Corporate Banner
Satellite Banner
ADME Tox
Scientific Community
 
Become a Member | Sign in
Home>News>This Article
  News
Return

The Economist Accused of Inaccurate Coverage of Cell Phone and Wireless Risks

Published: Tuesday, January 03, 2012
Last Updated: Tuesday, January 03, 2012
Bookmark and Share
Specialists in public health, oncology, neurosurgery, electronic engineering, toxicology, cardiology and epidemiology have published a critique of an opinion piece published in The Economist (9/3/11), “Worrying about Wireless”.

In the critique, entitled “The Economist—and the Truth About Microwave Radiation Emitted from Wireless Technologies,” the experts say the Economist failed to provide critical information about the emerging public health issue related to cell phones and wireless technologies and that it owes its readers a better accounting of the science.

Ronald B. Herberman, MD, Founding Director Emeritus of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Chairman of Environmental Health Trust and a distinguished cancer researcher, says of the Economist article, “The public the world over has been misled by this reporting.”

Dr. Herberman, who served as Professor of Medicine and Pathology at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, Hillman Professor of Oncology and Vice Chancellor for Cancer Research at the University of Pittsburgh, and who is now Chief Medical Officer of Intrexon Corporation, in 2008 issued an advisory to his faculty and staff recommending a variety of simple steps to reduce potential health risks from the use of cell phones. He says:

“A disservice has been done in inaccurately depicting the body of science, which actually indicates that there are biological effects from the radiation emitted by wireless devices, including damage to DNA, and evidence for increased risk of cancer and other substantial health consequences.”  Dr. Herberman adds, “It would behoove The Economist to publicly correct the errors made in this unsigned opinion piece by publishing a retraction—and investigating how such inaccurate and unbalanced scientific reporting could have occurred in the first place.”

Lennart Hardell, MD, PhD, Professor of Oncology, Orebro Medical Center, Orebro, Sweden, and a widely published, internationally renowned neuro-oncologist, agrees. He says, “The Economist has misrepresented the science indicating biological effects, links to cancers, and damage to DNA and male fertility from exposures to microwave radiation emitted by wireless technologies. Given the wide scale use of cell phones and other wireless devices globally, for the sake of public health I consider it essential that The Economist’s reporting be corrected to adequately advise readers of the risks.”

Dr. Hardell’s research has repeatedly found increased risk of brain cancers in frequent users of cell phones and/or cordless phones for more than a decade. His team’s research was cited in May in the World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) landmark decision to classify wireless radiation as a Class 2B ‘Possible Carcinogen’.

Policy advocate Deborah Kopald, MBA states, “It is exceedingly difficult to convince policy-makers to act in the public interest and parents and educators to give their charges proper guidance when they can point to a prestigious publication that provides false reassurance that not enough science exists to compel immediate behavior changes with wireless use.”

Swedish investigative journalist Mona Nilsson, says, “The publication of The Economist article ‘Worrying about Wireless’ was a sad day in journalism. If we cannot trust the media to accurately report the science on such an important subject in a balanced way, then who can we trust?” Nilsson was the journalist who broke the news that led to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) removing Anders Ahlbom of the Karolinska Institute last May from its panel of experts after learning Ahlbom had not disclosed he was a member of the board of his brother’s consulting firm, Gunnar Ahlbom AB, with links to the telecom industry.

Authors of the Economist critique, issued today, “The Economist—and the Truth About Microwave Radiation Emitted from Wireless Technologies”, include prominent scientists, physicians and oncologists from seven countries. They are requesting the Economist to correct its unsigned opinion piece so that it more accurately reflects the range of known biological effects and potential health risks from wireless radiation.


Further Information

Join For Free

Access to this exclusive content is for Technology Networks Premium members only.

Join Technology Networks Premium for free access to:

  • Exclusive articles
  • Presentations from international conferences
  • Over 2,900+ scientific posters on ePosters
  • More than 4,200+ scientific videos on LabTube
  • 35 community eNewsletters


Sign In



Forgotten your details? Click Here
If you are not a member you can join here

*Please note: By logging into TechnologyNetworks.com you agree to accept the use of cookies. To find out more about the cookies we use and how to delete them, see our privacy policy.


Scientific News
Keeping Tumor Growth at Bay
Engineers at Washington University in St. Louis found a way to keep a cancerous tumor from growing by using nanoparticles of the main ingredient in common antacid tablets.
Cancer Cells Kill Off Healthy Neighbours
Cancer cells create space to grow by killing off surrounding healthy cells, according to UK researchers working with fruit flies.
Future of Medicine Could be Found in a Tiny Crystal Ball
A Drexel University materials scientist has discovered a way to grow a crystal ball in a lab. Not the kind that soothsayers use to predict the future, but a microscopic version that could be used to encapsulate medication in a way that would allow it to deliver its curative payload more effectively inside the body.
Bile Acid Supports Production of Blood Stem Cells
A research group at Lund University has been able to show that bile acid is transferred from the mother to the foetus via the placenta to enable the foetus to produce blood stem cells.
Chemical Used to Replace BPA is Potentially Toxic
This study is the first to examine the effects of BPA and BPS on brain cells and genes that control the growth and function of organs involved in reproduction.
A Better Model for Parkinson's
Scientists at EPFL solve a longstanding problem with modeling Parkinson’s disease in animals. Using newfound insights, they improve both cell and animal models for the disease, which can propel research and drug development.
Improving Delivery of Poorly Soluble Drugs Using Nanoparticles
A technology that could forever change the delivery of drugs is undergoing evaluation by the Technology Evaluation Consortium™ (TEC). Developed by researchers at Northeastern University, the technology is capable of creating nanoparticle structures that could deliver drugs into the bloodstream orally – despite the fact that they are normally poorly soluble.
Toxicity Testing With Cultured Liver Cells
Microreactor replaces animal testing.
Neural Networks Adapt to the Presence of a Toxic HIV Protein
HIV-associated neurocognitive disorders (HAND) afflict approximately half of HIV infected patients.
Faster Drug Discovery?
Startup develops more cost-effective test for assessing how cells respond to chemicals.
SELECTBIO

Skyscraper Banner
Go to LabTube
Go to eposters
 
Access to the latest scientific news
Exclusive articles
Upload and share your posters on ePosters
Latest presentations and webinars
View a library of 1,800+ scientific and medical posters
2,900+ scientific and medical posters
A library of 2,500+ scientific videos on LabTube
4,200+ scientific videos
Close
Premium CrownJOIN TECHNOLOGY NETWORKS PREMIUM FOR FREE!