World Health Organization Says Mobile Phones May Cause Cancer

Schiphol writes "A new study by the World Health Organization (WHO) concludes that mobile phone radiation presents a carcinogenic hazard. Are cell phones going to be the new tobacco, then?" This seems to be a new interpretation of a long-tern WHO study of possible cellphone health risks that had "inconclusive results" last May.

Comments

Re:Because They Sell Better and the FDA Allows It

[osgeek]

Because oranges aren't always orange and they have imperfections. Shipping and storing only exacerbates this. But suppliers noticed that people bought more oranges when they looked "pure" orange. And the FDA allowed it (for whatever reason). Go to an organic food store sometime and look at the produce. You'll think it looks like shit. But it's really just not coated in dye.

Oh, but if the big bad evil government stopped oranges getting coated with food dye then everyone would complain that the nanny state is killing capitalism. So vote with your dollar and be lost in the sea of people who put perception above knowledge.

Why is it that slashdot is all about crowd sourcing things and peer-to-peer distributing the load until it comes to government? Then, suddenly, there's all kind of trust and faith in consolidation of power, authority, (re)distribution of resources, etc..

The fact that there are stores that openly and proudly sells uncolored produce tells me that many consumers know the difference and make a strong choice based upon those differences.

As a person who believes that going against capitalism often has unintended negative consequences, all I really ask to be mandated by government in this kind of case is truth in labeling.

Re:The summary is, of course, wrong.

[Bing Tsher E]

Yeah but is there any evidence at all that low level EMF radiation is bad for you or anyone?

Obviously, yes. What would be the economic incentive for the WHO to whore for fear-mongers if there wasn't a certain amount of evidence? Do luddites pool their money and contribute it to the WHO? Do the Landline Monopolies get together at night and conspire?

Re:I Can't Believe Your (Lack of) Critical Thinkin

[osgeek]

Wow, previous post moderated to the basement as flamebait. That's a rather chilling effect to place on a discussion.

Anyhow... you took a drive-by swipe at people who want the government to be less dominant in their lives. I took a contrarian position. Seems rather hypocritical for you to jump into an ad hominem (in your subject line, no less) and accuse me of pigeon-holing an issue. Yeah, I was generalizing... unfairly? That's debatable, but a pretty long discussion.

Then a bunch of the rest of your argument was a straw man. I chose my words about capitalism carefully and you chose to interpret them in some a different way. I didn't say that capitalism is always right or that you should never act against it. I just said that going against it often has unintended negative consequences. I don't see a need to defend a position I didn't take.

Then there's another straw man supposing that I'm looking for a greater degree of truth in labeling (carbon offsets? Really?) than I even want in regulation of the thing itself. Apparently, you missed the words in bold: all I really ask to be mandated by government in this kind of case is truth in labeling. We were talking about red dye on the peel of an orange, I think you should recall.

What ever happened to taking the arguments given rather than making up the ones you'd prefer to debate?