Another Deadly Brain Cancer Lawsuit Filed Against Cell Phone Companies

Photo of a little boy in a business suit holding a cell phone up to his head
You may have already heard about the link between cell phones and brain tumors, as several of our past articles have covered this topic from various angles. Cell phone radiation has been shown in hundreds of studies to increase a person’s likelihood of developing several types of cancer, including glioblastomas, which are an aggressive and deadly type of brain tumor. The body of science that proves this is increasing each year, and although the government regulatory entities and cell phone companies seem more intent than ever on covering this up, this truth has been trickling out into public awareness anyway.

Did you know there are currently over 70 active lawsuits against the cell phone companies from individuals who got brain cancer from cell phone radiation? Some of these cases have been sitting in the state and federal court system with very little progress for over 20 years! The defendants in these cases, which include most of the cell phone developers and service providers, as well as regulatory agencies like the FCC (Federal Communications Commission) and CTIA (Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association), have been taking advantage of some unethical loopholes in the law to keep these cases from progressing to evidentiary hearings and jury trials for as long as they possibly can, both of which would incriminate them beyond any doubt.

They are just delaying the inevitable. The truth is getting out there, and it won’t stay hidden from the mainstream awareness forever!  

Fatal brain cancer case in Louisiana could change the game

A new case was just filed in April of 2021, for the wrongful death of a 49-year-old Louisiana pastor, who used cell phones for 25 years. He developed an aggressive glioblastoma, which refers to stage 4 cancer of the glial cells in the brain, at the beginning of 2019. After many surgeries and therapies, loss of his ability to live life with any semblance of normalcy to the great devastation of this man, his wife and two sons, he passed away at the end of 2020.

His name was Frank Aaron Walker, and this case is known in short as Walker vs. Motorola, although the defendants include a total of 9 separate but interconnected companies and regulatory agencies who were all complicit in the fraud and deceit alleged in this case.

His wife and sons, who are the plaintiffs in this case, allege that the way Frank Allen Walker used cell phones for 25 years was promoted as safe, normal and completely harmless, and if he had known of the dangers, he would have used cell phones more safely or not at all. In the case, the evidence is laid out that proves that these companies have known for decades about the harms of cell phone radiation, and have continually chosen to hide this knowledge from cell phone users and the general public.

The family is represented by Hunter Lundy of Lundy, Lundy, Soileau & South, LLP, one of the leading personal injury law firms in the country, and by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., chairman and chief legal counsel for Children’s Health Defense (CHD). Both Lundy and Kennedy are also involved in other active cases on the health effects of wireless radiation.

For this case, they chose to file it in a Federal court in Louisiana. Most of the other 70+ active cases that are currently slow going were filed in a State court in D.C., and since the Federal courts are subject to a different process than the State courts, this case could proceed much more quickly than the other cases, potentially even helping to move the other ones forward! To learn more about how this works and the complex legalities of the court processes in general and these cases in particular, listen to this interview with Hunter Lundy by Dafna Tachover of Children’s Health Defense.

The main goal that will likely help all of these cases to break through is to get a solid evidentiary hearing, where expert scientists can explain to the court the large body of science, from older studies to very new ones, proving that cell phone radiation is harmful and can cause brain tumors. There are an impressive number of respectable scientists from all over the world that are ready to do this, as soon as an evidentiary hearing can be organized for these cases. If a jury is allowed to hear this out, there will be no way that these companies can continue to deceive the public, and the truth will come out.

History shows that with toxic products the public has been deceived into believing are safe for decades by corporations and the government, such as cigarettes and glyphosate (Monsanto’s RoundUp), the tide finally turned once one or more jury trials were allowed to happen. Regular people with common sense, when they hear the full deluge of evidence of harm, are no longer deceived by smooth marketing slogans and the attempted debunking of solid science and discrediting of respectable scientists.  

The dirty history of telecom & government dismissal of wireless harms

Most people don’t know how long this has been going on, and how deep the corruption goes. This lawsuit lays it all out, and it is shocking. You can even read this 69-page Walker vs. Motorola case yourself, if you want to get the full story!

The lawsuit details numerous peer-reviewed scientific studies, including U.S. government funded studies, that show that cell phone radiation causes cancer (as well as DNA damage, which is a precursor to cancer). The plaintiffs allege that the telecom industry has misrepresented the scientific evidence, suppressed credible evidence and and has conspired to conceal or alter results of studies.

