Slashdot Mirror

Yeah. The problem is not you if you don't read a website that is BS. And Junkscience.com is. The "Junk Man" himself, Steven Milloy, has larger-than-life ties to Corporate America - and he also works (or at least has worked) for FAUX News. Junkscience.com is nothing but some ideological BS. A thorough article here.

ok... its important to remember our history... Lai and Singh are the same two MORONS who made similar claims about magnetic fields almost ten years ago:

http://www.electric-words.com/cell/research/laisin gh/memory1.html

and NOBODY was able to duplicate their results. Although the two made $10,000 a pop being 'expert witnesses' for people who brough lawsuits against Motorola et. al. claiming their cell phones gave them tumors. It looks like they must have ran out of money.

This is the WORST kind of junk science imaginable.

Do me a favor and check your references next time.

A summary of the above link: Junkscience.com, which it seems you got all of these items from, was intially created and funded by Philip Morris to create doubt in our minds that cigarettes were bad for us. Its purpose has always been to discredit scientific findings that were harmful to its funder's business interests. It has no interest whatsoever in maintaining the "integrity of science".

The question isn't so much whether microwaves cook you (which nobody believes) but whether their high frequency EM radiation accelerates cell mutation thus increasing the chance of cancer. A lot of experts have weighed in on this issue, generally contradicting whatever the previous expert said. I'm not sure how I feel about the issue, though I can't help but remember those police officers who may have gotten cancer from their radar guns. OSHA EMF info here. FCC EMF page.

Non-existant? This is the best overview I've been able to find of the extensive research that has been done in this area. Note that nearly all of the results were negative, and most of the positive results were refuted by later studies. I have only been able to find a reference to one study of cell-phone radiation and it was apparently undertaken by the cell-phone industry, so I won't insult your intelligence by citing it. However, it is suggestive that studies of even much more powerful RF signals have yielded no evidence of a health hazard.

Your suggestion that it is usually better to guard against unproven risks is preposterous- we should guard against risks in proportion to the amount of evidence for the risk, and in inverse proportion to the costs of guarding against it. The problem is that the levels of RF radiation that the alarmists say are cancer-causing are so low that this would effectively mean banning broadcasting, which seems an awfully high price to pay to avoid a risk with little to no evidence that it even exists.

You can read more about it here and here

Da Cr33p

Before Milloy moved into his present role as "JunkMan", he was employed by a number of professional PR and lobbying companies, including Multinational Business Services which was Phillip Morris's main lobbyist on the environmental tobacco issue in late 1992 (when Milloy worked there).

- A healthy dose of scepticism is to be commended, but did you know that the guy behind this site is heavily funded by corporations? Not exactly the most unbiased source...

- Sure, global warming may turn out to be a false alarm. But, I'd far rather we take a bit of caution now, and consider the possibilities, rather than blissfully say "sure it may exist, but we should ignore it, for fear of depressing our economy". Please! There are more important things in life than the state of the stock market.

Radiation does not have to be ionizing to be dangerous!

I don't think anyone this side of Ted Kaczynski is arguing that all "radiation" is bad. But the people who maintain that RF "can't possibly be harmful because at these levels it doesn't have the energy to break molecular bonds" are taking a position even more ridiuculous than Ted's.

The only safe thing to say is that there is a lot we don't know, and that there is at least some evidence that even low-power RF can cause health problems. (That high-power RF can cause health problems is easily validated by defeating the safety interlock on your microwave oven. I don't recommend that you try that, as you'll probably need new corneas afterwards, if you're lucky..)

A couple of sites not mentioned yet that have a good set of reasonable links about possible risks:

Australian Journalist Stewart Fist's collection of General Cellphone Health risk links

Fist's list of links to scientific data and papers on the issue

I had another really good one or two bookmarked, but apparently they've moved. If I find out where they went, I'll post the info.

There are links in the above to the many studies that show a linkage between wireless phone usage (especially the GSM and other TDMA CancerPhones (my term, not his)) and non-trivial biological effects. We clearly don't understand this complex issue yet, but to say there's nothing there is simply to be ignorant of the facts, or take a blind position based on a wish.

Radiation does not have to be ionizing to be dangerous!

I don't think anyone this side of Ted Kaczynski is arguing that all "radiation" is bad. But the people who maintain that RF "can't possibly be harmful because at these levels it doesn't have the energy to break molecular bonds" are taking a position even more ridiuculous than Ted's.

The only safe thing to say is that there is a lot we don't know, and that there is at least some evidence that even low-power RF can cause health problems. (That high-power RF can cause health problems is easily validated by defeating the safety interlock on your microwave oven. I don't recommend that you try that, as you'll probably need new corneas afterwards, if you're lucky..)

A couple of sites not mentioned yet that have a good set of reasonable links about possible risks:

Australian Journalist Stewart Fist's collection of General Cellphone Health risk links

Fist's list of links to scientific data and papers on the issue

I had another really good one or two bookmarked, but apparently they've moved. If I find out where they went, I'll post the info.

There are links in the above to the many studies that show a linkage between wireless phone usage (especially the GSM and other TDMA CancerPhones (my term, not his)) and non-trivial biological effects. We clearly don't understand this complex issue yet, but to say there's nothing there is simply to be ignorant of the facts, or take a blind position based on a wish.

Try this article that suggests that Motorola is trying to suppress the results of these people studies.