DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR RESEARCH 
Directorate A  
Division Industry, Research and Energy 
STOA 
Scientific and Technological Options Assessment  
 
   
 
THE PHYSIOLOGICAL AND 
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF NON-
IONISING ELECTROMAGNETIC 
RADIATION  
 
Final Study 
 
 
 
Working document for the STOA Panel  
 
     
Luxembourg, March 2001     PE 297.574/Fin.St. Directorate General for Research 
 EN                           EN
 
   Cataloguing data : 
   Title:    
THE PHYSIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF 
NON-IONISING ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION  
 
Workplan Ref. :  EP/IV/A/STOA/2000/07/03  
 
Publisher:   European Parliament 
Directorate General for Research Directorate A The STOA Programme 
  
Author:   Dr. Gerard Hyland  
    
University of Warwick - U.K. 
    International Institute of Biophysics, Germany  
 
Editor:    Mr Graham CHAMBERS 
STOA Unit 
  Date:    March 2001   PE number:   
PE  297.574/Fin.St. This document is a working Document for the 'STOA Panel'. It is not an official publication of STOA. This document does not necessarily represent the views of the European Parliament 
 
 
 3 
  
Contents 
 
  
Part A  OPTIONS 
 
  1. Policy options for the European Parliament 
  2. Policy options for the European Commission 
  3. Technological options at the operational level 
 
  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
 
 
Part B  ARGUMENTS and EVIDENCE 
 
1. Introduction: Electromagnetic Compatibility and Electromagnetic Bio- 
incompatibility 
 
2. Why GSM  Signals are Bio-active 
 
3. Indications of Non-thermal influences of Microwave Radiation, including GSM 
 
3.1 In vitro  and in vivo  evidence 
3.2 Difficulties in replication 
3.3 Relevance of experiments to conditions realised in actual mobile phone usage  
 
4. Indications of Non-thermal Adverse Health Impacts of Exposure to GSM and similar 
microwave radiation  
 
5. From Non-thermal Effects to Adverse Health Effects 
 
6. The Increased Vulnerability of Pre-adolescent Children 
 
7. But Not Everyone is Adversely Affected 
 
8. The Inadequacy of Existing Safety Guidelines 
 
9. Some recommendations to enhance electromagnetic biocompatibility 
 
 
9.1 Policy options for the European Parliament 
 9.2 Policy options for the European Commission 
9.3 Technological options at the operational level  
 
10. Conclusions 
 
References 
 
 4 
  
Abstract 
 
 
 
This Study focuses upon an aspect of how living organisms and humans in particular can be adversely affected by highly coherent electromagnetic fields of technological origin, in a way that is not entertained or addressed by existing Safety Guidelines – namely, through the possibility of non-thermal, frequency-specific influences of an informational nature. Supporting evidence is presented, and attention drawn to a disturbing consistency between some of these influences and the nature of certain adverse health effects found amongst some exposed people. On the basis of a detailed analysis of the present situation, a number of recommendations are made to promote a higher degree of electromagnetic biocompatibility between these fields and the living human organism than currently obtains. 5 
 EN 
  EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT  
Directorate General for Research-Directorate A  
STOA  - Scientific and Technological Options Assessment 
Options Brief and Executive Summary  
PE nr. 297.574              March 2001 
 
THE PHYSIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL 
EFFECTS OF NON-IONISING ELECTROMAGNETIC 
RADIATION  
 
 
 
