Again: warning on higher risk for cancer from cellphones

[Skybird]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7523109.stm

Let the melee begin. :|\\

[nikimcbee]

So I guess I be the only one w/o brain cancer.:roll: I don't have a cell phone, and I don't want one. Electronic leash.

[SUBMAN1]

So I guess I be the only one w/o brain cancer.:roll: I don't have a cell phone, and I don't want one. Electronic leash.You know I don't have one either! :)

-S

[mcf1]

I have one, not using it much though.
But three weeks weeks ago instead of giving me a cancer, it saved my life, at a secluded crossroad a cab driver ran into my motorcycle and ran away leaving me there in the middle of the road in the summer heat, but luckily I had my cell phone and called an ambulance.
There still are some occasions that you could really use a cell phone.

[Skybird]

I have one, not using it much though.
But three weeks weeks ago instead of giving me a cancer, it saved my life, at a secluded crossroad a cab driver ran into my motorcycle and ran away leaving me there in the middle of the road in the summer heat, but luckily I had my cell phone and called an ambulance.
There still are some occasions that you could really use a cell phone.
Critcism ceetainly is not directed at rare, occasional use of cellphones, or using them in mergencies. Using the daily as the preferred option of commincation in the office, or the tool of routine to cal your friends - this is where any risk from being exposed to their radiation is coming from.

[Sailor Steve]

So I guess I be the only one w/o brain cancer.:roll: I don't have a cell phone, and I don't want one. Electronic leash.You know I don't have one either! :)

-S
If you don't have one, how could he possibly know that?
:rotfl:

[FIREWALL]

Now nobody has or uses it a little cellphones. :roll:

Must be costing all of you a small fortune to fix the dents in your monitors.

Is there a bandwagon you all don't jump on ?

[Takeda Shingen]

I use a cell. Of course, I'll be using it a lot less from now on.

[baggygreen]

I have one,

Don't use it in my line of work, at least not the primary one. Use it occassionally when i have to run around town to do assessments on people for footy, use it to send text messages rather than talk (i dont believe in the hype necessarily, but why risk more than necessary).

The main thing i use my phone for is as a music player/radio at work, because it is great for that and i flatly refue to buy an ipod.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Did this guy work on Global Warming prior to his cellphone research?


For the first half of the article I thought it was a joke. Is it?

[darius359au]

I love the line "We shouldn't wait for a definitive study to come out":nope:, so let get everyone panicking now with no proof -even says it in the story no Major study has proved a link,Reminds me of the British study a few years back that said to use handsfree so you keep the phone away from your head BUT then turned around 2 weeks later and said not to use a handsfree because it channels the phone signal straight into your head :o.
I think i'll go along with the weight of the evidence and not worry about it.

[FIREWALL]

I love the line "We shouldn't wait for a definitive study to come out":nope:, so let get everyone panicking now with no proof -even says it in the story no Major study has proved a link,Reminds me of the British study a few years back that said to use handsfree so you keep the phone away from your head BUT then turned around 2 weeks later and said not to use a handsfree because it channels the phone signal straight into your head :o.
I think i'll go along with the weight of the evidence and not worry about it.

Good to see common sense hasn't been lost.


It's amazing how some news making study turns out to be some self serving WHACKO. :roll:

[nikimcbee]

I use a cell. Of course, I'll be using it a lot less from now on.

I have free lost distance. :hmm: I need your number so we can talk football.:up:

[nikimcbee]

So I guess I be the only one w/o brain cancer.:roll: I don't have a cell phone, and I don't want one. Electronic leash.You know I don't have one either! :)

-S

We can hang out together and play Risk or something, after everybody else has died off.:hmm: :up:

[Frame57]

I have two of them and keep one "in my pants" on vibrate, then i use the other to call myself a lot....:lol:

[Peto]

I have two of them and keep one "in my pants" on vibrate, then i use the other to call myself a lot....:lol:

OK. Now I finally have a good reason to get o...two cell phones. :rotfl:

When the company I used to work for got split up they gave me my severance and asked for my cell phone and pager. I told them I was sorry, I had accidently backed over both of them 3 times that very morning :yep:.

Haven't looked back since.

[FIREWALL]

The ones here that are Pantywaist's know who they are.:p

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[Task Force]

What are they going to say next. Today in news... Headphones are dangerious and can lead to cancer. and standing to close to a microwave will fry your brain.:rotfl:

[Skybird]

You know the story of the seven dwarf? I think that's what they were called as - specialists from the tobacco industry who until the very end claimed that there is no evidence for smoking causing cancer. they claimed, too, that there is no scientific evidence.

Scientific studies depend a lot on extremely subjective critarias in the statistical field, and criterias of content anyway. Choose them and design a study research accordingly - and you will never get a scientific evidence.

Especially when it is not wanted.

Also, state-defined treshhold levels will not worry somebody if they are set so high that it is unlikely they will be reached or exceeded. The state then says officially something is harmless - even if it is not.

