This article like the telegraph is utter bs. The power output of a mobile phone by standard is a max of 1 watt. And even then the mobile phone does not use 1 watt constantly. Hell, if it was the case that we were getting damaged by these ranges of frequency bands we wouldn't be having WIFI all over the place for the same reason. Now Hypothetically if one was to be stupid enough to stand next to an active Mobile base-station antenna then yes, you would start having head-aches because of the emissive power concentration from the antenna, and also the fact that base stations are at max i think between 30-50 watts.
Mobile phone cancer warning as malignant brain tumours double
141–150 of 185 posts
Re: Mobile phone cancer warning as malignant brain tumours double
#142I'd also be interested to see how many more people just text or IM not talk compared to ten or twenty years ago. If there is a risk from cellphone EM radiation so it must also depend on phone usage and also modern phones emit less EM radiation? For me my main concern is I use my phone as an alarm clock and it's 30cm (1 foot) from my head all night. I also leave it there since it's my main phone so I keep it close to…
Put it in airplane mode overnight.
Re: Mobile phone cancer warning as malignant brain tumours double
#143Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm fascinated about casual dismissal of actual problems justified by the fact that other problems exist. I'm not panicked by this issue, but I think there's something there. I play cards with a bunch of neurosurgeons - every one of them has professional concerns about cellular and bluetooth usage, and 4/6 expressed those concerns to me individually about my AirPods.
Wired headphones work well. Is there risk from holding a transmitting phone in the hand for an hour, or adjacent to one part of body tissue, during an extended call? How about frequencies, e.g. will 5G alter the risk to local tissue? Is WiFi lower power & risk?
These particular folks were concerned about the idea of radios in each ear communicating across the brain. The potential interference or other impact on brain "electonics" was an area of concern, not just cancer.
I was surprised these guys were worried about it. They all use wired earbuds, which says enough for me.
Re: Mobile phone cancer warning as malignant brain tumours double
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this actually likely to have a notable impact on the statistics? My understanding is that cases diagnosed later or discovered in autopsy will contribute just as much as cases diagnosed early. Assuming that such tumours aren't routinely missed in autopsies. I imagine improvements in early detection may result in a temporary increase due to the shifting phase of detection, but this wouldn't account for a doubling ov…
1) Most people aren't autopsied upon death, autopsies are only performed in limited circumstances. I don't personally know of a single person whom died who an autopsy was performed on. 2) The article is vague and short but "cases of GBM in England have increased from around 1,250 a year in 1995 to just under 3,000" almost certainly refers to diagnosed cases of GBM, not including incidentals found in autopsies.
Autopsies are performed when the cause of death is indeterminate. Most people die of a known cause. A family member of mine was autopsied (in the UK) when they died unexpectedly. I expect that if killed by brain cancer, you'll either present symptoms resulting in a diagnosis (albeit a late one), or die unexpectedly and be autopsied.
Re: Mobile phone cancer warning as malignant brain tumours double
#145> cases of GBM in England have increased from around 1,250 a year in 1995 to just under 3,000. Not only the population of UK has increased in this time, it has also gotten older on average. Moreover is 0.002% of population getting GBM per year even significant enough to blame mobile phones (that is used by everyone)?
Agreed. Also not accounted for is the UK's huge immigration surge (more than doubling the foreign-born UK populace of the mid-90s). [1]
Different ancestries carry with them different genetic predispositions. It might be that the GBM rise is due to phenotypes not phones.
[1] http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings...
Re: Mobile phone cancer warning as malignant brain tumours double
#146Earlier quoted context omitted.
The VW scandal is notable because there is human malice involved. Those people, however small their cohort may be, are going to die because some engineers cheated. That's news, just as individual crimes are news. If this was a story about brain tumors going undetected because of deliberate misdiagnosis, it would get a ton more press still.
There have been many people saying that cell phones can cause tumors and they have been shouted down by industry experts on many occasions. Now, I wouldn't know the truth about this either way but (1) electromagnetic radiation is something we can measure and quantify and (2) almost anything in excess has the ability to cause cancer because it interferes with certain cell mechanisms. To categorically reject something…
The challenge is that cell phones causing cancer is that the idea that they cause cancer has long been promoted by morons who think that they produce radiation like a nuclear reactor.
The electromagnetic radiation that cell phones actually do produce is similar to say a radio or even more aptly a microwave and anyone who has ever nuked a spud knows what too much of it looks like and knows that your phones radio falls far short of what anyone would consider too much in the traditional sense.
Further large scale analysis has repeatedly failed to find a correlation between the introduction of cell phones and an uptick of brain cancer.
So in summary we are talking about a theory that has been repeatedly debunked by scientists and promoted by idiots if it turns out there is some novel mechanism by which it promotes brain tumors it will be a harder than average sell and it will be novel science not vindication of all the idiots who believed cell tower = plutonium.
Re: Mobile phone cancer warning as malignant brain tumours double
#147Here is a discussion/summary of the American Cancer Society:
https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-exposu...
It is certainly not an easy problem to measure and collect strong evidence for either side.
Re: Mobile phone cancer warning as malignant brain tumours double
#148I'd also be interested to see how many more people just text or IM not talk compared to ten or twenty years ago. If there is a risk from cellphone EM radiation so it must also depend on phone usage and also modern phones emit less EM radiation? For me my main concern is I use my phone as an alarm clock and it's 30cm (1 foot) from my head all night. I also leave it there since it's my main phone so I keep it close to…
Butt cancer you say? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FhjuRf5wPkc
Re: Mobile phone cancer warning as malignant brain tumours double
#149> cases of GBM in England have increased from around 1,250 a year in 1995 to just under 3,000. Not only the population of UK has increased in this time, it has also gotten older on average. Moreover is 0.002% of population getting GBM per year even significant enough to blame mobile phones (that is used by everyone)?
Agreed. Also not accounted for is the UK's huge immigration surge (more than doubling the foreign-born UK populace of the mid-90s). [1] Different ancestries carry with them different genetic predispositions. It might be that the GBM rise is due to phenotypes not phones. [1] http://www.migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings...
My little brother died of a GBM about 3 years ago. The research I did at the time indicated that there are essentially no known predictors of GBMs; there appears to be a very slight correlation with being white, male, and ~30-50, all which matched for him.
Re: Mobile phone cancer warning as malignant brain tumours double
#150Pretty sure this is complete B.S considering the view of talking on the phone millenials and younger have. Like, there are literal memes about one being horrified and the sound of a phone ringing, which to me seems like a good indicator that we're talking less on the phone, so why would brain tumors increase?
While there may be less calls made overall, one thing to consider is that more calls may be being made by mobile phones rather than by landlines, which are increasingly replaced by mobile phones.