|
TETRA Industry Group |
|
|
|
TIG fact sheets
|
What the Experts say There has been a substantial amount of research into the effects of radio frequency emissions, including the frequencies used by TETRA, over a number of years. The balance of scientific evidence does not demonstrate any link between radio frequency emissions at levels below the safety standards and adverse effects on health. But don’t take our word for it……look at what the recognised experts say. And on our ‘Useful links’ page (click here) we list a number of other web sites from which you can obtain further information. MTHR Report 2007 On 12 September the Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research Programme (MTHR) published its report for 2007, describing progress so far with its programme of research. The press release that accompanied the report said: “Mobile phones have not been found to be associated with any biological or adverse health effects according to the UK’s largest investigation into the possible health risks from mobile telephone technology. The Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research (MTHR) Programme has published their conclusions today as part of its 2007 Report. The six year research programme has found no association between short term mobile phone use and brain cancer. Studies on volunteers also showed no evidence that brain function was affected by mobile phone signals or the signals used by the emergency services (TETRA). The MTHR programme management committee believes there is no need to support further work in this area. The research programme also included the largest and most robust studies of electrical hypersensitivity undertaken anywhere in the world. These studies have found no evidence that the unpleasant symptoms experienced by sufferers are the result of exposure to signals from mobile phones or base stations. The situation for longer term exposure is less clear as studies have so far only included a limited number of participants who have used their phones for 10 years or more. The committee recommends more research be conducted in this area. The MTHR programme also investigated whether mobile phones might affect cells and tissue beyond simply heating them. The results so far show no evidence for this and the committee believes there is no need to support further work in this area. Professor Lawrie Challis, Chairman of MTHR, said “This is a very substantial report from a large research programme. The work reported today has all been published in respected peer-reviewed scientific or medical journals. The results are so far re-assuring but there is still a need for more research, especially to check that no effects emerge from longer-term phone use from adults and from use by children.” The research programme has also funded some basic measurements of radio signals from microcell and picocell base stations such as those found in airports, railway stations and shopping malls. These have shown that exposures are well below international guidelines. Additional studies also confirmed that the use of a mobile phone while driving, whether hand-held or hands-free, causes impairment to performance comparable to that from other in-car distractions. There are however indications that the demand on cognitive resources from mobile phones may be greater.” To read the report in full click here (link to the MTHR web site), where it is available in pdf form. The report refers to some studies that have been or are being carried out on TETRA signals, and the main references to TETRA in the body of the report are summarised here for ease of reference: Standard Exposure System Dr Phil Chadwick of MCL was commissioned to design a system to produce RF exposures representative of those to real phone and TETRA radio users. (report page 7) Brain Function The roll-out of the TETRA-based network for the emergency services prompted concern about the possible effects of exposure to pulse-modulated fields from the handsets.
Hypersensitivity A small proportion of users of electrical equipment, including mobile phones and TETRA handsets, report unpleasant symptoms such as headaches and tingling and this is sometimes described as ‘electrical hypersensitivity’.
MTHR noted that exposure to TETRA signals had not been adequately investigated, and further studies are now underway. These are:
Current and planned work on TETRA and hypersensitivity is also summarised on page 33 of the MTHR report. Biological Mechanisms A study by Dr Sienkiewicz at HPA, with colleagues at University of Bristol and DSTL, searched for evidence that RF fields could cause changes in brain function, using TETRA, GSM, and UMTS signals. The work has not yet been published. TETRA Emergency Services Radio Appendix C of the MTHR report (page 47 – 48) contains a summary of how the TETRA network for the emergency services operate, along with information on other RF systems, such as Wireless Local Area Networks, GSM Phones, and DECT phones. One of the objectives of the TETRA Industry Group is to facilitate a direct dialogue between expert scientists and users of TETRA technology. 2008 In March 2008 the Group hosted a London seminar at which the speakers were Professor Tony Barker of the University of Sheffield, Dr James Rubin of Kings College, London and Denise Wallace of the University of Essex. A summary of the seminar presentations and copies of some of the slides used can be found below:
2007 In April 2007 the Group hosted a seminar in London in conjunction with BAPCO, at which the speakers were Professor Lawrie Challis, Chairman of the MTHR Programme Management Committee, Dr John Tattersall and Sarah Smith of DSTL, and Dr Philip Chadwick, Director of EM Fields. A summary of the seminar presentations and copies of the speakers’ slides can be found below:
