Mobile phones could bring down the global economy

By Matthew Lynn Jun 13, 2011

Matthew Lynn

Share with
friends:

Comments (14) Print this article

There is no shortage of stuff out there to make investors feel nervous. The euro could get blown apart if a long, hot summer of protest in Greece and Spain boils over into civil unrest. The Chinese economy might suddenly turn down, removing just about the only source of global growth. Inflation might suddenly rip out of control, provoking central banks into raising interest rates sharply.

But there is one other risk that most people probably haven’t thought about. What if mobile phones really do give you cancer? Mobile technology has the potential to be another tobacco – a huge and powerful industry that was just about destroyed by the unfortunate fact that it killed people. If this happens, hundreds of billions will be wiped off stockmarkets around the world.

Of course, there is still no proven link between mobiles and brain disease. The World Health Organisation (WHO) is not claiming that there is. Its International Agency for Research on Cancer gathered together 31 experts in Lyon last week to review the available evidence. It concluded that there was a ‘possible’ link between mobiles and a type of cancer called glioma. The WHO has five rankings of cancer risk, ranging from carcinogenic to probably not carcinogenic. The ‘possible’ ranking is right in the middle of the range. So it’s not saying there is a definite link. Yet it isn’t ruling one out either.

For anyone tracking the industry, that isn’t particularly helpful. Lots of studies have been done of potential links to cancer, and none have been very conclusive so far. Mobiles appear to have some health effects. Against that, there has been no big increase in the rates of brain cancer in the 20 years or so since mobiles became a ubiquitous part of everyday life. It’s hard to assess the data accurately because brain cancer is a relatively rare condition, so there are not very many people to study. But just because cancer rates haven’t taken off yet, it doesn’t mean they won’t. People were smoking heavily for a long time before the damage that tobacco does to your health became apparent. Asbestos was widely used in building for decades until the risks were discovered. Right now, all that anyone can say is that there is some form of risk, which the medical experts will need to keep an eye on. What we do know for certain is that, if a link were ever proved, or were simply to move up from possible to probable, then the economic implications would be huge.

That’s mainly because this is a massive industry. According to the International Telecommunication Union, there are now 5.3 billion mobile-phone subscriptions. That takes in 77% of the world’s population. More than a billion handsets are being sold every year. Vast quantities of capital have been poured into building mobile networks. The rise of smartphones means that people are doing more with and spending more money on their phones every year. The rise of tablet computers will only send those figures even higher.


Sign up for a 3-week FREE trial of MoneyWeek
and get the following free as well

"The only financial publication I could not be without."
John Lang, Director, Tower Hill Associates Ltd


On just about every major bourse, the big mobile-phone players are among the indices’ leading companies. Vodafone –with a market value of £83bn – is a giant of the FTSE. France Telecom, which owns Orange, is one of the largest businesses on the CAC-40. The world’s largest mobile operator, China Mobile, is also one of the world’s biggest companies. Nokia may be struggling to re-invent itself, but it is still the world’s major handset manufacturer, and worth $25bn. Much of the South Korean stockmarket depends on the mobile divisions of Samsung and LG. New players, such as Taiwan’s HTC, have soaring share prices (indeed, it recently overtook Nokia in value). And, of course, Apple, which is now critically dependent on its iPhone, is now the third-biggest company in the world.

It doesn’t even stop there. Microsoft and Google have invested fortunes in creating mobile software divisions. Manufacturers of chips and other components help to sustain the commodities boom. Many retailers depend on the sales of mobile phones, as do the new generation of app writers. In short, mobile phones have fuelled much of the growth of the world economy in the past decade. A link between this technology and cancer would prove an economic as well as a medical catastrophe. So what can investors can do about it?

For starters, investors should be monitoring the medical data and keeping up with the latest developments. They should be demanding that the mobile companies do everything they can to research the risks – and mitigate them. There is no point in simply denying that such a risk exists, in the way that the tobacco industry did for decades. Investors should also be preparing an exit strategy. If a link is ever proved beyond a doubt, you don’t want to be holding the shares or bonds of any of the main players in the industry. You might want to avoid holding equities full stop – the knock-on effects for the rest of the markets would be so severe.

Meanwhile, don’t give up on some fairly old-fashioned technologies. Fixed-line operators, such as British Telecom, could be set for one of the greatest bounce backs of all time. The shares yield 4%, so tuck a few away. If we all decide to get rid of our mobiles and start using the landline again, these shares will soar.

