EDITORIAL : THE HINDU, INDIA

Is there a brain cancer risk?

The World Health Organisation's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has recently classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as “possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B).” The classification is based on increased risk for glioma from increased wireless phone use over a period of time. Glioma is a type of brain cancer that begins in the glial cells that surround and support the nerve cells. The grouping under 2B puts mobile phone use alongside 240 other agents, including low-level magnetic fields, for which evidence of harm is uncertain. IARC has stated that the evidence of carcinogenicity among mobile phone users is “limited.” Though it has found a positive association between mobile phone use and cancer to be “credible,” it notes that the possibility of chance, bias, or other factors playing a role “cannot be ruled out.” Interestingly, the carcinogenic labelling comes a year after the largest case-control study of the problem — WHO's Interphone study, undertaken in 13 countries, involving users with at least ten years' exposure, and published in the International Journal of Epidemiology — found “no increase in risk of glioma with mobile phone use.” Some large-scale studies undertaken in the past have come up with mixed findings. While a 2001 and 2006 follow-up Danish study found no relationship between risk of cancer and long-term mobile phone use among more than 400,000 people, a 2009 Swedish study found increased risk of brain cancer among those who used mobile phones for at least ten years, especially those below 20 years of age.

Unlike gamma rays and X-rays, cell phone radiation is non-ionizing in nature. Radiowaves are not energetic enough to remove electrons or ionize atoms or molecules and hence cannot directly damage cellular DNA. No mechanism has so far been found that can possibly explain the manner in which non-ionizing radiation can cause cumulative effect or DNA damage due to exposure over a period of time. Yet a precautionary approach needs to be adopted, considering the growing number of people, especially very young children, using the phone repeatedly and for long durations. Though countries have already set the upper limit to radiation from mobile phones to reduce the amount of non-ionizing radiation and heat absorbed by tissues, a further lowering of permissible levels may be required. Until such time definite answers are available, it is best that older children are encouraged to restrict mobile phone use and very young children asked to avoid its use. Adults can rely more on texting options and resort to hands-free modes of using mobile phones.

Hands off Libya

It does not portend well that member countries of NATO have given a unanimous extension to its mission in Libya by another 90 days beyond the initial deadline of June 27. This means the air-strikes, which began in March following Resolution 1973 of the United Nations Security Council, will continue. The resolution authorised “all necessary measures” to protect civilians in Libya from a crackdown by Muammar Qadhafi's regime on an anti-government uprising. Air strikes are a strange way to go about protecting civilians — despite all their precision equipment, bombardment by fast-moving aircraft will result in indiscriminate casualties. The Libyan regime claims that 718 civilians have so far been killed and over 4,000 injured in the bombings that began on March 18. If these deaths are proved, the participating powers — the U.S. and its allies in Europe — will have to answer for what amounts to no less than the war crimes a United Nations-ordered investigation has recently accused the Qadhafi government of committing. From the extended timeline, it is clear that the west's real intention in Libya is to use the U.N. resolution to effect a regime change in an oil-rich country. This conclusion is bolstered by the Obama administration's invitation to the Libyan rebel National Transitional Council to set up a representative office in Washington even as the conflict in Libya remains stalemated. The only lesson western powers seem to have learnt from the U.S. folly in Iraq is that invading a country to topple its leader is all right as long as you stick to bombing it from the air.

There is undoubtedly a strong movement against the Libyan strongman within his country, carried by the winds of democracy blowing throughout the West Asia-North Africa region. But it is crucially important that any regime change is brought about by forces within Libya. The Tunisian revolt would not have inspired similar movements in other countries in the region had it been the result of western intervention. Outside intervention, with its own agenda, is sure to rob the movement of its momentum and indeed legitimacy. That self-interest, not democracy, is at the top of this agenda is evident, else why would the U.S. be so unabashedly non-supportive of a similar movement in Bahrain? Colonel Qadhafi is no longer in complete control of the country; defections are depleting his coterie; diplomatically he is at a dead-end even on his home turf after the failure of a mediation effort by the African Union. But for this to move towards a positive conclusion, the west must take its hands off Libya. The air strikes must end, and the people of Libya must be left to determine their own destiny.