by guest blogger Isaac Eliaz, MD, MS, LAc, integrative medicine pioneer
Despite a long and contentious debate, published research is increasingly pointing to cellphone use as a risk to your health. The level and types of risk remain uncertain, but considering that four billion people today rely on cellphone for daily communication, any risk is unsettling.
Among the most recent studies casting doubt on cellphone safety is one published in the journal Antioxidants & Redox Signaling. The study arose from concerns that the very low levels of radiation emitted by cellphone may damage tissues of the head and neck, since the phones are typically held close to the ear for long periods of time. Researchers in Israel studied the saliva of 20 people who had been using cellphone from 8 to 15 years with an average time on the phone of 29.6 hours per month. The researchers focused on changes in saliva associated with oxidative damage to human cells. (Oxidative damage can occur when unstable molecules such as free radicals wreak havoc on cells, tissues, and DNA.) The results showed that cellphone users had a significantly higher increase in salivary markers for oxidative damage, compared with a group of deaf people who don’t use cellphone.
This study adds to a growing body of evidence that cellphone use is capable of damaging human cells. Studies published in the journal Oral Surgery, Oral Medicine, Oral Pathology, Oral Radiology, and Endodontology and in the journal Oral Diseases found that mobile phones can directly damage cells in the salivary glands, causing the glands to become overstimulated.
Other recent reports provide insight into what may actually be happening to human cells affected by mobile phone radiation. Research published in the Journal of Neuro-Oncology found that cellphone radiation may cause DNA damage and alter genes in brain cells. Additionally, a study of male volunteers reported in the International Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences showed that long-term use of cellphone can cause DNA damage and chromosomal instability in cells of the oral cavity and lymphatic system that could increase the risk of cancer.
The body of objective scientific research shows that wireless phone radiation penetrates the skull, affects blood flow, alters temperature and brain glucose metabolism, and may weaken the brain’s protective blood-brain barrier. Still, the debate over potentially harmful effects of long-term cellphone use is likely to rage on for years. The wireless industry and its lobbying groups provide plenty of funding for studies that find no link to ill health effects or are at least inconclusive. Health activists who carry the findings of studies like these too far also provide fuel for the critics. But while the public waits for definitive answers, we can take protective measures with an antioxidant-rich diet and extra supplementation to prevent or reduce possible risks linked to cellphone. The same measures may reduce health risks associated with many other forms of oxidative damage.
Strategies that boost antioxidants, circulation, and hydration and that detoxify heavy metals can be very useful. Vitamins C, A, E, and D3, as well as lipoic acid, CoQ10, selenium, glutathione and beta-1,3 glucans, are highly recommended antioxidants. Other ingredients that protect against oxidative damage include:
- Sea buckthorn, which helps protect against radiation damage and provide antioxidant support
- Rosemary extract, which contains compounds that fight radiation damage and provide antioxidant support
- Kelp, which contains sodium alginates to help remove radiation from the body
- Honokiol (magnolia bark extract), a powerful antioxidant and cell protector
- Medicinal mushrooms, particularly Reishi and Cordyceps, which help protect tissues from oxidative stress and inflammation, while detoxifying the body. Medicinal mushrooms are used to prevent tissue damage from radiation therapy in oncology treatments.
- Modified citrus pectin, which safely removes radioactive particles and heavy metals, combats inflammation, and blocks abnormal cellular growth
Experts also recommend reducing cellphone radiation exposure with your speaker phone function or using a headset with an air tube leading to the ear, such as this one. You can also limit the length of your conversation or use texting. When your cell phone is not being used, it is best to keep it away from direct contact with your body, especially near highly sensitive organs and tissues, such as the genital area, breasts, head, and thyroid.
Risk or no risk, cell phones are becoming the mainstay of personal communications, and as new uses for personal devices increase, so will our exposure to radiation levels. No matter which side of the debate a person chooses in our high-tech society, an ounce of prevention will always be worth a pound of cure.
Isaac Eliaz, MD, MS, LAc, integrates Western medicine with his extensive knowledge of traditional Chinese, Tibetan, Ayurvedic, homeopathic, and complementary medical systems. With more than 25 years of clinical experience and research, Dr. Eliaz has a unique holistic approach to the relationship between health and disease, immune enhancement, detoxification, and cancer prevention and treatment. For more information about his work, visit dreliaz.org.
Utter junk science… what a shame people believe this nonsense…
try publishing this in a respectable peer reviewed publication and you will be laughed out of the realm… but hey, the internet is a willing media there are many who will believe everything a snake oil salesman sells… P.T. Barnum was right….
Funny, ever notice that even when the author says ‘difinitive proof is lacking’ and says that ‘ making changes in how you use’, someone calls it ‘junk science’. The only ‘junk science’ is the science that doesn’t ask questions and do it’s best to provide for the health and safety of mankind.
Well written, and is a reflection of a report from the AMA suggesting that it may be best to take preventive action until definitive proof is available.
After all, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
They actually mentioned this in my aging and neuroscience program that is part of the College of Medicine USF. The professor who extensively studied the blood brain barrier is the one who brought it up. I could see the blood brain barrier being sensitive to radiation that accumulates over time. By the way, this professor is well respected in the academic field. Also, these high tiered peer reviewed journals that people speak of….can cost the researchers a few hundred dollars to a few thousand dollars. Data that doesn’t coincide with the general consensus or doesn’t get support from companies cannot afford to publish in those journals. To me this allows a large gap in what people call “respectable”. People don’t realize the politics between publishing and how much money has to do with these things.
Let me clarify. When I say it costs a few hundred to a thousand dollars, I’m not just referring to conducting the study. Instead I am referring to the cost to the researchers to the publishers of that journal. The researchers have to literally pay a fee to publish in high tiered journals. I found this shocking because in my other field, gerontology/psychology, there is usually a minimal fee ($40) or it is free. This is not the case for many scientific journals that are more biology/physiological based. So when someone completely disregards a study just because it is not in a higher tiered journal, they should at least give it a closer work before throwing it out the window.
I have personal experience as an oncology nurse caring for engineers who work with cell phone technology and have documented the increased incidence of brain and other cancers in those individuals.
It scares me to see young women in their tank tops this time of year believing they are “cool” when they tuck their cell phone into their bra instead of bag. Breast cancer won’t be far behind.
I have practiced Medicine for over 30 years and I have been a consultant Radiologist for many years as well. I have long since realised that health is one’s personal choice. Those who think there is no radiation hazard from cell phones only need to check their energy level. Rather than criticize such a good work allow the willing persons to heed this desirable caution.
I am not a ‘trained professional’ in the sciences, but I do observe the people around me.
I drove a truck for many years, and I have noticed a definite link between the use of cell phones and the lessening of reaction time to incidents around people. NOT just when they are actively using their cell phones, but even after they put them down.
People that I had dealt with over a period of time that used them changed, maybe you think I imagined it, but, these are people I know, that I dealt with on an almost daily basis, and the ONLY thing they had in common was that they used a cell phone a lot during the time I saw them. They progressively slowed in their reaction time. Why is that? The only thing they had in common was regular cell phone use.
thank a lot.