Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

California Government On the Dangers of Cellphones (cbslocal.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the secret-guidelines dept.

mi quotes a report from CBS Local: After keeping it hidden for years, California's Department of Public Health has released a draft document outlining health officials' concerns about cellphone radiation exposure. The previously unpublished document was released this week after a judge indicated she would order the documents be disclosed. Health officials' overall recommendation is to "increase the distance between you and your phone" by using a headset, the speaker phone function and text messaging. Health officials recommend not sleeping near your phone and not carry it in your pocket or directly on your body, unless it is off. The fact sheet also states that "EMFs can pass deeper into a child's brain than and adult's" so suggests parents limit their child's cellphone use to texting, important call and emergencies.

15 of 237 comments (clear)

  1. Sigh... by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If that's the case, then the entire human race needs to move to the bottom of salt mines, because the amount of radiation being produced by the sun ought to fry our brains by the time we're six months old.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    1. Re:Sigh... by Spazmania · · Score: 3, Informative

      The document was unreleased because it was a factually wrong draft. A corded phone produces a weaker EMF than a wired headset? Really?

      --
      Moderating "-1, Disagree" is simple censorship. Have the guts to post your opinion.
    2. Re:Sigh... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't know if their concerns are valid or not.

      The concerns are not valid. There are two ways you can determine this for yourself: The finger method, or the brain method.

      Finger method: Type some search terms into a browser and try to find peer reviewed research that shows cellphone radiation is dangerous. You won't find any. You will, however, find plenty of ranting by crackpots.

      Brain method: Think about what radiation is, and how it could damage a brain. There are two ways that could happen: heat and ionization. Cellphone radiation produces a negligible amount of the first, and none of the second.

      In the absence of either evidence or plausible mechanism, it is safe to presume cellphone radiation harmless. You should find something else to worry about.

    3. Re:Sigh... by zerocool512 · · Score: 4, Informative

      How do you know that heat and ionization are the only ways RF radiation can harm a brain?

      It's well known that exposure to UV increases the risk of skin cancer. Is that heating or ionization?

      That would fall under ionization

      --
      If techs didn't disagree with each other, then Microsoft would rule the world.
    4. Re:Sigh... by nbauman · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Several years ago, the IEEE Spectrum had a big article in which they tried to find the best current evidence on whether cell phones emitted harmful radiation. So they reviewed all the major studies.

      They had 2 interesting results:

      1. In the best evidence for the harms of EMF, the radiation wasn't steady over long periods of time, but intermittent, with exposures of minutes to hours every day.

      2. Studies of household radiation found the highest levels of EMFs from 2 sources: hair dryers and blenders.

      So if you're really worried about EMFs, you should get rid of hair dryers and blenders.

      I showed the IEEE Spectrum issue to Louis Slesin, the editor of Microwave News, and asked him about it. He refused to comment. I said, why not? He said, I just don't want to comment.

    5. Re:Sigh... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Is it impossible that you are wrong, and that heat and ionization are not the only way that a brain could be affected?

      Nothing is completely impossible, but this issue has been studied to death. Billions of people use cellphones. If there was an issue it would have shown up in epidemiological data long ago.

      Doing yet more research is nearly pointless. It would be far better to focus resources on other health issues that are supported by actual evidence rather than pseudoscience.

    6. Re:Sigh... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's well known that exposure to UV increases the risk of skin cancer. Is that heating or ionization?

      UV light causes ionization. Furthermore, there is ACTUAL EVIDENCE that UV light causes cancer. Skin cancer is highly correlated with UV exposure. Americans are more likely to get skin cancer on their left arm. Australians tend to get it on their right arm. The only plausible explanation for that is that Americans drive on the right, and Aussies on the left, exposing different arms to the sun.

      If cellphones cause cancer, there would be similar disparities in brain cancer incidence depending on whether the cellphone is held to your right ear or left ear. Researchers have looked for this, and found no significant difference in cancer rates between "listening side" and "non-listening side". There is also no evidence that heavy cell users have higher rates of brain cancer.

      Is it possible that that we have missed something? Sure, but maybe we also missed Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster.

  2. Re:This again?? by CaptainDork · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't care who you are, this is funny.

    The takeaway is that I don't care who you are.

    --
    It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  3. California's Department of Public Health by PPH · · Score: 3

    Protecting rats from cancer since 2007.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
    1. Re:California's Department of Public Health by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Funny

      Protecting rats from cancer since 2007.

      Why are politicians getting extra protection?

      --
      Table-ized A.I.
  4. Re:Real or Fake News? by msauve · · Score: 5, Funny

    With or without a tinfoil hat?

    --
    "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
  5. Natl. Cancer Institute's Explanation by coldandcalculating · · Score: 5, Informative

    Cell Phones and Cancer Fact Sheet

    "Exposure to ionizing radiation, such as from x-rays, is known to increase the risk of cancer. However, although many studies have examined the potential health effects of non-ionizing radiation from radar, microwave ovens, cell phones, and other sources, there is currently no consistent evidence that non-ionizing radiation increases cancer risk (1).

    "The only consistently recognized biological effect of radiofrequency energy is heating. The ability of microwave ovens to heat food is one example of this effect of radiofrequency energy. Radiofrequency exposure from cell phone use does cause heating to the area of the body where a cell phone or other device is held (ear, head, etc.). However, it is not sufficient to measurably increase body temperature, and there are no other clearly established effects on the body from radiofrequency energy."

    Sleep easily next to your smartphone tonight.

    1. Re:Natl. Cancer Institute's Explanation by alexo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      On the other hand:

      The WHO/International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified radio-frequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, associated with wireless phone use.

      -- http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-ce...

      If scientific bodies are still not on the same page, what can we expect of laypeople?

    2. Re:Natl. Cancer Institute's Explanation by coldandcalculating · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That's a fair point. Just remember, according to that classification system cellphones are in the same group as Carpentry and Joinery (p.7).

      Granted, I cherry picked that from the list but the reason for a 2B designation is that they don't have the statistical power from their study to rule it out as a cause of gliomas, which means that the incidence is very low in exposed vs. unexposed populations. I think it's safe to say that as long as laypeople are okay with living in a house made of carpentry then they should be okay with using a cell phone.

  6. National Cancer Institute disagrees by tomhath · · Score: 5, Informative

    The referenced draft document simply states that IF you are concerned about it, here's how to reduce exposure. It doesn't state that RF exposure is dangerous.

    In fact the National Cancer Institute says the opposite:

    What the study showed: No association was observed between cell phone use and the incidence of glioma, meningioma, or acoustic neuroma, even among people who had been cell phone subscribers for 13 or more years