phone emissions being absorbed by the head of the phone user, there have been attempts by both Motorola and Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association (AMTA) to discredit Microshield. The following is Microshield's reply to those attempts.

 

·by Joseph Prasada

 

Early stages of Microshield before it went on the market.

 

Back in the UK in 1991, there was a mobile phone user who started to suffer from migraine headaches after he switched to one of the UK's first digital mobile phones. He noticed that the more he used his mobile phone, the more frequent and intense the headaches became and, as he used the phone less, the headaches equally diminished.

Figuring there was some relationship between his headaches and the microwave radiation emitted from his mobile phone Microshield inventor Leslie Wilson designed a crude case employing strips of metal to shield his head from the localised radiation. The migraines disappeared and in their place came hoards of colleagues and friends who in turn also found relief what was then a very primitive device. Realising then the commercial implications, the idea for the Microshield was born. After placing an application with the Patent office the British inventor then spent four years examining the scientific evidence about the effects of microwave radiation and the shielding technology. The Micro-shield contains specialised shielding materials within the leather layers of the case and an exclusive PVC screen containing an ultra-fine mesh, which protect against radiation emissions from the phone's main body, earpiece, keypad and display screen. The case also features an adjustable aerial guard on the side to protect the user from the radiation from the antenna. In 1995, independent testing for the Microshield were commissioned through the British Approvals Board for Telecommunications which is owned by the Government. Using specialised digital equipment, these tests have shown radiation level reduction by over 90% without signal drop out.

In April 1996 it was launched at the UK's Royal Society of Medicine. The innovative Microshield has already proved a success in Europe and is now represented in 10 countries around the world.

 

The Launch in Australia

 

Since 1994 there have been some significant research and findings which have linked mobile phone use to various symptoms and illnesses. Unfortunately much of this information was not in the knowledge of the Australian public. The only little information they were receiving was from the telecommunication industry's associated bodies and Government departmental spokespersons.

They certainly were not going to promote issues that could be damaging their multi-billion dollar industry. Because of this, it was decided to hold a seminar on "Health Effects of Radio Frequency Radiation" at the Garvan Institute of Medical Research sponsored by Microshield. There at the seminar the Microshield device would be unveiled. It was in April this year that this seminar took place.

The seminar included presentations of research studies by Dr Bruce Hocking, former Telecom Chief Medical Officer, now independent Medical Consultant; Dr Peter French, Principal Scientific Officer of the Centre of Immunology and Dr Neil Cherry from Lincoln University, New Zealand. Concerns about low level microwave radiation were raised about recent research which indicated the possibility of adverse health effects including tumours, cancer, cell death, and cumulative DNA damage which is associated to various diseases such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's Disease.

Earlier to the launch, figures released towards the end of last year in London at a world convention on "Mobile Phones and Safety" showed that as much as 80% of microwave radiation, is absorbed into the human head during a phone call. These concerns were also highlighted in a recent Australian Government Discussion paper in March 1997 prepared by the Committee on Electromagnetic Energy Public Health Issues. It stated, "Human exposure of RFR (Radio Frequency Radiation) is greatest from mobile phone handsets because of the method of use, with the transmitting antenna of the mobile phone handset close to the head. There is evidence that localised hot spots or energy deposition in the brain may occur as a consequence of internal reflections".

Since the launch of the Microshield the Australian Consumers Association in May released a notice on the warning of mobile phones in regards to health on limiting exposure to Microwave radiation emitted from mobile phones.

 

Response from the Australian Public since the launch of the Microshield product

 

Apart from issuing more than 3,000 units in the last month the response has been very receptive. What is now important, is the unique position we have found ourselves in. That is never before had any one organisation openly logged so many anecdotal enquiries.

Microshield Industries UK has logged well over 1000 phone calls from users complaining of headaches and migraines. Other symptoms include eye and ear problems, a tingling/burning sensation to the skin, a numbness or soreness to the surrounding areas, nausea and dizziness.

One day before the launch here in Australia we were invited to appear on Channels Nine's Midday Show with Kerry-Anne. John Simpson from Microshield UK appeared with Dr Neil Cherry. Concerns were raised again which triggered many people to call in. In Australia Microshield logged over 3000 phone calls in the first two days with hundreds of callers complaining of exactly the same ranges of symptoms with those of the UK's. Some users were actually experiencing immediate overt symptoms when using their mobile phone and also reported were users complaining of feeling disorientated and confused. What is curious about these reported symptoms is that they are replicated when the user holds the phone on the other side of the head. Furthermore they disappear immediately a user stops using their mobile phone for a period of time and reappear once they start using it again.

 

Opposition to the Micro-shield device

 

Everyone (and that includes the telecommunications industry) knows that microwave radiation is emitted from mobile phones. I mean, that is how they work.

Before we launched here in Australia, we always knew that there could be some resistance from the Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association (AMTA) but we were always prepared for that. But the extent of that however took us by surprise with false and misleading information they were giving to their dealers and the public alike about our product. At the launch there were some Telecommunication industry representatives present that were vigorously taking notes. Within days there after, we received a notice from Motorola Australia's Law firm asking us to retract information we were issuing on our brochures which they say was either misleading and deceptive in conduct.