OPTIONS BRIEF 
1. Policy options for the European Parliament 
• the non-emergency prolonged use of mobile 
phones by children – and particularly pre-adolescents – be strongly discouraged, on account of their increased vulnerability to any potential adverse health effects. • the mobile phone industry refrain from 
promoting prolonged use of mobile phones by children by the use of advertising tactics exploiting peer pressure and other strategies to which the young are susceptible, such as the (now discontinued) use of DISNEY character fascias on the phones. • the mobile phone industry make it clear to the 
consumer that the specific absorption rate (SAR) - which in some countries is shortly to 
be declared on the handset - refers only to the 
degree to which the microwave emissions 
from the antenna can heat biological tissue, and is in no way  relevant to non-thermal  
effects that the emissions from a mobile 
phone may have on the user. • The efficacy of devices such as shields and 
ear-pieces be indicated on the basis of biological tests , and not solely on the reduction 
in SAR value (as determined by the use of a 
‘phantom’ head) that their use might achieve. b) It be made clear to the consumer that such 
devices afford no protection against the low 
frequency pulsed magnetic field from the battery of the phone. • concerning personal protection devices 
claiming to  boost the immunity of the user against any adverse impacts of exposure (including those from the battery magnetic field): a) The efficacy of such devices be established 
by biological testing. b) Such devices not be rejected (as has 
occurred in certain consumer surveys that 
have been published) solely on the grounds that their use does not reduce SAR, as 
measured using a ‘phantom’ head; for this is 
not what they are designed to do. Accordingly, the SAR is here a fundamentally 
inappropriate  measure against which to 
assess their efficacy
. 2. Policy options for the European Commission 
• Future EU-sponsored research should 
incorporate the following recommendations: a) living systems under investigation be 
exposed to the emissions of an actual mobile 
phone, rather than a ‘surrogate’, since the emissions have a quite different biological impact, in consequence of certain pulse frequency differences. b)  in assessing the significance to humans of 
results obtained using animals, particular 
attention be paid to differences in exposure conditions, such as whether exposure is size-resonant, whether it is to the near or far field of the antenna, and whether whole- body or more 
localised exposure occurs. c) systematic investigation be made into the 
influence of different kinds of pulsing (of real 
phones) on the human EEG , and ideally on 
the MEG , and of whether any observed 
changes in power spectra are correlated with 
changes in the level of deterministic chaos. 6  
 d) use be made of novel, non-invasive 
technologies, such as biophoton emission, to 
investigate the influence of mobile phone radiation on living systems. e) in assessing the effects of mobile phone 
radiation more attention be paid to lessons 
that have been learnt from exposure to other kinds of related radio frequency fields, such as those from the Skrunda, military and police radars. f) in the light of reports of cattle being quite 
seriously adversely affected at farms where 
there is a base-station, a veterinary monitoring service be established to collect and analyse such reports, and raise awareness amongst farmers of this potential hazard to their livestock. • attempts be made – perhaps under the aegis 
of national regulatory bodies - to increase awareness of the electromagnetic nature of living organisms and their consequent hypersensitivity to coherent, ultraweak electromagnetic signals. [Until this is achieved, the need to extend thermally-based safety guidelines, by incorporating   electromagnetic biocompatibility, is unlikely to be accepted.] 3. Technological options at the operational 
level 
Whilst the question of precisely how adverse 
health effects can be provoked by non-thermal 
influences of the pulsed microwave radiation currently employed in GSM  telecommunication, as 
well as those from ELF fields associated with other 
technologies, is far from resolved, the 
circumstantial evidence consistent with such influences suggests at least two ways in which biocompatibility with this technology could be enhanced by changes involving the fields alone:  
• In the case of exposure to GSM radiation, reduce intensities to the level below which no adverse effects have been empirically found in exposed populations, bearing in mind that there are indications of non-thermal thresholds for biological effects of the order of a microwatt/cm
2. Power densities a few tenths  
of this value are common at distances of 150-
200m from a typical 15m high Base-station mast and within the range of the more localised side-lobes in the immediate vicinity of a mast - adverse effects being reported at 
both locations . Incorporating a further safety 
factor of 10 indicates that, at locations where 
there is any long-term exposure, power densities should not exceed 10 nanoW/cm
2. [To appeal to the (alleged) absence of health 
problems associated with the higher power density electromagnetic fields emitted by radio/TV 
transmitters in an attempt to justify the retention of the present level of emission from GSM Base-stations is untenable, on at least two accounts: (i) the nature of the emissions are quite different, with respect to carrier frequencies, modes of transmission (pulsed/analogue), and beam morphology, (ii) there are health problems connected with some such transmitters, contrary to what is often claimed!] • Ensure that there are no ELF frequencies – 
either of amplitude modulation (including 
pulsing, as the extreme case) of RF fields, or 
of other electric /magnetic fields - in the range 
of human electrical brain-wave activity, or windows of calcium efflux. [In the case of exposure to GSM radiation, this will 
be achieved, to a certain extent, with the advent of the Third Generation of mobile phones (UMTS) that utilise CDMA in place of TDMA. For although any sensitivity to the microwave carrier will remain, the pulsing used in CDMA is irregular; accordingly, CDMA radiation cannot enjoy the same ‘oscillatory similitude’ with the human brain-wave activity and electrochemical processes as does TDMA. In consequence, however, of the somewhat higher carrier frequency used, which is closer to where water strongly absorbs microwaves, thermal effects could here become more of a problem, particularly in view of the somewhat higher powers at which they operate! The introduction of TETRA, on the other hand, gives rise to an increased level of both thermal and non-thermal concern.] EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 
 A major contemporary threat to the health of Society is man-made ‘electrosmog’. This non-ionising electromagnetic pollution of technological origin is particularly insidious, in that it escapes detection by the senses – a circumstance which tends to promote a rather cavalier attitude  regarding personal protection. Yet the nature of the pollution is such that there is literally ‘nowhere to hide’. Furthermore, given the relatively short time for which humanity has been exposed to it, we have no evolutionary immunity either against any adverse effects it might directly have on our bodies or against possible interference with natural electromagnetic processes, upon which homeostasis appears to depend, for example, the Schumann resonance – a weak electromagnetic field that oscillates resonantly in the cavity between the earth’s surface and the ionos phere at 
frequencies close to those of human brain rhythms, isolation from which has been found to damage human health. 7  
 What distinguishes technologically produced 
electromagnetic fields from most natural ones is 
their much higher degree of coherence . This 
means that their frequencies are particularly well-defined, and therefore more easily discerned by living organisms, including humans. This greatly increases their biological potency, and ‘opens the door’ to the possibility of frequency-specific, non-
thermal  influences of various kinds, against which 
existing Safety Guidelines – such as those issued 
by the International Commission for Non-ionising Radiation Protection ( ICNIRP ) - afford no 
protection. The Safety Guidelines are based solely on consideration of the ability of radio frequency ( RF) 
and microwave radiation to heat tissue, and of 
extremely low frequency ( ELF) magnetic fields to 
induce circulating electric currents in the interior of 
the body, both of which are known to be damaging to health, if excessive. Since the severity of these effects increases with the strength (intensity) of the fields in question, it is this that the Guidelines restrict, the frequency of the fields being taken into account only in so far as it affects (through ‘size’ 
resonance effects) the ability of the organism to 
absorb energy from the irradiating field and heat up accordingly. The Guidelines thus do not protect against adverse health effects provoked primarily  and 
specifically  through influences that the frequency  
of the fields might have on the human body. A necessary condition for such an influence is the existence in the organism of the biological counterpart of an electrically tuned circuit – i.e. an 
endogenous oscillatory electrical activity. In this case the organism will respond - in a way akin to a radio - if the frequency of the external field (either of the carrier wave, or of lower frequency amplitude modulations/ pulsings) matches or is close to that of its tuned circuit. This could result in either an undesirably high resonant amplification of, or damaging interference with, the associated endogenous biological activity. These influences can be considered to arise from a transfer of information  (in a generalised sense) 
from the field to a living organism, in that the 
organism is able, through this kind of ‘oscillatory similitude’, to recognise – and in turn respond to – a feature of the external field other than  its 
intensity. Equally important is that the external 
electromagnetic fields be sufficiently coherent to be discernible by the body against the level of its own incoherent thermal emission at physiological temperatures. Whilst this is usually the case, it should be noted that since the radiation is not perfectly coherent, the occurrence of non-thermal effects is still contingent upon a certain minimum intensity threshold, the magnitude of which is, however, well below that at which any discernible heating occurs. A good example of such an ‘informational’, frequency-specific, non-thermal electromagnetic influence on the living organism is the ability of a light flashing at a certain rate to trigger seizures in people suffering from photosensitive epilepsy. This is primarily due, not to the brightness (intensity) of the light, but rather to the frequency of the flash – which, if close to the frequency of the electrical brain activity involved in epileptic seizures, can trigger their occurrence - i.e. the 
phenomenon is primarily a frequency-specific 
effect of information transfer from the light to the brain, the brain being able to ‘recognise’ the light by the rate at which it flashes. Existing intensity-based Safety Guidelines (relating to the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum) afford no protection against such a non-thermal effect, unless set so low that the light is not visible! Some oscillatory endogenous electrical activities of the living human body are quite familiar - such as those of the heart and brain, which can be monitored by an electrocardiogram and electroencephalogram, respectively. Equally familiar is the circadian rhythm. Others, - such as the coherent electrical excitations at the cellular level whose frequencies typically lie in the microwave  region of the 
electromagnetic spectrum, and those pertaining to 
crucially important biochemical activities, involving, for example, the transport of calcium ions across cell membranes - are somewhat less well-known. Until the frequency/information dimension of non-
visible  electromagnetic radiation (microwaves and 
other non-propagating electric and m agnetic fields 
such as those from overhead power lines) - is recognised in its own right , these fields will  
constitute a potential threat to all living organisms. Since electromagnetic fields are indispensable to  technology that Society is reluctant to abandon,  more comprehensive protection should be developed. As  explained, we are currently  vulnerable to adverse health effects that might be 
 
