Bettawrekonize
Posts: 1460
Joined: 4/17/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
PITTSBURGH - The head of a prominent cancer research institute issued an unprecedented warning to his faculty and staff Wednesday: Limit cell phone use because of the possible risk of cancer. ... Herberman is basing his alarm on early unpublished data. He says it takes too long to get answers from science and he believes people should take action now — especially when it comes to children. ... “The question is do you want to play Russian roulette with your brain,” she said in an interview from her cell phone while using the hands-free speaker phone as recommended. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25821899/ I tend to agree that it often does take too long for science to get answers and that, until something has been tested for an extensive period of time (and ten years is probably not enough), it's better for us to be safe than sorry. I also don't really have that much faith in the "scientific consensus" to begin with. It seems like the "consensus" works hard to artificially eliminate controversy. quote:
A team of scientists funded by Telstra to investigate claimed links between cell phones and cancer has turned up probably the most significant finding of adverse health effects yet. When presented to 'Science' magazine for publication the study was rejected on the grounds that publication "would cause a panic". Three other prominent magazines including 'Nature' also later rejected the report, suggesting that they would not handle such important conclusions without the research being further confirmed. http://zoneoftruth.com/PHONES.html I think this suggests that there is a lot of other important research that also gets censored from the public because it doesn't yield desired results. It seems that more and more, any research that doesn't conform to the consensus (ie: the desired results) gets rejected and never exposed to the public. quote:
In Sweden a publicly funded study of more than 11,000 cell phone users found that the phones contributed to headaches and fatigue. And in the fall of 1998 a team of independent scientists concluded without a doubt that cell phones had a "biological effect." http://www.wave-guide.org/news/coneofsilence.html quote:
“For both acoustic neuroma and glioma (two types of brain cancer), overall risk was increased in the whole group, but significantly increased for ipsilateral exposure (tumor on the same side of the brain as cell phone exposure)…These results are certainly of biological relevance, as the highest risk was found for tumors in the most exposed area of the brain, using a latency period that is relevant in carcinogenesis.” ... Three of the four studies with data on over ten years use showed a statistically significantly increased risk overall or for ipsilateral exposure to microwaves. (In this context, ipsilateral exposure means the tumor is on the same side of the brain as cell phone exposure). ... The researchers also found an increased overall risk more pronounced for ipsilateral use of the cell phone (tumor on the same side of the brain as cell phone exposure). ... Cell Phones Increase the Risk of Two Types of Brain Tumor According to Study I'm not saying that cell phones cause cancer, just that it's better to be safe than sorry.
< Message edited by Bettawrekonize -- 7/29/2008 3:36:18 PM >
|