Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Experts Revive Debate Over Cellphones and Cancer
NY Times ^ | June 3, 2008 | TARA PARKER-POPE

Posted on 06/03/2008 7:48:27 PM PDT by neverdem

What do brain surgeons know about cellphone safety that the rest of us don’t?

Last week, three prominent neurosurgeons told the CNN interviewer Larry King that they did not hold cellphones next to their ears. “I think the safe practice,” said Dr. Keith Black, a surgeon at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, “is to use an earpiece so you keep the microwave antenna away from your brain.”

Dr. Vini Khurana, an associate professor of neurosurgery at the Australian National University who is an outspoken critic of cellphones, said: “I use it on the speaker-phone mode. I do not hold it to my ear.” And CNN’s chief medical correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, a neurosurgeon at Emory University Hospital, said that like Dr. Black he used an earpiece.

Along with Senator Edward M. Kennedy’s recent diagnosis of a glioma, a type of tumor that critics have long associated with cellphone use, the doctors’ remarks have helped reignite a long-simmering debate about cellphones and cancer.

That supposed link has been largely dismissed by many experts, including the American Cancer Society...

--snip--

Cellphones emit non-ionizing radiation, waves of energy that are too weak to break chemical bonds or to set off the DNA damage known to cause cancer. There is no known biological mechanism to explain how non-ionizing radiation might lead to cancer.

But researchers who have raised concerns say that just because science can’t explain the mechanism doesn’t mean one doesn’t exist. Concerns have focused on the heat generated by cellphones and the fact that the radio frequencies are absorbed mostly by the head and neck. In recent studies that suggest a risk, the tumors tend to occur on the same side of the head where the patient typically holds the phone...

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Technical
KEYWORDS: cancer; cellphones; health; medicine
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 last
To: proxy_user

I wonder about all the other radiation, such as from wireless computer connections.


41 posted on 06/04/2008 7:37:06 AM PDT by fightinJAG (RUSH: McCain was in the Hanoi Hilton longer than we've been in Iraq, and never gave up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: edcoil

Very few cellphone calls MUST be made. Most of the call time is mindless chatter.

Most cellphones can be jacked to a set of earphones or buds with a short mike, if extended talking is needed.


42 posted on 06/04/2008 7:39:05 AM PDT by fightinJAG (RUSH: McCain was in the Hanoi Hilton longer than we've been in Iraq, and never gave up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: xp38

A headset option that avoids the problem with the wire serving as an antenna right to your head, is a heaset with a tube insead of a wire. Here are a couple options:

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

http://www.rfsafe.com/

I have one and the sound is as good as using the cell phone itself. (I have a Motorola RAZR V3m.)

YMMV.


43 posted on 06/04/2008 8:20:39 AM PDT by TruthSetsUFree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow

You could usually tell when you got in the beam - your variometer would totally fritz for about half a second. No other (visible) effect though....

I actually suspect that the real power was aimed to the east, and the feeder beam was what we always intercepted as we flew on the west side. Maybe.


44 posted on 06/04/2008 9:12:07 AM PDT by Technocrat (McCain-Romney 2008. Crap.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Technocrat
Yup - sounds reasonable to me.
45 posted on 06/04/2008 9:16:12 AM PDT by ThePythonicCow (By their false faith in Man as God, the left would destroy us. They call this faith change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Eddie01

Let’s hear it for comm towers! (without which half our sites would not exist)


46 posted on 06/04/2008 9:17:52 AM PDT by Technocrat (McCain-Romney 2008. Crap.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow; FreedomPoster
Bluetooth does work at lower powers, but it is much closer to the brain. Power density falls off with the square of the distance, so low power closer can be just as dangerous as higher power that is farther away. Bluetooth can use up to 100 mW peak power, and uses the higher 2.4 GHz frequencies (same band as microwave ovens.)

From Wiki:

Evolution of Safety Standards

The following is a brief summary of the wireless safety standards, which have become stricter over time.

1966: The ANSI C95.1 standard adopted the standard of 10mW/cm2 (10,000 microwatts/cm2) based on thermal effects.

