Mobile phones: A public health time bomb? (http://networks.silicon.com/mobile/0,39024665,39179638,00.htm)
Worse than asbestos and smoking, claims neurosurgeon

Mobile phones could represent a public health time bomb akin to asbestos or smoking, according to a study by neurosurgeon Dr Vini G Khurana. It suggests there is growing evidence of a link between excessive long-term use of mobiles and certain types of brain tumours - reigniting a long-running debate about the safety of the technology.

During a 14-month-long study Khurana reviewed more than 100 studies on the effects of mobile phone use in recent medical and scientific literature - in addition to press and internet coverage - and concludes "there is a significant and increasing body of evidence… for a link between mobile phone usage and certain brain tumours".

The risk may be as great as a two- to four-fold increase of developing a tumour on the same side of the head as the 'preferred side' for mobile phone use, the report warns.

It states: "There is a growing and statistically significant body of evidence reporting that brain tumours such as vestibular schwannoma (acoustic neuroma) and astrocytoma are associated with 'heavy' and 'prolonged' mobile phone use, particularly on the same side as the 'preferred ear' for telephony…

"It is anticipated that this danger has far broader public health ramifications than asbestos and smoking, and directly concerns all of us, particularly the younger generation, including very young children."

Khurana, a Mayo Clinic-trained neurosurgeon with an advanced neurosurgery Fellowship in Cerebrovascular and Complex Tumor Surgery from the Barrow Neurological Institute in Phoenix, Arizona, and a fellow of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons, points out that previous studies which found no evidence of a link between mobile use and an increased risk of cancer often did not include enough long-term mobile phone users in their study sample.

Because 10 or more years is the length of time it can take for tumours to develop, Khurana says health studies of mobile phones must consider lengthy exposure to the devices - of a decade or more. He believes mobile technology has now been around long enough for any public health effects to begin emerging.

The report states: "The 'incubation time' or 'latency' (i.e., the time from commencement of regular mobile phone usage to the diagnosis of a malignant solid brain tumour in a susceptible individual) may be in the order of 10 to 20 years. In the years 2008 to 2012, we will have reached the appropriate length of follow-up time to begin to definitively observe the impact of this global technology on brain tumour incidence rates."

Yes, the debate about health dangers from cell phones has been going on a long time. Maybe long enough to finally get some conclusive proof that they are dangerous if overused. (Not to mention the numbers of distracted-while-driving auto accidents/deaths they cause...)

Hear that all you cell-heads? Better make sure your health care insurance is up to par.

I've been thinking about starting a board about this topic, but never got to it and I'm glad you did.

Cell phones are very bad for the brain, no question about it, but of course the nay-sayers will dispute that wholeheartedly.

*sets timer*

Coca cola keeps you from getting pregnant, TV will make you go blind, dancing causes indecent sexual arousal, making faces will cause your face to freeze in that position, lieing makes your nose grow longer, deoderant causes breast cancer, wearing hats makes you bald, masterbation will grow hair on your palms, etc.

Being born causes you to die. Therfore ......

Im kinda glad i dont use a cell phone!! (I think they look like crap and are very hard to use (The older ones in the 80s and 90s were MUCH BETTER))

i'm more worried about how they immediately make the user stupid.

i'm more worried about how they immediately make the user stupid.

:thumbs:

we're all gonna die from something. Except Scummy,she's gonna die of nothing:p

My mom gave me a radiation shield for the antenna of my phone that she ordered off the internet. They just started selling in them in the U.S., but they've been available in Europe for a while. They're called "Sar Shields" if anyone's interested, and they're supposed to reduce the radiation emitted by your phone by like 85%. My mom has always said that when she talks on the cell too long her head and ear get very hot and start hurting, and she had three phones in a row that the cell phone company had to replace because it turned out they gave off amounts of radiation that were unacceptable... So if you think your phone is giving you headaches, bring it in to your cell provider to get tested - it might be defective and giving off more radiation than it should, and if so they'll replace it for you.

My mom gave me a radiation shield for the antenna of my phone that she ordered off the internet. They just started selling in them in the U.S., but they've been available in Europe for a while. They're called "Sar Shields" if anyone's interested, and they're supposed to reduce the radiation emitted by your phone by like 85%.
Key word: "Supposed". Several studies have shown that those things are useless.

I wonder if blue tooth technology helps any with the amount of radiation you are exposed to. Anyone know?

