Radiation from mobile phone systems: is it perceived as athreat to people's health?

Bioelectromagnetics

Volumn 30, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 393-401

  Kristiansen, Ivar Sønbø ^a,b   Elstein, Arthur S ^c   Gyrd Hansen, Dorte ^b,d   Kildemoes, Helle W ^b   Nielsen, Jesper B ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

^d Dansk Sundhedsinstitut   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Mobile phone; Radiation; Risk communication; Risk perception

Indexed keywords

CELLULAR TELEPHONES;

3G PHONES; DENMARK; EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENTS; LUNG CANCER; MOBILE PHONE RADIATION; MOBILE PHONE SYSTEMS; MORTALITY RISK; ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE; RISK COMMUNICATION; TELEPHONE SURVEY;

RISK PERCEPTION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; DENMARK; EDUCATION; ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; INFORMATION; MALE; MOBILE PHONE; MORTALITY; NORMAL HUMAN; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADIATION MONITOR; RADIATION PROTECTION; RADIATION RESPONSE; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEX DIFFERENCE;

NICOTIANA TABACUM;

EID: 67649828031     PISSN: 01978462     EISSN: 1521186X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/bem.20484     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Ahlbom A, Green A, Kheifets L, Savitz D, Swerdlow A. 2004. Epidemiology of health effects of radiofrequency exposure. Environ Health Perspect 112(17):1741-1754. (Pubitemid 40017297)
2. Blettner M, Berg G. 2000. Are mobile phones harmful? Acta Oncol 39:927-930.
3. Breakwell GM, Barnett J. 2001. The Impact of Social Amplification of Risk on Risk Communication. Health and Safety Executive London. 332/2001. Sudbury. Contract Research Report.
4. Breakwell GM, Barnett J. 2002. The significance of uncertainty and conflict: Developing a social psychological theory of risk communications. Rev Soc Psychol 2:107-114.
5. Burgess A. 2002. Comparing national responses to perceived health risks from mobile phone masts. Health Risk Soc 4:175-188. (Pubitemid 34678851)
6. Chapman S,Wutzke S. 1997. Not in our back yard: Media coverage of community opposition to mobile phone towers - An application of Sandman's outrage model of risk perception. Aust N Z J Public Health 21:614-620. (Pubitemid 28209312)
7. Chapman S, Wutzke S. 1998. Community panics about mobile phone towers. Aust N Z J Public Health 22:406. (Pubitemid 28253957)
8. Elwood JM. 2003. Epidemiological studies of radio frequency exposures and human cancer. Bioelectromagnetics (Suppl 6):S63-S73. (Pubitemid 38622957)
9. EU. 2004. Risk Evaluation of Potential Environmental Hazards From LowFrequency Electromagnetic Field Exposure Using Sensitive in Vitro Methods (REFLEX). European Union. Quality of Life and Management of Living Resources.
10. Finucane ML, Slovic P, Mertz CK, Flynn J, Satterfield TA. 2000. Gender, race, and perceived risk: The 'white male' effect. Health Risk Soc 2:159-172.
11. Flynn J, Slovic P, Mertz CK. 1994. Gender, race, and perception of environmental-health risks. Risk Anal 14:1101-1108.
12. Frederiksen HB, Elverdam B, Nielsen JB, Hoelfelde LK. 2005. Mobile phones: A study of managing risk in everyday life (in Danish: Mobiltelefoner: En undersøgelse af risikoha° ndtering i hverdagslivet). Odense, University of Southern Denmark.
13. Frewer LJ, Scholderer J, Bredahl L. 2003. Communicating about the risks and benefits of genetically modified foods: The mediating role of trust. Risk Anal 23:1117-1133. (Pubitemid 38045093)
14. Hutter HP, Moshammer H, Wallner P, Kundi M. 2004. Public perception of risk concerning celltowers and mobile phones. Soz Praventivmed 49:62-66. (Pubitemid 38312975)
15. Hyland GJ. 2000. Physics and biology of mobile telephony. Lancet 356:1833-1836. (Pubitemid 30954043)
