They Knew All Along: Cell Phone Dangers

July 22, 2021

Cell phone companies had the technology to make their products safer, but never did.

Cell phones have become ubiquitous in today’s world, with Americans spending nearly five and a half hours on their phones every day. But are they safe? A compelling case can be made that the cell phone industry knew about the dangers of their products for decades, even had patents on technology to make their phones safer for consumers, yet did nothing; in fact, companies endangered consumers by stubbornly insisting, to this day, that cell phones are completely safe, just like the tobacco industry assured Americans for years that cigarettes don’t cause cancer.

Stunning information has been brought to light in a recent legal filing by the family of a Louisiana pastor who died of cancer. In the lawsuit, the plaintiffs allege that, not only did cell phone manufacturers know that their products exposed humans to radiation that could cause cancer, but they also developed various technologies to shield consumers’ heads from cell phone radiation—and never brought these technologies to market.

For example, in 1995 Motorola filed a patent application for an antenna with an electromagnetic shield which results in “little to no radiation directed toward the body of the user.” In 1998, Nokia received patents for a shielding layer between the antenna and the user to reduce the electromagnetic irradiation of the user and an accessory RF unit which “decreases radiation directed towards the user’s head.” In 2000, Centurion International received a patent for an antenna to “tailor the radiation characteristics of the antenna in such a way as to decrease the specific absorption rates (SAR) to the user of the” cell phone. There are many other examples.

Why were these consumer safety innovations never brought to market? Did the companies want to avoid the additional costs of adding these safety features? Did they think that adding the features would be a tacit admission that cell phones are, in fact, dangerous?

We know the wireless industry’s answer. According to the legal filing: “In 2002, Motorola’s director of global strategic issues, Norman Sandler, told Wireless NewsFactor: ‘Reports of these [mobile phone radiation shield] patents misrepresented their nature and intent…none of these Motorola patents was [sic] motivated by any health-related concerns or issues.’”

It is an interesting statement given the explicit language of some of the patents themselves. A Nokia patent application for a radiation shield, for example, specifically mentions potential health issues:

A continuous localized exposure to radio-frequency irradiation has been suggested to weaken myelin sheets of cells and to eventually lead to an impairment of hearing capability, vertigo, etc. It has been suggested that radio-frequency irradiation may stimulate extra growth among supportive cells in the nerve system, which in the worst case it has been suggested could lead to a development of malignant tumors, e.g., glioma [emphasis added].

This speaks to the galling dishonesty of the wireless industry about the adverse health effects of cell phones.

In the coming weeks, we will show how the wireless industry has engaged in various tactics to undermine, confuse, and discredit the debate about the safety of cell phones and how these companies game the already lax federal standards for radiofrequency energy absorption.

We have all gotten used to the convenience of cell phones and the improvements they’ve brought to our lives. But would consumers have embraced the technology so fervently had we been told the truth since the beginning about the dangers, without the wireless industry clouding the science and undercutting scientists who sound the alarm? We could be approaching another massive public health scandal in which a massively profitable industry ignored health concerns for decades to protect their bottom line. Companies that have the technology to make their products safer, but choose not to do so, need to be held accountable for their actions.

Share This Post

28 responses to “They Knew All Along: Cell Phone Dangers”

  1. NANCY RUSSELL says:

    THIS IS EXACTLY THE REASONS I HAVE NEVER OWNED OR USED A CELL PHONE OR ANY OF THESE RECENT APPLIANCES. IT BEGAN WHEN SMART METERS WERE FORCED UPON US IN PA AND ALTHOUGH I PREVENTED THEIR INSTALLATION AT MY PROPERTY FOR 6 YEARS THEY FINALLY TOLD ME MY SERVICE WOULD BE STOPPED UNLESS I ALLOW THE INSTALLATION OF THESE METERS. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE ELECTRIC COMPANY’S RULE THAT PERMIT THE CESSATION OF SERVICE FOR THIS REASON.

  2. Dave Scherer says:

    THS NEEDS TO BE PUBLICISED & AVTUALLY PRODUCED………

  3. Sharon blandi says:

    We,the people, should retaliate to these companies like the cigarette companies were made to face up. Our children are using cell phones! Let’s make them add protection for all our sake.

  4. Ginnie McNeil says:

    What was outcome of law suit from LA Pastor?