They asked that statements of research conducted by various respectable scientists be withdrawn from our booklet and also the Microshield's effectiveness test commissioned with the British Approvals Board of Telecommunications. We sent them a long response to their letter to either put up or shut up. Needless to say all the claims we made can be substantiated one way or another in so far as they are true. Microshield have the source documentation for all the statements that have been made.

We denied that we are engaged in any conduct which is either misleading or deceptive. Should they ever decide to take any formal action it shall be defended vigorously and any subsequent damages and cost shall be sought from Motorola Australia Pty Ltd. In the future however we shall not be taking their bully tactics lightly.

Peter Russell from the AMTA then decided to take this matter to the Australian Competition and Consumers Commission (ACCC) asking that the brochure also be retracted. We were asked to substantiate all of these claims. The Commission were advised by the AMTA that there is no substantiated evidence that such low level exposures can cause adverse health effects. They were also advised that the Australian Standard for radio frequency exposure is said to be one of the most stringent in the world. It is based on more than forty years of scientific research and is said to provide ample margin of protection.

In our reply we first stated that to deal with this whole issue it would take many volumes and that we would have to refer them numerously to other sources of material which could be obtained at National Reference Libraries and also on the Internet. We at Microshield have no medical experts working for us and we have therefore relied on the comments and reports confirmed by others far more eminently qualified to comment than ourselves. The booklet is essentially a collage of those comments and reports. We have in our possession every original source document to confirm authenticity.

What is very interesting is that the ACCC should readily accept AMTA's representative Peter Russell's comment as being accurate and immediately cast doubts about the accuracy of our own information. Have they in fact seen the 6000 or so reports he refers to supposedly confirming mobile phone safety? Are they also aware of the fact that virtually without exception, every independent scientist working in this field agrees that the exposure conditions for mobile phones, ie with the source of radiation held directly against the side of the head, is unique and that no real correlation of effects can be drawn from experiments carried out forty years ago on radio frequency radiation. The experiments I refer to were conducted at different frequencies to those which mobile phones operate under and also different power levels. In addition the majority RF research has been done in the far field and not the near field. There have also been many experiments carried out over the past 40 years which have drawn adverse conclusions relating to RF safety and ironically the cellular industry normally distances itself from such findings, by using the very same rationale they have become accustomed to, i.e. the research was done to long ago and did not replicate the particular conditions which mobile phone users expose themselves to and is therefore invalid. So it seems they only refer to past research when it suits them, i.e. when the result comes done in their favour. When it doesn't it is dismissed as inaccurate and labelled as "junk science".

I also made it very clear in our reply that I was astounded that they should automatically believe Peter Russell simply because he represents the cellular industry in Australia. That industry is not a health authority or indeed any other class of authority. They are simply a group of companies who have clubbed together to protect their own interests. What on earth do you expect them to say?

A question they might pose back to Mr Russell is that if there is not any health problem whatsoever relating to mobile phones, then why have 7 mobile phone manufacturers lodged their own patents for devices to protect the users from radiation emissions? At least one such patent application confirms that the device is intended "to prevent damage to the head of the user". Why also would manufacturers recommend in their handbooks that users may wish to reduce their exposure to RF energy (a less effective way of saying microwave radiation) by spending less time on the phone? The answer to these question is quite simple. They know that there is a problem.

We made it aware to the ACCC that virtually all of the research which give mobile phones a clean bill of health, has either been sponsored by the cellular industry or carried out by them and not by independent researchers. The current vogue is to sponsor studies, determine their direction and then edit the contents of the published paper. One such scientist supposedly acting independently, but who actually is being sponsored by Motorola confirmed as much. When asked why he had decided to conduct his experiments using a radio signal which was clearly inappropriate, he confirmed that he did not make the decision about the signal. "I did not pick it. Talk to the lawyers who wrote the contract".

As regards mobile phones complying with safety standards, I can confirm that those safety standards are currently under question and the European body CENELEC who advises the European Commission on such issues, has recently announced a proposal to revise the standards upwards which effectively will put every phone on the market outside the new limits. In any event, we made the ACCC aware that these limits are recommendations only and relate specifically to the thermal effects known to be caused by microwave radiation and not the non-thermal effects which is what we are really talking about here. There are no limits currently in place for non-thermal effects. The cellular industry in fact denies that there are any non-thermal effects despite the hoards of independent research which contradicts them. Calls to Microshield have had users complaining of various symptoms from the use of their mobile phone. I did suggest that the ACCC should refer them to Peter Russell of the AMTA so that he can take time out to respond to each one individually ensuring them that their problems are not caused by their mobile phone, because they are "safe and comply with current standards".

I finally respectfully suggested that if the ACCC really want to protect members of the Australian public then they should ask why the cellular industry is still advertising its products without mentioning the problems which users may experience with their health and the results of studies which implicate their product with possible serious long term illness. After all even the Australian Consumer Association this year saw fit to place a caution on the use of these devices.

 

For more info. call Microshield Industries on 02 9 212 4333

---

Postscript

(As reported in the Hobart The Mercury, August 8, 1997)

Watchdog backs off on mobiles

"Australia's leading consumer watchdog has declined to investigate controversial claims linking mobile phones to a wave of serious health problems including cancer and Alzheimer's disease. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) said it would not investigate claims about the dangers of mobile phones "for a number of reasons, including difficulties posed by the controversial nature of the issues involved"."