Who are the experts and why should you believe them? Science can never guarantee that anything is absolutely safe. But it can offer strong reassurance that any risk from a technology is small, particularly when set against the many risks we accept in our daily lives. Reputable scientists do not make unsubstantiated claims, but formulate hypotheses which they test rigorously through experiments and studies. For a study to have scientific weight it must be peer-reviewed and replicated in an independent laboratory. In this way the body of scientific evidence on any issue is built up over a period of time. Those who are already acknowledged by their peers to be experts in the field of RF naturally tend to be the scientists who are asked to undertake reviews of the whole body of scientific evidence and to sit on Government advisory bodies. In so doing they are careful to weigh both positive and negative evidence on any issue, and produce a balanced report. These scientists rightly remain absolutely independent of both Government and industry. What they say: in general........... “The MHTR programme was set up to resolve uncertainties identified by previous evaluations of the possible health risks associated with the widespread use of mobile phone technology. None of the research supported by the programme and published so far demonstrates that biological or adverse health effects are produced by radiofrequency exposure from mobile phones…………… ……………………reassuringly no epidemiological association was found between short term mobile phone use (less than 10 years) and cancers of the brain and nervous system. Studies on volunteers provided no evidence that brain function is effected by exposure to the signals emitted by mobile phones or TETRA radios……………………… …………………the committee has recognised that while many of the concerns raised by the Stewart Committee have been reduced by the programme and work done elsewhere some still remain…………priorities will include work to assess whether longer term exposure (greater than 10 years) increases the risk of developing cancers of the brain and nervous system” - MTHR report, September 2007 “nobody has established a medical risk and on balance there is no real reason to worry about TETRA. It is certainly no greater risk than a mobile phone…….the large body of scientific evidence to date indicates that non-ionising radiation does not have any biological effect.” - Prof Colin Blakemore, Head of the Medical Research Council, member of the Stewart Inquiry and member of the National Radiological Protection Board’s Advisory Group on Non-Ionising Radiation (AGNIR), 2002 “although areas of uncertainty remain about the biological effects of low level radiation in general, and about modulated signals in particular, current evidence suggests that it is unlikely that the unique features of the TETRA system pose a hazard to health” - National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) 2001 about base stations …… “heating effects from base stations are utterly negligible” - Prof Lawrie Challis, University of Nottingham, Vice Chairman of Stewart Inquiry, Chairman of the MTHR research programme and member of the NRPB Advisory Group on Non-Ionising Radiation (AGNIR), 2003 “the RF emission from a TETRA base station is continuous and not pulsed. Measurements show no pulse modulation at 17.6Hz and its harmonics to within experimental error. The changes in RF emission at these frequencies are 1% or less and can all be attributed to limits in the measurement procedure. There are regular interruptions in the streams of digital signals but the average level of RF emission is unchanged” - Prof Lawrie Challis 2003 about handsets ….. "In applying the cognitive testing regime we had used previously on analogue and GSM phones to TETRA-type phones, with only the 17.65Hz modulation pattern, we were not able to demonstrate any effect on human cognition. The work needs to be repeated with a more complete modulation content, but it does suggest that no specific effects can be attributed to 17.65Hz modulation" - Dr Alan Preece, University of Bristol, 2003 “there is a common misconception that heat from TETRA handsets can negatively affect the brain or body when used due to a warming effect. These claims are unrealistic as TETRA handsets emits less than one tenth of the energy needed to raise body temperature by one degree centigrade, and therefore operate many times below the international guidelines on exposure to non-ionising radiation" - Prof Colin Blakemore, 2002 …and the research work continues….. Following the publication of the report by the Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones a research programme, called the Link Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research Programme (MTHR), was set up to look into the possible health impact of mobile telecommunications. (click here for details). As mentioned higher up this page, the MHTR programme published a report on progress so far in September 2007. To download a copy of the report click here. The MTHR work programme continues, for example, the MTHR is funding researchers from the University of Essex to carry out a two-year study to establish if there are any short-term health effects from exposure to TETRA mobile radio masts, and in particular to look at people who appear to be particularly sensitive to the technology. For more information, click here. If you would like to volunteer to participate, contact ehstudy@essex.ac.uk. To supplement this, the Home Office has commissioned a number of TETRA-specific studies (click here for further details). One of the first of the studies to report its findings was carried out by the biomedical sciences department of the Defence Science and Technology Laboratory – an investigation into the effect of TETRA signals on cellular calcium. The study simulated the maximum exposure that can arise from TETRA handsets, as well as looking at several lower power levels to see if there could be ‘power windows’ where TETRA signals could cause a reaction. No effects on calcium response were found at any of the TETRA power levels. The results were published in the International Journal of Radiation Biology in December 2006 (click here to view). Back to Top or Home |
|
Web site built and maintained by Brenda McAll PR Consultancy © TETRA Industry Group 2004-2008 |
