Mobile Phones, Towers and Health Presentation

Mobile Phones, Towers
and your Health
Presentation by TV Ramachandran
10 April 2012 @ Mumbai

1

AGENDA

1. Introduction

2. What is EMF?

3. International guidelines on EMF & standards setting process

4. India follows international norms for EMF safety

5. Myths & Facts

6. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

7. In Conclusion

8. Useful links
2

Introduction

• Growth of telecom has been one of India’s greatest success stories
• Mobile communications are now fundamental to business operations,
individual lifestyles and the welfare of the Indian economy.
• As of date there are 900 million mobile subscribers in India and is expected to
reach 1.159 billion by 2013.
• In recent years, concerns have been raised about alleged adverse health
effects from the operation of mobile communications technology.
• This is despite independent research programs, expert reports, major
scientific reviews and advisory bodies around the world continuing to
conclude that, based on the current weight of scientific evidence, there are no
known adverse health effects from exposures below international guidelines.
• Concerns are also being triggered by providing misinformation through
public meetings, workshops, misleading press articles, etc. by interested
parties.

3

What is EMF?
EMF. i.e. Electromagnetic fields are part of everyday life, emitted both by
natural sources like the sun, the earth and the ionosphere, and by artificial
sources such as • mobile phone base stations • broadcast towers • radar
facilities • remote controls • electrical and electronic equipment

Radio frequency waves lie in In contrast, ionizing radiation,
the non-ionizing part of the such as x-rays can strip electrons
spectrum which means that they from atoms and molecules,
cannot directly impart enough producing changes that can lead
energy to a molecule to break or to tissue damage and possibly
change chemical bonds cancer
4

Radio waves are non ionizing

Mobile phones communicate by transmitting radio waves through a
network of fixed antennas called base stations.

Radiofrequency waves are electromagnetic fields, and unlike
ionizing radiation such as X-rays or gamma rays, can neither
break chemical bonds nor cause ionization in the human body.

WHO Fact sheet N°193 dated June 2011
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs193/en/index.html

5

World Health Organization recognizes exposure
limit guidelines recommended by ICNIRP & IEEE

Protection standards

International exposure guidelines have been developed to provide protection
against established effects from RF fields by the International Commission on
Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP, 1998) and the Institute of Electrical
and Electronic Engineers (IEEE, 2005).

National authorities should adopt international standards to protect their
citizens against adverse levels of RF fields. They should restrict access to
areas where exposure limits may be exceeded.

WHO Fact sheet N°304 dated May 2006

6

World Health Organization recognizes exposure
limit guidelines recommended by ICNIRP & IEEE

Exposure limit guidelines

Radiofrequency exposure limits for mobile phone users are given in terms of
Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) – the rate of radiofrequency energy absorption
per unit mass of the body. Currently, two international bodies 1, 2 have
developed exposure guidelines for workers and for the general public,
except patients undergoing medical diagnosis or treatment. These guidelines
are based on a detailed assessment of the available scientific evidence.


1
International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP). Statement on the
"Guidelines for limiting exposure to time-varying electric, magnetic and electromagetic fields (up to
300 GHz)", 2009.
2
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). IEEE standard for safety levels with
respect to human exposure to radio frequency electromagnetic fields, 3 kHz to 300 GHz, IEEE Std
C95.1, 2005.
7

Scientific How Standards are set
research

Peer-reviewed
publication
Consensus
standards
“As the progress in technology continues
and human beings are enjoying an increased quality of Regulations
life, it is essential for scientists to ensure that safety is
not compromised. Scientists must be very careful in reporting their findings.
Mistakes must be minimized and stopped at the first level of scientific research. As in
an Iraqi saying ‘‘it takes one person to throw a rock into to the well, and it will
take 10 people to get it out.’’

Let us make sure that what we do is right the first time. If there is a mistake, one
should be courageous to admit it promptly. Scientists should aspire to explore the
unknowns through sound and well-planned research and not to make the situation
worse through reporting what might be erroneous conclusions that take a long time to
clear up. As stated by the Biological Effects Policy Advisory Group of the Institution of
Engineering and Technology in Europe: ‘‘...scientists have an overriding
responsibility to ensure that their findings are robust before publication,
notwithstanding the various pressures to publish their work.’’ [IET, 2006].
8 Dr. C-K Chou
Thirty-five Years in Bioelectromagnetics Research, 2007

Weight of Evidence Approach

• In the huge body of literature available on RF electromagnetic fields
(and on mobile telephony in particular) several papers can be found
suggesting a variety of biological effects at exposure levels below limits
recommended internationally.

