Slashdot Mirror
Linkage between Cell-phone Usage and Long Term Memory Loss
sashae writes "Wired is reporting that that scientists at the University of Washington suspect that cell-phone usage causes long-term memory loss after a series of tests involving rats swimming in a pool of milk, attempting to find a platform in the centre of the pool. The rats exposed to cell-phone radiation were unable to find the platform after being exposed. "
All hand waving and qualitive results.
I want to know the method and intensity of irradiation, the number of rats used in the study etc.
One suggested method to alleviate this problem, would be to have the ariel (sp?) on the bottom of the 'phone. It'd still work, but be further from sensitive brain cells, but the obvious solution is handsfree equipment. Give us decent voice recognition and we're sorted. "Phone bob... *click*click* hi bob, i'm stuck in traffic..." etc.
I think I'll wait for NewScientist Coverage.
-Yarn - Rio Karma: Excellent
There are several studies on the 'net that prove pretty conclusively that driving is impaired (and accident rates, consequently, rise) when people are distracted. (Yes, I know, that seems pretty common sense, but, hell, so does waiting until you get home to make a phone call.)
Stupid people piss me off.
- A.P.
--
"One World, one Web, one Program" - Microsoft promotional ad
"Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
I wouldn't be able to swim to a platform in a pool of milk either.
I think that it is fair to make companies liable ex post facto (after the fact). Even if no malice is present, their product did cause damage through normal operation. It's the same argument where tobacco companies would be liable for cancer deaths (which they are) and Ford would be liable for exploding Pintos (which it was).
I don't know about this. The idea is that Tobacco Companies knew and intentionally withheld evidence of the deadliness of tobacco, and Ford either knew or was negligent in not knowing that their cars went boom.
The general scientific consensus for years has been that EM in any strength is completely harmless. The concept that it might not be is rather alien.
Imagine if Slashdot's color/font choices caused breakdown in mental stability in some portion of the population. Should CmdrTaco be liable?
Yours Truly,
Dan Kaminsky
DoxPara Research
http://www.doxpara.com
Rats do possess much, much thinner skulls.
That being said, one has to wonder about the structure and function of this type of memory, if ostensibly harmless frequency exposure can cause this kind of damage.
Is it fair to make companies liable ex post facto, incidentally? If I have no knowledge that my behavior could cause serious problems, and I make a good faith effort to both discover problems and handle the problem as best I can be expected, should I be liable?
How did they deliver the Microwave radiation? Any chance there were distracting harmonics only audible to the rats that might have polluted the study?
Yeah, this is pretty worrisome.
Yours Truly,
Dan Kaminsky
DoxPara Research
http://www.doxpara.com
I find it really weird that when someone questions the methods used in a study, they are often accused of believing the opposite of what the study's results show.
--
Fuck the system? Nah, you might catch something.
This is what really annoys me about science. Rats swimming around? I guess at some basic biological level we have certain similarities talking on cell phones with rats swimming. But the truth is is that cell-phones haven't been around long enough for any sort of long-term study (on humans), and they're really just freaking everyone out for no reason.
--
"Some people say that I proved if you get a C average, you can end up being successful in life."
I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
I just saw cell phones covered on Dateline (I think... one of those shows). They pointed out that while cell phones are required to keep their radiation levels within specified safety limits, the manufacturers get to do all the tests themselves and no one (not even the FCC) confirms the results... so Dateline did.
Depending on HOW you hold the phone, many phones far exceeded the safety limits. Moving the mouthpiece a little closer to your chin will vary the orientation of the antenna and can dramatically increase or decrease your exposure.
They also mentioned that one manufacturer (don't reacall who) had created a headset that plugs into the phone. The phone itself (and all its potentially harmful radiation) is kept far away from your noggin.
Just keep that antenna away from your skull and you'll be fine.
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
... maybe they should've phoned for directions.
Once again, evil RF radiation comes in to destroy our minds, give us brain cancer, and generally mess up our bodies.
