PRESS RELEASE N° 208 31 May 2011 IARC CLASSIFIES RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AS POSSIBLY CARCINOGENIC TO HUMANS Lyon,France,May31,2011‐‐TheWHO/InternationalAgencyforResearchonCancer(IARC)has classifiedradiofrequencyelectromagneticfieldsaspossiblycarcinogenictohumans(Group2B), based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer 1 , associated with wirelessphoneuse.  Background Over the last few years, there has been mounting concern about the possibility of adverse health effectsresultingfromexposuretoradiofrequencyelectromagneticfields,suchasthose emitted by wireless communication devices. The number of mobile phone subscriptions is estimatedat5billionglobally.  FromMay24–312011,aWorkingGroupof31scientistsfrom14countrieshasbeenmeeting at IARC in Lyon, France, to assess the potential carcinogenic hazards from exposure to radiofrequencyelectromagneticfields.TheseassessmentswillbepublishedasVolume102of theIARCMonographs,whichwillbethefifthvolumeinthisseriesto focusonphysicalagents, after Volume 55 (Solar Radiation), Volume 75 and Volume 78 on ionizing radiation (X‐rays, gamma‐rays, neutrons, radio‐nuclides), and Volume 80 on non‐ionizing radiation (extremely low‐frequencyelectromagneticfields).  The IARC Monograph Working Group discussed the possibility that these exposures might inducelong‐termhealtheffects,inparticularanincreasedriskforcancer.Thishasrelevancefor public health, particularly for users of mobile phones, as the number of users is large and growing,particularlyamongyoungadultsandchildren.  The IARC Monograph Working Group discussed and evaluated the available literature on the followingexposurecategoriesinvolvingradiofrequencyelectromagneticfields: ¾ occupationalexposurestoradarandtomicrowaves; ¾ environmentalexposuresassociatedwithtransmissionofsignalsforradio,televisionand wirelesstelecommunication;and ¾ personalexposuresassociatedwiththeuseofwirelesstelephones.  International experts shared the complex task of tackling the exposure data, the studies of cancer in humans , the studies of cancer in experimental animals, and the mechanistic and otherrelevantdata .  1 237913newcasesofbraincancers(alltypescombined)occurredaroundtheworldin2008(gliomasrepresent 2/3ofthese).Source: Globocan2008 Page 2 IARC CLASSIFIES RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AS POSSIBLY CARCINOGENIC TO HUMANS IARC, 150 Cours Albert Thomas, 69372 Lyon CEDEX 08, France - Tel: +33 (0)4 72 73 84 85 - Fax: +33 (0)4 72 73 85 75 © IARC 2011 - All Rights Reserved. Results The evidence was reviewed critically, and overall evaluated as being limited 2  among users of wirelesstelephonesforgliomaandacousticneuroma,andinadequate 3 todrawconclusionsfor  other types of cancers. The evidence from the occupational and environmental exposures mentioned above was similarly judged inadequate.The Working Group did notquantitate the risk;however,onestudyofpastcellphoneuse(uptotheyear2004),showeda40%increased risk for gliomas in the highest category of heavy users (reportedaverage: 30 minutes per day overa10‐yearperiod).  Conclusions Dr Jonathan Samet (University of Southern California, USA), overall Chairman of the Working Group, indicated that "the evidence, while still accumulating, is strong enough to support a conclusion andthe2Bclassification.Theconclusionmeansthattherecouldbesomerisk,and thereforeweneedtokeepaclosewatchforalinkbetweencellphonesandcancerrisk."  "Giventhepotentialconsequencesforpublichealthofthisclassificationandfindings,"saidIARC DirectorChristopherWild,"itisimportantthatadditionalresearchbeconductedintothelong‐ term,heavyuseofmobilephones.Pendingtheavailabilityofsuch information,itis important totakepragmaticmeasurestoreduceexposuresuchashands‐freedevicesortexting."  TheWorkingGroupconsideredhundredsofscientificarticles;thecompletelistwillbepublished in the Monograph. It is noteworthy to mention that several recent in‐press scientific articles 4  resultingfromtheInterphonestudyweremadeavailabletotheworkinggroupshortlybeforeit wasduetoconvene,reflectingtheiracceptanceforpublicationatthattime,andwereincluded intheevaluation.  A concise report summarizing the main conclusions of the IARC Working Group and the evaluations of the carcinogenic hazard from radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (including theuseofmobiletelephones)willbepublishedinTheLancetOncologyinitsJuly1issue,andin afewdaysonline. 2  'Limitedevidence of carcinogenicity': Apositiveassociation hasbeenobserved betweenexposure totheagent andcancerforwhichacausalinterpretationisconsideredbytheWorkingGrouptobecredible,butchance,biasor confoundingcouldnotberuledoutwithreasonableconfidence.  3 'Inadequateevidenceofcarcinogenicity':Theavailablestudiesareofinsufficientquality,consistencyorstatistical power to permit a conclusion regarding the presence or absence of a causal association between exposure and cancer,ornodataoncancerinhumansareavailable.  4  a. 