Comments (14)

Share with
friends:

Comments

  • 1. Roy Badami

    (21 June 2011, 01:45PM)  Complain about this comment

    If such a link were to be proven, then obviously the impact on the mobile phone industry could be large. They'd have liability costs to deal with, and in the short term consumers might be scared off.

    But in the longer term we're not going to stop using mobile phones. We'll just avoid holding them close to our heads (e.g. with handsfree kits).

    The inverse square law is your friend - if you increase your distance from the phone by a factor of ten then you've decreased the field strength by a factor of 100.

    roy

  • 2. Tim

    (13 July 2011, 11:07AM)  Complain about this comment

    It never changes doe's it, I am now a retired member of the Institute of the Motor Industry. For years they have been designing vehicles to reduce injuries to people involved in accidents, crumples zones, air bags etc. When they should have been using modern technical knowlege to prevent them in the first place. ie automatic braking systems if approaching to close to the vehicle in front of you and engine imobilisers to bring vehicles to a safe speed in restricted speed zones etc.
    Now the same is happening with mobile phones. Keep your distance use hand free sets to reduce the risks. Why with all the modern resourses don't they just design a risk free mobile phone in the first place, they have the technology to do so.

  • 3. George M

    (13 July 2011, 12:05PM)  Complain about this comment

    Scaremongering tosh. The best evidence so far is a Danish study following >400,000 people for 10 years, showing no increase in cancer. Smaller studies suggested maybe a link, but pool their data and any effect is lost in the noise. IARC classifies mobile phones as Group 2B “possibly carcinogenic to humans”. This errs very much on the side of caution - it includes nasties like DDT and lead, but also coffee and some medicines. Gasoline is in there too - expect that to get banned anytime soon? The safest category is occupied by only one chemical substance, which gives some idea of how cautious they are.

  • 4. Steve T

    (13 July 2011, 01:01PM)  Complain about this comment

    how many lives does mobile communication save?
    how many risks to life does mobile communication avoid?
    how much has this technology contributed to making the world smaller and safer?
    how much has this technology contributed to global productivity and will continue to do so - and therefore helped improve living standards?
    Let us hope society does not allow the 'Health & Safety Police' to affect this part of our lives !!
    Most things have an upside and a downside - let the people decide I say.

  • 5. Steve

    (13 July 2011, 01:22PM)  Complain about this comment

    Wacky.

  • 6. Pablo

    (14 July 2011, 08:52AM)  Complain about this comment

    Two issues here,

    One is that tobacco companies continue to be strong performing companies from an investment perspective, maybe because they find new people to kill in the developing world faster than those that get educated or die in the developed world.

    Secondly, using the article's logic I'd be much more concerned about fossil fuels than mobile phones, they have been proved to give people cancer, heart disease and strokes, not to mention black lung and other ailments from mining the resource.

  • 7. Karl Muller

    (13 September 2011, 12:35PM)  Complain about this comment

    This is a very important article -- it's a great pity that investors will NOT be "demanding that the mobile companies do everything they can to research the risks – and mitigate them." There is total denial over this issue right across the board.

    A prime example: as reported above, the World Health Organisation's cancer research body, the IARC, declared mobile phone radiation to be a "possible carcinogen". The WHO's EMF Project, which is responsible for mobile phones and health, has *not* updated its stance that there is no indication of any problem. When asked by Microwave News why this IARC finding was being ignored, the head of the EMF Project, Dr Emilie van Deventer, dodged the question entirely.

    Van Deventer is a microwave engineer, with a background in antenna design. She has no health training or expertise whatsoever. She would have no clue about how to issue a worldwide health alert. So she goes into denial…

  • 8. Joan Carles López

    (14 September 2011, 08:47PM)  Complain about this comment

    The issue already has been reporting, long ago, as an expert in electromagnetic pollution, me in my studies and measurements, I can say that smartphones are a great source of pollution, and pollution already exceed that comes from an antenna base and the there are disadvantages of a million smartphones worldwide, more information at www, gigahertz.es