I wonder if blue tooth technology helps any with the amount of radiation you are exposed to. Anyone know?
Bluetooth devices like headsets, which I imagine are class 2 devices, give off a maximum of of 2.5 mW, in I believe the 2.4 GHz range. Cell phones give off radiation of up to 2 W, I believe in the 1.1 GHz range. So, yes, cell phones will dump more radiation into your body than Bluetooth. Keep in mind, too, the inverse square law, which says that radiation drops commensurate to the square of the distance.

Key word: "Supposed". Several studies have shown that those things are useless.
Better safe than sorry. The fact is that we haven't had cell phones long enough to know whether they DO cause brain tumors over periods of 30 or 40 years of use. But we'll know soon enough. :)

Better safe than sorry. The fact is that we haven't had cell phones long enough to know whether they DO cause brain tumors over periods of 30 or 40 years of use. But we'll know soon enough. :)
Non-ionizing radiation tends not to be carcinogenic. Remember that microwave radiation (the radiation emitted by cell phones) is just electromagnetic radiation, i.e. the same damn stuff as radio waves, infrared, ultraviolet, and light. EM radiation is very well-studied, and the energies produced by cell phones just aren't high enough to do any damage.

Again, better safe than sorry. My mom's old cell phone made her head hurt so badly she would cry and stuff started oozing out of her ear. Yay, sounds perfectly harmless to me!

Again, better safe than sorry. My mom's old cell phone made her head hurt so badly she would cry and stuff started oozing out of her ear. Yay, sounds perfectly harmless to me!
sounds like an ear infection, aggravated by excessive volume.

sounds like an ear infection, aggravated by excessive volume.
No. It was not an ear infection, and like I already said, her cell phone was tested by the company and it was apparently defective - gave off so much radiation that they were obliged to replace it.

No. It was not an ear infection, and like I already said, her cell phone was tested by the company and it was apparently defective - gave off so much radiation that they were obliged to replace it.
did she see a Dr who told her she didn't have and ear infection? i'm not saying the phone wasn't defective, just that it could be an amazing coincidence.

Oh and also, my mother has very sensitive hearing... She complains that her phone is too loud for her except on the very lowest volume setting. So I doubt that she would be using "excessive volume". Even I never turn mine up to high, and I'm half deaf!

Oh and also, my mother has very sensitive hearing... She complains that her phone is too loud for her except on the very lowest volume setting. So I doubt that she would be using "excessive volume". Even I never turn mine up to high, and I'm half deaf!
excessive for her;)

that also sounds like an ear infection-where's Dr Mom when you need her!

did she see a Dr who told her she didn't have and ear infection? i'm not saying the phone wasn't defective, just that it could be an amazing coincidence.
As far as I remember, she thought it was an ear infection at first and went to the doctor for it... This was a few years ago, and all I know is that Sprint had to replace two of her cell phones and the last one which did the same thing she finally just threw away and canceled her service.... They must've learned how to fix it now because she's had sprint again for the past year and no problems with the current phone.

that also sounds like an ear infection-where's Dr Mom when you need her!
My mom knows ear infections... I had them pretty much constantly from age 3 to age 11.

we're all gonna die from something. Except Scummy,she's gonna die of nothing:p

Um.... ya!


But lookee here...


"If Mobile Phones Were a Type of Food, They Simply Would Not be Licensed"

It's a lengthy article but very interesting.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2000/12/17/mobile-phones-part-five.aspx

Um.... ya!


But lookee here...


"If Mobile Phones Were a Type of Food, They Simply Would Not be Licensed"

It's a lengthy article but very interesting.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2000/12/17/mobile-phones-part-five.aspx
food doesn't get licensed:confused:

As far as I remember, she thought it was an ear infection at first and went to the doctor for it... This was a few years ago, and all I know is that Sprint had to replace two of her cell phones and the last one which did the same thing she finally just threw away and canceled her service.... They must've learned how to fix it now because she's had sprint again for the past year and no problems with the current phone.
Sprint doesn't make the phone, they just "sell" it.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2005/03/26/cell-phones.aspx

Does this sound familiar?
 Nearly everyone uses it
 Has wide social acceptance
 Highly habit forming

More hints:
 More and more studies come out documenting harm from the product
 Product manufacturer denies dangers

Sure sounds like the tobacco industry, doesn't it? Well, it would appear the cellular phone industry is repeating the same path. We all know that history has a tendency to repeat itself, and that certainly seems to be the case here.

Critics claim the cell phone industry, just like the tobacco industry (Big Tobacco), seems determined to prevent and deny any suggestion that its products might be dangerous; however, years of negative research may prove otherwise.