• A rigorous and honest scientific analysis requires however the
consideration of all the literature, and a weight of evidence, i.e. that of
individual studies be considered based on their scientific quality,
replicability, and consistency.

• Any numerical limit based on hypothesis and without any exposure-
effect relationship is necessarily arbitrary.

Dr. Paolo Vecchia, Chairman ICNIRP
Minister’s Round Table on EMF, 27 March 2012 @ New Delhi

9

About ICNIRP
• ICNIRP - the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection
• ICNIRP is a non-governmental organization formally recognized by WHO
• ICNIRP also endorsed by International Telecommunications Union (ITU)
• ICNIRP evaluates scientific results from all over the world and produces
guidelines recommending limits on exposure
• Its guidelines not only based in science but also include a significant safety
margin - a 50 times reduction factor, sufficient to protect all people,
children, adults with low BMI, obese individuals & even people who, through
frailty or illness, have bodies are less able to control core temperature.
• No adverse health effects confirmed below current international
guidelines
• Typical public exposures from wireless networks & devices often many
times below the threshold for established health hazards.
Most countries in the world have not adopted any standards for EMF.
However, of the countries that do have standards, 90% have standards
based on ICNIRP
10
In 2008, India adopted EMF limits recommended by ICNIRP

EMF in our Daily lives
Emissions from various EMF sources are very much a part of our normal daily
lives. The RF emissions from these sources are several multifold times lower
than the safety limits set by international EMF standards bodies

Emissions from a mobile tower are lower than the emissions from a
microwave and even from our normal radio tuner!
11

MYTH - International limits do not take into account non thermal
or biological effects

FACT - World Health Organization has said:
– “The exposure limits for EMF fields developed by the International
Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) - a non-
governmental organization formally recognised by WHO, were developed
following reviews of all the peer- reviewed scientific literature,
including thermal and non-thermal effects. The standards are based on
evaluations of biological effects that have been established to have health
consequences.” http://www.who.int/peh-emf/standards/en/
– “With more and more research data available, it has become
increasingly unlikely that exposure to electromagnetic fields
constitutes a serious health hazard, nevertheless, some uncertainty
remains.” http://www.who.int/peh-emf/about/WhatisEMF/en/index5.html
– “Strict adherence to existing national or international safety standards:
such standards, based on current knowledge, are developed to protect
everyone in the population with a large safety factor.”
http://www.who.int/peh-emf/about/WhatisEMF/en/index5.html

12

MYTH - International limits do not take into account non thermal
or biological effects

FACT - Both ICNIRP & IEEE consider non thermal and long term
effects
•“Induction of cancer from long-term EMF exposure was not considered to be
established, and so these guidelines are based on short-term, immediate health
effects ….. In the case of potential long-term effects of exposure, such as an
increased risk of cancer, ICNIRP concluded that available data are
insufficient to provide a basis for setting exposure restrictions, although
epidemiological research has provided suggestive, but unconvincing, evidence
of an association between possible carcinogenic effects and exposure at levels
of 50/60 Hz magnetic flux densities substantially lower than those
recommended in these guidelines…ICNIRP
•“Despite more than 50 years of RF research, low-level biological effects*
have not been established. No theoretical mechanism has been established
that supports the existence of any effect characterized by trivial heating other
than microwave hearing. Moreover, the relevance of reported low-level effects
to health remains speculative and such effects are not useful for standard
setting.” …IEEE
13

* IEEE uses the term low-level biological effects instead of non-thermal effects

MYTH – WHO says cellphone use can increase cancer risk…
International Agency for Research on Cancer has found evidence of increase in
glioma and acoustic neuroma brain cancer for mobile