  5. Unlike cigarettes, which are restricted to adults who have the right to choose with all the information available, cell phones are endangering children unrestricted. I say let our government get off the menthol ban kick, and force these phone makers to provide those radiation protection shields! Kids love their phones–but they must be made safe!

  6. Susan A says:

    This article says cell phones call nerve damage. Could that also be related to severe panic disorder, as panic disorder is a nerve damage disease.

  7. VFarrell says:

    Thank you for this article. What a shame .Honesty and integrity no longer are the reality.

  8. Susan says:

    I am/was an organist. The organ is also an “irradiating” danger. Since we already have nerve synapse problems in our family (sister with Mysathenia Gravis), I have already a tendency to lose my hearing. The loss really picked up though, I am afraid, with the “wireless” hearing aids. It is now so bad, I cannot hear my husband form 3 inches away without the aids. However using them is causing nerve synapse to ear damage, I believe. Once the connection of 1/100,000th of an inch is broken, there is no getting it back. Therefore, I cannot play more than a half hour a day of organ without having hearing loss registered on tests, and I suspect the hearing aids are doing the most rapid damage.

    I purposefully do NOT have any other wireless devices, including Smartphones, in my home. But I have had my house tested and the folks that work at home next door have plenty. My “guru” has had me taking supplements combatting Wifi for years before my hearing loss became obvious. That brings up yet another question: “Why supplements should NOT be taken off the market!”

  9. Susan Mullins says:

    I am/was an organist. The organ is also an “irradiating” danger. Since we already have nerve synapse problems in our family (sister with Mysathenia Gravis), I have already a tendency to lose my hearing. The loss really picked up though, I am afraid, with the “wireless” hearing aids. It is now so bad, I cannot hear my husband form 3 inches away without the aids. However using them is causing nerve synapse to ear damage, I believe. Once the connection of 1/100,000th of an inch is broken, there is no getting it back. Therefore, I cannot play more than a half hour a day of organ without having hearing loss registered on tests, and I suspect the hearing aids are doing the most rapid damage.

    I purposefully do NOT have any other wireless devices, including Smartphones, in my home. But I have had my house tested and the folks that work at home next door have plenty. My “guru” has had me taking supplements combatting Wifi for years before my hearing loss became obvious. That brings up yet another question: “Why supplements should NOT be taken off the market!”

  10. Susan says:

    If I left a reply previously, I apologize. It was because I thought my info was not accepted as such.

    However, there is an addition here: My sister with MG now has a brain tumor, a meningioma, exactly the same as my father. For different reasons, the “benign” tumor killed him, and will kill her fairly soon. Dad was a research chemist dealing in detergent or solvents made from coal tar. I am sure it affected his nerve connections and he passed the damage on to all his 4 children and grandchildren. Starting with Dad, they all have neurological diseases and cancers.

  11. Wanda Meck says:

    I have a tumor in my right ear called an acoustic neuroma which I feel positive was caused by a cell phone held to that ear for hours and hours. I am right handed. These tumors are not malignant, but I have lost my hearing. It isn’t growing, thank goodness, so I am watching and waiting. I don’t want brain surgery.
    Studies have shown cell phones as a possible cause.
    Cell phones are dangerous and should be used only with the speaker phone and away from the body.

  12. Suzanne says:

    Of course they did!

  13. M. Lehman says:

    Why does this not surprise me in the least?

  14. Vera Shaver says:

    I do not own a cell phone I never have and never will. They track you they know everything about you.
    I hate this new technology. I grew up in a different world then what it is now. And these cell phone’s can cause brain cancer. I know someone who used there cell phone a lot and now they have brain cancer and there life has been shorten because of it.

  15. Molly Hauck says:

    Cellphones emit radiation and cause many kinds of cancer and especially glioblastoma, which is incurable and inoperable. People need. To be warned about the dangers of cellphones and celltowers.

  16. Wayne Robey says:

    Cell phone radiation is a long neglected subject but there is more to it than antenna pattern.I was recently required to get a new phone with more automation and no 3G capability. The radiation measured at 2 meters is much higher than the old one. As to antenna pattern, there are trade offs based on application. The higher directivity that gives a lower SAR may degrade performance when the phone is not close to a person while the careful use of a headset will give a lower SAR than any antenna shield. In conclusion, some variety and guidance in choosing the correct phone for the application seems to me to be the best approach.