For example, one study showed that radio waves from mobile phones definitely damage DNA and other cells in the body, and that the damage extended to the next generation of cells. Another research case in particular delivered quite a blow to the cell phone industry: The Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association hired a man to head up a $28-million research program into possible health effects from cellular phones.

Findings revealed that heavy cell phone users experienced:
 An increased rate of brain cancer deaths
 Development of tumors
 Genetic damage

Ironically, the cell phone industry has not commissioned another large-scale study, at least not publicly, since. Why? Because the cell phone industry is a multi-billion-dollar industry that can't afford to find out that, ultimately, cell phones are dangerous. Moreover, similar to Big Tobacco, the cell phone industry will be opened up to large liability claims if they were to start issuing warnings and precautionary tales now, which opens up the possibility that they knew the danger of radio waves all along.
CNET.com March 8, 2005

food doesn't get licensed:confused:

And mobile phones aren't food.

And mobile phones aren't food.
i've had more phones thrown at me than food...but i moved quicker back then:)

i've had more phones thrown at me than food...but i moved quicker back then:)


Alrighty then.

:confused: :rolleyes: :confused: :rolleyes:

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/wireless/phones/2004-12-21-mobilerads_x.htm

Mobile phone radiation harms DNA, new study finds
MUNICH/AMSTERDAM (Reuters) —

Radio waves from mobile phones harm body cells and damage DNA in laboratory conditions, according to a new study majority-funded by the European Union, researchers said on Monday.

The so-called Reflex study, conducted by 12 research groups in seven European countries, did not prove that mobile phones are a risk to health but concluded that more research is needed to see if effects can also be found outside a lab.

The $100 billion a year mobile phone industry asserts that there is no conclusive evidence of harmful effects as a result of electromagnetic radiation.

About 650 million mobile phones are expected to be sold to consumers this year, and over 1.5 billion people around the world use one.

The research project, which took four years and which was coordinated by the German research group Verum, studied the effect of radiation on human and animal cells in a laboratory.

After being exposed to electromagnetic fields that are typical for mobile phones, the cells showed a significant increase in single and double-strand DNA breaks. The damage could not always be repaired by the cell. DNA carries the genetic material of an organism and its different cells.

"There was remaining damage for future generation of cells," said project leader Franz Adlkofer.
This means the change had procreated. Mutated cells are seen as a possible cause of cancer.

The radiation used in the study was at levels between a Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) of between 0.3 and 2 watts per kilogramme. Most phones emit radio signals at SAR levels of between 0.5 and 1 W/kg.
SAR is a measure of the rate of radio energy absorption in body tissue, and the SAR limit recommended by the International Commission of Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection is 2 W/kg.

The study also measured other harmful effects on cells.
Because of the lab set-up, the researchers said the study did not prove any health risks. But they added that "the genotoxic and phenotypic effects clearly require further studies ... on animals and human volunteers."

Adlkofer advised against the use of a mobile phone when an alternative fixed line phone was available, and recommended the use of a headset connected to a cell phone whenever possible.
"We don't want to create a panic, but it is good to take precautions," he said, adding that additional research could take another four or five years.

Previous independent studies into the health effects of mobile phone radiation have found it may have some effect on the human body, such as heating up body tissue and causing headaches and nausea, but no study that could be independently repeated has proved that radiation had permanent harmful effects.
None of the world's top six mobile phone vendors could immediately respond to the results of the study.

In a separate announcement in Hong Kong, where consumers tend to spend more time talking on a mobile phone than in Europe, a German company called G-Hanz introduced a new type of mobile phone which it claimed had no harmful radiation, as a result of shorter bursts of the radio signal.

Again, better safe than sorry. My mom's old cell phone made her head hurt so badly she would cry and stuff started oozing out of her ear. Yay, sounds perfectly harmless to me!
Look up the definition of anecdotal evidence, and get back to me.

Look up the definition of anecdotal evidence, and get back to me.

Always the nay-sayer, aint ya?

pfffffttttt!!!!!!!!!

:hitout:

I wonder if blue tooth technology helps any with the amount of radiation you are exposed to. Anyone know?

Here's an article about BlueTooth vs. BlueTube. It says the BlueTube is much safer than the BlueTooth. I don't have either cuz I rarely use my cell phone but since you asked...

http://products.mercola.com/blue-tube-headset/

Look up the definition of anecdotal evidence, and get back to me.
Yeah, because I totally said that that was evidence of all cell phones being dangerous. My point was that some cell phones are defective and at least potentially dangerous. Are you trying to tell me that you know for sure that NO cell phones are dangerous AT ALL?

