Slashdot Mirror

Now just ramp that up a little bit. Don't forget http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3685264, so they are giving you a burst of radiation right before you going to get an extended burst of radiation. Now add in your typical sun bathing holiday and the return trip is even more dangerous. Just to add in that touch more fluorescent lights http://www.arpansa.gov.au/radiationprotection/factsheets/is_cfl.cfm and of course you have a ton of mobile phones in the vicinity as well as airport radar http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/rf/radar.asp.

I am sick of the repeated lie, don't worry ours is safe, on it's own heh heh. Compound affect, a modern US airport would have to be one of the most dangerous places to be. There more than anywhere else they should be taking steps to reduce exposure not add to it.

So let's start seeing some real numbers on total exposure. Drive to Airport exposed to airport radar, stand under bright florescent for a couple of hours, everybody using mobile phones lots of people in very close range, go through xray, exposed to extra radiation during flight, land at another airport with radar, couple of more hours under florescent lights, then go to beach and get sunburn. Skin cancer rates rising, use sunblock? Now we need a 24 hour a day 7 day week radiation block and they haven't finished yet. They'll keep adding in more 'safe on it's own devices' until future current youth will pay a huge price when they finally become short lived adults.

Powerwatch is a good overview site dealing with health issues surrounding microwave and lower frequency electro-magnetic radiation. It may surprise many of you, but there have been clear-cut studies showing DNA damage on acount of EM fields, even at low frequencies: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1241963

Or how about the link at the bottom of http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/'s web site:
http://www.emfields.org/screening/overview.asp

Cotton Electrocloth Hat (a snip at £35.25/m) anyone?

Some links relevant to the program...

The Stewart Report summary:
http://www.iegmp.org.uk/report/summary.htm
(there's a link to the full text there too)

ICNIRP Publications
http://www.icnirp.de/pubEMF.htm

Karolinska Institutet:
http://ki.se/ki/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=130&l=en

Long-Term Sickness and Mobile Phone Use:
http://www.acnem.org/journal/pdf_files/23-2-septem ber_2004/23-2_mobile_phones-hallberg.pdf
PDF; a paper co-authored by Olle Johannson. It wasn't directly mentioned on the program but I guess has informed his views.

Electrohypersensitivity: State-of-the-Art of a Functional Impairment:
http://taylorandfrancis.metapress.com/index/G78U43 45510209JQ.pdf
PDF; authored by Olle Johannson.

Powerwatch:
http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/

The telegraph article that seemed to be the source of the "teachers demand no wifi" section of the program:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/ne ws/2007/04/23/nwifi23.xml

This isn't supposed to be an unbiased list of views; it's just links relevant to the program (which in my view, wasn't unbiased). Anyway - read, look for more, and make your own mind up.

(posted AC; I don't need the Karma)

Secondly, you cannot expect me to accept "I work in the scientific community" when you provide no credentials to me whatsoever. If you intend to have a debate with me on this, and you are so confident in your scientific qualifications, why not forgo the anonymous coward route?

Onto the "meat and potatoes" of your post (if you will)...
"The study suggests that there is no substantial risk of acoustic neuroma in the first decade after starting mobile phone use. However, an increase in risk after longer term use or after a longer lag period could not be ruled out." -- This is the last line of your first source, did you even read this? The risk increases were marginal, and could be ruled as coincidental. It's also important to note that acoustic neuroma is neither a brain tumor, nor a cancer. (Also, it's rather bothersome to me that none of your reports are full-text, how can I draw accurate judgment of your sources without full text? That is like reviewing a book by reading its sleeve.)

You extol Alasdair Philips as an expert and one who is qualified to make conclusions about the dangers of EMF and microwave affects on people, yet he doesn't seem to be a doctor, and the medical condition he speaks of isn't listed on WebMD or Wikipedia leading me to think that it's likely a farce. In fact, if one takes even a short browse of his website, they will find several dubious looking things, all of which are enough to evoke the skepticism of someone of such esteemed scientific credentials as yourself.

You scoff at me for talking about the EMF of other devices and state that they only operate on the 50-60 Hz frequency range, and from that I can deduce that you mean to tell me that this frequency range is not dangerous to humans however, the man you speak of as being some sort of expert on the subject has posted a number of papers on how living under or near power lines can raise cancer risk.

