It’s the moment we’ve all been dreading. Initial findings from a massive federal study, released on Thursday, suggest that radio-frequency (RF) radiation, the type emitted by cellphones, can cause cancer.

The findings from a $25 million study, conducted over two-and-a-half years by the National Toxicology Program (NTP), showed that male rats exposed to two types of RF radiation were significantly more likely than unexposed rats to develop a type of brain cancer called a glioma, and also had a higher chance of developing the rare, malignant form of tumor known as a schwannoma of the heart.

This is one of those subjects that has been hotly debated, but this multi-year study suggests that there is indeed an increased risk.

Personally, I use a headset whenever I make a call more than a minute or so; not because I’m worried about radiation, but because holding a phone to my ear for a long time hurts my shoulder.

I’ve also wondered about Bluetooth radiation. Those wrist computers many of us are wearing now; could they be dangerous?

Source: “Game-Changing” Study Links Cellphone Radiation to Cancer – Mother Jones

6 thoughts on “

  1. Even if the studies are valid, they are valid only for lab testing. The obvious question is… Why hasn’t there been a noticeable rise in gliomas since the introduction of cell phones?

  2. Even if the studies are valid, they are valid only for lab testing. The obvious question is… Why hasn’t there been a noticeable rise in gliomas since the introduction of cell phones?

  3. The reason why this and other very expensive laboratory studies have conducted is that about thirty years ago there were epidemiological studies conducted in Europe that detected a small increase in certain brain cancers with cellphone usage. Based on the specialists quoted in the WSJ article (link below) it may be awhile and more studies before there are new safety standards for cellphones.

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-cellphone-study-fans-cancer-worries-1464393051

    With regards to safety of bluetooth headsets, there are a fair number of articles such as the one below (it may be out of date). If you’re really worried, perhaps you may want to used a wired headset.

    http://www.electricsense.com/1010/bluetooth-what-you-will-learn-nowhere-else-%E2%80%93-is-it-really-dangerous/

    • I’m 69, and not particularly worried. I’m not the sort of person who hides under the bed when some new potential danger is announced. The ElectricSense article shows a lot of bias, and little fact. (Where, exactly, are the data linking pulse rise time to cancer?) Lloyd’s useless response to the woman in Texas shows that he has no understanding of human psychology.

      I have no problem with the possibility that EM energy might induce cancer. But I see no real data on it. In simple language… If gigahertz radiation causes brain tumors, then there should be a rise in such tumors that roughly parallels the rise in the use of cell phones, WiFi, etc, How long would it take to confirm (or deny) a statistical correlation? Five minutes?

      Science is not about facts. It’s about asking good questions. I’ve asked a good question. Would someone please answer it?

  4. The reason why this and other very expensive laboratory studies have conducted is that about thirty years ago there were epidemiological studies conducted in Europe that detected a small increase in certain brain cancers with cellphone usage. Based on the specialists quoted in the WSJ article (link below) it may be awhile and more studies before there are new safety standards for cellphones.

    http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-cellphone-study-fans-cancer-worries-1464393051

    With regards to safety of bluetooth headsets, there are a fair number of articles such as the one below (it may be out of date). If you’re really worried, perhaps you may want to used a wired headset.

    http://www.electricsense.com/1010/bluetooth-what-you-will-learn-nowhere-else-%E2%80%93-is-it-really-dangerous/

    • I’m 69, and not particularly worried. I’m not the sort of person who hides under the bed when some new potential danger is announced. The ElectricSense article shows a lot of bias, and little fact. (Where, exactly, are the data linking pulse rise time to cancer?) Lloyd’s useless response to the woman in Texas shows that he has no understanding of human psychology.

      I have no problem with the possibility that EM energy might induce cancer. But I see no real data on it. In simple language… If gigahertz radiation causes brain tumors, then there should be a rise in such tumors that roughly parallels the rise in the use of cell phones, WiFi, etc, How long would it take to confirm (or deny) a statistical correlation? Five minutes?

      Science is not about facts. It’s about asking good questions. I’ve asked a good question. Would someone please answer it?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.