Yeah, because I totally said that that was evidence of all cell phones being dangerous. My point was that some cell phones are defective and at least potentially dangerous. Are you trying to tell me that you know for sure that NO cell phones are dangerous AT ALL?

They are all potentially hazardous to one's health.

Some worse than others but none of them are safe.

They are all potentially hazardous to one's health.

Some worse than others but none of them are safe.
Scummy, it's just as silly to say that as to say that none of them are dangerous. There's really not enough evidence to say that.

Scummy, it's just as silly to say that as to say that none of them are dangerous. There's really not enough evidence to say that.

I have to disagree. There have been numerous studies and plenty of evidence to say that... and that's why I said it. This information isn't really that new, but the majority of folks will look the other way and say its hogwash, as I've seen here today and will see here tomorrow and the day after that, and the day after that, etc.

Take your blinders off, people. Read the studies and keep an open mind, assuming that's possible for even some of you.

:rolleyes:

Scummy, there are just as many studies that conclude exactly the opposite. It's a matter of which studies you believe, not a matter of any concrete facts.

Take your blinders off, people. Read the studies and keep an open mind, assuming that's possible for even some of you.
You don't know dick about science. It's really laughable that you try to seem knowledgeable about science, when all you do is quote quacks and try to pass it off as science. It's really quite ridiculous. You're just as bad as the religious right, in fact. Or the "MARIHUANA MAKES YOU CRAZY!" people.

I have to disagree. There have been numerous studies and plenty of evidence to say that... and that's why I said it. This information isn't really that new, but the majority of folks will look the other way and say its hogwash, as I've seen here today and will see here tomorrow and the day after that, and the day after that, etc.

Take your blinders off, people. Read the studies and keep an open mind, assuming that's possible for even some of you.

:rolleyes:

look at me and tell me more genetic mutation is going to be worse?

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o245/mikezila_bucket/60ac.jpg

You don't know dick about science. It's really laughable that you try to seem knowledgeable about science, when all you do is quote quacks and try to pass it off as science. It's really quite ridiculous. You're just as bad as the religious right, in fact. Or the "MARIHUANA MAKES YOU CRAZY!" people.

Ya, right. Believing the studies of the extended use of cell phones cause at least some damage to the brain/DNA is exactly like believing the "MARIHUANA MAKES YOU CRAZY!" people.

What a hateful fukking jackass you are.

Ya, right. Believing the studies of the extended use of cell phones cause at least some damage to the brain/DNA is exactly like believing the "MARIHUANA MAKES YOU CRAZY!" people.
Yes, it is. Studies have consistently failed to show any causal link between cell phone usage and cancer.

look at me and tell me more genetic mutation is going to be worse?

http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o245/mikezila_bucket/60ac.jpg



I see nothing wrong :o

Ya, right. Believing the studies of the extended use of cell phones cause at least some damage to the brain/DNA is exactly like believing the "MARIHUANA MAKES YOU CRAZY!" people.

What a hateful fukking jackass you are.
Borg does many things, but it's doubtful fucking is one of them:slap:

play nice.:mad:

More jibberish from the luny idiots..... ya right.


http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/04/17/are-cell-phones-more-dangerous-than-smoking.aspx

For every 1 article that says Cell Phones give cancer, there are two that say they don't.

For every 1 article that says Cell Phones give cancer, there are two that say they don't.

Y'know, back in the day (and probably to the present time) the cigarette industry published/funded/etc. all kinds of documentation/studies proving that smoking cigarettes won't cause cancer. They even got medical doctors to recommend smoking for indigestion.

While I'm not saying I believe it, I will say it's entirely possible that the mega-communications companies might be doing the same thing the cigarette companies did all those years.


http://cellphoneuse.org/images/rat_brain.jpg

Y'know, back in the day (and probably to the present time) the cigarette industry published/funded/etc. all kinds of documentation/studies proving that smoking cigarettes won't cause cancer. They even got medical doctors to recommend smoking for indigestion.

While I'm not saying I believe it, I will say it's entirely possible that the mega-communications companies might be doing the same thing the cigarette companies did all those years.


http://cellphoneuse.org/images/rat_brain.jpg



You are right but please give me my brain back. I need to make another phone call.



http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/9429/oddanimals136hf4.jpg