And finally, you cannot tell me that "money-grabbing wacky organizations" cannot get significant coverage on large networks. In the United States, every news network in the entire country has covered right-wing religious organizations and their attempts at banning the teaching of evolution to children in schools and its replacement with the pseudo-scientific hokum that is "intelligent design." These groups have not only gotten coverage from media outlets, but they have even received what could be considered positive coverage by some. Extreme and sensationalist points of view make good news, they entertain people and they get more viewers, it's not at all surprising that your news outlets covered Mr. Philips for this reason.

Your argument holds very little water, while you're correct on two things: that it has not been unquestionably proven that EMF does not cause cancer, and we are being exposed to more microwaves than ever before, you fail to provide any proof that Alasdair Philips is anything more than a opportunistic hack, or that microwave EMF causes cancer. Your subsequent source postings are lackluster google attempts at finding something to back up your assertions and, perhaps worst of all, it seems that the goal of your post was simply to insult me. You can walk around in

Secondly, you cannot expect me to accept "I work in the scientific community" when you provide no credentials to me whatsoever. If you intend to have a debate with me on this, and you are so confident in your scientific qualifications, why not forgo the anonymous coward route?

Onto the "meat and potatoes" of your post (if you will)...
"The study suggests that there is no substantial risk of acoustic neuroma in the first decade after starting mobile phone use. However, an increase in risk after longer term use or after a longer lag period could not be ruled out." -- This is the last line of your first source, did you even read this? The risk increases were marginal, and could be ruled as coincidental. It's also important to note that acoustic neuroma is neither a brain tumor, nor a cancer. (Also, it's rather bothersome to me that none of your reports are full-text, how can I draw accurate judgment of your sources without full text? That is like reviewing a book by reading its sleeve.)

You extol Alasdair Philips as an expert and one who is qualified to make conclusions about the dangers of EMF and microwave affects on people, yet he doesn't seem to be a doctor, and the medical condition he speaks of isn't listed on WebMD or Wikipedia leading me to think that it's likely a farce. In fact, if one takes even a short browse of his website, they will find several dubious looking things, all of which are enough to evoke the skepticism of someone of such esteemed scientific credentials as yourself.

You scoff at me for talking about the EMF of other devices and state that they only operate on the 50-60 Hz frequency range, and from that I can deduce that you mean to tell me that this frequency range is not dangerous to humans however, the man you speak of as being some sort of expert on the subject has posted a number of papers on how living under or near power lines can raise cancer risk.

And finally, you cannot tell me that "money-grabbing wacky organizations" cannot get significant coverage on large networks. In the United States, every news network in the entire country has covered right-wing religious organizations and their attempts at banning the teaching of evolution to children in schools and its replacement with the pseudo-scientific hokum that is "intelligent design." These groups have not only gotten coverage from media outlets, but they have even received what could be considered positive coverage by some. Extreme and sensationalist points of view make good news, they entertain people and they get more viewers, it's not at all surprising that your news outlets covered Mr. Philips for this reason.

Your argument holds very little water, while you're correct on two things: that it has not been unquestionably proven that EMF does not cause cancer, and we are being exposed to more microwaves than ever before, you fail to provide any proof that Alasdair Philips is anything more than a opportunistic hack, or that microwave EMF causes cancer. Your subsequent source postings are lackluster google attempts at finding something to back up your assertions and, perhaps worst of all, it seems that the goal of your post was simply to insult me. You can walk around in

Secondly, you cannot expect me to accept "I work in the scientific community" when you provide no credentials to me whatsoever. If you intend to have a debate with me on this, and you are so confident in your scientific qualifications, why not forgo the anonymous coward route?

Onto the "meat and potatoes" of your post (if you will)...
"The study suggests that there is no substantial risk of acoustic neuroma in the first decade after starting mobile phone use. However, an increase in risk after longer term use or after a longer lag period could not be ruled out." -- This is the last line of your first source, did you even read this? The risk increases were marginal, and could be ruled as coincidental. It's also important to note that acoustic neuroma is neither a brain tumor, nor a cancer. (Also, it's rather bothersome to me that none of your reports are full-text, how can I draw accurate judgment of your sources without full text? That is like reviewing a book by reading its sleeve.)

