Radiation from Cell Phones Flagged as "Possibly"--Not Probably--Carcinogenic

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


The radiation emitted by mobile phones has been classified as "possibly carcinogenic to humans" by a World Health Organization (WHO) scientific working group.

The May 31 announcement, however, doesn't imply that cell phones cause cancer. It suggests that there are still enough unknowns not to rule out long-term health effects of the devices, which are now used by billions of people around the globe.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) based its new conclusions on previous studies of humans, animals and lab work. The group called evidence for a link between cell phone use and glioma and acoustic neuroma cancers "limited"—and a link with other types of cancers "inadequate." Evidence for a link between cancer and exposure to other radiofrequency electromagnetic sources—including microwaves, radar, and television and radio transmission signals—was also found to be insufficient.

Over the years, the findings on cell phones and cancer have been about as spotty as mid-'90s cellular service coverage. A decades-long study in some European countries found no increase in the occurrence of brain cancer despite a huge jump in mobile phone use. A study earlier this year concluded that cell phone emissions did have an affect on brain metabolism near where callers held the devices against their heads. But as Scientific American columnist Michael Shermer explained last year, "Physics shows that it is virtually impossible for cell phones to cause cancer." (In short: unlike UV radiation, the radiation from cell phones is too weak to destroy the bonds inside cells.)

But the 31 scientists involved in the new assessment seem to want to play it on the safe side. "Given the potential consequences for public health," IARC Director Christopher Wild said in a prepared statement, "it is important that additional research be conducted into the long-term, heavy use of mobile phones."

A more detailed explanation behind the IARC's recommendations will be published in the July 1 issue of The Lancet Oncology.

Image courtesy of iStockphoto/Yuri_Arcus

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe