Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

Gallimore's Fine Restaurant
 
 
Tuesday, 9th February 2010

'I got tumour from phone use' says Wigan man

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

"There is no way my younger children will have a mobile phone. A child's skull is thinner than ours. Phone radiation heats up the blood vessels in the membrane around the brain and damages them."
Neil Whitfield
Published Date:
03 November 2009
A Wigan man is campaigning for parents and schools to be aware of the dangers of wi-fi after developing a near-fatal brain tumour.
Neil Whitfield, 52, of Bakewell Drive, Beech Hill, is working with Wired Child, an organisation to protect children from wireless technology, to ensure mobile phone and wi-fi safety for children.

The father-of-six developed a near-fatal acoustic neuroma – a non-cancerous brain tumour growing on the acoustic nerve – in 2001 and, along with his consultant, he believes it was a direct consequence of years of heavy mobile phone use.

He had the tumour removed and suffered facial paralysis for several months and has lost hearing in one ear.

He is now campaigning for parents to ensure their children are not heavily exposed to mobile radiation, including phones and wi-fi equipment.

He said: "The World Health Organisation had an article in the paper saying there is a link between mobile radiation, cancer and tumours on the brain.

"Mobile phones are dangerous for individuals and children using them. I have been campaigning for years for phone companies to label packaging to warn of the dangers.

"There is no way my younger children will have a mobile phone. A child's skull is thinner than ours. Phone radiation heats up the blood vessels in the membrane around the brain and damages them.

"Now I am asking parents to be cautious and urge them to contact their schools and find out of they have installed wi-fi and why they have not been consulted about it.

"Wi-fi is the same technology. Imagine a classroom with 20 odd computers and all the kids in, it's like being contained in a big microwave. Parents should be consulted and given a lot of information.

"If they are used in a sensible way, with a precautionary approach they are reasonably safe.

"Parents are ignorant to the fact phones are dangerous and they need to be educated."

Vicky Fobel, trustee of Wired Child, said: "It's really easy for children to reduce their exposure without having to live without technology.

"Simple things like turning off mobile phones at night rather than sleeping with it under a pillow make a huge amount of difference."
For more information visit www.wiredchild.org

Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 03 November 2009 3:47 PM
  • Source: Wigan Evening Post
  • Location: Wigan
 
Prev
1
2
Next
Last
1

Janet Bosworth,

03/11/2009 11:52:31
The article and evidence have not been published yet, so it is important not to arrive at premature conclusions. WI-FI however is not mentioned in the WHO article. FYI Placing a transmitter closer against the skin is far different than being in the room or next door.

"The programme, jointly funded by the Government and the industry, concluded that mobile phones, base stations and masts 'have not been found to be associated with any biological or adverse health effects'.

However, according to a decade-long study, due out in the coming weeks, people who used mobiles for a decade or more had a 'significantly increased risk' of developing some types of brain tumours. "


There was also a response in The Express that I feel relevant to repost :

"The real problem is innumeracy. I you wear a blue doughnut on your head, some of you will get cancer.
If you are sick and perform a "blood-letting", some will be cured. I am not sure if is still in use but doctors use diathermy machines to warm certain parts of the body for therapeutic purposes. This was done via penetrating electromagnetic waves. The optimum frequency seems to be 800 to 1200MHz in order to penetrate deep enough past the skull. The radio wave length, however has to be short enough to allow for a localized differential from closed A-B points within the tissue. Another source of innumeracy is the fear of the 60Hz/50Hz powerlines. Even at 1million volts at 200 ft up, the fullwave at 60Hz, or so, the full wavelength comes to 1.56 million feet or 256 miles!
The triple or dual power wires overhead also act as a transmission line, canceling out emission even further. With a cell phone you have to ask: Does heating by itself cause cancer? I am a ham radio operator. I even build transmitters on my bench. An average cellphone emits about 0.6watts peak in the USA when a weak signal is detected. If you keep it on when on the subway or our of range it will beacon on high power every so often and when on in a f
2

Janet Bosworth,

03/11/2009 11:52:59
The article and evidence have not been published yet, so it is important not to arrive at premature conclusions. WI-FI however is not mentioned in the WHO article. FYI Placing a transmitter closer against the skin is far different than being in the room or next door.
3

john shale,

03/11/2009 12:37:15
I recall an article, from several years ago, that announced that a Swedish University team had detected a disruption of the process of meiosis in cells.
That is, as cells divide and the chromosomes replicate, some damage may occur.
I know that chromosomes are much smaller, than the wavelength of mobile phone radiation, but it seems possible that the research is valid.
If so, then this could result in tumours.
Usually a damaged cell will be caused to die (apoptosis) by its neighbours.
Occasionally a cell does not die but will be unable to perform its proper function and find its proper place in a tissue. It will just begin reproducing without control. This lump of damaged cells is called a tumour and does damage simply by the process of squashing neighbouring cells and maybe cutting off their blood supply.
Some tumours can grow, choke their own blood supply and either die off completely or just cycle between growth and death.
Any tumour in the Head is going to damage something vital, whereas a tumour in some places can be inconsequential, until a cell breaks off and enters either the blood stream or the lymphatic system, where it can travel to another more important and more vulnerable site (meta=change. stasis=place).
Maybe we shouldn't panic, yet, but I'll stick to emergency use only and try to limit it to texts. I certainly wouldn't want a child to use one, unless, perhaps, they used an earpiece.
Remember that the Government has a vested interest in suppressing any warnings, having sold the airwaves to the mobile phone Industry, who obviously have a vested interest.
The switch to digital TV is to free up further radio frequencies for sale for similar usage.
4

john shale,

03/11/2009 12:47:44
Damn! I meant mitosis, not meiosis.
5

F Wainwright,

London 03/11/2009 14:51:35
There is no doubt in my mind that cell phone radiation in dangerous and this article confirms it, but my biggest concern is that everybody keeps looking at cell & mobile phones but another potential problem is DECT cordless phones that are in the majority of UK households. I am sure most people were not aware that they are transmitting pulsed microwave radiation 24/7 even if a call is not being made. The base stations are emitting a constant stream of pulsed microwave radiation ALL THE TIME This is because the original specification called for constant communication between the base stations and all the handsets. There is more than enough evidence on the web and in many peer-reviewed studies. I understand there are ways of avoiding this constant exposure with low radiation phones, but the only problem is that the industry is hiding its head under a stone and hoping it will go away. Wake up Britain – it is easy for the industry to say there is no conclusive proof that there is any danger – but does anybody really believe that pulsed microwave radiation is good for you?
6

Wiganisblue,

03/11/2009 17:00:14
There have been plenty studies that have found no hard links between mobile radiation and cancer. Now because one Wigan man has a tumour that he and his consultant BELIEVE was caused by his phone then we are all supposed to be afraid? Where is his proof? Could he not have just got a brain tumour like one of my boyhood friends got in the early 80's and died without mobiles even being around then? Two in three people in the UK own a mobile so why have we all not got tumours?

It was just the same with the MMR jab, one study said it was dangerous and caused a massive uproar, but even though plenty more studies found it safe, people always remember the warnings. Now kids are not getting immunised by their worried parents which is going to lead to more deaths than the number of kids who would developed autism.

Remember, statistics only lie when you don't understand them.
7

PDC,

nodnol 03/11/2009 20:31:31
.si melborp eht tahw ees t'nod I dna sgniht eseht esu ylraluger I lleW
8

The Thing,

Kitt Green 03/11/2009 21:15:02
I'm with WiganisBlue. Most of the population including kids now have a mobile phone. So where are all the extra brain tumours? The difference between good science and bad science is that little thing called PROOF.

If phone radiation really did warm up the brain and damage cells a basic scan would show up a patches of damaged cells near the ear. I'm all for government conspiracies but this would need every doctor in the UK to be in on the secret.

You are more likely to be killed in a car. How many of these people frightened of phones have stopped driving their kids around?
9

Broady,

03/11/2009 22:11:06
As usual your headline comment is misleading. In the story Mr. Whitefild actually said "along with his consultant, he believes it was a direct consequence of years of heavy mobile phone use" He believes is a totally different thing to it being definite.
10

,

04/11/2009 10:14:34
Comment Reported Unsuitable By User
Prev
1
2
Next
Last

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.