SCI/TECH: Mobile Phone Radiation Harms DNA

Researches announced Monday that mobile phones do harm body cells and human DNA in laboratory conditions. The Reflex study conducted by 12 research groups in seven European countries did not prove that mobile phones are a immediate risk to health but concluded that more research is needed.

The research was conducted over a four year period by exposing human and animal cells to electromagnetic fields typically produced mobile phones.




While mobile phones are used by everyone today I think its finally time to study the effects that having a radio device 2 inches from your brain might have. Although the effects are not seen by todays users you have to wonder what the future will bring for users who use cell phones everyday.

Oh my another claim that cell phones are harming us.

I can recall studies when cell phones first came out that stated cell phones caused cancer, now this. Just some fools looking for some attention nothing more. The story contains the standard disclaimer "More Studies are required" Duh

Keep in mind when they claimed they caused cancer very few had cell phones now a great majority have more then one, yet we have seen no rise in brain cancer have we?



Also wasn't this the very same group that claimed last week that Lap Tops could affect the male penis in some way?

The actual test states "electromagnetic fields" were used. This isn't necessarily specific to Cell phones. With Cell phones, using hands-free might make that significantly less, but what about other areas in our every-day lives?
For example, using an EMF reader, my microwave puts out about 5 to 7 up to a couple feet from it. And this is considered ok by the FCC!
What about computer monitors, and everyother electric device that we use daily?
Should the FCC review thier guidelines? Should product manufacturers be forced to report the EMF emissions? This opens up so many questions above and beyond Cell phone use. Although, since we typically put the cell phone next to our heads, they deserve to be near the top of the list.


[edit on 20-12-2004 by NERaptor]

Originally posted by NERaptor
The actual test states "electromagnetic fields" were used. This isn't necessarily specific to Cell phones. With Cell phones, using hands-free might make that significantly less, but what about other areas in our every-day lives?
For example, using an EMF reader, my microwave puts out about 5 to 7 up to a couple feet from it. And this is considered ok by the FCC!
What about computer monitors, and everyother electric device that we use daily?
Should the FCC review thier guidelines? Should product manufacturers be forced to report the EMF emissions? This opens up so many questions above and beyond Cell phone use. Although, since we typically put the cell phone next to our heads, they deserve to be near the top of the list.


[edit on 20-12-2004 by NERaptor]

They have been making claims about electromacnetic waves for years, that is nothing new and most have been proven wrong to my knowledge.

Here is a good link on the subject.

www.mcw.edu...

Originally posted by shots
Keep in mind when they claimed they caused cancer very few had cell phones now a great majority have more then one, yet we have seen no rise in brain cancer have we?

Cancer rates are actually going up though, in general, including brain cancer.
This Cancer Trends study summarizes this by saying:
4 cancers have gone down (incidence, death)
8 Cancers have higher incidence, but modern medicine is lowering mortality rate.
11 cancers for which incidence and Death rate are increasing.
Note that this includes Brain Cancer.

Also take into account that cancers due to asbestos, lead poisoning, etc should be going down.

The study is from 97, couldn't find a newer analysis.
Note that this was age-weighted, so the argument that people are simply living longer doesn't apply

shots....
leave science to scientists...
remember... for about 25yrs after radiation was discovered, the only people who were telling us that radiation was bad, were the scientists who studied it...
everyone else was soaking up radiation for wacky health cures...
and lead was considered safe for plumbing until scientists studied that also... for many years (always needing more test studies)...
cell phones and other EF devices have not been around as long, yet have more studies and more people telling us they are harmful...
yes the FCC needs to look into this, and find what they have already found (but couldn't act on, since mobile technology is big business) that they can be harmful.
The most worrisome is the new GSM network that europe is now realizing, after using it for many years, causes cancer clusters around the antenna stations... (don't even have to use one to get hurt by them)


[edit on 20-12-2004 by LazarusTheLong]

It is very rare for me to make a cell phone call without using a headset. I have two, so that if I leave one in the car, there's one in the house, too. There are a couple of advantages. One of course is the radiation factor. The other is that I get the advantages of a speaker phone, but with privacy, so that I can make calls in, say, a restaurant, work through all those menus, do my banking and such without having everyone hearing the details. I also do my best to avoid the "cell yell."

The radiation used in the study was at levels between a Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) of between 0.3 and 2 watts per kilogram. Most phones emit radio signals at SAR levels of between 0.5 and 1 W/kg.

SAR is a measure of the rate of radio energy absorption in body tissue, and the SAR limit recommended by the International Commission of Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection is 2 W/kg.

The study also measured other harmful effects on cells.

Because of the lab set-up, the researchers said the study did not prove any health risks. But they added that "the genotoxic and phenotypic effects clearly require further studies ... on animals and human volunteers."

[...]

Adlkofer advised against the use of a mobile phone when an alternative fixed line phone was available, and recommended the use of a headset connected to a cellphone whenever possible.

"We don't want to create a panic, but it is good to take precautions," he said, adding that additional research could take another four or five years.

Previous independent studies into the health effects of mobile phone radiation have found it may have some effect on the human body, such as heating up body tissue and causing headaches and nausea, but no study that could be independently repeated has proved that radiation had permanent harmful effects. [emphasis mine]

www.reuters.com...

These researchers used up to twice the radiation than is emitted by cell phones and admit that their research does not prove harm caused by cell phones. I think the headset advice is good, not only from a safety standpoint, but from a practical one, as well, as I stated earlier.

[edit on 04/12/20 by GradyPhilpott]

GradyPhilpott
These researchers used up to twice the radiation than is emitted by cell phones and admit that their research does not prove harm caused by cell phones. I think the headset advice is good, not only from a safety standpoint, but from a practical one, as well, as I stated earlier.

I agree on the use of the headsets and wish they made their use manditory in cars to help prevent accidents.

I seldom use my cell since I retired, however my wife does and I got her a headset for her car just for safety reasons. Now if I can just get her to use it. You know what they say you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink

I have one question though. Why would they use such high levels? That seems rather extreme, kind of like they do in some tests on medicine. The labels on the state take two tablets a day for up to 10 days, yet researchers took it for up to one year. It was at that time they found that problems started.

I only mentioned the above based on the latest regarding a warning that came out about Alieve (sp?). Geesh give me a break of course it might cause problems in some at those levels.

Now critics are calling for it to be removed from the markert because of those tests. Logic tells me rewording the label should be enough, unless of course further testing at lower doses produces similar results.