8  
 provoked by non-thermal effects of the frequency 
dimension, which escapes regulation by the existing intensity-based Safety Guidelines. Unlike intensity, the frequency aspect of the problem cannot be addressed without interfering with the frequency characteristics and informational content of the aggressing field (the integrity of which must,  of course, be maintained in communication technologies, such as GSM  
telephony). We need therefore to consider 
strategies that do not target the field, but rather the person being irradiated, and devise ways to provide a higher degree of immunity than at present. Such strategies are currently under development, and a number of related protection devices are already available commercially, although often their efficacy has not always been adequately demonstrated. (There is an obvious parallel here with the pharmacological strategy of attempting to protect against bacterial infection by taking vitamin C, for example, to fortify the immune system, 
rather than wearing a protective mask to simply 
reduce the intensity of the bacterial field to which the person is exposed.) The competence of existing Safety Guidelines could be broadened by extending the familiar consideration of electromagnetic compatibility (EMC ) between electromagnetic radiation and 
electronic instrumentation to the living human 
organism , as an electromagnetic instrument itself, 
par excellence . An ambitious programme  of 
electromagnetic biocompatibility  is an important 
task for the 21
st century, and one that is shirked 
only at our peril. There is currently much public concern over  possible adverse health effects provoked by long or short term exposure to electrosmog. This concern focuses especially on overhead power lines and  GSM  telephony. Quite justifiably, the 
public remains sceptical of attempts at 
reassurance by government and industry, particularly given the unethical way in which they often operate symbiotically so as to promote vested interests, often under the brokerage of the  regulatory bodies whose function it supposedly is to ensure that the safety of the public is not 
compromised by electromagnetic exposure! Given recent experience with official duplicity over BSE/CJD  – with the initial assurances of no risk 
and subsequent revelations of cover-ups - the 
public is now understandably wary of safety assurances from ‘official’ government scientific sources w.r.t. electromagnetic pollution. This scepticism is enhanced when views contrary to   
official perceived wisdom is, at worst silenced or, at best, studiously ignored. Public scepticism is further exacerbated by reports of research supported financially by the Mobile Phone Industry and of its attempts to ‘persuade’ those whose findings might damage market development to actually alter their results  to make 
them more ‘market friendly’. There is currently an attempt (under the aegis of the World Health Organisation) to globally ‘harmonise’ exposure standards, by persuading countries with more stringent limits – such as Russia and China - to relax them in favour of the higher levels tolerated in the West. It can be no coincidence that in Russia, where the frequency-specific sensitivity of living or ganisms to 
ultra-low intensity microwave radiation was first discovered over 30 years ago, that the exposure guidelines (even if applied in theory, rather than in practice) are still 100 times more stringent that those of ICNIRP ! There is a regrettable tendency to attribute market–friendly research a greater significance, publicity and profile than non-market friendly research, which suggest the possibility of adverse health impacts. An example of this is provided by the recent publication of a USA epidemiological study, in which the statistically significant finding of an elevated risk amongst users of mobile phones of the incidence of a rare kind of tumour (epithelial neuroma) in the periphery of the brain – precisely 
where there is maximum penetration of radiation from the mobile phone  (the laterality of which also 
correlated with phone usage) - was glossed over  
and completely escaped the attention of the media, who focused instead on the  finding that there was no overall  increase in the incidence of 
brain tumours amongst mobile phone users. The mainstream scientific approach to assessing the harm of human exposure to electromagnetic fields is guided by an essentially linear  perception, 
which might well be adequate to deal with thermal 
effects, but is  inappropriate for realistic consideration of the non-thermal, frequency-specific vulnerability of the living organism to the rather coherent electromagnetic fields. In contrast to thermal effects, non-thermal influence necessarily depends on the state of the organism when it is exposed.This of course varies not only between different  individuals, but  also for 
the same  individual, depending on his/her 
condition at the time of exposure – i.e. such 
 
9  
 influences are inherently non-linear in nature. As 
such, they often appear bizarre from a linear 
standpoint. In addition, difficulties in i ndependently 
replicating in experiments tends to lead to their dismissal. Attempts to address a problem that is inherently non-linear from a linear perspective only exacerbate things: outdated knowledge is worse than ignorance - at least the ignorant know what they do not know! In the case of the mobile phone issue, not only has there been a reluctance on the part of official bodies to grasp this non-linear ‘nettle’, but a lamentable failure to pay attention to  indications of the harm to humans and animals caused by exposure to pulsed microwave fields of sub-thermal intensity that have been long available from experience with microwave installations (not least military ones) similar to those used in GSM  
telephony. It is not so much that, in the haste to make this new and valuable technology available, the  necessary safety research has been bypassed or compromised, but rather - and more repr ehensibly 
- that already available indications that the technology is potentially less than safe have been, 
and continue to be, studiously ignored , both by the 
industry and by national and international 
regulatory bodies. A good example of this is afforded by the conduct of the UK National Radiological Protection Board, which was ‘unable’ to provide the Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones ( IEGMP ) - for 
whom they were acting as the Secretariat - with 
certain highly relevant published papers, on the grounds that they could not ‘find’ them, despite having been provided with the full references by at least two individuals who gave evidence to the IEGMP , and curiously having had no difficulty in 
providing less significant papers from the same 
issue  of the journal! The concern of the public is thus not unfounded, and the irony of the present situation w.r.t mobile phones and  base-stations is that current Safety Guidelines afford greater protection to electronic instrumentation than they do to human beings! There is a lack of  expert consensus on the significance and credibility of research into biological effects of GSM-type radiation and  possible adverse health reactions in susceptible people (despite many consistent, anecdotal positive reports). It is probably true to say that if the same lack of concensus and level of concern surr ounded a new 
drug or foodstuff, it would never be licensed. Of particular concern to the public – and  generating the most outrage – is the involuntary subjection of certain groups of the population 24 hours/day, 7 days/week to the emissions of GSM 
base-stations, when they are insensitively sited 
near to homes, schools and hospitals. The environment of these people is permanently  and unavoidably polluted.This is a totally unacceptable state of affairs, which raises serious ethical questions, and arguably contravenes the Nuremberg Code, in that it is these people who will 
eventually reveal the degree to which chronic exposure to such fields is noxious – information 
that is not currently available : in other words, they 
are effectively involuntary subjects in a mass 
experiment. This study offers a perspective on the potential implications for human health of exposure to the pulsed microwave radiation currently used in GSM  
telephony, which differs somewhat from that 
currently espoused by mainstream science, but one that provides a much more holistic insight into the essential elements of the problem. Of particular importance is the emphasis given to (i) the fact that electromagnetic fields are not alien 
to living organisms, but play a crucial role in 
controlling and maintaining their orderly functions – i.e. that a living organism is an electromagnetic 
instrument of great and exquisite sensitivity. (ii) the subjectiveness of human vulnerability, 
which necessarily follows from the inherently non-
linear nature of the problem, which is here recognised ab initio,  and  
(iii) the presence of ELF features both in the 
microwave pulses emitted by the antenna of a 
mobile phone and in the (much more penetrating) 
magnetic field associated with the surges of 
electric current from the battery of the handset, which are necessary for the generation of the microwave pulses. Indeed, it is here suggested that it is precisely through the presence of these ELF features that 
the emissions of a GSM  phone and other related 
communication technologies, such as TETRA , can 
influence brain function - notably, its 
electromagnetic activity (brain-waves), its electrochemistry (including that of the neuroendocrine system, particularly with respect to melatonin levels) and the permeability of the blood-brain barrier, as well as altering cellular 
 