You extol Alasdair Philips as an expert and one who is qualified to make conclusions about the dangers of EMF and microwave affects on people, yet he doesn't seem to be a doctor, and the medical condition he speaks of isn't listed on WebMD or Wikipedia leading me to think that it's likely a farce. In fact, if one takes even a short browse of his website, they will find several dubious looking things, all of which are enough to evoke the skepticism of someone of such esteemed scientific credentials as yourself.

You scoff at me for talking about the EMF of other devices and state that they only operate on the 50-60 Hz frequency range, and from that I can deduce that you mean to tell me that this frequency range is not dangerous to humans however, the man you speak of as being some sort of expert on the subject has posted a number of papers on how living under or near power lines can raise cancer risk.

And finally, you cannot tell me that "money-grabbing wacky organizations" cannot get significant coverage on large networks. In the United States, every news network in the entire country has covered right-wing religious organizations and their attempts at banning the teaching of evolution to children in schools and its replacement with the pseudo-scientific hokum that is "intelligent design." These groups have not only gotten coverage from media outlets, but they have even received what could be considered positive coverage by some. Extreme and sensationalist points of view make good news, they entertain people and they get more viewers, it's not at all surprising that your news outlets covered Mr. Philips for this reason.

Your argument holds very little water, while you're correct on two things: that it has not been unquestionably proven that EMF does not cause cancer, and we are being exposed to more microwaves than ever before, you fail to provide any proof that Alasdair Philips is anything more than a opportunistic hack, or that microwave EMF causes cancer. Your subsequent source postings are lackluster google attempts at finding something to back up your assertions and, perhaps worst of all, it seems that the goal of your post was simply to insult me. You can walk around in

Secondly, you cannot expect me to accept "I work in the scientific community" when you provide no credentials to me whatsoever. If you intend to have a debate with me on this, and you are so confident in your scientific qualifications, why not forgo the anonymous coward route?

Onto the "meat and potatoes" of your post (if you will)...
"The study suggests that there is no substantial risk of acoustic neuroma in the first decade after starting mobile phone use. However, an increase in risk after longer term use or after a longer lag period could not be ruled out." -- This is the last line of your first source, did you even read this? The risk increases were marginal, and could be ruled as coincidental. It's also important to note that acoustic neuroma is neither a brain tumor, nor a cancer. (Also, it's rather bothersome to me that none of your reports are full-text, how can I draw accurate judgment of your sources without full text? That is like reviewing a book by reading its sleeve.)

You extol Alasdair Philips as an expert and one who is qualified to make conclusions about the dangers of EMF and microwave affects on people, yet he doesn't seem to be a doctor, and the medical condition he speaks of isn't listed on WebMD or Wikipedia leading me to think that it's likely a farce. In fact, if one takes even a short browse of his website, they will find several dubious looking things, all of which are enough to evoke the skepticism of someone of such esteemed scientific credentials as yourself.

You scoff at me for talking about the EMF of other devices and state that they only operate on the 50-60 Hz frequency range, and from that I can deduce that you mean to tell me that this frequency range is not dangerous to humans however, the man you speak of as being some sort of expert on the subject has posted a number of papers on how living under or near power lines can raise cancer risk.

And finally, you cannot tell me that "money-grabbing wacky organizations" cannot get significant coverage on large networks. In the United States, every news network in the entire country has covered right-wing religious organizations and their attempts at banning the teaching of evolution to children in schools and its replacement with the pseudo-scientific hokum that is "intelligent design." These groups have not only gotten coverage from media outlets, but they have even received what could be considered positive coverage by some. Extreme and sensationalist points of view make good news, they entertain people and they get more viewers, it's not at all surprising that your news outlets covered Mr. Philips for this reason.

Your argument holds very little water, while you're correct on two things: that it has not been unquestionably proven that EMF does not cause cancer, and we are being exposed to more microwaves than ever before, you fail to provide any proof that Alasdair Philips is anything more than a opportunistic hack, or that microwave EMF causes cancer. Your subsequent source postings are lackluster google attempts at finding something to back up your assertions and, perhaps worst of all, it seems that the goal of your post was simply to insult me. You can walk around in

Secondly, you cannot expect me to accept "I work in the scientific community" when you provide no credentials to me whatsoever. If you intend to have a debate with me on this, and you are so confident in your scientific qualifications, why not forgo the anonymous coward route?

