What the Cellphone Industry Doesn't Want You to Know About Radiation Concerns

www.alternet.org...

In a recent analysis [4] for theHuffington Post, Davis examined the cellphone industry's long-term strategy, devised in the early '90s, to deal with studies showing cellphone radiation damages DNA: "war-game the science." Noted in a 1994 Motorola memo, this strategy, wrote Davis, "remains alive and well" today, the latest example occurring just last month. When the World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) published newly detailed documentation for its yearlong 2011 expert review—which declared cellphone radiation a "possible human carcinogen" (same as lead and DDT)—the multi-trillion-dollar cellular industry responded by citing a new dubious [5] report out of Taiwan.

Davis, the founding director of the Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology of the U.S. National Research Council, pointed out that the online abstract concludes "with some highly unscientific language that sounds as though it was crafted for the PR section of Foxconn, the Taiwanese producer of phones for Apple, Motorola, and Sony:

'In conclusion, we do not detect any correlation between the morbidity/mortality of malignant brain tumors and cellphone use in Taiwan. We thus urge international agencies to publish only confirmatory reports with more applicable conclusions in public. This will help spare the public from unnecessary worries.'"

and...

BJ: What is the most difficult obstacle you've found in trying to bring more public awareness to this issue?

DD: The close-mindedness of my scientific colleagues has sometimes been utterly astonishing. That the most prominent scientists, very respected people, are so close-minded because they are also human and addicted to these devices. That's been the most difficult thing to deal with. But we're winning on the science because we're not making this stuff up.

Good Morning Everyone,

I hope that everyone is aware of this danger of cell phone usage. It's not new news, it's just news that most of us choose to ignore because we 'depend' so on our mobiles.

So, my point in posting this is to note the "War game the science" angle of the article. This is happening to all science that doesn't support the aims and goals of BIG BUSINESS and it is turning us into a society of science idiots. When it's PR firms and marketeers that write the science or scienc hacks that will do anything for a buck what else can happen.

The telecon companies are strong arming individual scientists, their universities and the journals that publish their results and more and more are unable to resist the money and power of these companies.

This corporate take over of science is truly frightening and, in my opinion, more important then the latest outrage over guns or secrets - because it's affects our perception of reality and touts falsity as truth.

Greta article! I consider myself a relatively light user of my celly, but now I have reason to cut back even more. I wonder, since the source doesn't mention, if the same risks (cancer $ sterility) are possible with other wireless devices like laptops. I can picture some corporate ner-do-well thinking "if only we could get people to voluntarily irradiate their reproductive regions, we might be able to reduce population growth...AHA! LAPTOP COMPUTERS!".

Originally posted by Urantia1111
Greta article! I consider myself a relatively light user of my celly, but now I have reason to cut back even more. I wonder, since the source doesn't mention, if the same risks (cancer $ sterility) are possible with other wireless devices like laptops. I can picture some corporate ner-do-well thinking "if only we could get people to voluntarily irradiate their reproductive regions, we might be able to reduce population growth...AHA! LAPTOP COMPUTERS!".

Not an expert - but my limited understanding is that anything Electronmagnetic has effect (affect??? - never figured that one out). What really got me with this article, new information to me, was the effect of 'thinning the brain/blood barrier'. I wonder what effects that would cause.....

We can't escape EMF (electromagnetic field) pollution anywhere and I think it's changing us and not for the better.

Back when I got my first Motorola flip phone, the instruction manual had all kinds of warnings. It pretty much warned against being within 1 inch of the antenna while it was in use. Also warned against messing with the antenna while it was in use.

We, as a whole, chose to ignore those warnings to this day. On a brighter side, the digital networks put out less damaging radiation as their analog counterpart. It's the data and stuff that make the digital phones just as bad.

You get more damaging radiation from your home WiFi network than a cell phone. Even living in a domicile with faulty wiring puts out more juice than a phone.

The cell phone industry puts all the warnings and cautions in their user manuals (the complete user manual, not the quick flip crap most people go by - the complete user manual will list the warnings, but most people now can't or won't bother to comprehend it). We just don't bother to read them.

S&F for a good topic.

reply to post by FyreByrd


Your blood brain barrier allows metabolites, like oxygen and glucose, to pass from your blood, into your brain and central nervous system. It also protects the brain from viruses and bacteria in your blood. Another key function, is that it prevents hormones and neurotransmitters in the rest of the body, from messing with its vital work running the show. It provides also, homeostasis (a constant environment) for the brain.

A thinning of this barrier therefore, could result in too much blood product passing into the brain and the central nervous system which might allow various infections through also, meaning that relatively normal sicknesses could suddenly present with much more serious symptoms, like swap your headache for a coma and work from there kind of serious. If its ability to prevent hormones and neurotransmitters from accesing the brain fails, the brain will be altered in its activities by the presence of these chemicals, resulting in behavioral changes and probably some spatial awareness issues, temperature regulation problems and so on... the list is pretty long in terms of the possible effects.

I believe a new trend in thinking is arising where any amount of radiation could be harmful, even low-level background radiation.

www.washingtonsblog.com...