FACT
The largest retrospective case-control study to date on adults, Interphone,
coordinated by the …(IARC), was designed to determine whether there are links
between use of mobile phones and head and neck cancers in adults. The
international pooled analysis of data gathered from 13 participating countries
found no increased risk of glioma or meningioma with mobile phone use
of more than 10 years. There are some indications of an increased risk of
glioma for those who reported the highest 10% of cumulative hours of cell
phone use, although there was no consistent trend of increasing risk with
greater duration of use. The researchers concluded that biases and errors
limit the strength of these conclusions and prevent a causal interpretation.
Based largely on these data, IARC has classified radiofrequency
electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B) …
WHO Fact sheet N°193, June 2011

14

MYTH – Using a cellphone will cause Ear Tumor
Using a cellphone increases the temperature of the earlobe;
warm sensation/pain > Tinnitus > irreversible hearing loss >
all these effects lead to ear tumor!

FACT
Tinnitus is the medical term for "hearing" noises in your ears when there is no
outside source of the sounds…
…Tinnitus can be a symptom of almost any ear problem, including •Ear infections
•Foreign objects or wax in the ear •Injury from loud noises •Meniere's disease…
Alcohol, caffeine, antibiotics, aspirin, or other drugs can also cause ear noises.
Tinnitus may occur with hearing loss. Occasionally, it is a sign of high blood
pressure, an allergy, or anemia.
Rarely, tinnitus is a sign of a serious problem like a tumor or aneurysm
U.S. National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health

15

MYTH – It is not safe to live near a mobile tower

FACT
•The IARC Monograph Working Group discussed and evaluated the available
literature on the following exposure categories involving radiofrequency
electromagnetic fields:
– occupational exposures to radar and to microwaves;
– environmental exposures associated with transmission of signals for radio,
television and wireless telecommunication; and
– personal exposures associated with the use of wireless telephones.

Results
•The evidence was reviewed critically, and overall evaluated as being limited
among users of wireless telephones for glioma and acoustic neuroma, and
inadequate to draw conclusions for other types of cancers. The evidence from
the occupational and environmental exposures mentioned above was
similarly judged inadequate.
IARC Press Release, 31 May 2011
16
http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2011/pdfs/pr208_E.pdf

MYTH – Increased cancer cases with proximity to towers
10 housewives in Sher-e-Punjab colony, Andheri (E) have been diagnosed with various
forms of cancer – 6 breast cancer cases, 1 ovarian cancer, 1 blood cancer, 1 inguinal
lymph node cancer, 1 unknown relapsed after chemotherapy

FACT
•Cancer: Media or anecdotal reports of cancer clusters around mobile phone
base stations have heightened public concern. It should be noted that
geographically, cancers are unevenly distributed among any population.
Given the widespread presence of base stations in the environment, it is
expected that possible cancer clusters will occur near base stations
merely by chance. Moreover, the reported cancers in these clusters are
often a collection of different types of cancer with no common
characteristics and hence unlikely to have a common cause.


17

MYTH - People living within 50 to 100 meter radius of a tower are
in the high radiation zone
Are more prone to ill effects of electromagnetic radiation

FACT
•. …. The levels of RF exposure from base stations and wireless networks are
so low that the temperature increases are insignificant and do not affect human
health.
•The strength of RF fields is greatest at its source, and diminishes quickly
with distance. Access near base station antennas is restricted where RF signals
may exceed international exposure limits. Recent surveys have indicated that RF
exposures from base stations and wireless technologies in publicly accessible
areas (including schools and hospitals) are normally thousands of times below
international standards.
•In fact, due to their lower frequency, at similar RF exposure levels, the body
absorbs up to five times more of the signal from FM radio and television than
from base stations. … Further, radio and television broadcast stations have
been in operation for the past 50 or more years without any adverse health
consequence being established.
18

MYTH- A person should not use cellphone
for more than 18-24 minutes a day
In USA, maximum SAR limit is 1.6w/kg which is for 6
minutes, it has a safety margin of 3-4

FACT
•The averaging time for General Population/Uncontrolled exposure to fixed
transmitters is not applicable for mobile and portable transmitters. See 47
CFR §§2.1091 and 2.1093 on source-based time-averaging requirements for
mobile and portable transmitters.”
http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Engineering_Technology/Documents/bulletins/oet65/oet65a.pdf