  • 9. Mia Nony

    (14 September 2011, 10:08PM)  Complain about this comment

    There is one other electrical item with which aggressive smart frequencies cause illegal frequency conflict. It is called a human being. They couple w/ human bodies, turning all biological creatures into involuntary conductors. Frequency conflict is illegal. Any electrician would be thrown in jail for doing so to the power grid. Has no one thought to question the fact that the causal link for frequency induced cancer, heart disease, any disease involving nerves or muscles, has been found on September 24, 2010? Mass disease is being generated illegally right under our noses by power utility corporations. They cook you by converting your dwelling into the equivalent of a microwave oven. the thermal heat effect is forbidden under all international EMF safety code law. Electrical induction, nerve & muscle depolarization, gradual electrical failure of the human & the biosphere grid is ILLEGAL. Smart meters are illegal under Canadian Federal Law Safety Code Six pages 1 to 9.

  • 10. Emma

    (15 September 2011, 02:55AM)  Complain about this comment

    Anyone undecided about the safety of mobile phones, or the infrastructure they require, might be interested in the articles below.

    http://www.safeschool.ca/uploads/Blake_Levit_Henry_Lai_1_.pdf
    http://www.powerlinefacts.com/Sciam_article_on_lobbying.htm
    http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/reasons_a4.pdf
    http://www.buildingbiology.ca/input/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Rimbach-Study-20112.pdf

  • 11. Art Joyce

    (16 September 2011, 10:55PM)  Complain about this comment

    For those who see health risks associated with wireless technologies as "scaremongering tosh" I would point you to a 40-year plus history of scientific studies going back to the Cold War providing plenty of material to raise red flags.
    In fact if you read Dr. Devra Davis' new book 'Disconnect', she outlines how the telecommunications industry has done an even better job than the tobacco industry of obscuring the scientific evidence. Same as the oil industry did with global climate change. Same old tactics, because sadly, they work.
    Several international scientists testified before Canada's Standing Committee on Health (HESA) last year that our current public exposure standards are "outdated and inadequate to protect public health." They are urging application of the Precautionary Principle which does NOT require 100% scientific certainty to take action to protect public health.
    http://www.stayonthetruth.com/hesa-committee.php
    http://www.safeschool.ca/Parliament_of_Canada.html

  • 12. Liz

    (18 September 2011, 02:16AM)  Complain about this comment

    Thought-provoking article! I'd like to see an article addressing a projection of the wider economic implications for ignoring the possible health effects - eg increased health demand and costs, decreased workforce and incomes, reduced income from taxation for governments, population decline etc. Consider that for the first time in human history children are being exposed to microwave radiation for lifetime exposure at levels that are thousands of times above natural background radiation...!

  • 13. Angela Flynn

    (18 September 2011, 06:21PM)  Complain about this comment

    Over 80% of studies looking into biological effects from wireless radiation from cell phones, DECT cordless phones, WiFi and wireless Smart Meters have been funded by the wireless industry. If you design a study to not find results it will not find them. Most cell phone studies only follow users for a short period while it takes a decade or more for tumors to form. And they define heavy users as those who only use a phone one hour a week. These tactics distort reality. Brain tumors are on the rise in 20 - 29 yr old women in the U.S. This is the age group that is likely to have the highest exposure. - Ref. - http://neuro-oncology.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2010/07/16/neuonc.noq077.abstract
    Brain cancer incidence trends in relation to cellular telephone use in the United States

  • 14. Angela Flynn

    (18 September 2011, 06:26PM)  Complain about this comment

    I should have added that the authors of the study I refer to are a prime example of distorting reality. They fail to take into account cordless phone use which also emit microwaves. So while they document the rise in brain tumors, they fail to account for total microwave exposure among the injured. Failure to account for cordless phone use is a common tactic used to distort cell phone studies.

Leave a comment

This will be the name displayed with your comment.

This helps us verify comments are genuine. It will not be displayed anywhere on the site and is stored confidentially.

Please keep your comment within 1,000 characters and relevant to the main topic. We encourage healthy debate, but we don't allow insults or bad language. Anything off topic or unpleasant, we'll remove. Enjoy the conversation! Thank you.

captcha To prevent spam-related comments please enter the characters shown in the 'Captcha' box to the left.

By leaving a comment you accept our terms and conditions.


FREE - MoneyWeek's daily investment emailJohn Stepek

Our free daily email, Money Morning, is an informative and enjoyable analysis of what's going on in the markets. Written by our Editor, John Stepek, and guest contributors.
Sign up FREE to Money Morning here.

>