10  
 calcium ion concentrations. It is possible that this 
latter effect is only one particular facet of a more general disruptive influence that ELF fields can 
have on the integrity of essential ion-protein links 
(as suggested by recent Russian work) - an influence that could well be relevant also to consideration of bio-negative influences of exposure to other  kinds of electromagnetic fields, 
such the low frequency magnetic fields associated 
with power lines and the mains appliances that they supply, which have been the subject of controversy for a much longer time. The Study is structured as follows. Attention is first drawn to the irrationality of the current  situation that effectively affords – through electromagnetic compatibility regulations ( EMC ) - 
electronic instrumentation a higher level of 
protection against GSM  radiation, for example, 
than do existing Safety Guidelines governing 
human exposure, which protect only against adverse health effects attributable to excessive heating, and not against those that might be provoked in some people by the radiation’s non-
thermal , frequency-specific interference with 
endogenous electromagnetic activities essential 
for homeostasis. To appreciate this more fully, the study explains why GSM  signals are bio-active, and gives 
numerous examples of frequency specific, non-
thermal biological influences that the kind of radiation currently used in GSM  telephony can 
exert on  living organisms, including humans. Difficulties sometimes experienced in independent attempts to replicate these effects - which are frequently used to discredit positive results, and to dismiss them as artefacts of the particular experimental protocols used - are addressed, and possible reasons for discrepant results identified. The relevance to humans of findings obtained using animals, such as rats - which can be subject to exposure conditions that are quite different from those experienced during mobile phone use – is discussed and, in the case of human studies, the importance of exposing the subjects to the emissions of a real mobile phone, rather than a ‘surrogate’, as is often done, is stressed. Attention is then focused on the reality of adverse health impacts of both human and animal exposure to GSM  and similar radiation, including that from 
military sources. Although the occurrence of non-thermal influences 
per se  does not, of course, necessarily entail 
adverse consequences for human health, growing 
indications of a consistency between some of the published non-thermal effects of GSM  radiation 
and the nature of certain reported adverse health 
effects, is cause for concern - particularly the recent reports of an increased incidence in a rare kind of brain tumour (notwithstanding the relatively short exposure time in comparison with typical latency periods), which is consistent with the genotoxicity of the radiation. Reasons why children must be considered potentially more at risk are identified, and  arguably the most  significant point - namely that not everyone  is necessarily adversely affected - is 
addressed, as also are the implications of this on 
the validity of the familiar claim that there are no established adverse health effects of exposure to GSM  radiation, provided its intensity conforms to 
the limits set by existing Safety Guidelines, which, 
it is argued, neglect the most discriminating feature of all –  the fact that the object exposed is alive. Author: Dr. G. Hyland 
 University of Warwick , 
Department of Physics, Coventry, UK 
and 
International Institute of Biophysics , 
Neuss-Holzheim, Germany 
 
Opinions expressed in this STOA Report 
do not necessarily represent the official 
view of the European Parliament. For further information, please contact: 
Graham CHAMBERS ,  STOA Unit 
 
Directorate A 
Environment, Energy 
and Research Division, 
STOA 
European Parliament 
L-2929 
LUXEMBOURG 
Fax: (352) 4300 27718  or: 
 
 
Rue Wiertz 60 
B-1047 BRUSSELS 
Fax: (32) 2 2844980  
 
 
 
11  
 Part B: ARGUMENTS and EVIDENCE 
 
B-1. Introduction: Electromagnetic Compatibility and Electromagnetic Bio- 
        incompatibility  
The importance of ensuring compatibility between activated electronic instrumentation of various 
kinds and the pulsed microwave radiation currently used in GSM  mobile telephony is well 
recognised and generally accepted. Prohibition of the use of cellular phones on aircraft and in hospitals, on the grounds that their emissions might adversely interfere with the operation of sensitive electronic equipment, is familiar, and their possible deleterious effect on personal medical devices, such as heart pacemakers, hearing aids, defibrillators and insulin pumps has been the subject of a number of published scientific studies in recent years. Given that it is inconceivable - at least in the case of aviation and hospital equipment - that the interference could arise from the heating effect of the radiation, some other, non-thermal , influence of the radiation must here (at least tacitly) be 
considered to be responsible. Unfortunately, however, the same considerations do not currently extend to the alive human organism, which is generally considered to be immune from adverse influences of GSM  radiation, on account of its intensity
1 being far too low to cause any deleterious 
degree of body tissue heating, as quantified through the so-called specific absorption rate, or SAR - 
the rate at which the external electromagnetic field deposits energy in unit mass of the body, averaged over a certain period of time; for, contrary to case of electronic instrumentation, it is generally believed that for humans  adverse effects can arise only from excessive heating. Indeed, 
this belief is reflected in the relative leniency of the  Safety Guidelines
2 issued by the International 
Commission for Non-ionising Radiation Protection ( ICNIRP ), which permit humans to be exposed 
to electric fields that are over ten times stronger  than the limit of 3V/m limit that is applicable to all 
electronic goods offered for sale in EU under current EMC  legislation. on electromagnetic 
compatibility ( EMC ). Despite the prevalence of this attitude - particularly amongst the various Regulatory Bodies, both national and international - it is not one that is universally held
3, and the debate over the potential 
noxiousness of GSM  radiation continues at both professional and public levels. What is so 
disturbing is if the same level of concern and uncertainty obtained in the case of a new food or drug, they would almost certainly never be licensed. A good example of the prevailing disregard for what might be termed ‘electromagnetic 
biocompatibility’ is the development of TETRA  (Trans European/or Terrestrial Enhanced Trunked 
Radio Access), which operates at somewhat higher powers than does GSM , and over a much wider 
range of microwave carrier frequencies. Most disturbing, however, is the fact that the basic frame repetition rate is here 17.6Hz. For this frequency (which lies in the range of beta brain-wave activity) is close both to that at which a flashing visible light can provoke seizures in people with photosensitive epilepsy
4, and to the modulation frequency at which there is a maximum in the 
expression of calcium ions from brain cells when they are irradiated with amplitude modulated, low intensity RF radiation over a wide range of carrier frequencies
5-7; it should be remembered that these 
ions play a crucial role in inter-cellular communication, any interference with which could well undermine the integrity of the whole nervous system, although the extent to which this actually occurs is, at present uncertain, owing to a lack of the necessary research. Furthermore, in consequence of the lower frequency band assigned to the emergency services (380MHz - 400MHz), the penetration of the radiation is here much greater than it is with GSM , facilitating its deeper access 
into the brain directly through the skull. 12  
  
