Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Study Finds No Link Between Mobile Phones and Cancer (Again)

Posted by Soulskill on from the discard-the-tinfoil-hat dept.

judgecorp writes "A Danish study of more than 350,000 people found no correlation between using a mobile phone and getting cancer. The results backs up previous work, but researchers say more work is needed to be completely sure."

12 of 150 comments (clear)

  1. I expect... by eexaa · · Score: 3, Funny

    ...someone here telling that mobile phones may not cause damage to us, but they certainly make bees behave weird and die.

    1. Re:I expect... by Dewin · · Score: 3, Informative

      Increased EM radiation from rising cellphone use is one speculated cause of Colony Collapse Disorder

      --
      Of course nobody reads the FAQ! If people read the FAQ, the Questions wouldn't be so Frequently Asked.
    2. Re:I expect... by Oswald+McWeany · · Score: 3, Funny

      That is sooooo 1990 of you. Join the 21st century- even bees have iPhones now.

      The GPS function on it has revolutionized nectar collection.

      --
      "That's the way to do it" - Punch
  2. Re:What about the other studies? by Nabeel_co · · Score: 4, Informative

    Actually, If you look at those studies closely, most of them say that there is no link, just a slight correlation.

    Those studies are usually mis quoted, or taken out of context. Assuming they are not bias.

  3. Re:What about the other studies? by Spad · · Score: 4, Informative

    Those that aren't in the "We took 30 cancer patients and asked them if they used cell phones" category have generally not been statistically significant.

    There's a good article about it here: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/tomchiversscience/100090300/do-mobile-phones-really-cause-cancer-probably-not-again/ from a little earlier this year.

    Generally, phones causing cancer is much more "interesting" than phones not causing cancer, so the studies that show even the slightest hint that they might garner far more attention from the media than they probably should, whereas those that don't have to be much more significant (like this one) before they get decent coverage.

  4. Re:What about the towers? by ustolemyname · · Score: 3, Informative

    Radio output from the tower at 200 feet is nothing compared to a cell phone two inches from your brain. Inverse square law, QED.

  5. No amount of proof is enough. by Kenja · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People who believe that cell phones cause cancer and vaccines cause autism will never be convenced by any amount of evidence.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
  6. Should be pretty obvious by now by some1001 · · Score: 5, Informative

    E=hf.

    Visible light does not cause cancer. UV, XRay, and Gamma (all higher frequency than visible) do cause cancer.

    Even if we knew nothing about the fact that we are exposed to so much radio and microwave radiation on a daily basis, does it not make sense that electromagnetic radiation below visible light should also not cause cancer (that is, for it to not be an ionizing radiation)?

    I mean, who cares if your brain dissipates some radio energy to heat in the brain? Has a small temperature in a localized part of the body caused cancer in the past? Unless the heat dissipated raises the temperature of the brain over 104, I do not see much concern.

  7. Obligatory XKCD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    http://xkcd.com/925/

  8. Living causes cancer by gstrickler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So stop worrying about all the things that contribute so little to the risk that a 350,000 person study can't identify a link. Enjoy your life, and avoid the things with a strong correlation to cancer, like tobacco, excessive UV exposure, high levels of radioactivity, etc.

    We don't need more study of a link between cell phone usage and cancer, because repeated studies have shown that any risk is too low to measure even in large studies of long term users, therefore, too low to worry about.

    --
    make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
  9. More testing is needed! by Arancaytar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Maybe 25th time is the charm: "Significant link found between cellphones running Windows Phone, p < 0.05!"

  10. Amateur Radio Operators study? by JSBiff · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder, in the last 100 years, has anyone done any study on Amateur Radio Operators and their families?

    Most hams have antennas, on their roofs, or in the back yard, radiating hundreds or in some cases, up to 1500 Watts of power.

    Seems like doing a cancer risk study on them might provide some useful insight into the question of whether RF exposure can possibly increase risk of cancer?