NATALIE SOUTHWORTH
Special to The Globe and Mail
Tuesday, January 9, 2001

Bill Marangos used to carry his cellphone everywhere he went -- in his car, on the street, at home -- speaking on it for up to 2,500 minutes every month. And then out of the blue he stopped.

"I realized I was holding a device that gave off a high electromagnetic frequency. And it was pressed right up to my head," says the Toronto entrepreneur.

"I was scared I was hurting myself."

He searched for a protective device to help reduce the radiation coming from his cellphone, which he tested himself with a handheld device he bought from a store. But he says, "Nothing worked. There's a lot of bogus claims out there."

So, after a year spent talking to scientists and engineers, Mr. Marangos designed his own protective device -- a black leather pad called a Cell Guard that wraps around the cellphone antennae.

He says the device contains a secret material that absorbs up to 52 per cent of the electromagnetic radiation that comes from most cellphone models. Two independent Canadian labs -- including Aprel Laboratories in Ottawa -- backed up his claim, after putting the device through a standard test used to measure the amount of absorbed radiation.

"I think it's better to go without a cellphone altogether. I'd rather never sell another one of my devices if people would become aware of the health dangers," says Mr. Marangos, who now uses his cellphone only occasionally.

However, the jury is still out about whether exposure to electromagnetic fields -- a form of electromagnetic radiation given off by cellphones, microwave ovens, computer monitors and other sources -- is in fact harmful to people's health.

No conclusive scientific evidence exists that proves using cellphones causes cancer, or brain tumours, as some people have speculated.

Indeed, one of the most rigorous studies to date -- published last month in the Journal of the American Medical Association -- failed to find any association between brain cancer and short-term use of hand-held cellular telephones. But the authors of this study, which was funded in part by a research group established by the cellular telephone industry, concluded that more research still needs to be done about the impact of long-term use.

While the correlation between cellphones and severe health effects is unclear, the scientific community does agree that exposure to EMFs can stimulate nerves, muscles, cause shocks and burns and raise tissue temperature, says Reza Moridi, vice-president for science and technology at the Radiation Safety Institute of Canada, an independent national organization dedicated to the promotion of radiation safety.

And Mr. Moridi says lab studies on animals have shown a change in cellular function, a decrease in melatonin and accelerated tumour growth. For people who use cellphones, he suggests holding them further away from the head because the electromagnetic field weakens with an increase in distance.

But rather than wait until all the health risks are clearly known, some people are going much further and taking the issue into their own hands. They say it is better to be prudent at a time when the telecommunication industry is expanding rapidly, selling more cellphones and other cellular technology.

"As the telecom industry expands, we need good planning in place so we don't add to the electromagnetic field frequency in the city," says Dr. Monica Campbell, the manager for health promotion and environment with Toronto Public Health.

The department recommended to the city's Board of Health that all new cell towers in Toronto produce 100 times less radiation than they are allowed to emit under Safety Code 6, Health Canada's radiation-safety regulation. The Board endorsed the recommendation and Toronto Public Health wants to try out the new plan on city-owned land.

"We don't know how serious the health effects are yet. But if there are ways to avoid higher EM fields, why not? We think it's prudent," says Dr. Campbell.

The same recommendation is already in place in Switzerland, she says. "Some people emphasize the cancer risks. For us the science is showing sleep disturbances, effects to the cardiovascular system and shifts in the permeability of the blood brain barrier."

David Fernie, an entrepreneur who recently developed a cellphone safety device in Richmond B.C., says that knowing there might be a risk of impaired health is enough to act. "If there is a risk you can minimize, why wouldn't you?" says Mr. Fernie.

His company, Cell Safety Co., developed a self-adhesive strip made of gold, silver and platinum that sticks along the side of the cellphone. He says the strip was given the standard radiation-absorption test from two labs that showed it absorbs between 48 to 98 per cent of radiation, depending on the phone model.

But are these devices -- which cost between $25 and $100 -- really worth it?

Fergal Nolan, president of the Radiation Safety Institute of Canada, says it's just too soon to know if these so-called protective devices are beneficial because of the lack of research on electromagnetic fields.

"I hear concerns about EMFs coming from computers, electrical cables and power lines. And there is the issue of the proximity of cellphones to brains."

Without conclusive scientific agreement, it would be irresponsible for the Institute to endorse cellphone protective devices, adds Mr. Nolan, who uses a cellphone.

Milt Bowling, the executive director of the Electromagnetic Radiation Task Force at the Health Action Network Society, a B.C.-based health organization which looks at environmental health concerns, says many of the new cellphone protectors and other alternatives make outrageous claims and might do more harm than good.

The British Consumers Association published a study that found earpieces or ear buds -- a replacement to handheld cellphones -- transmit three times the amount of electromagnetic radiation into the inner ear than handheld devices.

According to a report from Aprel Laboratories, one cellphone case model actually increased the amount of radiation the cellphone emitted by 84 per cent. And another protective shield that claims to reduce radiation from cellphones, absorbed only 1 per cent of the radiation.

"There are a lot of wild claims out there," says Mr. Bowling. "The health research on EMFs is 10 years behind so we can't judge the safety products properly."

Mr. Bowling took up the fight against EMFs in 1997 after AT&T tried to put a cellular microwave transmission device on the roof of his son's school in Vancouver. AT&T backed down as did Microcell Solutions, which ended up removing a cross containing a microwave transmitter the company had donated to the church next to his son's school.

Since then, Mr. Bowling has rearranged his living room to be what he considers more EMF friendly. He sits a few feet from his computer monitor, no longer owns a microwave and doesn't use a cellphone.

"This is my fight. I'm not backing down," he says.

Mr. Marangos, president of Markap Cellular Solutions Inc., has joined the battle, saying people need to be educated about cellphones and cellphone safety. He says there's enough scientific research pointing to long-term health risks to raise alarm bells.

However, so far he has one distributor in the U.S. for the Cell Guard and no Canadian distributors.

"I get a lot of interest and then for some reason it dies. I don't understand it. I'm convinced cellphones are the tobacco of the 21st century."

THe Globe and Mail January 9, 2001