19

MYTH – Biological effects of EMF Dizziness!
People living in the main beam are exposed to higher Buzzing in the head!
radiation levels complain of headaches, sleep Headaches!! Fatigue!
disturbance, memory related disorders, fatigue, buzzing
in the head, joint pain, miscarriage, cancer, etc.
Sleep disturbance!
Joint pains!
FACT
…individuals have reported a variety of health problems that they relate to
exposure to EMF…This reputed sensitivity to EMF has been generally termed
“electromagnetic hypersensitivity” or EHS.
EHS is characterized by a variety of non-specific symptoms, which afflicted
individuals attribute to exposure to EMF. The symptoms most commonly
experienced include dermatological symptoms (redness, tingling, and burning
sensations) as well as neurasthenic and vegetative symptoms (fatigue, tiredness,
concentration difficulties, dizziness, nausea, heart palpitation, and digestive
disturbances).
The symptoms are certainly real and can vary widely in their severity. Whatever
its cause, …. EHS has no clear diagnostic criteria and there is no scientific basis
to link EHS symptoms to EMF exposure. Further, EHS is not a medical diagnosis,
nor is it clear that it represents a single medical problem.
WHO Fact sheet N°296, December 2005
20 http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs296/en/index.html

MYTH- Biological effects of EMF
Effects such as sleep disruption, headache,
concentration, forgetful memory, fatigue, dizziness,
palpitations, visual disorders, cardio vascular problems,
buzzing in the head, altered reflexes – many of these are
related to changes in the electrical activity of the brain

FACT
…. At the frequencies used by mobile phones, most of the energy is
absorbed by the skin and other superficial tissues, resulting in negligible
temperature rise in the brain or any other organs of the body
A number of studies have investigated the effects of radiofrequency fields on
brain electrical activity, cognitive function, sleep, heart rate and blood
pressure in volunteers. To date, research does not suggest any consistent
evidence of adverse health effects from exposure to radiofrequency fields at
levels below those that cause tissue heating. Further, research has not been
able to provide support for a causal relationship between exposure to
electromagnetic fields and self-reported symptoms, or “electromagnetic
hypersensitivity”.
21

MYTH- children are more vulnerable to EMF
FACT
“…the scientific evidence does not show a danger to users of wireless
communication devices including children”.
Food and Drug Administration, USA, 2005

“In conclusion, there is no convincing scientific data to assume a difference in
the absorption of electromagnetic energy in heads of children and adults, nor is
it likely that the electromagnetic sensitivity of children’s head changes
significantly after the second year of life. Because of this, the Health Council of
Netherlands sees no reason for recommending limiting the use of mobile
phones by children”.
The Health Council of the Netherlands, 2004

“… with the recent popularity of mobile phone use among younger people, and
therefore a potentially longer lifetime of exposure, WHO has promoted further
research on this group. Several studies investigating potential health
effects in children and adolescents are underway.”

22

MYTH – EMF radiation is tantamount to being in a microwave!

FACT
All radiated energy from a phone/tower cannot be directed into a
single point

Do you think if a person held a cup of water long enough then
it would start to boil ?

MYTH – EMF limits needs to be reduced to 1/100 of existing levels
to be safe

FACT - For threshold effects, when a large margin of safety is
assured, anything below is safe

Whether it is a 50 foot tall or a 5 foot tall boat, they are all safe to
go under the Golden Gate Bridge
Dr. C-K. Chou, Chairman,
24
Technical Committee 95, ICES, IEEE
International Health Conference, 8 February 2012 @ New Delhi

MYTH – EMF limits needs to be reduced to 1/100 of existing levels
to be safe

FACT
Lower BTS emissions lead to Higher Emissions from handsets: as per
physics and telecom engineering, the strength of the signal from the mobile
handsets varies based on its proximity to the BTS and the strength of the
signal from the BTS. If the emission levels for BTS are lowered, it will
result in a corresponding increase the signal strength from the mobile
handset, resulting in greater personal exposure of subscribers to EMF

Power emitted by mobile phones is limited by the adaptive power control
(APC)
An increased distance from the base station results in little or no
reduction of the environmental level of electromagnetic fields and in a
significant increase of power emitted by the phones
Dr. Paolo Vecchia, Chairman, ICNIRP
25

MYTH – A radiation shield will protect you from EMF
exposure
FACT
•The use of commercial devices for reducing radiofrequency field
exposure has not been shown to be effective.

•Various products are being marketed that claim to increase the safety of
mobile phone use. These products generally take the form of shielded cases,
earpiece pads/shields, antenna clips/caps, special batteries and absorbing
buttons.
•A mobile phone automatically operates on the lowest power necessary to
maintain call quality. If an add-on device adversely affects the phone's
antenna, the phone will attempt to transmit more power up to its specified
maximum.
•Scientific evidence does not indicate any need for shields on mobile
phones. They cannot be justified on health grounds and the effectiveness of
many such devices in reducing exposure is unproven.
26
GSMA Association Health Booklet

FAQ - Should I be concerned about the wireless network in my
office or at my child's school?

The UK Health Protection Agency advises that on the basis of current scientific
information Wi-Fi equipment satisfies international guidelines and, therefore,
there is no reason why schools and others should not use Wi-Fi equipment. In
addition, the WHO concluded in May 2006 that '...there is no convincing
scientific evidence that the weak RF signals from base stations and wireless
networks cause adverse health effects.'

FAQ - Are the stories that mobile phones can cook eggs or make
popcorn pop really myths?

They are both myths. There is simply not enough power from a mobile phone to
produce either effect. A mobile phone has a maximum average power of about
0.25 watts, compared to 900 watts or more from a microwave oven.

27

FAQ - Does a lower SAR mean that a phone is safer?

No. Variations in SAR do not mean that there are variations in safety. While
there may be differences in SAR levels among phone models, all mobile
phones must meet RF exposure guidelines.

FAQ - Why are there so many restrictions on using mobile phones
in hospitals?

At short range, the radio signal from a mobile phone may cause interference
with electronic medical devices. At distances greater than 1-2m, the possibility
is substantially reduced. It is possible for mobile phones to be used in
designated areas of hospitals.

FAQ - Why can't I use my mobile phone when I fly?

It is standard practice on aircraft to turn off all types of radio transmitters and
certain other electrical devices unless they have been demonstrated not to
cause interference to aircraft systems.
28

INTERNATIONAL HEALTH CONFERENCE
Ensuring Public Health and Safety in the Mobile Industry
8 February 2012 at New Delhi,
Organized by Assocham with the support of
Ministry of Science & Technology & Ministry of Environment and Forests

Panel of speakers comprised of eminent international experts from globally recognized
and reputed non-commercial organizations who have impeccable credentials and
knowledge on this subject as well as concern for health aspects. These included

2.Dr. Emilie van Deventer, Team Leader, Radiation Programme, World Health
Organization (WHO) & Head, International EMF Project
3.Prof. Paolo Vecchia, Chairman, International Commission for Non-Ionizing Radiation
Protection (ICNIRP),
4.Dr. CK Chou, Chairman, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE)
International Committee on Electromagnetic Safety TC95,
5.Dr. Vijayalaxmi, Professor at Department of Radiation Oncology University of Texas
Health Science Center,
6.Prof Kenneth Foster, University of Pennsylvania,
7.Prof Niels Kuster, Director, Foundation for Research on Information Technologies in
Society (IT’IS),
8.Dr. Jack Rowley, Director Research & Sustainability, GSM Association and
9.Mr. Michael Milligan, Secretary General of the Mobile Manufacturers Forum

29 http://www.assocham.org/events/recent/showevent.php?id=667

Key Messages from WHO

• [WHO] Objective: attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of
health
• Present Scientific Knowledge: Health effects not established below
international guidelines
• WHO does NOT develop EMF standards but facilitates international
consensus on standards …International bodies, ICNIRP and IEEE/ICES,
develop international guidelines for human protection from EMF exposure
• WHO Model Legislation : To assist countries without appropriate legislation
to protect their population from EMF ...provide a legal framework to provide
protection from EMF …EMF limits - adoption of international standards to
limit EMF exposure of people (ICNIRP guidelines); emissions of EMF from
devices (IEC and IEEE device emission standards)…uniform application of
the Act across the national jurisdiction
Dr. T. Emilie Van Deventer
Team Leader, Radiation Programme, World Health Organization (WHO)
& Head, International EMF Project
30