B-2. Why GSM  Signals are Bio-active 
 
That the low intensity, pulsed microwave radiation currently used in GSM  telephony can exert subtle, 
non-thermal influences on the alive human organism arises, in the first place, because microwaves are, after all, waves , and, as such, have properties other than solely intensity. In particular, GSM  
radiation has certain rather well defined frequencies, which facilitate its discernment by the living organism, and via which the organism can, in turn, be affected. This is so because the alive  human 
organism itself supports a variety of oscillatory electrical biological activities, each characterised by a particular frequency, some of which happen to be close to those used in GSM! The particular frequencies utilised in GSM  that must be anticipated to be particularly ‘bio-active’ are 
those of the microwave carrier (900/1800 MHz) and those associated with certain pulsings that characterise the signal employed in the Time Division Multiple Access ( TDMA ) strategy that is used 
in GSM - specifically, the multi- frame repetition rate of 8.34Hz, and the 2Hz periodicity associated 
with the discontinuous transmission ( DTX ) mode of the phone – an energy saving mode that 
becomes active when the user is listening but not speaking. For there is evidence
8 that adequately 
metabolising systems themselves support highly organised, oscillatory electrical activities at the 
cellular level, whose frequencies generally lie in the microwave  band, in terms of which the 
dramatic effects of ultra-low intensity microwaves of specific frequencies on processes as fundamental as cell division and intercellular communication can be understood in a rather natural way
9. It should be noted that this endogenous microwave activity is a quite general (non-
equilibrium) prediction of modern, non-linear biophysics10 for living systems, under appropriate 
metabolic conditions. The two ELFs (at 8.34Hz and 2Hz), on the other hand, correspond to those found in the human EEG  
- specifically, in the ranges of the alpha and delta brain-waves, respectively. In the case of a GSM  mobile phone, these two ELFs are reinforced by those of the essentially 
unscreenable magnetic  fields associated with the current surges from the battery of the phone that 
are necessary in order to endow the microwave emission with the pulse characteristics required for 
TDMA . Peak magnetic field strengths as high as 40 µT have been measured near the back of one 
particular model of phone
11, 12, the noxiousness of which is indicated by recent experiments13, 14 
employing chick embryos, which reveal an increased  degree of mortality when the phone is 
protected by a proprietary shielding device that reduces the microwave output. With the device in place, the increased (microwave) power output necessary to maintain contact with the base-station necessitates stronger surges of current, associated with which are correspondingly stronger (and 
evidently more noxious) ELF magnetic fields. These ELF magnetic  fields could thus pose an even 
greater hazard to human health than do those associated with the microwave emission, a matter that warrants further experimental investigation. In this connection, mention should be made of recent theoretical advances
15 in understanding, at the quantum level, the disruptive influence that ELF fields 
(including pulsed ones) can have on the integrity of essential ion-protein links , resulting in an 
imbalance of intra and inter cellular ion concentrations; this can result in metabolism malfunction and high levels of stress that can be lethal to organisms in the early stages of development. It should be noted these ideas are also relevant to consideration of bio-negative influences of exposure to other  
kinds of electromagnetic fields, such the low frequency magnetic fields associated with power lines and the mains appliances that they supply, which have been the subject of controversy for a much longer time. 13  
 B-3. Indications of Non-thermal influences of Microwave Radiation, including GSM 
 3.1 In vitro  and in vivo  evidence 
Much experimental evidence of non-thermal influences of microwave radiation on living systems has 
been published in the peer reviewed, scientific literature during the last 30 years – relating both to  in 
vitro  and in vivo  studies - including some obtained more recently under exposure to radiation both 
from a real GSM  phone; most often, however, an experimental ‘surrogate’ microwave generator is 
used, the emissions of which can differ in certain important ways, the importance of which is not 
generally recognised ( see Section B-3.3 ). It should also be appreciated that the fields to which the 
investigative systems are exposed in some of the earlier work are even farther removed from GSM , 
both with respect carrier frequency, as well as CW/pulsed differences. A selection of some in vitro  
studies is given below in Table I. Table I 
 
 
Epileptic activity in rat brain slices in conjunction with certain drugs16 
             Resonant enhancement of cell division in the yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae17, 
             Resonant effect on the genome conformation of Escherichia coli cells18 
Synchronisation of cell division in the yeast Saccharomyces carlsbergensis19 and in E. coli 20 
‘Switch-on’ of certain epigenetic processes, such as λ-phage21, 22 and colicin synthesis23 
Alteration in the activity of the enzyme orthinine decarboxylase ( ODC )24-26 
Reduced efficiency of lymphocyte cytoxicity27, 28 
Increased permeability of the erythrocyte membrane29, 30 
Effects on brain electrochemistry (calcium efflux)5-7 
Increase of chromosome aberrations and micronuclei in human blood lymphocytes31 
Synergistic effects with cancer promoting drugs such as phorbol ester32 
 
 
 In vivo  evidence of non-thermal influences, mainly under exposure to actual GSM phone radiation, 
comes predominantly from animal studies, some of which are summarised in Table II:   
Table II 
 
Epileptiform activity in rats, in conjunction with certain drugs33 
Depression of chicken immune systems (melatonin, corticosterone and IgG levels)13, 14 
Increase in chick embryo mortality13, 14 
Increased permeability of the blood-brain in rats34, 35 
Effects on brain dopamine/ opiate electrochemistry 36 
Increases in DNA  single and double strand breaks in rat brain37, 38 
Promotion of lymphomas in transgenic mice39 
Synergistic effects with certain psychoactive drugs40 
Stressful effects in healthy and tumour bearing mice41 
             Neurogenetic effects and micronuclei formation in peritoneal macrophages in mice41 
 
