Largest review yet of published research finds that so far there has been 'no indication' of increased risk

There is no clear evidence that radiation from mobile phones can damage public health, despite a surge in scientific studies, according to the largest review yet of published research.

Scientists found no convincing proof that radio waves from mobile phones cause brain tumours or any other type of cancer, but cautioned that they had too little information to assess the risk beyond 15 years of usage.

The report by the Health Protection Agency's independent advisory group on non-ionising radiation (AGNIR) said it was "important" to watch for signs of rising cancer cases, including monitoring national brain tumour trends, which so far show "no indication" of increased risk.

In the review, "Health Effects from Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields" the advisory group considered hundreds of peer reviewed scientific studies that looked at the effects of mobile phone radiation on cells, animals and people.

"There are still limitations to the published research that preclude a definitive judgement, but the evidence overall has not demonstrated any adverse effects on human health from exposure to radiofrequency fields below internationally accepted guideline levels," said Professor Anthony Swerdlow, chairman of the AGNIR and an epidemiologist at the Institute of Cancer Research.

The advisory group last reviewed the health effects of mobile phones in 2003. Since then, Swerdlow said there was "enormously more" scientific information available and that studies were often better quality than the studies around then.

Some research reviewed by the group found that mobile phone radiation might cause subtle changes to low frequency brain waves that could be picked up by electroencephalograms (EEGs), but it was unclear whether the effects were consistent and had any health implications.

Simon Mann of the HPA said that while the agency was not changing its long-held, precautionary stance that children should refrain from "excessive use" of mobile phones, "the reassurance that can be provided that there are no effects is much stronger than it was 10 years ago".

In making recommendations for future research, the report emphasised a need to focus on new and emerging devices that emit radiofrequency radiation, and to gather more data on cancer risk among those who have used phones for more than 15 years.

"There is no convincing evidence that radiofrequency exposure causes health effects in adults or in children but beyond 15 years for mobile phones, we have to say we have little or no information," Swerdlow said. "I think it is important therefore, to some extent, to keep an eye out on this, which we will do into the future."

"Remember this is an exposure that 20 years ago nobody had and now practically everybody has so you might expect that if there were appreciable effects that you would see them in the tumour rates," he said. "But if this is something that takes 15, 20 years or more to show up – we have no reason to think there is an effect – if it takes a long time to show up, we need to keep watching the rates just in case."

Professor Patricia McKinney at the centre for epidemiology and biostatistics at Leeds University said: "The general public should be reassured by the conclusions on mobile phone use as the current evidence does not support any causal link to brain tumours or other cancers. However, the conclusions relate to mobile phone exposures of up to 15 years and further monitoring of possible risks is needed."