Last month, a major review of cell phone cancer risks appeared in the Annual Review of Public Health. The authors would have us believe that cell phones do not present a cancer risk. In the course of digging into the text and supporting documents, I came across some striking contradictions, as well as some serious omissions. They give me pause about the paper’s conclusions and the motives at work. I believe that a major objective of the review is to cast doubt on IARC’s classification of RF as a possible human carcinogen, and by extension empower the WHO and ICNIRP to sidestep precaution.
The Precarious Case Against Precaution, my detailed look at one of the central arguments used to dismiss precaution: If there were a cancer link, we would be seeing an increase in the number of brain tumors reported to national cancer registries. As I was finishing this article, I received some e-mail traffic that raises questions about the peer review process that the paper went through —or more correctly, about the lack of a conventional peer review.
My companion piece:
Row over Cancer, Cell Phone Review
Louis Slesin, PhD
Editor, Microwave News