 
14  
 Human in vivo  studies, under GSM  or similar conditions, include: 
 
1)  Effects on the human EEG , specifically, a delayed increase in spectral power density 
particularly in the alpha band42, which has been corroborated43 in the awake EEG  of adults 
exposed to GSM  radiation. Influences on the asleep EEG  have been reported, including a 
shortening of rapid eye movement ( REM ) sleep44 (with possible adverse effects on learning) 
during which the power density in the alpha band again increases, and effects on non- REM  
sleep45. Exposure to mobile phone radiation also causes a significant decrease in the 
preparatory slow potentials in certain regions of the brain46, 47, and affects memory tasks48-50. 2)  Observation of an increase in resting blood pressure during exposure51. 3)  Observation of an increase in the concentration of nitric oxide in exhaled air correlated 
with mobile phone use, indicative of an elevated level of stress and inflammation52. 4)  The established efficacy of Microwave Resonance Therapy53, 54 – i.e. the possibility of re-
storing homeostasis in a wide variety of human pathological conditions by ultra-weak microwave irradiation at specific frequencies under carefully controlled clinical conditions - otherwise known as ‘quantum medicine’, in view of the fact that such low intensities are used that individual quanta are involved. The existence of such positive effects of microwave irradiation makes it difficult to argue that such radiation can not have the opposite effect – i.e. a bio-negative one – when applied indiscriminately, and at higher 
intensities – in much the same way that the therapeutically beneficial effect of pharmaceutical drugs does not preclude the possibility of allergic drug reactions or, indeed, drug abuse. Although, apart from in the latter case, the power density of the radiation used in these experiments is typically that found at the head when using a mobile phone, and thus much higher than that found in publicly accessible areas in the vicinity of a base-station, the information  content of the radiation 
emitted by the latter is the same; accordingly, these results are not irrelevant to the consideration of 
potential adverse health effects associated with chronic exposure to base-station radiation. 3.2 Difficulties in replication 
It should be noted that difficulties sometimes experienced in attempts to independently replicate 
certain frequency-specific non-thermal effects are actually to be expected . For in consequence of the 
highly non-linear, non-equilibrium nature of living systems, even the slightest differences in the physiological state of the biosystems used, and in the conditions obtaining in a particular experiment can, in consequence of deterministic chaos, assume singular importance
55. Quite apart from this problem, however, discrepant results can often be traced to certain differences in experimental protocols that only become apparent upon close scrutiny. Examples of this can be found in the attempt
56 to replicate the resonant influence of centimetre microwaves of sub-thermal 
intensity on cell division in the yeast S. cerevisiae  found by Grundler et al.17, and the attempt by 
Malyapa et al.57 to replicate the increase in DNA  breakage under low intensity microwave irradiation 
found by Lai and Singh37, 38. 15  
 In the case of the yeast experiments, several features can be identified that could well account for the 
differing results, such as differences in the phase of the cell cycle at which exposure occurred, the use of synchronised cells in one experiment but not in the other, and differences in the imaging systems used (real-time vs. non-time lapse) to monitor cell division. In the case of the DNA  experiments, whilst both groups used microwave radiation of the same 
frequency, they irradiated different systems (live rats vs. a cell line), and used very different assays to 
assess the DNA  damage; in addition, the replication attempt did not separate the (positively charged) 
bound protein from the (negatively charged) DNA  strands, thus obtaining much less migration in the 
electrophoresis field, which was also applied for a much shorter time than in the original experiment; both these features militate against the formation of the ‘comet’ tails used to assess the degree of fragmentation. 3.3 Relevance of experiments to conditions realised in actual mobile phone usage  
Quite apart from possible differences in the physiological states of the animals used in the original an 
replication experiments, it should not be overlooked that differences in irradiation conditions can also contribute to difficulties in achieving replication; in addition, they can also be a confounding factor in assessing the relevance of positive animal results to humans (as also, incidentally, can differences in the ratio of the duration of irradiation to the lifetime of the species in question.) Thus, for example, whereas, for humans, whole-body  exposure is realised arise only in the case of a base-
station, where ‘far-field’ conditions obtain, this is not necessarily so for animals, which, depending on their size, can be whole-body exposed to the near- field of a 900MHz phone antenna (or its 
experimental surrogate), the characteristics of which are quite different. In the case of humans, by contrast, use of a phone primarily results only in a rather localised  exposure to the near-field of the 
antenna. A further factor to be remembered is that in many experiments, subjects are not exposed to the actual emission of an real GSM  mobile phone, but rather to that of a ‘surrogate’ microwave 
generator whose the output can differ in certain crucial ways. For example, it may not even be 
pulsed, and even if it does so at the GSM  frame repetition rate (217Hz), it most probably will not 
contain the (bioactive) multi-frame  frequency of 8.34Hz, and certainly not the 2Hz that characterises 
the DTX  mode. B-4. Indications of Non-thermal Adverse Health Impacts of Exposure to GSM and  
        similar microwave radiation   
The popular belief that adverse health effects can be induced only by the heating effect of GSM  
radiation is a fallacy:  1. There is rather consistent empirical, anecdotal evidence from many countries that the health of 
some people is adversely affected in various ways when they are exposed to this kind of radiation, 
despite its intensity being  well below  existing safety limits based on consideration of the SAR. It 
should be stressed that the anecdotal  nature of many of the reported health problems – such as 
headache, sleep disruption, impairment of short term memory, nose bleeds and, more seriously, an 
increase in the frequency of seizures in some children already suffering from epilepsy - does not 
constitute grounds for dismissing them out of hand, as is so often advocated. For given the paucity, to date, of systematic epidemiological studies pertaining to this relatively recently introduced 
 
16  
 technology, such reports are an indispensable source of information – a point acknowledged in last 
year’s Report58 of the UK Commons’ Select Committee, dealing with the question of mobile phones 
and health. 2. More disturbingly, not withstanding the absence of any overall  increase in the incidence of brain 
tumours amongst users of mobile phones (mainly analogue ones, it should be emphasised), a statistically significant increase (by a factor of between 2 and 3) in the incidence of a rather rare kind of tumour (epithelial neuroma) in the periphery of the brain - where the radiation has the greatest 
access - the laterality of which correlates with mobile phone use, has been found
59 in an 
epidemiological study in the USA, as part of the WTR  Programme60. 3. There is documented evidence 
61, 62 that long-term (involuntary) exposure to microwave radiation 
of intensities intermediate between that realised near an active phone and that found in the vicinity of 
a base-station (but at somewhat different carrier frequencies than used in GSM ) does causes serious 
illness, such as leukaemia and lymphoma, in certain exposed people. This is the conclusion reached by a relatively recent reanalysis of the Lilienfeld report on the Moscow US Embassy irradiation 
during the ‘cold’ war, based on information that only became fully available following the Freedom of Information Act, which reveals that the original verdict of no serious health effects was, in fact, a sanitised version of Lilienfeld’s findings, in which his statements of concern had been deliberately removed by the State Department. 4. A US Defence Intelligence Agency document
63 dated March 1976, reviewing Soviet work on 
biological effects of non-thermal exposure to microwave and radiofrequency radiation makes interesting, but disturbing, reading. For not only have many of the effects there reported now been found in the case of exposure to GSM  telephony radiation, but the following extract (which, 
incidentally, was eventually also removed) reveals a less known ‘dark side’ of the issue that is consistent with the Moscow Embassy affair, and one that presaged – as it turned out - the subsequent deployment of this kind of radiation in psychotonics and other forms of non-lethal microwave weaponry:  
‘The potential for the development of a number of antipersonnel applications is suggested by the research published in the USSR, East Europe and the West. Sounds and possibly even words which appear to be originating intracranially can be induced by signal modulation at very low average power densities. Combinations of frequencies and other signal characteristics to produce other neurological effects may be feasible in several years. The possibility of inducing metabolic disorders also suggested. Animal experiments reported in the open literature have demonstrated the use of low level microwave signals to produce death by heart seizure or by neurological pathologies resulting from breaching of the blood-brain barrier’. 5. An invaluable indicator of the potential noxiousness of the pulsed microwave fields emitted by 
base-stations is the increasing number of reports - some published, some as yet anecdotal - of adverse effects on the health and well-being of various animal species, specifically cattle, dogs, birds and bees. In the case of the affected cattle reported in one particular study
64, the cattle (which were found 
to line up, all facing away from the mast) displayed a variety of problems, including severely reduced 
 