Key Messages from ICNIRP
• …the scientific literature published since the 1998 guidelines has
provided no evidence of any adverse effects below the basic restrictions
and does not necessitate an immediate revision of its guidance on limiting
exposure to high frequency electromagnetic fields
• [...] studies have yielded no convincing evidence that typical exposure
levels lead to adverse reproductive outcomes or an increased cancer risk
in exposed individuals (ICNIRP Guidelines, 1998)
• We found [in 2009] the existing evidence did not support an increased
risk of brain tumours in mobile phone users within the duration of use yet
investigated. ICNIRP believes on preliminary review of the [Interphone]
results, that they do not change the overall conclusions. ICNIRP therefore
considers that the results of the Interphone study give no reason for
alteration of the current guidelines (ICNIRP Note on the Interphone Study,
2010)
• An increased distance from the base station results in little or no reduction of
the environmental level of electromagnetic fields and in a significant increase
of power emitted by the phones
Prof. Paolo Vecchia, Chairman, ICNIRP
31

Key Messages from IEEE
• Science-based recommendations are made to protect against all
established adverse effects in human beings associated with RF exposure
• The biological effects of RF exposure have been studied for more than
60 years… No adverse health effects have been confirmed below the
current international RF safety guidelines or exposure standards (ICNIRP,
IEEE).
• An effect is considered established when consistent findings of that
effect have been published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, with
evidence of the effect being demonstrated by independent laboratories, and
where there is consensus in the scientific community that the effect occurs for
the specified exposure conditions.
• [ICNIRP and IEEE have RF exposure standards, with large safety
margins to protect all population …for threshold effects, when a large
margin of safety is assured, anything below is safe… [for example] whether it
is a 50 foot tall or a 5 foot tall boat, they are all safe to go under the
Golden Gate Bridge.

32
Dr. C-K. Chou, Chairman, Technical Committee 95, ICES, IEEE

In Conclusion

• Use of cell phones is a part of our daily life and provides numerous benefits.
• However some people are confused and concerned about the rumored health
effects of electromagnetic fields (EMF) emitted by mobile communication
systems.
• (ICNIRP) guidelines for RF exposure [which have been adopted by India in
2008] are recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the
International Telecommunications Union (ITU) and provide science-based
exposure limits that are applicable to both public and occupational exposure
from RF and ELF fields
• ICNIRP forms the basis for national regulations in 90% of the countries
around the World that have adopted standards for EMF exposure.
• Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) is another international
standard which is followed primarily in the Americas.
• These international guidelines are based on a weight of evidence review from
all peer-reviewed scientific literature and not on the conclusions of any single
33
scientific paper.

In Conclusion

• The guidelines provide protection against established effects of exposure to
EMF and includes significant safety margin to protect all people including
children.
• No adverse health effects have been confirmed below the current
international RF safety guidelines or exposure standards (ICNIRP, IEEE). The
typical public exposures from wireless networks and devices are often many
times below the threshold for established health hazards.
• WHO notes that significant differences between national regulations and
international recommendations can foster confusion for regulators and policy
makers, increase public anxiety and provide a challenge to manufacturers
and mobile operators who need to tailor their products to each market.
• WHO recommends that National authorities should adopt international
standards to protect their citizens against adverse levels of RF fields.

34

Useful Links

http://www.who.int/peh-emf/project/en/ World Health Organisation
project on EMF

http://www.icnirp.de/ International Commission on Non
Ionizing Radiation Protection

http://www.ieee.org/index.html Institute of Electrical and
Electronic Engineers

http://www.dot.gov.in/ Department of
Telecommunications
http://www.coai.com/ Cellular Operators Association of
India

http://www.gsmworld.com/health/ GSM Association pages on
health and environment

www.emfexplained.info EMF communications initiative
from industry associations

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/pri/en/oj/dat/1999/l_199/l_19919990730en00590070.pdf European Union Directive for
ensuring safety in member states
(1999)

35

Mobile Phones, Towers and Health Presentation

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (19)

Similar a Mobile Phones, Towers and Health Presentation

Similar a Mobile Phones, Towers and Health Presentation (20)

Último

Último (20)

Mobile Phones, Towers and Health Presentation