1982: The IEEE recommended further lowering this limit to 1mW/cm2 (1,000 microwatts/cm2) for certain frequencies in 1982, which became a standard ten years later in 1992 (see below).

1986: The NCRP recommended the exposure limit of 580 microWatts/cm2.

1992: The ANSI/IEEE C95.1-1992 standard based on thermal effects used the 1mW/cm2 (1,000 microwatts/cm2) safety limit. The EPA called this revised standard "seriously flawed", partly for failing to consider non-thermal effects, and called for the FCC to adopt the 1986 NCRP standard which was five times stricter.

1996: The FCC updated to the standard of 580 microWatts/cm2 over any 30-minute period for the 869MHz, while still using 1mW/cm2 (1,000 microwatts/cm2) for PCS frequencies (1850-1990 MHz).

1998: The ICNIRP standard uses the limit of 450 microwatts/cm2.

I don't believe that either cell phones or Bluetooth headsets are dangerous or cause cancer, but I'm just saying if these doctors are so worried about the effects of a 1 watt cell phone at 800 MHz, they should be just as worried about 100 mW at 2.4 GHz.)

And yes, a corded headset is just as "dangerous," because the outside shield of the cable will conduct the cell phone transmissons and re-radiate them right at the ear, centemeters from the brain tissue. (It's known as the skin effect of RF radiation.)

Dr. Vini Khurana got it right when he said he only uses the hands free mode on his phone. Your best defense against electromagnetic radiation is distance.

Or just don't worry about it.

47 posted on 06/04/2008 11:30:25 AM PDT by Yo-Yo (USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo

100 mW is a Class 1 Bluetooth device. Most headsets are Class 2, at 2.5 mW. And it’s just as close as a mobile handset held to the ear.


48 posted on 06/04/2008 11:39:26 AM PDT by FreedomPoster (<===Non-bitter, Gun-totin', Typical White American)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo
I don't use Bluetooth, so perhaps this is a dumb question. But how can one get much closer to my brain than a cell phone held up to my ear, without doing brain surgery or some such?
Your best defense against electromagnetic radiation is distance.

Or just don't worry about it.

Or aggressive nutrition, appropriate for improving ones resistance to all manner of cancers.
49 posted on 06/04/2008 1:45:33 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (By their false faith in Man as God, the left would destroy us. They call this faith change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: ThePythonicCow
I don't use Bluetooth, so perhaps this is a dumb question. But how can one get much closer to my brain than a cell phone held up to my ear, without doing brain surgery or some such?

Many flip phones have the antenna located in the lower half of the phone, which places the antenna near the lower jaw.

With a Bluetooth headset, the antenna is often in the body of the boom, right over (and sometimes inside of) the ear, and just below the temple.

As I said, it's all semantics anyway, and I'll go with your nutrition answer.

50 posted on 06/04/2008 3:01:11 PM PDT by Yo-Yo (USAF, TAC, 12th AF, 366 TFW, 366 MG, 366 CRS, Mtn Home AFB, 1978-81)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Yo-Yo
Ah ok - oral cancer beats brain cancer <grin>.

Bon Appétit!

51 posted on 06/04/2008 4:49:00 PM PDT by ThePythonicCow (By their false faith in Man as God, the left would destroy us. They call this faith change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: shineon
Popcorn Popper

Watch the YouTube videos.

52 posted on 06/09/2008 4:28:33 AM PDT by SC DOC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Quix

Ping.


53 posted on 06/20/2008 12:23:56 AM PDT by Joya (Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior, have mercy on me, a sinner!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joya

Thanks.


54 posted on 06/20/2008 1:18:11 AM PDT by Quix (WE HAVE THE OIL NOW http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3340274697167011147)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Quix

Off Topic,

Quix,

here’s where I read about the hydrogen peroxide. Looks like a site with a few other topics of interest.

http://educate-yourself.org/

Joya


55 posted on 06/30/2008 9:57:11 AM PDT by Joya (Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, Savior, have mercy on me, a sinner!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-55 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson