Wireless/Mobile /

Cell phone safety

Recent legal claims against employers who issue cell phones raise questions about corporate liability. How can you protect yourself?

By Sharon Gaudin
Network World, 07/02/01

Mark Hart was hired in August 1998 as director of worldwide sales for smartphone maker NeoPoint. As someone who demonstrated cell phones, often prototypes, to pick up sales, you could say being on the phone was Hart's job.

He started using a prototype of the NeoPoint 1000 in October 1998. Five months later, after suffering from headaches, fatigue and a series of seizures, the 45-year-old Hart was diagnosed with a fast-growing brain tumor on the right side of his head.

During surgery in July 1999 to try to remove the cancer, he had a stroke that left him partially paralyzed on his left side. The entire tumor could not be removed, and his health is still in jeopardy.

Convinced that using the company-issued cell phones on the job caused his brain tumor, Hart filed a workers' compensation claim with NeoPoint (which has since gone out of business) seeking compensation for lost wages and help paying his medical bills, according to Alissa Magenheim, his attorney.

NeoPoint's insurance carrier denied the claim, and Hart is now appealing to a California state appeals board, seeking to have the insurance carrier pay the claim. In fact, no one has ever won a court case based on the argument that cell phones were responsible for a person's health problems.

The Hart case and others like it, while human tragedies, raise serious issues for network and telecom executives. Are companies that issue cell phones to their employees opening themselves up to possible litigation? And what are IT managers to believe? Do cell phones cause health problems such as brain tumors, eye cancer, memory loss and fatigue? Or is that belief simply an unfounded health scare? And how should IT managers respond when employees or senior managers pose questions about cell phone risks?

"We're sitting on a time bomb here," says Libby Kelley, executive director of the Novato, Calif., Council on Wireless Technology Impacts, a nonprofit, public health advocacy group. "You're going to have one claim where somebody wins, and then it will start snowballing, just like it did with tobacco."

"You'll see increases [in workers' compensation claims]," predicts Diana Wann, a workers' compensation attorney in Indianapolis, Ind., and management co-chair for the workers' compensation committee of the American Bar Association. "You have the scientific proof problem to overcome, and that's a fairly large hurdle. But that doesn't mean claims won't be made against employers. [People] sue for everything. They'll bring actions, I'm sure."

There are at least three other cases, in addition to the Hart case, of U.S. employees suing or filing workers' compensation claims against their employers, claiming they developed brain tumors while using company-issued cell phones on the job.

Network executives who already have issued cell phones or are contemplating that move face a complicated issue that involves what is arguably the most popular consumer product ever - a product that is fast becoming a must-have for the overworked, deadline-ridden, hardly-ever-in-the-office business person.

No one is saying companies should amass legal teams and plot insurance and courtroom strategy. But companies should weigh the scientific reports and set policies on how they want business conducted and how they can limit potential liability.

To issue or not to issue

Companies issuing cell phones could be opening themselves up to potential liability for any cell phone-related health problems.

And more and more companies are issuing cell phones. There are an estimated 110 million cell phones in the U.S., according to the cell phone industry. And the percentage of companies paying for cell phones for their employees rose from 7% in 1999 to 11% in 2000, according to market research firm IDC.

Companies need to consider how integral cell phones are to their business. How important is it for employees to be in touch at all times? Will sales be lost, will opportunities be missed or will customers or users be kept waiting if employees aren't reachable by phone at all times?

At John Deere Ottumwa Works, in Ottumwa, Iowa, cell phones are an integral part of the way engineers and other technical workers do their jobs. "I think the problems they solve far outweigh the danger, at least for us," says Deb Parks, infrastructure analyst at John Deere Ottumwa. "[Employees] may be standing out in the middle of a hay field in Oklahoma, and they need to get some information and talk to someone here," Parks says.

The company has issued between 120 and 130cell phones from the Ottumwa office. "From our standpoint, I don't have any issues . . . I know there's always a question about it, but most people chalk it up to, 'Ahh, I'm not going to worry about it.' "

On the other hand, Mike Riley, the chief scientist responsible for emerging technologies at R.R. Donnelly & Sons in Chicago, is still evaluating cell phones. Riley says people in the corporate communication department are considering handing out cell phones for work use. He has been keeping a close eye on the studies.