Onto the "meat and potatoes" of your post (if you will)...
"The study suggests that there is no substantial risk of acoustic neuroma in the first decade after starting mobile phone use. However, an increase in risk after longer term use or after a longer lag period could not be ruled out." -- This is the last line of your first source, did you even read this? The risk increases were marginal, and could be ruled as coincidental. It's also important to note that acoustic neuroma is neither a brain tumor, nor a cancer. (Also, it's rather bothersome to me that none of your reports are full-text, how can I draw accurate judgment of your sources without full text? That is like reviewing a book by reading its sleeve.)

You extol Alasdair Philips as an expert and one who is qualified to make conclusions about the dangers of EMF and microwave affects on people, yet he doesn't seem to be a doctor, and the medical condition he speaks of isn't listed on WebMD or Wikipedia leading me to think that it's likely a farce. In fact, if one takes even a short browse of his website, they will find several dubious looking things, all of which are enough to evoke the skepticism of someone of such esteemed scientific credentials as yourself.

You scoff at me for talking about the EMF of other devices and state that they only operate on the 50-60 Hz frequency range, and from that I can deduce that you mean to tell me that this frequency range is not dangerous to humans however, the man you speak of as being some sort of expert on the subject has posted a number of papers on how living under or near power lines can raise cancer risk.

And finally, you cannot tell me that "money-grabbing wacky organizations" cannot get significant coverage on large networks. In the United States, every news network in the entire country has covered right-wing religious organizations and their attempts at banning the teaching of evolution to children in schools and its replacement with the pseudo-scientific hokum that is "intelligent design." These groups have not only gotten coverage from media outlets, but they have even received what could be considered positive coverage by some. Extreme and sensationalist points of view make good news, they entertain people and they get more viewers, it's not at all surprising that your news outlets covered Mr. Philips for this reason.

Your argument holds very little water, while you're correct on two things: that it has not been unquestionably proven that EMF does not cause cancer, and we are being exposed to more microwaves than ever before, you fail to provide any proof that Alasdair Philips is anything more than a opportunistic hack, or that microwave EMF causes cancer. Your subsequent source postings are lackluster google attempts at finding something to back up your assertions and, perhaps worst of all, it seems that the goal of your post was simply to insult me. You can walk around in

They sell worthless junk along the same lines as aluminum foil hats, and magic-crystal healing devices. They aren't protecting people from EMF, they are getting rich of scaring people into believing that it's going to destroy them and their families.

They completely disregard the fact that we have been, and continue to be bombarded by radiation from natural sources such as the sun, celestial events, and the Earth's magnetic core. Making our homes into faraday cages just means that we won't be bombarded by EMF in our houses, but wait! Every single electronic device emits some amount of EMF, from your toaster, to your microwave, to your vibrator, it's all going to emit some amount of EMF and you really can't escape it without becoming a Luddite and living in a sealed hovel in some remote location.

It's also important to note that there are different kinds of radiation, at its purest definition, it's the transmission of energy via waves. In that case, sound is radiation, ripples in water, also radiation. What most people confuse, however, is electromagnetic radiation versus particle radiation. Electromagnetic radiation is the oscillation of magnetic fields, particle radiation is caused by nuclear decay and the two are quite different. Electrons moving around is a lot less invasive than a red hot proton ripping through the nuclei of your cells which leads us to how cancer is caused by radiation. Particle radiation, caused by nuclear decay, shoots off ions at high velocities which actually shoot through your body and kill cells. Sometimes, in the process of doing this, they will damage the nucleus of a cell but not so much that the cell dies, just enough to mangle its DNA. This can cause faulty reproduction of this cell which can, in turn, cause tumors, or even cancerous growths. This kind of radiation is fundamentally different from the kind of radiation that makes your microwave and even oven (yes, heat is radiation!) work.

It's this lexical confusion that throws a lot of people off, yes it's radiation, no it's not dangerous unless at very high energy levels. And even then, it just cooks you like so much hot dogs. You don't grow tumors, you don't get cancer, you don't turn into a hideous fly-man, you just pop like a big water-ballon.

They sell worthless junk along the same lines as aluminum foil hats, and magic-crystal healing devices. They aren't protecting people from EMF, they are getting rich of scaring people into believing that it's going to destroy them and their families.

They completely disregard the fact that we have been, and continue to be bombarded by radiation from natural sources such as the sun, celestial events, and the Earth's magnetic core. Making our homes into faraday cages just means that we won't be bombarded by EMF in our houses, but wait! Every single electronic device emits some amount of EMF, from your toaster, to your microwave, to your vibrator, it's all going to emit some amount of EMF and you really can't escape it without becoming a Luddite and living in a sealed hovel in some remote location.

