Source of funding and results of studies of health effects of mobile phone use: systematic review of experimental studies

Abstract

There is concern regarding the possible health effects of cellular telephone use. We conducted a systematic review of studies of controlled exposure to radiofrequency radiation with health-related outcomes (electroencephalogram, cognitive or cardiovascular function, hormone levels, symptoms, and subjective well-being). We searched Embase, Medline, and a specialist database in February 2005 and scrutinized reference lists from relevant publications. Data on the source of funding, study design, methodologic quality, and other study characteristics were extracted. The primary outcome was the reporting of at least one statistically significant association between the exposure and a health-related outcome. Data were analyzed using logistic regression models. Of 59 studies, 12 (20%) were funded exclusively by the telecommunications industry, 11 (19%) were funded by public agencies or charities, 14 (24%) had mixed funding (including industry), and in 22 (37%) the source of funding was not reported. Studies funded exclusively by industry reported the largest number of outcomes, but were least likely to report a statistically significant result. The interpretation of results from studies of health effects of radiofrequency radiation should take sponsorship into account.

Seven Deadly Sins of Environmental Epidemiology and the Virtues of Precaution

“…Studies supported by the pharmaceutical industry are well known to be much more likely to conclude that a drug is efficacious than studies conducted without such support, 22,23 but similar tendencies have been observed in other fields. [24][25][26][27][28] Gluttony is the related desire for an excess of anything, in our case mostly an inordinate appetite for credentials and publications. It involves preoccupation with producing and publishing to excess, thereby leading to social apathy.…”

A Re-Look at Mobile Phones Usage Issues

“…Many of the studies were financed by communications corporations so bias is inevitable. 59 studies were selected of which 12 of them were sponsored by the communications industry, 11 were sponsored by charity organizations, 14 received various sponsorships of which communications corporations took part and 22 had no specifications of funding sources [26] From the report, telecommunications firms had the highest number of funded studies so bias is very possible as their main goal is to remain in business. Odds ratio between charity organizations and telecommunications funded studies was 95% CI, 0.02-0.7829].…”

Health Effects of Mobile Phone Usage

“…Other significant data have been published by Huss (Huss, Egger, Hug, Huwiler-Muntener, & Roosli, 2007), who selected particularly important articles about the biological and health effects of RF: if one is the average probability of s.s. positive results in work funded by public bodies, the probability of at least one positive result in those funded by the cellphone companies is just one positive result out of ten. The probability for studies with mixed funding sources lies somewhere between, and even studies not citing any source of funding (increasingly common owing to lax editorial work) are influenced to some extent.…”