"Certainly any time an individual's health is impacted or it's brought into question, it needs to be taken a look at very seriously," Riley says. "There is simply not a definitive statement yet, and until there is, there will be a question of how safe or unsafe it's going to be."

Riley says if the company decides to issue cell phones, being upfront with employees will be the first step. "If we get in that position, we certainly would be forthcoming and say there are reports that may indicate this could be a health risk and you should be aware of that," Riley says. "I think it's only fair to let people know if there is an issue they need to be educated about. Then they can make their own choice."

The studies

Everyone agrees cell phones, both analog and digital, emit radio frequency radiation (RFR) from the antenna. That's simply how the calls or data are transmitted. And most will agree that some of that radiation is absorbed by the user's head, sinking in about 1 to 2 inches within the skull, causing some heating of the brain tissue.

What those absorbed radio waves and the resulting heat do - or don't do - is at the heart of the scientific debate.

The cell phone industry's trade group, the Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association (CTIA), and cell phone manufacturers argue that there are no health risks from cell phone use.

"There's nothing in the science to suggest there are any adverse health effects with cell phones," says Jo-Anne Basile, vice president for external and industry relations for the CTIA. "The more studies they have, the more absolute they become."

Norman Sandler, director of global strategic issues for Motorola, one of the three major cell phone manufacturers, emphatically states that all Motorola's cell phones meet government safety standards, a promise made by all the leading producers.

He also notes that Motorola and the rest of the industry have spent a lot of money on research into RFR and its effect on humans.

"There are no biological changes that have been established vis a vis the use of mobile phones," Sandler says. He adds there are some questions that still need to be answered, but says there is no evidence of harm. "It's not that we don't think that. None of the scientific experts around the world think that. There have been numerous official scientific reviews undertaken by national governments and standard-setting bodies, and they've all come to the same conclusion - that there are no adverse health risks associated with use."

However, some scientists and government officials disagree.

A study funded by the British government, undertaken by an independent group of scientists and published last year, warns people to not let children use cell phones and spurred the government to set up a database of occupationally exposed workers.

"People can vary in their susceptibility to environmental hazards," the report by the Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones states. "We conclude therefore that it is not possible at present to say that exposure to RF radiation, even at levels below national guidelines, is totally without potential adverse health effects, and that the gaps in knowledge are sufficient to justify a precautionary approach."

Alex Ross, senior spokesman for the U.K. Department of Health, says his office distributed between 11 million and 12 million leaflets warning people to be cautious until more research is done. The British government has recently allocated �7 million, the equivalent of $10.64 million, for a research project expected to begin this fall.

Dr. Russell Owen, chief of the radiation biology branch at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Center for Devices and Radiological Health, says, "There is no scientific evidence that demonstrates there are any adverse health effects from wireless phone radio frequency energy."

But Owen also says it's not so cut and dry. "Scientific literature really is a mixed bag of studies," he says. "There are positive and negative studies. Indeed there are conflicting studies. . . . Studies here and there do raise questions."

Dr. Jerry Phillips, who was a research scientist for 30 years and a well-known cell phone radiation researcher for nine years, says in two separate studies he found evidence that cell phone frequency radiation causes biological effects.

Motorola funded Phillips' study and the scientist alleges that the cell phone manufacturer told him to delete any reference in presentations to DNA damage and biological effects. "There was to be absolutely no mention of DNA damage at any time," Phillips says. "The industry was more interested that we go away, that the results go away."

"I'm not sure what he's talking about," says Motorola Sandler. "We've gone to great lengths over the years to safeguard the independence of Motorola-sponsored researchers." Sandler adds that Phillips' research was a "mixed bag" that didn't come to any clear conclusions.

The CTIA sank $25 million into the Wireless Technology Research (WTR) program, a six-year effort through the late 1990s aimed at proving the safety of the cell phone. The CTIA put Dr. George Carlo in charge of the project.

However, Carlo broke ranks with the CTIA and reported that WTR studies showed there is potential for health risks. "I recommended that they let the consumers know what they know so they can make their own choices about the amount of risk they want to assume," says Carlo, who has been shunned and derided by the industry. Carlo went on to write a book, Cell Phones, Invisible Hazards in the Wireless Age.

