Children absorb higher doses of cell phone radiation than adults

Industry-linked publication should be retracted, claim independent scientists

Independent scientists call for retraction of a high profile 2014 review by industry-linked authors. A recently published re-analysis reveals systematic misinterpretations, obscuring higher doses to the child brain from cell phone use.

A December 2014 review by Kenneth Foster and C-K Chou has been discredited in a careful reanalysis by independent scientists with Environmental Health Trust.

Foster and Chou reviewed 23 publications, concluding that there is no consistent evidence of higher “exposures” in children (energy absorbed per gram of tissue would correctly be termed “dose”). Text extracts from the publications were tabulated, and the ratio of child to adult doses were graphed. Although the majority of the text summaries indicate that children would receive higher peak doses, the Foster and Chou graph indicated the opposite: 25% of the bars indicated higher peak doses in children; 30% showed little or no difference; and 46% showed higher peak doses in adults.

Although Foster and Chou reviewed 23 publications, the discussion largely focused on work of Prof. Om Gandhi, who responded, confirming that children do indeed absorb higher peak tissue doses of radiation.

Furthermore, Brazilian researchers confirmed with up to date computer modelling that children do indeed experience higher peak doses in their brains.

Environmental Health Trust’s Dr. Morris and co-authors call for retraction of the Foster and Chou review, on the basis that the primary conclusion is incorrect. There is less than one in a hundred chance that all of these misinterpretations are random, so the systematic misinterpretations therefore indicate that the work is biased.

All four reports are published in the prominent journal, IEEE Access.

Meg Sears, PhD, is an Ottawa-based environmental health researcher, and Chair and Science Advisor of Prevent Cancer Now

New York Times’ Exposé: CDC’s Retraction of Warnings about Cell Phone Radiation Electromagnetic Radiation Safety,… https://t.co/ZT9JbaNU7G

— Enviro. Health Trust (@saferphones) January 2, 2016

Published: December 17, 2015

#CdnHealth 50 studies re potential #WiFi harm 2 kids ignored in @HealthCanada‘s #SafetyCode6 https://t.co/3eg6bdQxTL pic.twitter.com/BAk5Rw030T

— Prevent Cancer Now (@PreventCancerNw) December 12, 2015