'Acoustic neuroma risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the INTERPHONE international case‐ controlstudy'(theInterphoneStudyGroup,inCancerEpidemiology,inpress) b. 'Estimation of RF energy absorbed in the brain from mobile phones in the Interphone study' (Cardis et al., OccupationalandEnvironmentalMedicine,inpress) c. 'Risk of brain tumours in relation to estimated RF dose from mobile phones – results from five Interphone countries'(Cardisetal.,OccupationalandEnvironmentalMedicine,inpress) d.'LocationofGliomasinRelationtoMobileTelephoneUse:ACase‐CaseandCase‐SpecularAnalysis'(American JournalofEpidemiology,May24,2011.[Epubaheadofprint].   Page 3 IARC CLASSIFIES RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AS POSSIBLY CARCINOGENIC TO HUMANS   Formoreinformation,pleasecontact DrKurtStraif,IARCMonographsSection,at+33472738511,orstraif@iarc.fr;DrRobertBaan, IARCMonographsSection,at+33472738659,orbaan@iarc.fr;orNicolasGaudin,IARC CommunicationsGroup,atcom@iarc.fr(+33472738478) Linktotheaudiofilepostedshortlyafterthebriefing: http://terrance.who.int/mediacentre/audio/press_briefings/   AboutIARC The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) is part of the World Health Organization.Itsmissionistocoordinateandconductresearchonthecausesofhumancancer, the mechanisms of carcinogenesis, and to develop scientific  strategies for cancer control. The Agencyisinvolvedinbothepidemiologicalandlaboratoryresearchanddisseminatesscientific informationthroughpublications,meetings,courses,andfellowships.  If you wish your name to be removed from our press release e‐mailing list, please write to com@iarc.fr.  NicolasGaudin,Ph.D. Head,IARCCommunications InternationalAgencyforResearchonCancer WorldHealthOrganization 150,coursAlbert‐Thomas 69008Lyon France  Emailcom@iarc.fr http://www.iarc.fr/ IARC, 150 Cours Albert Thomas, 69372 Lyon CEDEX 08, France - Tel: +33 (0)4 72 73 84 85 - Fax: +33 (0)4 72 73 85 75 © IARC 2011 - All Rights Reserved. Page 4 IARC CLASSIFIES RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AS POSSIBLY CARCINOGENIC TO HUMANS IARC, 150 Cours Albert Thomas, 69372 Lyon CEDEX 08, France - Tel: +33 (0)4 72 73 84 85 - Fax: +33 (0)4 72 73 85 75 © IARC 2011 - All Rights Reserved. ABOUTTHEIARCMONOGRAPHS WhataretheIARCMonographs? The IARC Monographs identify environmental factors that can increase the risk of human cancer. These include chemicals, complex mixtures, occupational exposures, physical and biologicalagents,andlifestylefactors.Nationalhealthagenciesusethisinformationasscientific supportfortheiractionstopreventexposuretopotentialcarcinogens.Interdisciplinaryworking groupsofexpertscientistsreviewthepublishedstudiesandevaluatetheweightoftheevidence that anagentcanincrease theriskofcancer.The principles, procedures, andscientificcriteria thatguidetheevaluationsaredescribedinthePreambletotheIARCMonographs. Since1971,morethan900agentshavebeenevaluated,ofwhichapproximately400havebeen identifiedascarcinogenicorpotentiallycarcinogenictohumans. Definitions Group1:Theagentiscarcinogenictohumans. This category is used when there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in humans. Exceptionally, an agent may be placed in this category when evidence of carcinogenicity in humansislessthansufficientbutthereissufficientevidenceofcarcinogenicityinexperimental animals and strong evidence in exposed humans that the agent acts through a relevant mechanismofcarcinogenicity. Group2. This category includes agents for which, at one extreme, the degree of evidence of carcinogenicityinhumansisalmostsufficient,aswellasthoseforwhich,attheotherextreme, there are no human data but for which there is evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals.AgentsareassignedtoeitherGroup2A(probablycarcinogenictohumans)orGroup2B (possiblycarcinogenictohumans)onthebasisofepidemiologicalandexperimentalevidenceof carcinogenicity and mechanistic and other relevantdata.Thetermsprobablycarcinogenicand possibly carcinogenic have no quantitative significance and are used simply as descriptors of different levels of evidence of human carcinogenicity, with probably carcinogenic signifying a higherlevelofevidencethanpossiblycarcinogenic. Group2A:Theagentisprobablycarcinogenictohumans. Thiscategoryisusedwhenthereislimitedevidenceofcarcinogenicityinhumansandsufficient evidenceofcarcinogenicityinexperimentalanimals.Insomecases,anagentmaybeclassifiedin this category when there is inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and sufficient evidenceofcarcinogenicityinexperimentalanimalsandstrongevidencethatthecarcinogenesis is mediated by a mechanism that also operates in humans. Exceptionally, an agent may be classifiedinthiscategorysolelyonthebasisoflimitedevidenceofcarcinogenicityinhumans.An agent may be assigned to this category if it clearly belongs, based on mechanistic considerations, to a class of agents for which one or more members have been classified in Group1orGroup2A. Page 5 IARC CLASSIFIES RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AS POSSIBLY CARCINOGENIC