One of the studies that came out of Carlo's WTR effort was a four-year case study through the American Health Foundation, headed up by Joshua Muscat.

Muscat says there were no signs of a correlation between cell phone use and health problems, except for one rare type of tumor. The American Health Foundation, according to Muscat, is applying for more funding to conduct more research on that rare tumor.

"I don't see how one could come away with any other conclusion than there is no risk from using [cell phones]," Muscat says. "That's not to say there might not be potential for concern in the long term . . . But there's nothing to justify a warning that there is a pending epidemic of brain tumors because of cell phones."

That's also the message from several other studies, including an epidemiological study conducted by the National Cancer Institute and a Danish study of 420,000 cell phone users that was published this spring.

"The fact of the matter is [these studies] are significant because of their size and their rigor," Basile of the CTIA says. "There have been no indications of adverse health effects."

However, these studies have been met with skepticism from critics who argue that the studies haven't been large enough, haven't looked at longtime cell phone users and haven't looked at specific kinds of tumors, such as those that grow in the emissions absorption area on the edge of the skull.

"I think none of the studies provide much information," says Maria Feychting, a radiation and cancer researcher with the Institute of Environmental Medicine at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden. "They have problems with study design. People in their studies haven't used cell phones enough so they have too few cases and controls of people who have used cell phones for a long time."

Feychting is part of a 13-country study of brain, neck and head tumors headed up by the International Agency for Research on Cancer in France. Feychting says the four-year study won't be sufficient to check long-term effects, but it should propel research further than it's gone up to this point.

Safety precautions

If a company decides that workers need to be equipped with cell phones, what then? What policies or procedures should network executives put in place?

Bill Plummer, vice president of government and industry affairs for Nokia, says people should have options of different ways to use cell phones for their convenience, not for any real safety issues.

"Whether they're employees receiving a phone from a company or a consumer off the street, they should do what makes them feel comfortable," says Plummer, conducting the interview from his car using a hands-free cell phone device. "Certainly, I can see where consumers should be aware of different lifestyle choices available to them . . . whether it's a belt clip or a hands-free device."

Here are some tips gathered from people on both sides of the debate - lawyers, cancer patients and gadget aficionados:

Cheapest isn't always best. Investigate many different cell phone models, focusing on the brands with the lowest RF ratings. But keep in mind that manufacturers rate themselves. There's no independent third-party here. If the economic slowdown isn't affecting your business, you may want to have the phones tested yourself. In the future, look for phones that are independently rated.

Talk with your employees. Hold mandatory meetings for anyone using a cell phone on the job, or include anyone who uses one for personal reasons and simply wants more information. Talk to them about the studies. Tell them where they can get more information on the research (for a list of links, click here).

Recommend employees keep the phone as far away from their body as possible when it's in use. Tell them to point the antenna away from them and anyone near them. They also should be aware that if they wear their phone on their bodies, clipped to their pants or in a pants or shirt pocket, they can be exposed to bursts of emissions caused by incoming calls or data transmissions. Those emissions can be absorbed into the body as easily, if not more easily, than the head. People concerned about health effects say they worry those bursts could potentially lead to problems such as liver, kidney, ovarian or testicular cancer.

Issue headsets along with each cell phone.

Be aware that there has been little, if any, testing of some protective devices, such as radiation shields. Buy tested products.

Tell employees to use a regular wired phone when possible.

"It's incumbent upon employers to make sure any equipment they're issuing to employees is safe to use," says Hart, who is battling cancer. "I think employers don't give it a thought."

Find out more:

Official Web site of the Cell Telecommunications and Internet Association

The World Health Organization�s section of its web site directed to information on cell phones and the electromagnetic spectrum

FDA�s Consumer Update on mobil phones

Countil on Wireless Technology Impacts
Citizens and professionals concerned about the safe uses of electromagnetic radiation

Find here Britain�s report from their Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones

Home page of the Wireless Consumers Alliance, a non-profit corporation, focused on making sure wireless providers are meeting consumers needs.

Get information on Dr. George Carlo and related efforts at the Web site of the Health Risk Management Group, Inc.

Study published in the New England Journal of Medicine on Cell telephone use and brain tumors

Motorola�s information on health and safety

Web site for the National Brain Tumor Foundation

Mobile Manufacturers Forum

European patent office search

Web site for online U.S. patent searches