In several instances over the past three decades, credible scientists were hired by the telecom industry to do studies to “prove” that cell phone use was safe. Every single time, their findings showed otherwise, and in every case, when industry didn’t like the results the scientists gave them, they went to work to make sure the study was never published, and if the scientist refused to be silent and said they would report the results anyway, industry then spent much effort to destroy that scientist’s reputation.

One example was the work of Henry Lai, PhD, in 1994. He was hired by the CTIA, Motorola and other telecommunications companies to conduct studies demonstrating the safety of cell phones. However, the experiments he did ended up showing DNA damage from radiation similar to what cell phones use. They did everything they could to prevent those studies from being published, and when that didn’t work, they tried hard to discredit the scientific reputation of Dr. Lai. To this day, Henry Lai’s industry funded studies are among the best and most incriminating, especially considering the opposite results were expected by those who originally funded the studies!

After Lai’s findings disappointed the industry, they hired other researchers to attempt to disprove these unfavorable results. Again, subsequent research confirmed Lai’s findings, which they also refused to publish.

The science proving wireless harms is still rolling out at a steady pace, and some of the most significant results yet have come out only in recent years, while these cases have been sitting in the courts waiting for action. In 2011, the IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) examined the entire body of research on wireless radiation, then decided to classify it as a Class 2B Possible Carcinogen. At the time, they stated that the only reason it was considered “Possible” instead of a “Probable Carcinogen” (Class 2A) was a lack of animal studies. In their estimation, every angle of research, including extensive human epidemiological studies, had indicated wireless radiation as cancer causing, and all they needed was more animal studies to make for a more certain judgment.

Since that time, the two most thorough and comprehensive animal studies have been published. The most notorious is the NTP (National Toxicology Program) study, which was a long term (10 year) and very expensive ($30 million in taxpayer money) government commissioned study. Just like the studies mentioned in this article previously, their stated motive for this study was to “finally put to rest” the idea that cell phones cause cancer, and to prove their safety. The study results showed the opposite, pointing specifically to widespread DNA damage in rats and mice, as well as gliomas of the brain (what Frank Walker had) and schwannomas of the heart.

After seemingly being surprised and even alarmed by the initial findings, spokespersons for these government organizations did a one-eighty and decided not to announce the findings publicly, besides a short explanation on the FDA website downplaying the importance of the study, stating that the animal study won’t apply to humans. This bold and contradictory statement was made after the IARC had announced that they need animal studies specifically, to further prove wireless harms. Also, this study’s design and implementation was flawless, and done with utmost quality and care to ensure that this will apply to humans. You can read more about the NTP study on wireless radiation in our previous article on the topic.

A couple years ago, results from another large, long-term study at the Ramazzini Institute in Italy were published that replicate the results of the NTP study. This study on over 2,400 rodents also found central and peripheral nervous system cancers (specifically gliomas and schwannomas) from exposure to radiofrequency radiation. Scientists aware of the results of both studies are strongly recommending that the IARC (International Agency for Research on Cancer) reclassify radiofrequency radiation from “possible” to a “probable” human carcinogen.

We have all the science we need to show with absolute certainty that wireless radiation is harmful to living organisms. Now we just need the platform to get the information out there and hold these companies liable, which is what a proper evidentiary hearing and jury trial will be for these court cases!  

The telecoms have patents for cell phone safety technology, which they never implemented

Perhaps the biggest insult in all of this is the little known fact that these cell phone companies have already created technology that would make cell phones safer, but this technology was never implemented. They know how to make cell phones safer. This means they also know that cell phone radiation is inherently harmful. If it wasn’t, why would they investigate safety devices? There are at least 14 actual U.S. patents for these devices, applied for and received by the manufacturers. However, they failed to ever implement these upgrades into the design of their phones! It’s easy to guess that the reason for this is because if they add these things in, that would be a public admission of the inherent harm of their products, which they have insisted for decades doesn’t exist. Making cell phones safer now would be admitting that they have been lying for 20-30 years, which would automatically incriminate them for thousands of potential personal injury and wrongful death cases. It would be a mess, and may even put them out of business. So instead, they continue to promote that the way cell phones are commonly used is “completely safe”. Nothing to see here.