It's also important to note that there are different kinds of radiation, at its purest definition, it's the transmission of energy via waves. In that case, sound is radiation, ripples in water, also radiation. What most people confuse, however, is electromagnetic radiation versus particle radiation. Electromagnetic radiation is the oscillation of magnetic fields, particle radiation is caused by nuclear decay and the two are quite different. Electrons moving around is a lot less invasive than a red hot proton ripping through the nuclei of your cells which leads us to how cancer is caused by radiation. Particle radiation, caused by nuclear decay, shoots off ions at high velocities which actually shoot through your body and kill cells. Sometimes, in the process of doing this, they will damage the nucleus of a cell but not so much that the cell dies, just enough to mangle its DNA. This can cause faulty reproduction of this cell which can, in turn, cause tumors, or even cancerous growths. This kind of radiation is fundamentally different from the kind of radiation that makes your microwave and even oven (yes, heat is radiation!) work.

It's this lexical confusion that throws a lot of people off, yes it's radiation, no it's not dangerous unless at very high energy levels. And even then, it just cooks you like so much hot dogs. You don't grow tumors, you don't get cancer, you don't turn into a hideous fly-man, you just pop like a big water-ballon.

Having got and read the study in question in its entirity, the conclusions given by the media are extremely misleading. The study itself looks only at a specific subset of brain cancers, known as "gliomas". Now these constitute approximately 50% of all brain tumours, but the research to date that has found links between mobile phone usage and brain cancers found a doubling in acoustic neuromas, a totally different form of brain cancer simply not covered by this study. In that respect it is very irresponsible to make the conclusion that mobile phones don't cause brain cancer.

It is also interesting to note that the media failed to comment on a critical issue mentioned in the summary of the report: brain cancers typically take 10 - 25 years to diagnosis after the exposure to the initial suspected cause. The authors themselves noted that they simply did not have the data to draw any conclusions on long term mobile phone users (greater than 10 years of use). This would indicate that they were unable to assess the subset of mobile phone users likely to have developed the brain cancers in the first place. An example of how important this fact is is that the paper in 2005 showing the 1.9-fold increase in acoustic neuromas only found it in those exposed to mobile phones for greater than 10 years (where they had sufficient data to make the statistically significant analysis).

All in all this study is reassuring that short or medium term usage of mobile phones do not have a significant effect on a subset of brain cancer types, but it says absolutely nothing about long term use or other brain cancers. As some other cancers still have a signifant published increase that has not been refuted by this study or any others to date, and as there are a number of reported health effects aside from cancers attributed to mobile phones, this certainly doesn't reassure me.

This Powerwatch page shows a good summary of the shortcomings of the report, and raises a couple of interesting points not in this post.

I would not by one!! If it is a 3G telephone it's even worse!! People who work in the industri (Ericsson, Nokia etc) should really be released from the NDA they signed(I did sign as well...) if they have information regarding the public health. The information I got regarding the effects of these frequencies was informal, but if half of it was true...I would really not put the transmitter inside my head!! Do you know how much effect (wattwise) a telephone (3G) peaks at?? I will not break the NDA by posting this link. When putting a microwave transmitter (2GHz) inside the head you seriously are pushing your luck!!
One of the most intelligent guys I ever met is in a wheelchair getting worse by the year after being subjected to MASSIVE EM-fields when he was installing radars. He was the magnetron specialist(still is I suppose). The effect those babies could produce....They melted the snow in the radar direction....and there he was calibrating and testing...needless to say, he is not very healty...

Maybe this is a reason to pursue development of an all-optical solar-powered computer.

Drink plenty of good clean water (minimum of 2 litres per day for an adult). This is VERY important as we have found that most ES people we have seen are chronically dehydrated.

The list of symptoms is like a hypochondriacs grab bag: Such vague, common symptoms like "sleep problems", or "tiredness". To be honest it sounds more like depression than anything else.

Until such a time as they can put someone in a radio isolated room, and test how they feel with and without a transmitter turned on, with a positive correlation, I find this absolutely ridiculous. The symptom list is exactly the same as the sympton list used for dirty vents, bad office air, extended computer use, drinking unfiltered water, having bad feng sheu, etc.