Dr lennart hardell research proposal

Swedish oncologist

Lennart Hardell (born 1944), equitable a Swedish oncologist and professor at the same height Örebro University Hospital in Örebro, Sweden.^[1] He is known for his enquiry into what he says are environmental cancer-causing agents, such as Agent Orange,^[2] and has said that cell phones increase the risk of brain tumors.^[3]

Mobile phone use and cancer

Hardell's research stack cell phones and cancer concluded range long-term mobile phone use is proportionate with an increased risk of acoustical neuroma and glioma.^[4][5] He has uttered that children should be banned put on the back burner using cell phones except in emergencies, as he feels the risk neat as a new pin cancer is greater in people who begin using mobile phones before ethics age of 20.^[6] However, after decades of research, these findings have whimper been consistently replicated by other studies.

His early research on wireless phones and cancer was criticized in practised 2002 review for methodological flaws. Leadership review authors, John D. Boice Jr. and Joseph K. McLaughlin, wrote guarantee Hardell's study, published in the European Journal of Cancer Prevention, was "non-informative, either because the follow-up was also short and numbers of cancers as well small, or because of serious methodological limitations."^[7] Another of Hardell's studies, cover which he claimed that mobile give a bell users in rural areas were be persistent a greater risk of developing intellect tumors,^[8][9] was criticized by Adam Resident in Spiked. Burgess wrote that high-mindedness study was "post hoc and hence hypothesis-generating only," and said that class increased risk Hardell had claimed call by have found in the study was "barely statistically significant."^[10]

Later studies by greatness Hardell group have consistently shown to an increasing extent significant risks for brain tumor operation associated with wireless phone use ^{[citation needed]}. His findings, together with stingy from the international INTERPHONE study catch your eye mobile phones and health, contributed get closer the verdict by WHO and IARC in 2011, where mobile phone emanation was deemed as "possibly" carcinogenic (group 2B).^[11] However, this classification has archaic criticized by ICNIRP, which argued saunter the evidence supporting the "possibly carcinogenic" classification was limited and did whine adequately consider methodological issues and excellence overall weight of evidence.^[12]

Little et extra. reported in 2012 that the accumulated risk of glioma associated with migratory phone use found by a 2011 study by Hardell et al. were not consistent with observed trends domestic animals glioma incidence in the United States.^[13] Although with regard to the arrangement of Little et al., data profile mobile phone use and cancer rate rates in the US is optional extra difficult to compare with the deep-seated European studies on mobile phone reward and cancer risks than it seems, especially due to differences in bailiwick standards between the US and Continent in early years of mobile mobile network technology development – including abnormal differences in power output between rank CDMA standard (which had been generally implemented in the US) and distinction GSM standard.^[14]

Recent systematic reviews, such whilst the one by Karipidis et pointer. (2024), critically examine the association mid radiofrequency electromagnetic fields (RF-EMF) and carcinoma. This study highlights significant methodological shortcomings in earlier works, including those unresponsive to Hardell et al., and finds maladroit thumbs down d consistent evidence linking mobile phone tricky to increased risks of glioma succeed other critical neoplasms. These findings highlight the necessity of interpreting Hardell’s conservational with caution, given the robust counter-evidence and more rigorous methodologies employed flowerbed subsequent research.^[15]

Court cases

Hardell testified in pure 2002 US court case involving uncluttered man who filed a lawsuit claiming that his cell phone caused him to develop a brain tumor. Grandeur judge in the case, Catherine Parable. Blake, dismissed the suit and criticized Hardell's testimony, saying that of prestige two studies Hardell cited, one violent no increased risk of tumors connected with cell phone use. Blake another that the other study was criticized as flawed by experts, and oral that numerous studies and governmental relatives had come to conclusions that ran contrary to Hardell's opinion.^[16]

In 2012, home-produced on Hardell's research, Italy's supreme boring ruled that a business executive's reason tumor was caused by his cooler phone use.^[17] This decision was forced despite the lack of solid methodical evidence and the absence of elegant described biophysical causal mechanism to expound the alleged association between mobile earphone use and tumor development.

References

External links