Only use your mobile if it's really important

When the chairman of the Health Protection Agency a nd the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB) is reported as being worried enough about the safety of mobile phones to ban his own grandchildren from using them, the rest of us should take heed. What does Sir William Stewart know that we don't?

The latest NRPB advice on the use of mobile phones is due to be issued today, but I don't expect any earth-shattering revelations. Yesterday's reports of Sir William Stewart's concerns are probably more to do with personal frustration than any new scientific data.

Sir William warned the nation five years ago that not enough was known about the long-term safety of mobile use in children, but his concerns appear to have been ignored, by parents and children alike.

One in four primary school children and nine out of 10 secondary school children now have their own mobile - twice as many as when Sir William first voiced his concerns.

Research findings have been contradictory. Reviews by respected groups like the American National Cancer Institute and the British Advisory Group on Non-Ionising Radiation have dismissed links with cancer, as did a recent respected study led by Sir William. On the other hand, Swedish research has suggested that brain tumours are more likely among heavy mobile users (an hour or more a day) and a study in Finland - home of the mobile giant Nokia - has shown that prolonged mobile use leads to significant changes in brain chemistry which could predispose people to long-term damage.

Whatever the real story, the risks are likely to be small. It's generally okay to assume that if doctors can't agree on whether something is safe or not, it is unlikely to be very bad for you, but if anyone is likely to be damaged-MY ADVICE IS: it will be our children. Their skulls are thinner and their brains smaller, so, dose for dose, they are far more susceptible to radiation than adults.

The industry rejects such concerns and says that it is the job of parents, not regulatory authorities, to decide whether a child has a mobile, and how often he/she is allowed to use it. But then they would say that, wouldn't they - judging by my teenage daughters' monthly bills the industry is far more dependent on young users than it would care to admit.

As a parent, I strongly believe that the benefits of owning a mobile - such as being in constant contact and able to get help if required - outweigh the potential hazards, but, in the absence of conclusive proof of safety, it pays to be cautious.

My advice is:

Choose a phone that emits less radiation. Every handset on sale in the UK is tested to measure how much radiation penetrates the user's head, and the results are published as specific absorption rate (SAR) values. The European Council recommends a maximum SAR of two, but there is tremendous variation - my Nokia comes in at 0.63, roughly four times higher than a Sony Eriksson Z600.

Mobile-phone manufacturers are quick to point out that anything under two is regarded as safe, but surely lower must be better. Visit www.mmfai.org to find out the SAR rating before you buy. Don't encourage heavy use. Go for the cheapest plan with the fewest inclusive minutes, so that your child only uses his/her mobile when they have no other option. It is not a toy, so don't encourage them to treat it like one.