Open Meeting

Home > Open Meetings >

Thursday 20 January 2000, University of Wales College of Medicine, Cardiff

Introduction

The third open meeting of the Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones (IEGMP) took place in Cardiff and was attended by the Chairman, Sir William Stewart, and nine members of the Group. About 50 members of the public were present, including some local news media. The Chairman opened the meeting by introducing members of the Group; he then described the remit of the Group from the Minister for Public Health. He said that the plan was to submit a report in spring 2000. An essential part of the work of the Group is to review available scientific evidence, including medical and epidemiological studies, biological and animal studies, and any other available information. In particular, the Group wanted to gather evidence from members of the public and lobby groups who claim to have evidence of health effects or who have views on other issues regarding mobile phones.

Funding of IEGMP

A participant asked about the funding arrangements for the Group. The Chairman described the setting up of the Group in 1999 by the Minister for Public Health and stated that the Department of Health had provided funds for the working of the Group. The members receive an attendance allowance for attending meetings related to preparation of the Group's report. No funding comes from the mobile phone industry.

Health effects

There were several questions related to possible health risks from mobile phones. The work of Dr Henry Lai, at the University of Washington, Seattle, was quoted from the floor as evidence of damage at the cellular levels but a member of the Group said that there had been no independent replication of Dr Lai’s findings. The physics of radiofrequency (RF) waves and their interaction with tissues are understood. The quantum energy contained in a microwave does not appear to be sufficient to break macro molecular bonds (ie, DNA). The energy in RFwaves is too low by five orders of magnitude (1 10⁵ or 100,000). But what about the disruption of ionic transport across cell membranes? Again, a member of the Group stated that there is no conclusive evidence of such effects and also no evidence of enzyme damage. A lobby group disputed this and quoted evidence for effects from recent studies at Bristol University (Dr Preece) and Nottingham University (Dr de Pomerai) which indicate the possible production of heat shock proteins following exposure to RFradiation from mobile phones. The Chairman said that it is this type of evidence that the Group will review carefully.

Precautionary principle

Some questions from the floor were about the attitude of the Group to the precautionary principle. It was impossible to give a categorical assurance of zero risk. In this case, some people urge the adoption of the precautionary principle, just in case there is an undiscovered latent or cumulative effect. The Chairman stressed that this was an important issue and all the arguments would be considered carefully.

Research reviews and requirements

There are certain results from research, which are quoted frequently as evidence for deleterious effects of RF waves. For example, Russian work in the 1940s is often quoted by people as showing effects at levels considered safe today. There were some questions about this evidence from the floor. Members of the Group stressed the need to evaluate the quality of the research in addition to the results claimed. The Group is reviewing the work and will make recommendations for further research. One speaker referred to the 1996 European Commission (EC) Expert Group, chaired by Dr A F McKinlay, National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB), which had make a number of recommendations for research but, to date, the research plan had not been put into operation. This was noted, but the EC Fifth Framework Research Programme was just starting, based on the 1996 report. It will be half-funded by industry with the other half coming from governments. It will be managed by the European Union and the International Agency for Research on Cancer to eliminate government or industry pressures. The Group will comment on this research programme and the need for any further research.

There was a specific question on the need to review the efficacy of mobile phone shield devices. It was felt the public needed sound advice on this. The Chairman said that this issue was being considered by the Group.

Mobile phone masts and planning issues

An environmental group was strongly critical of the NRPB guidelines and its attitude to the precautionary principle, especially in relation to the siting of masts near schools or esidential areas. The group argued that the advice from NRPB lacks credibility and local and central government planners hide behind NRPB advice in order to allow approval of siting plans in sensitive areas. Also, NRPB guidelines are different from internationally agreed guidelines, which further diminishes their credibility.

The Chairman said that the NRPB advice and evidence would be reviewed impartially.

Attitudes to risk

There were some general questions about risk raised from the floor. Could the Group define a safe level of exposure to RF waves? Members of the Group thought that this was too general a question and that it is a question of how safe or how risky. Also attitudes of people to risks are influenced strongly by perceived benefits, and whether any risk is voluntary or imposed. The Group recognised how attitudes could be different when considering the risks from handsets and those from masts.

Concluding remarks

The Chairman thanked all those who attended and contributed to such a lively meeting. He said that many valuable points had been made and noted by the Group. He encouraged all those who wanted to contribute further written evidence to the Group to do so as soon as possible.

The original announcement of the open meeting is available.

First issued 9 March 2000