It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

A Possible Cellphone Link to Cancer? A Rat Study Launches New Debate

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 27 2016 @ 09:51 AM
There is a thread from 2006 that speaks to this: mobile phone harmful effects

But, since there is a new study that brings further attention to the possible link between cellphones & health issues (cancer/tumors) I thought it might be worthwhile for some readers to post the recent info here.

From NBC News reporter Maggie Fox:

A giant U.S. study meant to help decide whether cellphones cause cancer is coming back with confusing results. A report on the study, conducted in rats and mice, is not finished yet. But advocates pushing for more research got wind of the partial findings and the U.S. National Toxicology Program has released them early.

The findings are giving new life to the longstanding debate over whether cellphone use might cause cancer. They suggest that male rats exposed to constant, heavy doses of certain types of cellphone radiation develop brain and heart tumors. But female rats didn't, and even the rats that developed tumors lived longer than rats not exposed to the radiation.

WHAT? So, radiation and tumors make the male rats live longer? No way! There has got to be something else at play here...

They go on to report:

The partial report covers what the researchers considered the most worrying findings. "The occurrences of two tumor types in male Harlan Sprague Dawley rats exposed to RFR (radiofrequency radiation), malignant gliomas in the brain and schwannomas of the heart, were considered of particular interest, and are the subject of this report," the team writes in its report. Sprague Dawley rats are a common type of lab rat. "These findings appear to support the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) conclusions regarding the possible carcinogenic potential of RFR." IARC, the cancer arm of the World Health Organization, said in 2011 it was possible the devices might cause cancer and recommended further study.

Here is a link to the entire article: SOURCE

At this point I want to point out that RATS DON'T USE CELLPHONES. I also want to yell: STOP TESTING ON ANIMALS! Fortunately, advances in computer modeling and other advances in science are convincing some researchers to use alternative means of testing products and theories without resorting to torturing/killing animals.

Thanks for reading- I look forward to hearing your comments.

edit on 5272016 by seattlerat because: my spilling sugs

posted on May, 27 2016 @ 11:03 AM
It's interesting, and I've always had the feeling this devices we wield each day, have negative effects on biology.

Radiation and constant engagement of unseen waves, staring at illuminated screens..

Recently I left a job in commission sales, working for Rogers Wireless (Canada leading cellphone provider).
Before having this job I didn't like, care for, and barely used a cellphone. Of course the devices became a necessity for the job.

During my 2+ years running my store, everyday life with a cellphone, wifi, Bluetooth, waves, radiation, illuminated screens. ....

It's hard to pin point, but my eyes for sure have become weary, and the energy of my body itself, the "jolt" I always had (no energy drinks or substances, natural energy), was lesser then 2+ years prior.

My mother, has worked in the cellphone industry for almost 2 decades. As a child I remember her very active, lively, with alot of energy. Very sharp and good at her job.

Today she is diagnosed with MS, she has no energy to do much, and her eyes are really weary as well.

My tenure at this job, was conflicting as I always thought the MS was caused by the constant life style of a cellphone wielder, for so long. It's just something that I always felt and made sense to me.

Hence I left the industry a couple months ago and definitely will not be going back.
Of course I have no proof, our intelligent establishment that has an answer for everything, hasn't conducted enough research on the effects, and still have no idea the cause of MS.

Such revealing of cellphones harming biology with long term use - would put a massive dent in a billion billion $ industry globally.

Such corporations don't want that happening....
edit on 27-5-2016 by Elementalist because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 27 2016 @ 12:31 PM
If you asked 100 people would you give up your cellphone or risk cancer.. You would certainly have a landslide for the cellphone..

No one cares for these studies if it means giving up their iPhone and Facebook.

posted on May, 27 2016 @ 05:38 PM
a reply to: Elementalist

I am sorry to hear about your mom's MS diagnosis - I lost mine in 2001 from complications related to that horrible affliction. Unfortunately, there is a very high incidence of auto-immune disorders in the Pacific Northwest region and I have been dealing with Crohn's disease for the past 35 years. I commend you for leaving the industry- it must have been a difficult decision to change employment.

I suspect that there HAS been research that PROVES the link between certain technologies and disease/illness but it has been suppressed or covered-up by the globalist corps.

posted on May, 27 2016 @ 05:40 PM
a reply to: Misterlondon

Maybe if the government began taxing Facebook posts or cellphone usage as they have done with tobacco some might feel compelled to use tin-cans & string to communicate or revert to snail-mail.

posted on May, 28 2016 @ 07:03 PM
James Gilliland said something rather radical but kind of obvious. They, the most assinine psycho's the cosmos has thrown out here, go out of their way to choose frequency ranges that are BAD for you.

Why not use one of the beneficial ones to call people on. Technology isn't bad, its a wonderful thing! So why do they make it bad?

Just don't give power away to psycho's and you have the best technology for both humanity and nature, not the worst.

edit on 28-5-2016 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 29 2016 @ 12:25 AM
a reply to: Unity_99

This is something I never considered- is it because these are the easiest/least expensive frequencies to take advantage of in communications technology? Or, is it part of a more sinister agenda? I suspect that it just doesn't matter to the manufacturers as long as they rake in the $$$$$$$$$$ until their pockets are overflowing and it spills out onto their floors so deep that they can swim in it.
edit on 5292016 by seattlerat because: my spilling sugs


log in