Aeronautical Engineer on Cell Phone / Brain Cancer Lawsuit
Date: Sun, 6 Aug 2000 23:34:03 -0700
From: ilena rose
ilena@san.rr.comTo: Recipient List Suppressed:;
Ilena,
This reply is from an the aeronautical engineer I was telling you about. He is taking this cell phone thing seriously and mentioned it to me several weeks ago. Here is his response to your memo. TC
----- Original Message -----
From: Les Nelson
les.nelson@gat.comTo: TC Leary
tigress@adnc.comSent: Thursday, August 03, 2000 9:17 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: $800 MILLION Cell Phone / Brain Cancer Lawsuit
TC,
I think that the best thing is to take control of the situation irrespective of any possible future actions the industry may take. This is a classic situation in which an ounce of prevention is worth a ton of cure. I believe that the following actions will remove most risk:
1.. Get a remote headset and ALWAYS use the phone with that.
2.. Always hold the phone a couple feet away from your body, and keep your hand away from the antenna -- grasp the phone away from the antenna. It's best to just lay the phone down a couple feet away from you while talking with the remote headset.
3.. WHENEVER THE PHONE IS POWERED ON, KEEP IT AWAY FROM YOUR BODY EVEN IF YOU ARE NOT CURRENTLY USING IT -- EVEN IF YOU HAVE IT POWERED ON ONLY FOR INCOMING PHONE CALLS. The phone sends out a periodic burst signal even when not in use whenever it is on. (This is a problem with these belt-mounted phones. The technician here who just died always had his phone powered up on his belt. AND the cancer started from a tumor on his kidney directly adjacent to the position of his phone. This doesn't prove anything, but taken together with all the other evidence, it looks like there is a significant chance that the radio-frequency radiation could be a cause of mutation leading to cancer.)
4.. To remove ALL risk: Buy a special phone in which the handset (or headset) and dialing buttons are on a separate assembly that connects to the main phone with a cord at least 3 feet long and the antennal is mounted on the main phone unit. This is probably not easy to find and would be more cumbersome to use, but would effectively remove ALL risk.
Eventually, the industry will probably come up with easier, more practical solutions; but, for the present time, this is the safest course of action.
Why doesn't everybody get cancer from these phones? First of all, cancer can take a very long time to develop, so that the full impact is not yet visible. Furthermore, it's very tough to establish a cause-and- effect relationship. Also, cancer from radiation is a "numbers game": it depends on length of exposure, strength of exposure, and susceptibility of the specific person's tissues to mutation from the radiation source. All of the above taken together make this an elusive problem-- but still risky.
Les.
At 07:50 AM 8/3/00 -0700, you wrote:
Les,
You're in sunc with current events. How do we find out what that Qualcomm phone has and what the company plans to do about it in the future. I can't imagine people will want to give up the phones if risks can be removed. I feel like e-mailing this message along to the company.
TC
Suit contends cell phones responsible for brain cancer
Baltimore, August 2 , A Maryland man filed an $800 million lawsuit against a cell phone maker and others, claiming years of using the wireless phones caused his brain cancer.
Attorney Joanne Suder filed the suit on behalf of Dr. Chris Newman, 41, of Jarrettsville, against Motorola, Bell Atlantic, Verizon Maryland and others on Tuesday in Baltimore City Circuit Court.
The malignant tumor was discovered in 1998 behind Newmanžs right ear. Suder said Newman used wireless hand-held phones at least several times a day between 1992 and March 1998, when he was diagnosed with cancer.
"Because of the nature of his work he had to be in touch with patients on a minute-to-minute basis," Suder said.
The suit seeks $100 million in compensatory damages and $700 million in punitive damages.
Although concerns that cellular phones may cause cancer or other health problems have grown over the past few years, the federal Food and Drug Administration has said there is no evidence that radiation from the telephones poses a health risk.
However, there is no proof that cell phones are risk-free either, the FDA has said. In June, the FDA announced a partnership with the phone industry under which about $1 million in studies on the issue would be conducted.
A trade group for the wireless industry introduced a new policy last month requiring cell phone makers to disclose information on radiation levels produced by their phones.
More than 90 million American now have cell phones, most of whom began using them in the past five years.
Norman Sandler, a spokesman for Schaumburg, Ill.-based Motorola, said company officials had not seen the suit and could not comment. However, similar lawsuits over the past few years all have been withdrawn by the plaintiffs or dismissed by the courts, Sandler said.
"We have maintained for years that such assertions are groundless," Sandler said.
Considerable research has provided a "sound basis for the public to use these phones safely."
Suder said the evidence in her case overwhelming.
"I would not have taken the case if I didn't think it would be successful," Suder said.
Suder says Newmanžs cancer is terminal and he is unable to work.
Newman, the father of three, said he hopes other cell phone users
will learn from his experience.
"If I could say anything to anyone I would say donžt use them. I mean, it's not worth it to lose your kids. Itžs not worth it to lose your livelihood," Newman said.
