|
Cell Phones And
Cancer. Should You be Concered? Part 1
EM Field Meter
Life Bluetube Headsets
Cell Phone Sensitivity
Cell Phone Towers Health Effects
Vicki When the occasional coverage regarding the potential connection
between cell phones and cancer crosses my radar, one thing I
have noticed that these stories are almost universally short
on is actionable information. One says there is a
connection. One says there isn't a connection. Another says
the jury is out. So what? Given my options, what am I
supposed to do with this information? Although it's my
opinion, I'm about to tell you what I'm going to do with it.
What you do is, of course, up to you.
http://www.cellphoneradiationprotection.com/reports/cell-phone-cancer-02.shtml
One thing I learned in the course of researching this blog
is that you have to be careful about who you present that
question to. Some will automatically read between the lines
and assume that you might be basing your purchase decisions
on this information and they'll more or less tell you that
doing so is a dumb idea. So, before I continue, let me make
three things absolutely clear about the connection between
cell phone radiation and cancer - three facts that, for the
foreseeable future, will guide my decision-making about
handset purchases and, hopefully, yours as well.
The first important fact about the connection between cell
phone radiation and cancer is that there's a group of people
who, based on the research they've seen, will emphatically
say that the results prove that there's no connection
between cell phones and brain cancer. You don't have to
think too hard about who some of these people must be (the
ones with a business to protect). As best as I can tell, the
basis of their claims is a deduction. Since there is no body
of research to have conclusively proven a connection between
cell phone radiation and cancer, we can make the deduction
that the connection doesn't exist. That's how a lot of
cause-and-effect science works and it's fair to say that on
a case-by-case basis (for example, whether the research is
about the connection between cell phones and cancer or the
effectiveness of the color red in signaling motorists to
stop at a stop sign), we can be hypocrites when it comes to
putting our faith in some deductions, but not others.
The second important fact about the connection between cell
phone radiation and cancer is that there's another group of
people, who, based on the research they've seen, will
emphatically say that more research needs to be done. Some
in this group are more prepared to lean in the direction of
a connection than others, but virtually all agree that, at
the very least, the results so far are too inconclusive to
rule the connection out. Many researchers and scientists are
in this group.
The third fact is that before a cell phone can be put on the
U.S. market, it has to live up to a lot of federal
regulations and one of them is the maximum SAR level.
Virtually everyone I've spoken regarding this issue cites
the 1.6 W/kg maximum, and that fact is confirmed by a page
on the Federal Communications Commission's Web site that
says "The FCC limit for public exposure from cellular
telephones is an SAR level of 1.6 watts per kilogram (1.6
W/kg).
Given these three facts — the existence of two groups and
the FCC regulations — I'm not prepared to go out on a limb
and warn you that cell phones cause cancer, or that I even
suspect they do. But, in my opinion, if you're a person that
would rather be safe than sorry when it comes to your
personal safety (as I am), this is enough information to
affect how you buy cell phones.
First and foremost in my mind is that the jury is clearly
still out. Though hardly anybody will unequivocally tell you
that cell phones cause cancer, there are enough respected
voices on the topic that say it's too early to unequivocally
say they don't.
Via a telephone interview, one such researcher — The
University of Washington's Henry Lai — even said (verbatim)
"the jury is still out." We talked about a number of
scientific reasons, unresearched scenarios, and newer
studies which proved to me that, at the very least, there
are plenty of bases left to cover before anyone can begin to
conclusively swing in either direction. On the scientific
front, Lai talked about how there are differences in opinion
over testing methodology.
For example, Lai thinks it's fair to question how much brain
tissue should be involved in a radiation test. "Should it be
10 grams or one gram?" asked Lai. "With 10 grams, the
radiation is much more diluted than with one gram. Why not
seek to minimize the dilution by going with one gram or even
less. One gram of brain tissue has over a billion brain
cells in it. All you need is one cell to be damaged to
become cancerous." Lai advocates tests that seek to maximize
the exposure of each cell, rather than to dilute it. Makes
sense to me. Worst-case-scenario testing is common in many
other things us humans do. Why not this? Says Lai, "The cell
phone companies advocate the 10-gram approach." I'm sure
they have their reasons. Does it matter? What's more
important is that there are enough smart people who don't
agree.
I asked Lai about different common scenarios. At first Lai
talked about testing phones while people are talking on them
because that's when they're transmitting. But what about
when people aren't talking on them? Today's digital phones,
some of which are also e-mail devices, are constantly in
contact with the network. What's the difference between the
radiation we're getting when the phone isn't "in use," when
it's ringing, and when we're talking on it? Marry those
three to where the phone is at any given point. Just before
my old Nextel phones use to ring, the speakers in my car
made a funny noise. If the phone was lying near the
electrical socket by the sink — the one with the built-in
circuit breaker — the circuit breaker would pop just before
it rang.
Clearly, the phone is emitting something in the process of
ringing. (Did any brain cells pop?) "What do you think that
was about?" I asked Lai. If you're using some sort of
headset but the phone is still on your belt or in your
pocket, and it's idle, ringing or in use, then what? Or,
what if you're using a speaker phone? Given a phone with a
particular SAR rating, what are the effects of distance on
the radiation levels? Lai responded that that these
questions were all great ones to ask and that it's quite
simple: more work needs to be done. (Citing a very recent
study that explored the connection between cell phone-like
radiation and sperm damage, Lai also suggested that men
might want to think twice before putting a cell phone in
their pockets.)
Cell Phones And Cancer. Should You be Concered? Part 2
Guinea Conakry
Belgium, Brussels,
Croatia Zagreb
Albania Tirana
Uganda Kampala
Serbia Belgrade
Roseville California USA
Lithuania, Villinus,
Germany, Berlin,
City of Shellharbour Australia
http://www.emfnews.org/store |