17  
 milk yields, emaciation, spontaneous abortions, and still births. Especially relevant are the following 
facts: ( i) the condition of the cattle was found to improve dramatically when they were removed to 
pastures well away from the mast, only to deteriorate again once they were brought back, ( ii) the 
adverse effects appeared only after  GSM  microwave antennae had been erected on a tower that had 
formerly been used to transmit only (analogue) TV and radio signals, associated with which there had, in this case, been no evident health problems. It should be noted that this is not an isolated 
occurrence, similar problems with cattle being reported from elsewhere
65. In the case of domestic 
canine pets, there are a number of anecdotal reports of their immune systems being adversely affected, again in a reversible  way. Finally, there are reports of declines in bird and bee populations 
following the commissioning of new base-station masts. It should be noted that the occurrence of adverse effects in animals  is particularly significant, in that 
it indicates that the effects are real, and not psychosomatical, as is often claimed, in the case of humans exposure, by those who maintain that base-station radiation is harmless. Furthermore, given that animals are often more highly electrosensitive than are humans, the serious nature of the health problems they have manifested over such a relatively short period of time could well portend a correspondingly serious noxiousness in the case of long-term exposure of humans, and constitute a 
valuable early-warning system, similar to the ‘canary down the mine’! 6. It is of interest, and probably highly significant, to note that some of the same symptoms have 
been reported in epidemiological studies (involving animals and plant life, in addition to humans), connected, not with mobile phone base-stations, but with other  kinds of installations operating at 
somewhat lower frequencies - specifically, a Short-wave radio transmitter
66, and a radar67, the latter 
being at 154-162MHz, with a pulse repetition frequency of 24.4Hz - at locations where the intensity of the emitted radiation is comparable  to that typically found at 150m from a base-station. Additional effects include: 
 
i)   Depressed nocturnal melatonin levels in cattle66. ii)  Less developed memory and attention span (as well as decreased endurance of their 
neuromuscular apparatus) of children68 living within a 20km radius of the radar, subject to a 
maximum exposure of 0.039 µW/cm2. iii) A six-fold increase in chromosome damage in cows69 exposed to a likely maximum 
intensity of 0.1 µW/cm2. (The cited field intensities are estimated from information on the electric field intensity as a 
function of distance from the radar installation, given in Ref. 70.) In each case , the unexposed population to the rear of the beams constituted the control group. 7. At somewhat higher intensities, but still well below the exposure limits permitted by the ICNIRP  
Guidelines, is a 2-fold increase in the incidence of cancer amongst Polish military personnel, which has been revealed by a long term, on-going study
71. With respect to the apparent absence to date of such serious, life-threatening adverse effects in the case of human exposure to GSM  base-station radiation, it should be noted that this is no guarantee of 
 
18  
 immunity against long-term  (or chronic) exposure. For exposure to this kind of radiation is still in its 
‘early days’ in comparison to the much longer (10-15 years) latency period of the kinds of cancers that might be initiated or promoted in certain people. Partly responsible for the reluctance to accept the reality of the underlying non-thermal effects is not 
only their often counter-intuitive nature - as exemplified, for instance, by the fact that they often become more marked as the strength of the irradiating field decreases  - but also the difficulties 
sometimes experienced in attempts to replicate them, as already mentioned in  Section 3.2 . On the 
other hand, the equal reluctance to accept that they can provoke adverse health reactions in some people can be attributed - at least in part - to a general lack of appreciation that electromagnetic fields 
are not alien  to an alive organism, but actually play a rather fundamental and integral role in its 
organisation and control, from the cellular level upwards
72-74  - i.e. that an alive organism is itself  an 
electromagnetic instrument of great and exquisite sensitivity, and, as such, is just as vulnerable to being deleteriously interfered with (non-thermally) by external electromagnetic fields as is an activated piece of electronic equipment, (although in the latter case the influence of a given field is always the same , unlike the situation with an alive organism.) B-5. From Non-thermal Effects to Adverse Health Effects  
 
The hypersensitivity of the alive human organism to ultraweak microwave radiation is reflected in the ways in which this kind of radiation has been found to affect a wide variety of brain functions, as 
already noted in Section B-3.1  - such as electrical activity ( EEG )
42-50, electrochemistry5-7, 24-26, 36, and 
the permeability of the blood/brain barrier34, 35 - and to degrade the immune system13, 14, 27, 28. Although these effects do not necessarily entail adverse health consequences, there is an undeniable consistency
75 between some of these non-thermal influences and the nature of many of the health 
problems reported, such as headache, sleep disruption, impairment of short term memory, and, more seriously, significant increases in the frequency of seizures in some epileptic children when exposed to base-station radiation, and of brain tumours amongst users of mobile phones; it must, however, be admitted that precisely how these influences actually provoke adverse health reactions is at present 
unclear. Thus, the reports of: 
 
a) Headache are consistent with the fact that microwaves are known to non-thermally affect 
the dopamine–opiate system of the brain36 and to increase the permeability of the blood-brain 
barrier34-35, since both of these have been medically connected with headache77-82. b) Sleep disruption are consistent with the effect of GSM  radiation on rapid eye movement 
(REM)  sleep44 and on melatonin levels13, 14 - the latter being found also epidemiologically, in 
the case of RF exposure66. c) Memory impairment is consistent with the finding that microwave radiation targets the 
hippocampus16. d) Since there is no reason to suppose that the seizure inducing ability of a flashing visible  
light does not extend83 to (invisible) microwave radiation (which can access the brain 
directly through the skull) flashing at a similarly low frequency, together with the fact that exposure to this kind of radiation is known  to induce epileptic activity in certain animals
33, 
 
19  
 reports84 of increased  seizure activity in some children that already suffer from epilepsy are 
perhaps not surprising. e) The statistically significant increase in the incidence of amongst users of mobile phones in 
the incidence of epithelial neuroma is consistent both with the genotoxicity  of low intensity 
microwave radiation, as indicated by the increased number37-38 of DNA  strand breaks85, the 
formation of chromosome aberrations and micronuclei in human blood31 (the latter being 
corroborated in the case of GSM  radiation by the WTR  Programme60), and with the 
promotional  effect of GSM  radiation in the case of transgenic mice that had been genetically 
engineered to have a predisposition to develop cancer39. B-6. The Increased Vulnerability of Pre-adolescent Children 
 