  17. Cindy Y Araya says:

    What a bunch of baloney! Who wrote this drivel?

  18. Aminah Yaquin Carroll says:

    My boyfriend in NYC was an early cell phone user–the kind with the antennae. He was an investment banking manager and a bookie. In both pursuits he was on the new cell phones from morning through night. Within 4 years he was dead of brain cancer.
    It is my belief that the nations that have actually legislated limits on cell phone use are ahead of the curve in terms of protecting young people’s devlopong brains. the real GREEN movement needs to be based uopon combaating pollutants, not manipulating climate change and the weather in order to catstrophize and justify untenable social engineering by technologues and technocrats.

  19. Porkette says:

    It’s been proven that cell phones can also cause epileptic seizures for some people who have epilepsy. The frequency
    can also cause early alzheimers in many people because it shrinks and hardens the hippocampus of the brain. All of this was proven by a medical team who work in Neurology.

  20. Dawn Ohlsson says:

    Clean your act up prepared for a barrage of lawsuits

  21. Andrew Charnley says:

    The most important and pivotal point of electromagnetic transmissions is that electricity has made the world ill and scientists ‘exposed’ to this research over the last 120 years have understood this to an acute degree of awareness.

    This includes unsheathed wiring in the first homes to have electricity, ship-to-shore with massive radio transmissions power – installed rapidly for and since WWI, Radar, UHF, VHF and the plethora of devices that utilise wireless transmission with analogue and digital standards (such as DECT, especially at high rates), cordless telephones and now the insidious 2G, 3G and the 5G technology used for years in the war fields in the Middle East, and recently for crowd control with Low Pulsation fields cutting across human bodies 37.5 trillion cells (average number of cells in a human being, clarified by two university studies in 2016).

    Your 37.5 trillion human cells operate at 0.7 volts to provide orchestrated function to all these cells operating as different organs and thousands of systems for life support of you and your transport system of 60,000 miles of veins that rely upon their frequencies and are more important than being connected for the average 7.5 hours that Americans, and others are effectively connecting to their sophisticated human body machines.

    The human race is filled with proven and repetitive bad decision making qualities, making us deeply unfit to deserve what we have been provided with by nature. Indigenous peoples have more connection with mother nature than the modern thinking man or woman. Mother Nature will win in the end as this ending is already our clear demise as we are looking to change our DNA to benefit human lives – how arrogant can scientists and their worshippers become!

    • Harry Popman says:

      Thank you so much for your comments. It is an eyeopener for many who have not yet realized the hidden dangers found with electromagnetic Radiation. Maybe it’s ignorance for some people to learn about. Unfortunately, they will have to pay the price by a shortened lifespan. Your description of the relevant danger explains precisely what happens if we humans are exposed to cellphone dangers. I wish everyone to learn about it and wish them a long and happy life.

  22. Kathleen says:

    Don’t forget radio transmitting electric meters on our homes/properties! We get electric from a cooperative that insinuates in it’s newsletter that it is switching to these & has no choice???!!!

  23. Josette says:

    This is why democracy is dead in the IS and isn’t coming back.

  24. Gordon says:

    This is something I have been concerned about for a long time. The reasons for potential risk are easy to see–microwave energy interacting with the processes in the body. That’s why I have a land-line phone; only have a cell for travel since all the pay phones disappeared.
    The reason for the scrapped directional antenna idea would be to limit exposure to the user.
    My Dad was a radar tech in the Navy, and he died from an awful dementia, though he was a happy, healthy person. I long suspected latent injury from his exposure to microwaves.
    Probably the reason the directional antenna idea was scrapped was because the directionality meant that a user changing positions would cause one tower to lose the signal, and the call would have to be handed off to another tower, which would complicate the system.
    The sic is not warranted though, because “none” means “not one”, so “none…was” is correct English.

  25. Ann I Baker says:

    We must have more safety measurers in place for cell phones. Only thru hugh fines will the Cell carriers be held accountable.

  26. Anton McInerney says:

    Those making decisions affecting the health of the public need to be scrutinized for all their private investment ties. Cancer treatments are the world’s largest money maker. Love of money is the root of all evil!

Leave a Reply to Wayne Robey Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *