A new study suggesting a pregnant woman’s cell phone could cause behavioral problems in her unborn baby has given birth to a debate among medical experts.

 

In the study, researchers from UCLA and Denmark issued a survey to mothers of 13,159 children in Denmark, asking questions about their use of cell phones during pregnancy, as well as their child’s behavior.

 

The researches found the mothers who used cell phones during pregnancy also reported a higher level of behavioral problems in their children. But while the results suggest an increased risk of hyperactivity, impulsivity and difficulty concentrating in those children, epidemiological experts – including one of the paper’s authors – said it would be a mistake to assume the findings are conclusive.

 

Dr. Jorn Olsen, professor and chair of epidemiology at UCLA and co-author of the paper, told ABC News that media coverage of the research has been off target.

 

“That’s clearly not what we wanted to suggest, and we think that there is no reason that pregnant women should be very alarmed at the findings we have,” he said. “I think that a number of journalists broke the story on this and that they did not take all of the assumptions into consideration [when reporting it].”

 

Olsen added that he and his colleagues had not expected the paper to be released until next month. The study is slated for publication in the July issue of the journal of Epidemiology.

 

Charles Poole, associate professor of epidemiology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, said a number of factors could have been at play in this preliminary study that would have thrown the results off. Poole said the information was obtained through interviews with the mothers, who may not have given accurate accounts of their cell phone use when pregnant. Also, he noted, perhaps mothers who were heavy users of cell phones were more likely to report behavior problems in their children.

 

The authors “only briefly mentioned the possibility that maternal cell phone use, especially postnatal use, could have adverse effects on child behavior in ways having nothing at all to do with radio frequency fields,” Poole said. A possibility is that mothers who were constantly on their cell phones may have paid less attention to their children, who subsequently acted out.

 

Olsen added that the study was never intended to suggest a biological mechanism by which cell phone exposure could lead to behavioral problems in children. In the study, the authors point out other variables that could explain behavioral changes, including diet, exposure to lead paint and exposure to pollution.

 

The study is not the first attempt to explore some of the possible adverse health effects of cellular phones. And, as with the other studies, it appears to be inconclusive.

 

“Current scientific evidence doesn’t indicate any adverse health outcomes associated with exposure to radio frequency energy from cell phones," said U.S. Food and Drug Administration spokeswoman Peper Long. “Although there have been reports of negative health effects from low levels of radio frequency energy, these reports have not been replicated or confirmed.”

 
Olsen noted that there are many reasons to explore all conceivable health impacts of cell phone use, as it is a technology that is becoming ever more pervasive in our highly-connected society. The results of the study, he said, could provide avenues to other researchers studying the potential effects of cell phone radiation. 

Still, epidemiological experts said, the findings may not be ready for public consumption.
  

“I think this is a competently and well-done study, but I think there are enough red flags that this should probably not be something the U.S. public needs to be alarmed about,” said Dr. Tim Byers, professor of epidemiology and community health at the University of Colorado in Aurora. “I am particularly concerned about mothers and fathers who may constantly be worried about whether something they did caused their child’s behavioral problems.”

 

Poole says the study is “well worth” publishing in a medical journal, but, because it’s highly preliminary, should not be making news in the general public.

 

“No one connected with the study should be doing anything to encourage media attention on it – that includes the journal, the funding source, the institutions with which the authors are affiliated and the authors themselves,” Poole added. “In my opinion, that would constitute sensationalism.”