Almost all of these patents were applied for in the ‘90s. That is a very long time to be aware of the harms of a product, as well as the solution, and to still do nothing about it! Here are a few examples from the lawsuit text:
  • On October 24, 1991, Hitachi received a patent to reduce the cell phone user’s exposure to RF radiation “to prevent the health of the user from being injured.”
  • On August 11, 1992, Mitsubishi was issued a patent for a cordless telephone designed to “reduce the effect of an electromagnetic wave onto a head of a human body” by coating the handset with shielding material on the side closest to the user’s head.
  • On December 26, 1995, Motorola filed a patent application for an antenna with an electromagnetic shield which results in “little to no radiation directed toward the body of the user.”
  • On April 9, 1996, a patent issued to Kevin and Norval Luxon for a shield apparatus which utilizes electromagnetic radiation absorbing materials “disposed about the antenna and portable wireless transmitting apparatus and between the user and the antenna and transmitting apparatus to shield or protect the user from the potentially harmful radiation emissions from the wireless communication apparatus.”
  • On July 28, 1998, Nokia received a patent for a shielding layer between the antenna and the user to reduce the electromagnetic irradiation of the user. The application says the cell phone antenna is a “few centimeters from the brain, the hearing organs, and the organ of equilibrium. Although a direct heating effect could be left without further consideration, it has been suggested that modulated RF radiation induces changes in the electrical status, i.e., in the ion balance of nerve cells. A continuous localized exposure to radio frequency irradiation has been suggested to weaken myelin sheath of cells and to eventually lead to an impairment of hearing capability, vertigo, etc. It has been suggested that radio frequency irradiation may stimulate extra growth among supportive cells in the nerve system, which in the worst case it has been suggested could [lead] to a development of malignant tumor, e.g., glioma form supportive cells.”
There are several more examples similar to this. They have known all along about the harms of their products.  

What happens next with the cell phone brain tumor court cases?

As we explained earlier, many of the currently active court cases are happening in the Superior Court for the District of Columbia, which is a State court. The first one was filed in 2001, and since then, 12 of the later cases have been consolidated with the first one for the purposes of an upcoming evidentiary hearing. The first case is referred to, in short, as Murray vs. Motorola, so all 13 consolidated cases are now under that name. The evidentiary hearing for this group of cases is scheduled for July of 2021. The hearing will determine which of the plaintiff’s experts are considered qualified to testify in trial, by deciding if their opinions are based on scientifically reliable evidence.

Until this hearing, none of the other 70 cases in State court will be allowed to proceed. However, the Walker vs. Motorola case that was filed in Federal court in Louisiana in April will proceed separately from these other cases.

Another issue that is holding back the Murray cases is that after a particularly powerful document was submitted this March by the plaintiffs, a 176-page expert opinion by Dr. Christopher Portier, the defendants responded by requesting that no evidence that was not in existence in 2013 should be allowed. Their stated reasoning is convoluted: 2013 was when the first evidentiary hearing in these cases happened, where they approved 5 out of 8 of the plaintiff’s experts, but then the court changed the standard they abide by for expert opinions (from Frye to Daubert), which ended up delaying the progress of these cases by an additional 7 years for various reasons. It’s obvious to us that the real reason they made this request is because they’re afraid of letting Dr. Portier speak, and because some of the biggest scientific blows to the cell phone industry’s safety claims have come since 2013!

Christopher Portier was the director of the National Center for Environmental Health at the CDC, associate director of the National Institute for Health and Environmental Science and associate director of the National Toxicology Program (NTP). He is also a scientific advisor for the World Health Organization (WHO), and was a member of the IARC working group that classified wireless radiation as a Group 2B Possible Carcinogen in 2011.

Those are some pretty major credentials.

Dr. Portier states in the conclusion of his report, “In my opinion, RF exposure probably causes gliomas and neuromas and, given the human and experimental evidence, I assert that, to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty, the probability that RF exposure causes gliomas and neuromas is high.”

Now the court in the Murray cases has to decide whether to allow Portier’s testimony, as well as other post-2013 evidence. With the Walker case in Louisiana, this evidence is already part of the initial lawsuit, so this case is not bound by this same limitation. Therefore, it may progress much more quickly, possibly even paving the way for all the other cases to move forward, as well.

As of June 2021 in the Walker vs. Motorola case, the initial papers have been served to the defendents and they are awaiting a response. We will keep you updated on the progress of this case (and all of the others)!

The truth coming out is inevitable. It is just a matter of time!  


Children’s Health Defense: “Family Sues Telecom Giants, Alleging They Hid Risks of Cell Phone Radiation That Caused Man’s Brain Cancer” –

“April Marie Walker, et al., v. Motorola Mobility, LLC, et al.” –

Older post Newer post

This post copyright ©2020-2023 Blushield USA. All rights reserved.

Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission is strictly prohibited.