Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cellphone-Cancer Link Found in Government Study

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 163 posts

Re: Cellphone-Cancer Link Found in Government Study

#91

Post by mcbits »

derptacious wrote: post #80
retrogradeorbit wrote: post #40

It's important to note that according to official dogma, non-ionising radiation can not cause cancer. I've heard my own concerns about non-ionising radiation dismissed (even belittled) so many times that I've lost count. Most often this comes from educated people who think that their education constitutes the whole of all knowledge about the universe and that there is nothing left to be discovered. But one should und…

The establishment demands that non-ionizing UV can be carcinogenic, but laugh if someone thinks that microwave - at various doses - could be! Why does it take so much evidence to even propose that low doses of the frequency that cook food can have adverse health effects on living humans? The fact that they're not willing to recommend bluetooth or earbuds without a mountain of evidence is another demonstration of clos…

Fire cooks food, but waving your hands above a candle for warmth doesn't "cook" your hands. However, if you do damage your skin (especially repeatedly), the tissue damage and repair cycle can increase the risk of cancer.

So when it comes to cell phones, do those microwaves merely warm human tissue very slightly, or might it occasionally be concentrated in a way to cause micro-burns? Supposing the body is repeatedly having to heal tiny microwave burns, it wouldn't be surprising at all if cancer risk is increased.

Re: Cellphone-Cancer Link Found in Government Study

#92

Post by agumonkey »

maxerickson wrote: post #81
agumonkey wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about wifi ? Since I, we, are sitting next to routers all day long, which I guess are sending more EMW energy through us than 3G towers.

The exposure from towers and base stations will be tiny compared to the exposure from devices. Inverse square law and all that.

That was my assumption too but I never tested it.

Re: Cellphone-Cancer Link Found in Government Study

#93

Post by cozzyd »

hayitsbacon wrote: post #15

"I suspect that this experiment is substantially underpowered and that the few positive results found reflect false positive findings." - Dr. Michael S Lauer, Director of Cardiovascular Sciences at NHLBI. Peer Review in Appendix G starting on page 36 of the study. http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/05/26/055699.f...

Indeed, I did not find their response to this reviewer to address the statistics criticisms satisfactory. Also, although they try to adjust for this, I'm not sure if their rate correction fully corrects for longevity.

Re: Cellphone-Cancer Link Found in Government Study

#94

Post by nashashmi »

taneq wrote: post #77
joshvm wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mother Jones posted this link: http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/05/26/055699.f... Key points: - The rats were exposed in utero and throughout their lifetimes - They did pilot studies to find what radiation level did not cause a body temperature rise to remove that as a confusing factor - 900MHz CDMA and GSM signals - SAR of 0, 1.5, 3, 6 W/kg. For comparison the FCC limit is 1.2 W/kg in 1 gram of tissue.…

Oh great, now those damn people with CDMA phones are going to be even more smug. :P

I was always more comfortable with CDMA than GSM, partly because the speakers near a GSM phone can pick up on the GSM transmission code, what code is being sent, the duration sent, and the time in between transmissions. It was literally like hearing the morse code.

I immediately correlated the electromagnetic feelings in my body to this signal. And never trusted GSM phones again.

Re: Cellphone-Cancer Link Found in Government Study

#95

Post by bkmartin »

taneq wrote: post #77
joshvm wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mother Jones posted this link: http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/05/26/055699.f... Key points: - The rats were exposed in utero and throughout their lifetimes - They did pilot studies to find what radiation level did not cause a body temperature rise to remove that as a confusing factor - 900MHz CDMA and GSM signals - SAR of 0, 1.5, 3, 6 W/kg. For comparison the FCC limit is 1.2 W/kg in 1 gram of tissue.…

Oh great, now those damn people with CDMA phones are going to be even more smug. :P

Give Verizon another reason to raise my rates... GREAT!

Re: Cellphone-Cancer Link Found in Government Study

#97

Post by bkmartin »

tfm wrote: post #71
fyhhvvfddhv wrote: post #70

If cellphones and WiFi caused cancer you'd think we would see the cancer rates explode over the past 20 years. Have they?

Cancer is a very broad church. There have been a lot of lifestyle changes over the last twenty years, very difficult to specify control groups ....

You could possibly use the Amish as a control group. They are probably exposed less than almost any other group to these types of radiation due to their distance in proximity. They, of course, do come into contact with it in minor ways when interacting in public, but far far less than the general population.

Re: Cellphone-Cancer Link Found in Government Study

#99

Post by epistasis »

colordrops wrote: post #96

In a similar vein, don't even think of questioning GMOs. You even just hint that you wanna see more studies on their safety you will be torn limb from limb, even if you admit to trusting them and eating them yourself.

That's because there already have been many many studies, and regulations require that each new food GMO be studied as well. If you don't mention all those, I'm guess the "tearing limb from limb" is actually annoyance at your ignorance.

Re: Cellphone-Cancer Link Found in Government Study

#100

Post by Karunamon »

kisstheblade wrote: post #89
retrogradeorbit wrote: post #40

It's important to note that according to official dogma, non-ionising radiation can not cause cancer. I've heard my own concerns about non-ionising radiation dismissed (even belittled) so many times that I've lost count. Most often this comes from educated people who think that their education constitutes the whole of all knowledge about the universe and that there is nothing left to be discovered. But one should und…

No, the "dogma" is just that scary cellphone RADIATION! is no more harmful than the radiation from lightbulbs, flashlights, candles etc. And probably a couple of orders of magnitudes less so. But hey, radiation, you know, nucular, scary.

Snark aside, those lightbulbs, flashlights, and candles are not placed directly against the head and near the reproductive organs (in pockets) for upwards of a thousand hours per year.
Post reply on HN