Brain tumour increase in Denmark by 40% between 2001-2010


Tumours in brain and nervous system are increasing in Denmark according to the latest report from Danish Cancer Registry. The increase is seen both in men and women.

Text: Mona Nilsson | | Läs denna artikel på svenska

Among men the number of brain tumours have increased by 40% between 2001 and 2010 (per 100 000 inhabitants, age standardised) and among women by 29%. In real numbers it is 268 more cases per year among men and 227 among women that are diagnosed with a tumour in brain or central nervous system.

In Sweden the trend is stable and no increase is reported in the report from Swedish Brain Tumour Registry.

However the Swedish Brain Tumour Registry is known to be suffering from underreporting, which I wrote about some weeks ago. Still the Swedish brain tumour flat trend is promoted by some experts and scientists as ”evidence” that mobile phones don’t increase brain tumour risks.

The Swedish trend was used by the CEFALO scientists, that claimed that they only looked at the Swedish data because they ”saw the highest risk in Sweden” for brain tumours in their own study on children’s and adolescent’s brain tumour risk from mobile phone use. Based on primarily the Swedish trend, and not their own obtained data, they claimed the results was ”reassuring”.

Also in their editorial, accompanying the last updated version of the scandalous “world’s-largest-brain-tumour-study” (the study excluded the 200 000 of the heaviest users and instead put them as unexposed in the control group), Anders Ahlbom and Maria Feychting from the Karolinska Institute put forward the Swedish brain tumour trend, and interestingly not the Danish trends. Anders Ahlbom and Maria Feychting both are members of ICNIRP, that has recommended today’s limits for mobile telephony, that would have to be lowered if a brain tumour risk was admitted, with huge negative impacts for the industry.

Text: Mona Nilsson

  • NewsVoice kräver äkta för- och efternamn för den som vill kommentera efter artiklar. Varför?
  • I kommentarsfältet har varje person ansvar för sin egen kommentar. Kommentarer som bryter mot kommentarsreglerna eller svensk lag kan tas bort eller ändras.
  • Donera gärna till NewsVoice, en gratistidning som är beroende av läsarnas stöd. Pengarna går till undersökande och oberoende journalistik.


  1. It can be an insidious health hazard within a few years in all cellular dense communities unless authorities seriously address the issue, I fear…

  2. Only questions asked are responded to. I have taken some interest in asking about anamnestic procedures for cancer victims. It should be interesting to know abot the victim’sexposure history to learn about environmental impacts on health. Interestingly I only know abot one case where such considerations worked (case was cancer from dioxin exposure!) Otherwisw doctor’s seem to be extremely disinterested in knowing what may have caused the cancer, except smoking…

  3. As electromagnetic pollution expert I can say that this data is important, but these data are only there, here in Spain we have no epidemiological studies on the subject, and is refusing to do it, sure would meet with surprises, thanks for spreading these studies because they serve to promote the precautionary principle claimed on wireless systems,

    • I have a large collectionof material showing the general corporate strategy to deny any need for the precautionary principle. It’s an interesting notion here that the keepers of the national cancer data in Sweden possibly have behaved as gatekeepers as well!

  4. Thank you for unearthing these important statistics. People need to understand that there are biological effects from pulsed radiofrequency radiation emitted from cell phones. You can read some of the research at i am especially concerned about children because their brains absorb more radiation than adult brains. The RF penetrates through half of the brain of a 10 year old-child with a cell phone placed to his/her ear. It penetrates 75% of the way through a 5 year-old child’s brain. We don’t know what the long term health consequences will be for our children.

    • Dear Christine,

      After doing some reading myself, I found the same information, about children from 5 to 10 years absorb a lot more cell phone radiation, which is why I became proactive at getting
      radiation protection for my family and me. You can lower SAR exposure in a 75% to 95% depending on the cell phone model.


      • Hardell once told me that when the Interphone studies were recalculated the same way his group had done, the results fell out equal, so it should not be a surprise to find increasing numbers in thw age group that needed to be hidden, just count on others for another result…

KOMMENTERA [Se kommentarsregler]

Vänligen ange din kommentar!
Vänligen ange ditt namn här