That the industry has a high interest in not allowing the impression of cellphone radiation, if exposed to it too long and too often, could effect tissue of your body, especially the brain, goes without saying.

The first studies rising doubts on according radiations maybe not being so harmless as claimed, date back to the first half of the nineties.

Healthy scepticism is good advise. And to reduce cellphone communication as far as possible is good advise, too.

Next problem: pollution of public social space by cellphone calls. Have you ever realised how much crap is spread by using cellphone? "Hi darling, I'm just two crossroads from home, I'll be there in five minutes." Very interesting, so thanks for releasing this vital information to the rest of the people in your bus. If somebody would call me and have nothing better to explain why he saw the need to make me stop what I was doing, running to the phone and waste my time, I would be very angry with him/her sooner or later.

[UnderseaLcpl]

a)You know the story of the seven dwarf? I think that's what they were called as - specialists from the tobacco industry who until the very end claimed that there is no evidence for smoking causing cancer. they claimed, too, that there is no scientific evidence.


b)Scientific studies depend a lot on extremely subjective critarias in the statistical field, and criterias of content anyway. Choose them and design a study research accordingly - and you will never get a scientific evidence.

Especially when it is not wanted.

c)Also, state-defined treshhold levels will not worry somebody if they are set so high that it is unlikely they will be reached or exceeded. The state then says officially something is harmless - even if it is not.

That the industry has a high interest in not allowing the impression of cellphone radiation, if exposed to it too long and too often, could effect tissue of your body, especially the brain, goes without saying.

The first studies rising doubts on according radiations maybe not being so harmless as claimed, date back to the first half of the nineties.

Healthy scepticism is good advise. And to reduce cellphone communication as far as possible is good advise, too.

d)Next problem: pollution of public social space by cellphone calls. Have you ever realised how much crap is spread by using cellphone? "Hi darling, I'm just two crossroads from home, I'll be there in five minutes." Very interesting, so thanks for releasing this vital information to the rest of the people in your bus. If somebody would call me and have nothing better to explain why he saw the need to make me stop what I was doing, running to the phone and waste my time, I would be very angry with him/her sooner or later.

So we meet again skybird!:D But this timer I agree with you, a little.

a) Essentially true. We are in agreement here. However, I must point out how long it took the government to really take an effective stance on this issue.
I am disappointed that the tobacco industry would conceal information about their product, I admit it is an example of 'market failure'

b)Once again, we agree. Statistics can say anything you want them to. If more people looked at the samples used in generating these statistics, they might not be so easily duped.

c) I am going to disagree here, simply because if we allowed that kind of paranoid logic to affect all our decisions we would never do anything.
You have a 30% chance of getting cancer just from being alive. Most of the radiation you will ever absorb comes from natural sources like the sun and radon.
The cellular phone, and in fact, all wireless communications technology, may subject us to minor levels of harmful radiation, but so what? Automobiles subject us to minor levels of injury and death from collisions but nobody cares.
There are many facets of progress that do occasionally kill or injure people,; transportation, toxic materials, medical malpractice, electricity etc. ad infinitum, but it used to be worse.
The fact is, someday technology will remove the health risks of these devices and simultaneoously introduce new heakth risks. Just let it go, there's nothing we can do about it.

d) I see how that can be annoying but seriously, what are you gonna do, introduce a law that bans uneccesary cellphone conversations?
Actually I am wondering if you were joking in this last paragraph, so I won't go into it too much.
Surely, you are aware that the main pollutant of "public social space" is the public.

Your move, skybird:D

[f14driver]

We'd better shut down all wireless networks then, the radiation emitted from wireless routers is far greater then the radiation from Cell phones. :damn:

So wave your hand, shut down your wireless internetrouters and return to snail mail again :doh:

[August]

We'd better shut down all wireless networks then, the radiation emitted from wireless routers is far greater then the radiation from Cell phones. :damn:

So wave your hand, shut down your wireless internetrouters and return to snail mail again :doh:

OMG how could we ever survive right?

Wireless routers do indeed produce more radiation than cell phones but they are not commonly stuck to the side of someones head when they are in operation either.

[Platapus]

If we were really concerned with exposing our tender bodies to the evils of scintillating radiation, we would avoid granite buildings. :)

[Skybird]

So we meet again skybird!:D
GT forum is a small world.;)

Anyhow, i am not antipathic to you, since last time both in forum and PM we exchanged our very opposing views in a non-fighting manner and did not let it become personal or offending. My problems with some other people is not with differing opinions, but the way in which they express them or try to propagate them (not meaning you).

If we would always agree on everything and would always share the same knowledge and the same perspectives, "debates" would be very boring here.

Move? Must i make one? I think you simplify in your point c.), and the comparison between cars and cellphones does not work. Better would work a comparison of having an option for tasty aromes added to the sweet water from the pipes in your house - at the price of these aromes increasing risks to youir health.

Enough ballet for one evening! :lol: