♪ ♪
>> Wendy Mesley:
This is a special edition
of marketplace.
Most of us carry our phones
next to our body.
And why wouldn't we?
Science, tests and the hidden
message in your cell phone.
>> I can't find it.
>> Such information about health
cannot become a fine print.
>> Wendy: We test
the top-selling brands.
So the results are in?
>> We got the results.
>> Surprised?
>> I don't think I'll carry it
the same way I have been.
>> Now I'm a little bit worried.
>> Wendy:
This is your marketplace.
There's a secret
inside our phones.
>> Really?
>> Wendy: Some would
even call it a warning.
>> Where would I be able
to find it?
>> Wendy: It's a message
that cell phone makers
are required to share, but most
have never seen it and can't
even find it when they try.
>> Control centre.
General.
>> I can't find it.
I'm going to be honest.
>> That's how it looks?
>> The message in my phone says,
"To reduce exposure to RF energy
"use a hands free option
"such as speakerphone,
"to carry the phone at least
"five millimetres away
"from your body, to ensure
"exposure levels remain at
or below the as-tested levels."
♪ ♪
>> So don't leave it
in your pocket.
>> I never hold my cell phone
1.5 centimetres from my body,
ever.
>> What does that mean?
>> Exactly what
that message means is what
I'm trying to figure out.
Why are we being told to keep
our phones away from our body?
I did my first story on
cell phones almost 20 years ago.
Is your study something
that the cell phone industry
was watching?
>> Yes, of course.
>> Wendy: There wasn't a lot
of science back then.
>> A thimble full of research
is what we have now.
>> Wendy: But suspicions were
starting to grow that cell phone
use had some health risks.
>> When did you start to think
this had something to do
with a cellular phone?
>> I think when I saw
the first MRI and saw
the location of the tumour.
>> Wendy: Also growing
was the suspicion that we're
not being told the whole story.
>> Industry can be really
truly malignant.
>> There are no adverse
health effects
in fields of this nature.
>> The industry clearly
is hands off.
>> Shouldn't we know
the answer by now?
All these years later,
I'm still asking
the same questions--
are cell phones safe
and are being told enough
to make that decision
for ourselves?
There is a city in California
that doesn't think we are.
Berkley is a great example of
the battle between the people
who think that the public needs
to know more about cell phones
and the cell phone industry
that thinks that people
have been told enough.
City council actually passed
something called an ordinance
ordering all of the phone stores
in the city to put up a sign.
>> Hi there.
I'm good.
How are you?
>> Wendy: So when you walk in,
you see the message
that is inside your phone
actually up on the counter.
So they do have it here.
And then they think
that people will have
more information.
>> Hi there.
>> Wendy: They might change
their behaviour
or they might choose not
to change their behaviour.
♪ [dramatic]
>> The city is in a new battle
over what it can say about cell
phones and your cancer risk.
>> Wendy: Berkley has got
the message out,
but those signs have stirred up
a lot of controversy.
>> For now, this law
is in effect.
>> Wendy:
The cell phone industry
wants them to come down.
>> Face off today between
two very high-profile attorneys
over the issue of cell phone
radiation warnings.
>> Wendy: On the cell phone
industry's side,
the same lawyer
who fought for big tobacco.
>> There are no link
between cell phones and
any known health problems.
>> Wendy: They're arguing
that the signs are alarmist.
>> The total effect,
Your Honour, is watch out.
>> Wendy: But Berkley
is standing their ground.
>> All we've done is
to make sure that consumers
are aware of this basis.
>> Wendy: The fight
is expected to go all the way
to the supreme court.
>> We will let you know
when he issues his ruling.
>> Did you have any idea
that this would lead to this?
>> I did.
You know, cities have been
trying to educate consumers
about the effect of RF radiation
and safe use guidelines
for years.
>> Wendy: Mayor Jesse Arreguín
is on the front lines
in this battle over
the right to know more.
>> They say that
that message is baseless.
That you have
no scientific proof that
there's any safety concern.
>> All we are asking
that stores do is provide
the same information that
the federal government mandates
and that's already supposed
to be disclosed.
>> There's less than
20 mobile stores here.
Why is it such a big case
for the wireless industry?
>> I think the concern on the
part of the telecommunications
industry if we can do it
in Berkley, then other cities
will do it as well.
>> You're going
to stick with it?
>> We're going
to stick with it.
>> Wendy: At the heart
of the message
the cell phone industry
doesn't want displayed,
information on how
to make sure you are not exposed
to radiation levels above
the government safety limit.
Whether it suggests carrying
the phone at five, ten,
or 15 millimetres away
from the body depends
on how it was tested.
>> I would say these
are the bestsellers
out of all three brands.
>> Wendy: So before
leaving Berkley, I pick up
a few phones to find out
what that testing is about.
>> Here you are.
Thank you very much.
>> Have you ever seen
the testing before?
>> All these stories
about cell phones, I've never
actually seen the testing.
The lab we're going to is one
of many that's hired to test and
certify the phones before they
are allowed out on the market.
So they're going to show us
how that testing works,
but also we've asked them
to do an extra test for us,
because we want to see
what happens, what results
they get when they test
the phone the way people
actually use them,
right up against the body.
So the chief engineer
at this lab, his name is
Jay Moulton, and he's going
to do the test for us today.
So I've got three phones
here for testing.
>> Okay.
>> From the top three
manufacturers.
And the big sellers
are the Samsung Galaxy,
the LG 5...
>> Okay.
>> and the iPhone 7.
>> Okay.
>> So this is it?
>> This is it.
>> Wendy: Moulton was part
of an international committee
that designed this
testing standard.
What are you
going to start with?
>> Well, we'll start
with the head measurement.
>> What is the wand
actually looking for?
>> It's looking for the highest
amount of electric field
coming into the tissue.
>> This is supposed to represent
what happens inside the brain?
>> Yes.
>> Wendy: Just like for
the manufacturers, our phones
will be tested at the highest
power level possible.
>> So it will be transmitting
as if you were as far away
from a base station
as you can get
and still make a call.
>> My phone is trying
extra hard.
>> This is the worst case
it can ever get to be
for a cell phone.
Put it into the holder.
Move it up close to the head.
And then I just,
at this point I'm going to
adjust so that the speaker
is right at the edge of the ear.
>> Wendy: That plastic ear
is six millimetres thick
and positions the phone
at the distance
it's assumed we hold it.
And if you are thinking
that head looks big,
it's because it is.
>> The head was designed
based on a 1950s army study
of all the army men
and they came up with
an average-sized head.
>> This idea was devised
before little kids
starting using phones.
>> Yes.
>> Wendy:
This one size fits all model
is just one of the reasons
critics say it's time for
the testing to change.
I'm in Washington, DC
to see Devra Davis.
She's a toxicologist,
a senior epidemiologist.
When I first met her
about 10 years ago,
she told me that
the testing method
doesn't at all take into effect
the size of a child's brain.
>> You see here this side
showing you the brain
of an adult.
>> So this is where
the cell phone would sit,
and this is the radiation
that's absorbed?
>> Yes.
>> This is the one
we're most concerned about.
This is the head
of a five-year-old.
>> She was a big part
of the fight to get lead
out of drinking water.
She fought against tobacco.
And now for-- actually,
for many years now,
she's been fighting
to tell people
that they should be concerned
about cell phones.
When I first interviewed you
many years ago, you were
persuaded there was a problem.
You are still persuaded.
>> Oh, more than ever
unfortunately.
>> Why?
>> Well the science
has progressed.
Without any question.
We have more experimental data
on animals.
Unfortunately, we have
more data on people.
>> How much more science
is there now?
>> I'd say it has doubled
since I first really
became aware and wrote
about this in 2007.
>> Wendy:
Among the recent research,
a $25 million study on rats
by the US government,
the largest they've ever done.
The findings were
released just last year.
>> It was set up
to answer the question
whether or not there
was any effect on health
from low levels of radiation
like those from cell phones.
The scientists running the study
thought it would find nothing.
They were astonished
when they showed this increase
in highly malignant,
aggressive tumours of the brain
and the heart.
>> Wendy: Astonished because
some rats were exposed
to radiation levels
below the safety limit
that cell phones have to meet.
The findings were deemed
so important, those heading it
wasted no time
letting the regulators know.
Canada was looped in, too.
But when we ask Health Canada
about it, they say...
Health Canada isn't
the only one with questions.
For many it comes down to this.
If cell phones are a problem,
where are all
the brain tumours in humans?
>> This is one of the worst
tumours we have ever seen
in a guy who said
he lived on his phone.
>> Wendy: In Edmonton,
neuro-oncologist Dr Jay Easaw
recently helped launch
a brain tumour registry...
>> It seems the tumour
is growing. It's putting
pressure on the skull.
>> Wendy: ..to track what
we're seeing in Canada.
So you're looking
for answers.
>> 100 per cent.
>> What are your suspicions?
>> I believe that we're going
to see more and more studies
that show a correlation
between cell phone use
and the incidents
of brain tumours.
There's no question
that we're seeing more
young people coming into clinic
with brain tumours,
and the question is why.
>> But your message is not
reflected by Health Canada.
>> Yeah.
>> What do you think of that?
>> [sighs] You know,
I understand why
because the data that are out
there are so controversial.
And in Health Canada's position,
they have to look at the data
and they have to come
to a conclusion.
And truthfully,
the data are inconclusive.
>> Why is there not more data?
>> Do you know why?
I'll tell you,
even in our own clinic,
we've tried to keep
track of this.
And when we ask a patient
about their cell phone use,
we're asking them to remember.
And that's just not reliable.
And that's why it's important
to get the message out now.
We need to at least get young
people and adults to start
thinking about their use.
And doing things
that potentially
can help protect them.
>> Have you ever done
that test for anyone else?
>> No I haven't.
Because it's not a requirement,
so the manufacturers
don't do it very often.
>> Wendy: New tech,
old safety rules?
This is your marketplace.
>> Wendy: Science, tests,
and your phone
on your marketplace.
Questions around cell phone
safety have now spanned decades.
As the science mounts on both
sides, so do criticisms over
how much we're being told.
>> Such information about health
cannot become a fine print.
>> I do think that information
should be made more available.
♪ ♪
>> Why the concern?
>> It's constantly emitting
microwave radiation.
And that radiation,
if it's right next to your body,
gets into you.
Whether it's your breast
or your pants pocket.
Reality is, every millimetre
closer to the head or body
you keep a phone,
you can get more radiation.
>> Wendy: So why does
the government allow phones
to be tested at a distance?
>> Okay, so this is where
we do the body measurements,
is on the flat phantom.
>> Wendy: And what will happen
when we test them the way
you actually wear them?
So first, you're going to do it
with the distance.
>> Yeah.
>> Wendy: Chief engineer Jay
Moulton is helping us find out.
>> First measurement,
what I'll do is at,
with a five millimetre gap,
which this is
a five millimetre distance.
>> Because that's how
they test it, with
a five millimetre distance?
>> This is how Apple 
did the original test.
>> Wendy: Apple tests
closer than many
at five millimetres;
 LG does their testing at 10;
 Samsung tests this phone at 15.
That's a full centimetre
and a half away from the body.
The maximum allowed.
>> That seems like-- who wears
their phone 15 millimetres away?
>> It's big gap.
>> Wendy: A gap that was
designed in the day of holsters.
>> When was the last time you
saw somebody with a phone in
there who wasn't under age 70?
>> Why don't they test
the way that people use it,
like next to the body?
>> I think if phones were tested
the way people use them,
none of them would pass.
>> Wendy:
Results from the first test,
the way manufacturers do it,
are in.
All three phones come
within the safety limit.
>> Okay, so that's
no surprise to you?
>> That's no surprise.
>> Wendy: Time to start
our test-- the way
most of us carry them.
>> We'll roll this thing
all the way up until
it touches and has a zero gap.
>> Wendy: have you ever done
that test for anyone else?
>> No, I haven't.
Because it's not a requirement
so the manufacturers
don't do it very often.
>> Wendy: Not required
even though most people
we talked to say this...
>> Yes, I definitely would not
carry it five millimetres
from my body.
I would have it
very close to me.
>> It's in my jean pocket
over here or
it's in my back pocket.
>> Wendy: But what harm
could that do?
>> We have known now for
more than 10 years that men
who keep phones in their pocket
have lowered sperm count,
they have poorer sperm quality.
>> Young women sometimes wear
their phones in their bra.
>> Correct.
>> This is an MRI
that was shared with us
by our colleague Dr John West
of a 21-year-old.
These are tumours in her breast.
The hot spot right here,
right under where
the phone was kept.
>> But how do you know that
could be caused by a cell phone?
>> We don't know,
but what we know is this--
it's extraordinary unusual
for a young woman
to have one breast cancer.
To have two, three, or four and
they all develop as separate
tumours under the antenna
of the phone,
that's beyond coincidence.
>> Wendy: A link between
breast cancer and phones
hasn't been proven,
but for Davis, case reports
like this are worrisome.
>> We think this is enough
of a concern that we're telling
people, please be aware of this.
>> Wendy: This is why
she argues phones
should be tested
the way we wear them.
So what happens when they are?
So the tests are all done.
>> Tests are all finished.
>> And?
>> The number
exceeded the limit.
It went up significantly
with each one of the phones.
>> Wendy: That's right.
The phones exceeded the safety
limit when they were moved
right against the body.
The radiation absorbed
increased three to four times.
Does that concern you?
>> No.
Primarily because this is
a worst case test
to where everything
is at max power,
maximum worst conditions.
>> Wendy: We shared our results
with all three manufacturers.
 LG told us they take
the responsibility of producing
safe products seriously and test
according to the guidelines.
 Samsung says their phones
meet or exceed
all regulatory standards.
As for Apple, they have
no comment and refer us back
to that message in our phones.
Health Canada-- on track
or behind the times?
>> They don't want
to investigate this.
I think they are not --
they are looking for any excuse
they can find to continue
with the status quo.
>> Wendy: The former head
of Microsoft Canada speaks out.
This is your marketplace.
>> Wendy:
This is your marketplace.
Seven out of ten people say
they carry their phones in their
pocket or against their bodies.
But when we tested three popular
brands the way you wear them,
all went over Canada's limits
on radiation exposure.
>> It's kind of scary.
>> I don't think I'll carry it
the same way I have been.
>> Now I'm a little bit worried.
>> Wendy: He may be worried,
but Health Canada says it's not
because their safety...
They're saying that the testing
is so safe that there is no way
that we could be at harm.
>> The system is out of date.
It's testing something
that's not relevant
to how we use phones or
to the ways that we know phones
can affect our health.
>> Just keep it 15 millimetres
away from your body.
>> Wendy: Canadian groups have
been urging Health Canada to
reassess those safety limits too
since science now shows
possible harm below the level
that phones are tested for.
>> We're stuck in this quagmire
of believing this science
that is decades old.
>> Wendy:
Frank Clegg is an engineer
and the former president
of Microsoft Canada;
now, he heads a group
advocating for safer
use of technology.
>> There are dozens and dozens
of studies that we presented
to Health Canada that show harm
at levels below
Canada's guidelines.
>> Wendy: He thought they were
making headway when a couple
of years ago, the government
agreed to review the issue.
Over 200 studies were
submitted by Clegg's group.
Research on humans and animals
suggesting potential harm,
everything from behaviour
changes to DNA damage
and sperm abnormalities.
All at radiation levels below
what phones are tested for.
Clegg was told many
don't meet Health Canada's bar.
He wants to know why.
>> I think they are looking
for any excuse they can find
to continue with the status quo.
>> Wendy: We asked repeatedly
to speak with Health Minister
Jane Philpott, but she declined
our request for an interview.
So we took our questions
to cancer epidemiologist
Paul Demers.
>> The evidence that comes out,
I believe, is still mixed.
>> Wendy: Demers was asked
to review the science on
cell phones for Health Canada.
>> So what is your
bottom line then?
Are-- the way that we use
cell phones now, are we safe?
>> I believe we are.
The fact is we don't have,
at least when I looked at
the evidence last,
we don't have the evidence
to say that there are
adverse health effects.
There are other scientists
that I respect
who are more convinced.
>> What do you do
with your phone?
>> I keep it in my pants pocket
so it's handy.
It hasn't concerned me
to that level.
>> Wendy: As for Health Canada's
bottom line, they say...
They add...
>> So how do you explain that?
>> Health Canada's
track record is atrocious.
How long did it take
to figure out tobacco?
So the fact that Health Canada
is behind isn't news.
The fact that they're not
doing anything about it
to me is unforgivable.
>> Wendy: Clegg wants change,
but for now says information
should be out in the open
so people can decide
for themselves.
>> I think there's
an opportunity for Canada
to be among the leaders
in the world like Berkley,
California, to get
the manufacturers' warnings out
to say, look, be careful
how you use the technology,
there is a safe way to use it
and there's a potentially
harmful way.
>> When I first started
covering this, manufacturers
were saying there's no science
showing any concern.
Then it became there's
no conclusive evidence.
Now it seems, the totality
of science doesn't--
the lingo is changing.
>> Yeah, the lingo is changing
but they can't make it
all go away.
We should not insist on proof
that we have made people sick
before taking steps
to protect others.
>> Wendy: While Health Canada
says you shouldn't be concerned,
they do provide tips
in case you are.
>> So do you feel like you're
any closer to the answer?
>> Well, it's been 20 years
of asking two questions--
one, are cell phones safe?
I still don't know
the answer to that.
And two, are people being
given enough information
to decide for themselves?
And on that I think
I've discovered, I think
we've proven that people,
most people have no idea that
message is in their phone, a
message the government requires.
So I think it's kind of obvious
that they could be more upfront
with that information.
So I'm going to keep pushing
for more information and
I'll report back in 20 years.
>> Okay. Thank you.
>> Asha: Join us for our
season finale on April 7th.
>> Team Asha versus...
>> Team Charlsie.
>> Let's do this.
>> Asha: Charlsie and I
are going head-to-head.
Investigating the wedding
industrial complex.
>> The minute you say wedding,
the money bells go off.
ding-a-ling-a-ling!
>> Everything is marketed to
brides as like, you need this
or your wedding will suck.
>> Asha: But are you paying
extra just because of one word?
>> You'd be looking at $452.
>> You're looking at $800.
>> Wow.
It's a wedding war
you won't want to miss.