16. Jensen LM, Svenningsen H. 2004. The mobile dilemma: A qualitative study of people's concern about mobile phone radiation (in Danish: Det mobile dilemma - En kvalitativ undersogelse af befolkningens bekymring for mobilstraling). Informationscenteret for Miljo & Sundhed.
17. Kundi M, Mild K, Hardell L, Mattsson MO. 2004. Mobile telephones and cancer-A review of epidemiological evidence. J Toxicol Environ Health B Crit Rev 7:351-384. (Pubitemid 39180813)
18. Law A, McNeishW, Gray L. 2003. Base station fears: The paradox of mobile geograpby. Geography 88:320-330. (Pubitemid 37529260)
19. MacGregor DG, Slovic P, Morgan MG. 1994. Perception of risks from electromagnetic-fields-A psychometric evaluation of a risk-communication approach. Risk Anal 14:815-828. (Pubitemid 24362992)
20. Marris C, Langford I, Saunderson T, O'Riordan T. 1997. Exploring the "psychometric paradigm": Comparisons between aggregate and individual analyses. Risk Anal 17:303-312.
21. McMahan S, Lutz R, Meyer J. 2002. Attitudes about electric and magnetic fields: Do scientists and other risk experts perceive risk similarly? J Environ Health 65:9-12.
22. Morgan MG, Slovic P, Nair I, Geisler D, Macgregor D, Fischhoff B, Lincoln D, Florig K. 1985. Powerline frequency electric and magnetic-fields - A pilot-study of risk perception. Risk Anal 5:139-149. (Pubitemid 15026339)
23. Morgan MG, Florig HK, Nair I, Cortes C, Marsh K, Pavlosky K. 1990. Lay understanding of low-frequency electric and magnetic fields. Bioelectromagnetics 11:313-335.
24. Poortinga W, Pidgeon NF. 2003. Exploring the dimensionality of trust in risk regulation. Risk Anal 23:961-972. (Pubitemid 37193553)
25. Repacholi MH. 2001. Health risks from the use of mobile phones. Toxicol Lett 120:323-331. (Pubitemid 32375099)
26. Rothman KJ. 2000. Epidemiological evidence on health risks of cellular telephones. Lancet 356:1837-1840. (Pubitemid 30954044)
27. Sadetzki S, Chetrit A, Jarus-Hakak A, Cardis E, Deutch Y, Duvdevani S, Zultan A, Novikov I, Freedman L, Wolf M. 2008. Cellular phone use and risk of benign and malignant parotid gland tumors - A nationwide case-control study. Am J Epidemiol 167:457-467. (Pubitemid 351264146)
28. Siegrist M, Cvetkovich GT, Gutscher H. 2001. Shared values, social trust, and the perception of geographic cancer clusters. Risk Anal 21:1047-1053. (Pubitemid 34044941)
29. Siegrist M, Earle TC, Gutscher H. 2003. Test of a trust and confidence model in the applied context of electromagnetic field (EMF) risks. Risk Anal 23:705-716. (Pubitemid 36929566)
30. Siegrist M, Earle TC, Gutscher H, Keller C. 2005. Perception of mobile phone and base station risks. Risk Anal 25:1253-1264. (Pubitemid 41695776)
31. Sjoberg L. 1998. Worry and risk perception. Risk Anal 18:85-93. (Pubitemid 28124563)
32. Sjoberg L. 2001. Limits of knowledge and the limited importance of trust. Risk Anal 21:189-198. (Pubitemid 32679247)
33. Sjoberg L. 2002. Attitudes toward technology and risk: Going beyond what is immediately given. Policy Sci 35:379-400. (Pubitemid 36141447)
34. Sjoberg L, Fromm J. 2001. Information technology risks as seen by the public. Risk Anal 21:427-441. (Pubitemid 34193672)
35. Slovic P. 1986. Informing and educating the public about risk. Risk Anal 6:403-415. (Pubitemid 17227597)
36. Slovic P. 1987. Perception of risk. Science 236:280-285. (Pubitemid 17061043)
37. Slovic P. 1993. Perceived risk, trust, and democracy. Risk Anal 13:675-682. (Pubitemid 24012162)
38. Stewart W. 2000. Mobile phones and health. Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones (IEGMP).
39. WHO. 2002. Establishing a dialogue on risks from electromagnetic fields. Geneva, World Health Organisation, Department of Radiation and Environmental Health Protection of the Human Environment.