Pre-adolescent children can be expected to be (potentially) more at risk than are adults - as recognised in the recently published Report
86 of the UK Independent Expert Group on Mobile 
Phones - for the following reasons:  
 
i)    Absorption of microwaves of the frequency used in mobile telephony is greatest87 in an 
object about the size of a child’s head – the so-called ‘head resonance’ – whilst, in consequence of the thinner skull of a child, the penetration of the radiation into the brain is greater than in an adult. ii)    The still developing nervous system and associated brain-wave activity in a child (and 
particularly one that is epileptic) are more vulnerable to aggression by the pulses of microwaves used in GSM  than is the case with a mature adult. This is because the multi-
frame repetition frequency of 8.34Hz and the 2Hz pulsing that characterises the signal from a phone equipped with discontinuous transmission ( DTX ), lie in the range of the alpha  and 
delta  brain wave activities, respectively. The fact that these two particular electrical 
activities are constantly changing in a child until the age of about 12 years – when the delta-waves disappear and the alpha rhythm is finally stabilised – means that they must both be 
anticipated to be particularly vulnerable to interference from the GSM  pulsing. iii)    The increased mitotic activity in the  cells of developing children makes them more 
susceptible to genetic damage. iv)    A child’s immune system, whose efficiency is, in any case, degraded by radiation of the kind 
used in mobile telephony, is generally less robust than is that of an adult, so that the child less able to ‘cope’ with any adverse health effect provoked by (chronic) exposure to such radiation. B-7. But Not Everyone is Adversely Affected  
 
Because both the occurrence of the initial provoking non-thermal effect  as well as  the severity of any 
associated adverse health effect depend on aliveness, they necessarily depend on the physiological 
state of the organism when it is exposed to the radiation  - i.e. non-thermal effects are non-linear  
effects. Accordingly, it is quite possible that exposure to a low intensity field can entail a seemingly disproportionately large  (non-linear) response (or none at all), and vice versa  (consistent with which 
 
20  
 is the familiar occurrence of ‘windows’ of response), quite unlike the situation with the predictable 
(linear) thermal effects. Since the physiological state of different people cannot, however, be anticipated to be the same – depending as it does on factors such as the stability of an individual’s brain rhythms against interference or entrainment by the radiation, their already prevailing level of stress, and the robustness of their immune system – it follows that identical  exposure to exactly the same  radiation 
can entail quite different (non-thermal) responses in different people (or even in the same person, depending on his/her condition at the time of exposure
88), quite unlike the case of active electronic 
instruments. This is, of course, consistent both with the fact that not every exposed person is 
adversely affected (as is also the case with smoking*, for example, 
………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 
* In the case of smoking, it is often claimed that the odds ratio is here much higher than it is in the case of 
electromagnetic exposure; but this is necessarily so , because the former compares heavy smokers with non-
smokers, of whom there is effectively no electromagnetic counterpart, everyone being unavoidably at least lightly exposed. where not all smokers get lung cancer!) and with the difficulties encountered in some laboratory 
attempts to replicate non-thermal effects, particularly under in vivo conditions. For depending on a 
person’s genetic predisposition, and the fact that stress is cumulative, it is quite possible that exposure to an electromagnetic field simply supplies the final contribution that raises a particular person’s level of stress above some critical value, thereby ‘triggering’ the manifestation of some pathology that is already in a well advanced state, but which, in the absence of any exposure, would 
have remained latent. On the other hand, as already mentioned in Section B-3.2 , difficulties 
sometimes experienced in attempts to independently replicate certain frequency-specific non-thermal 
effects are actually to be expected,  in consequence of the highly non-linear, non-equilibrium nature 
of living systems, whereby even the slightest differences in the physiological state of the biosystems used and in conditions obtaining in a particular experiment can, in consequence of deterministic chaos, assume singular importance. Accordingly, the oft-repeated statement that ......‘ There are no established adverse health effects of 
exposure to GSM radiation (of sub-thermal intensity) ’....... is actually quite true, but, in view of the 
above, this is necessarily so , thus making the statement essentially vacuous. The more relevant 
consideration is whether there is an established risk to human health. It must be concluded that such 
a risk does indeed exist, but - in view of the above considerations- the actual number and identity of those at risk are necessarily unknown, a priori , although, for the reasons identified, children and 
highly stressed people - particularly those with already compromised immune systems (as well as those on certain prescribed psychoactive drugs) - must be considered more vulnerable. For the Mobile Phone Industry, regulatory bodies and government to deny this risk is not only untenable, but also, more significantly, lays them open  to the charge that they attempted to ‘ shield 
the public from uncertainty. ’
89. There is nothing to be lost - and a lot to be gained - by frankly 
admitting the existence of this risk, albeit possibly only to a minority of the public, and, in accordance with the recommendations of the Stewart Report
86, taking the necessary steps to 
minimise it, such as those specified in Part A  
    
 
21  
 B-8.
The_effects_of_EMF.txt
Summarize the following text section accurately and concisely. Maintain specific details and numerical information, and use anti-repetition mechanisms:

        DIRECTORATE GENERAL FOR RESEARCH 
Directorate A  
Division Industry, Research and Energy 
STOA 
Scientific and Technological Options Assessment  
 
   
 
THE PHYSIOLOGICAL AND 
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF NON-
IONISING ELECTROMAGNETIC 
RADIATION  
 
Final Study 
 
 
 
Working document for the STOA Panel  
 
     
Luxembourg, March 2001     PE 297. 574/Fin. St. Directorate General for Research 
 EN                           EN
 
   Cataloguing data : 
   Title:    
THE PHYSIOLOGICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF 
NON-IONISING ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION  
 
Workplan Ref. :  EP/IV/A/STOA/2000/07/03  
 
Publisher:   European Parliament 
Directorate General for Research Directorate A The STOA Programme 
  
Author:   Dr. Gerard Hyland  
    
University of Warwick - U. K. International Institute of Biophysics, Germany  
 
Editor:    Mr Graham CHAMBERS 
STOA Unit 
  Date:    March 2001   PE number:   
PE  297.
Dr. Gerard Hyland
Who is the author of this study?
The potential health risks associated with non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation, specifically the effects of GSM signals on the human body.
What is the main focus of this study?
The potential adverse health effects of exposure to GSM radiation, particularly for children and vulnerable individuals.
What is the primary concern of the public regarding the use of mobile phones?
They do not account for the non-linear, non-equilibrium nature of living systems, which makes it difficult to replicate certain experiments and predict the effects of long-term exposure.
What is the main issue with existing safety guidelines?
The study suggests that a more comprehensive approach is needed, including the development of electromagnetic biocompatibility and the recognition that the body is an electromagnetic instrument that can be affected by external electromagnetic fields.
What is the recommended approach to address the issue of non-thermal effects?