TO HUMANS IARC, 150 Cours Albert Thomas, 69372 Lyon CEDEX 08, France - Tel: +33 (0)4 72 73 84 85 - Fax: +33 (0)4 72 73 85 75 © IARC 2011 - All Rights Reserved. Group2B:Theagentispossiblycarcinogenictohumans. Thiscategoryisusedforagentsforwhichthereislimitedevidenceofcarcinogenicityinhumans andlessthansufficientevidenceofcarcinogenicityinexperimentalanimals.Itmayalsobeused whenthereisinadequateevidenceofcarcinogenicityinhumansbutthereissufficientevidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. In some instances, an agent for which there is inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and less than sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals together with supporting evidence from mechanistic andotherrelevantdatamaybeplacedinthisgroup.Anagentmaybeclassifiedinthiscategory solelyonthebasisofstrongevidencefrommechanisticandotherrelevantdata. Group3:Theagentisnotclassifiableastoitscarcinogenicitytohumans. This category is used most commonly for agents for which the evidence of carcinogenicity is inadequateinhumansandinadequateorlimitedinexperimentalanimals. Exceptionally, agents for which the evidence of carcinogenicity is inadequate in humans but sufficientinexperimentalanimalsmaybeplacedinthiscategorywhenthereisstrongevidence thatthemechanismofcarcinogenicityinexperimentalanimalsdoesnotoperateinhumans. Agentsthatdonotfallintoanyothergrouparealsoplacedinthiscategory. AnevaluationinGroup3isnotadeterminationofnon‐carcinogenicityoroverallsafety.Itoften meansthatfurtherresearchisneeded,especiallywhenexposuresarewidespreadorthecancer dataareconsistentwithdifferinginterpretations. Group4:Theagentisprobablynotcarcinogenictohumans. Thiscategoryisusedforagentsforwhichthereisevidencesuggestinglackofcarcinogenicityin humans and in experimental animals. In some instances, agentsfor which there is inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans but evidence suggesting lack of carcinogenicity in experimentalanimals,consistentlyandstronglysupportedbyabroadrangeofmechanistic and otherrelevantdata,maybeclassifiedinthisgroup. Definitionsofevidence,asusedinIARCMonographsforstudiesinhumans The evidence relevant to carcinogenicity from studies in humans is classified into one of the followingcategories: Sufficientevidenceofcarcinogenicity: The Working Group considers that acausalrelationship has been established between exposure to the agent and human cancer. That is, a positive relationship has been observed between the exposure and cancer in studies in which chance, biasandconfoundingcouldberuledoutwithreasonableconfidence.Astatementthatthereis sufficient evidence is followed by a separate sentence that identifies the target organ(s) or tissue(s)whereanincreasedriskofcancerwasobservedinhumans.Identificationofaspecific targetorganortissuedoesnotprecludethepossibilitythattheagentmaycausecanceratother sites. Page 6 IARC CLASSIFIES RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AS POSSIBLY CARCINOGENIC TO HUMANS IARC, 150 Cours Albert Thomas, 69372 Lyon CEDEX 08, France - Tel: +33 (0)4 72 73 84 85 - Fax: +33 (0)4 72 73 85 75 © IARC 2011 - All Rights Reserved. Limited evidence of carcinogenicity: A positive association has been observed between exposuretotheagentandcancerforwhichacausalinterpretation isconsideredbytheWorking Group to be credible, but chance,biasor confounding could not be ruled out with reasonable confidence. Inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity: The available studies are of insufficient quality, consistencyorstatisticalpowertopermita  conclusion regardingthepresenceorabsenceofa causalassociationbetweenexposureandcancer,ornodataoncancerinhumansareavailable. Evidence suggesting lack of carcinogenicity: There are several adequate studies covering the full range of levels of exposure that humans are known to encounter, which are mutually consistentinnotshowingapositiveassociationbetweenexposuretotheagentandanystudied cancer at any observed level of exposure. The results from these studies alone or combined should have narrow confidence intervals with an upper limit close to the null value (e.g. a relativeriskof1.0).Biasandconfoundingshouldberuledoutwithreasonableconfidence,and the studies should havean adequate length of follow‐up. A conclusion  ofevidence suggesting lackofcarcinogenicityisinevitablylimitedtothecancersites,conditionsandlevelsofexposure, andlengthofobservationcoveredbytheavailablestudies.Inaddition,thepossibilityofavery smallriskatthelevelsofexposurestudiedcanneverbeexcluded. Insomeinstances,theabove categoriesmaybeusedtoclassifythedegreeofevidencerelated tocarcinogenicityinspecificorgansortissues.  . Lyon,France,May31,2011‐‐TheWHO/InternationalAgencyforResearchonCancer (IARC) has classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group2B), based on an increased risk. 75 © IARC 2011 - All Rights Reserved. Page 4 IARC CLASSIFIES RADIOFREQUENCY ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS AS POSSIBLY CARCINOGENIC TO HUMANS IARC, 150