This is crap science reporting. (Since I haven't read the scientific paper, I can't judge the science). It is possible that low level RF from cell phones had an effect on the rat's ability to find the platform in the middle of the milk, but I don't see how one can conclude that memory is what was affected. How about directional sense or motor coordination?
I still maintain that standing in sunlight complaining about radiation from your cell phone is like calling your neighbor during a hurricane to complain that his cat is breathing on your trees.
Until you have an etiology whereby RF causes harm to your brain, you can't say RF is the cause.
The effects of RF at thes power levels and distances from your neurons is so miniscule. Until you show me a physiological change in brain tissue exposed to RF, I just don't buy it.
Boo! Raaayyydiayyyytion! Boo!
What's hitting you when your turn on a light? Radiation! What's hitting you when you stand in the sun? Radiation (really broadband radiation, too, from DC to daylight)! Radiation is nothing but energy in motion, either in photons (RF, aka "light") or in massive particles (alpha and beta particles, protons, neutrons, or electrons moving at high speeds).
Radiation can really only affect you in a few ways. It can raise your temperature, it can break chemical bonds, or it can cause nuclear change. The first effect is the most common and happens at lower energies (like those in cell phones). The second is an electron effect and happens at higher energies. The third is a nuclear effect at happens at really high energies where neutrons are forced into atomic nuclei making, possibly, unstable isotopes out of stable ones. This last one is quite rare and I don't think any terrestrial RF source has that kind of energy (I'm not a physicist, can this happen at cosmic ray energies?). The second and third effects just don't happen at energies this low. (Actually, I would guess that the second could happen VERY RARELY through some phonon effect or somesuch -- can an educated person help me out here?)
Anyways, I still think this is way overhyped. You get more harmful radiation working in a granite building. If you're really scared, get a mag mount antenna (if you double the distance between your head and the antenna, your reduce the dose to 1/4th, triple it, 1/9th, and so on -- inverse square law, remember?) and keep your calls short.
;-)
cpeterso
Erm, yeah. I have, erm... what's that number after one... two, in fact ;)
:)
No, the real problem was using Konqueror as a browser (kfm) to post an article with a broken < in it rather than < or something like that. Woops
~Tim
--
Rushing on down to the circle of the turn
I heard it on local radio many years ago (watching them use them :)
~Tim
--
Rushing on down to the circle of the turn
I have read of at least one study, maybe two, that showed the RF leakage up the headset wire was roughly equivalent to that in the antenna, so this probably only creates the illusion of distancing the hazard. (I'll see if I can find the URL - I think I have it in my bookmarks list at home, which is separate because it had over 1200 entries tha last time I synchronized my bookmarks - ack!)
Besides, who's to say your liver or something isn't even more at risk than your brain? We just don't know or understand much about these effects yet...
"The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last
Well, a few people have suggested tinfoil hats, but these can just reflect the radiation back down into your head if they don't cover the sides, or produce anoying RF nulls if they do cover the sides of the head.
:-) )
.) -- Happy talker with long term .. ] memory intact
Herewith, then, is the ultimate engineering solution to the problem as only a True Texan could devise it - the Tin Gallon Tin Hat with clever central radiation device.
(Copyright and all patent rights reserved in case anyone is actually silly enough to build it
(Rob: Why can't I include at least a small image here? I hate ASCII art!)
Note antenna safely up above tin hat
(Central position assures optimum
| signal strength!)
|
(((( | )))) -- dangerous radio waves
_|_
|[ ]|--- Cellphone plugs into convenient
|...| receptacle in top of hat
_|...|_
/ |___| \
| |---Tin Gallon Tin Hat
____|_______|____ (Brim protects body from
| _/ \_ harmful radiation)
|(. 0 0
| [
\ \ /
" \ YAK / Note microphone hanging from hat!
-----
This is the true answer to your question of, "where is the safe yet practical place to put that antenna anyhow?" Of course it comes in sizes (taller users get shorter antennae) to ensure doorway clearance. Oh yeah, and this should be a good reason for the rest of you to realize why it's important to drive a pickup truck, something we've known in Texas for a long time!
(and yes, i can say that, since my family has been here for several generations. That said, I prefer the Ferrari to the truck, but it's important to also have a good tow vehicle if you own "a furrin sports car that looks like a shark"...)
"The future's good and the present is nothing to sneeze at." - Roblimo's last
Yes, it was an attempt at humor. No offense was intended to those gastrointestinally impaired or otherwise sensitive to such a subject.
... that's why it's "over-rated" now ... or maybe THEY didn't read my post and simply moderated down due to other's not getting it. We are all sheep at one time or another I guess.
Obviously someone else with moderator points didn't get it either
It's not the cell phone's microwaves that cause the problems, it's that most mice are lactose intolerant and they are swimming aimlessly around due to the gas the milk is giving them.
If you've ever attached a balloon to a small boat, put it in water, then let it go you'll understand what I'm saying and why the mice swim in circles.
The article points out that this radiation is not exactly the same as cell-phone radiation; I'd be interested in seeing what the differences are.
Let's also not get too worked up about one study; the results of just one study are not definitive (in either direction).
"You can never have too many elephants on your team."
Just remember: To make up for any damage from cell-phone radiation, just eat more mashed potatoes.
Tell your friends about xenu.net
There is a credible body of experimental work which links acetylcholine to memory (consolidation and retrieval). However, you're correct, the article does not successfully link in the experiment with the pre-existing evidence - although he tries hard to insinuate it.
--
--
There is no premature anti-fascism. -Ernest Hemingway
"After a glass of 2% I just forget all my complaints about the government, its very relaxing. Have some, its bliiiisssss..."
Hmm.. I now know why people on the freeway seem to forget how to drive the moment the cell-phone touches their ear.
.sig: Now legally binding!
Meanwhile, my cell phone and brains work ok, but memory loss and symptoms of radiation sickness are observed after alcohol consumption.
To be honest, I'm more than a little leery about trusting science news from Wired (or any other 'news' source, for that matter). It would have been nice to have some more info of the experiment.
Now speculation.
The big problem, IMO, with applying these results to humans is that we shouldn't have to. If cell-phone use results in memory loss, cell-phone users should have noticed something a long time ago (or people studying cell-phone users, anyway). And conversely, it should be simple enough to verify the results by studying cell-phone users. Considering that lab rats seem to be vulnerable to everything known to man, I'm not really convinced.
I'm not one to disparage the scientific method, but the more important fact is what particular mechanism in RF exposure to the brain might be causing the acetylcholine deficit.
We can start the process of generalizing and extending theories when we know the how and why of the subject. Alone, this experiment is scientific trivia: not uninteresting, but unattached to the greater body of knowledge.
I'd think that knowledge of this mechanism would be important for a fair bit more than cell phones - think about all the things that we use which give off some kind of signal. This makes further research in this vein quite relevant and necessary.
Likewise, we should consider the nature of the study data. Is it replicable to humans, most importantly. Although ethics considerations may preclude testing directly, evidence of a long-term memory deficit could possibly be teased out of an epidemiological or statistical study.
In any case, my own cell phone is staying where it usually does: in my coat pocket and turned off.
--
--
There is no premature anti-fascism. -Ernest Hemingway
The research is sound and valid. It clearly shows that:
Yuppies who use cell-phones in their endless effort to win the rat-race while buoyed up by the milk of human kindness, tend to forget the ethical platform, their veritable solid ground in a shifting, fluid sea of corporate mentality, and become wife-beating dead-beat dads and absentee fathers who do not contribute to society in the slightest.
Actually, we need to remember (hard to do, since we use cell-phones) that dairy products are high in fat, which is bad for you.
If I was forced to swim around in a pool of milk, I'd have a hard time remembering things as well.
Reminds me of an old joke about a Russian scientist experimenting with flies.
1. Remove fly wings so it doesn't escape, and place fly on table.
2. Move hands towards fly: Observed that fly walks away.
3. Remove a leg from the fly.
4. Place fly on table.
5. repeat steps 2 thru 4 as needed.
Conclusion: After the removal of all legs, the fly becomes conditioned not to fear hands.
-- What you do today will cost you a day of your life.