Merged: NY Post reports cellphone & cancer "link", before the study has been published

[bigred]

I wouldn't the big C on anyone of course, but I would love if this marked a sharp downtown in all the morons walking around with these damn things glued to their ears 24/7. Appears that the big companies might have been irresponsible about it, scientists and their studies aren't always right, and going "hi tech" isn't always good :shock:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,569465,00.html

[MattusMaximus]

It'll be interesting to see if this study ever actually surfaces, and if so, what it *actually* says...

Study: Cell Phone Cancer Link

Quote:

A groundbreaking, $30 million study into cell phones has found a link between long term use and brain tumors.

The World Health Organization is about to reveal that its decade-long investigation has found the devices can lead to cancer — and the internationally-respected body will soon issue a public health message with its findings, London’s Daily Telegraph reported today.

The conclusion goes against years of assurances by cell phone companies and scientists that cell phone use is safe.

But last month, Sen. Arlen Specter (D – Pa) organized Senate hearings to examine health implications of talking on-the-go.

The WHO’s Interphone investigation’s results showed, "a significantly increased risk" of some brain tumors "related to use of mobile phones for a period of ten years or more," the Telegraph reported today.

The study’s head, Dr. Elisabeth Cardis, said, "In the absence of definitive results and in the light of a number of studies which, though limited, suggest a possible effect of radiofrequency radiation, precautions are important."

The project carried out studies in 13 countries, talking to tumor sufferers as well as healthy cell phone users, It interviewed 12,800 people.

The results will be officially published before the end of the year, according to the Telegraph.

I'm guessing this is going to be a classic example of the media screwing up the reporting of a scientific study. Anyone else have info and/or thoughts on this?

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by bigred

I wouldn't the big C on anyone of course, but I would love if this marked a sharp downtown in all the morons walking around with these damn things glued to their ears 24/7. Appears that the big companies might have been irresponsible about it, scientists and their studies aren't always right, and going "hi tech" isn't always good :shock:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,569465,00.html

From your link:

Quote:

The study’s head, Dr. Elisabeth Cardis, said, "In the absence of definitive results and in the light of a number of studies which, though limited, suggest a possible effect of radiofrequency radiation, precautions are important."

Just because Fox News says a thing, that doesn't mean you have to accept it uncritically.

Why not wait until the actual report comes out, and other scientists have had a chance to review its findings and replicate its experimental results?

[Eos of the Eons]

Quote:

The World Health Organization is about to reveal that its decade-long investigation

Yeah, some idiot sent out a media alert, and the media being as illiterate on science as usual doesn't know to wait to verify what the reviewed results are. Wanna bet some nut put out the release and is now selling people on how to pretect themselves from this type of radiation? I was at a women's entrepreuner show, and half of them were selling people on devices to measure the radiation in homes and saying they could give advice on how to prevent it!

The article is sadly missing out on the fact that this kind of radiation was around long before cell phones and is not harmful!
http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/lin...dio_waves.html

Quote:

Many people fear that EMFs cause cancer; however, a causal connection between EMFs and cancer has not been established. The National Research Council (NRC) spent more than three years reviewing more than 500 scientific studies that had been conducted over a 20-year period and found "no conclusive and consistent evidence" that electromagnetic fields harm humans.


"The photon energy of a cell phone EMF is more than 10 million times weaker than the lowest energy ionizing radiation" (Trottier 2009). Thus, the likelihood that our cell phones, microwave ovens, computers, and other electronic devices are carcinogenic is miniscule.

http://www.skepdic.com/emf.html


Wanna bet that the actual study results will be completely opposite of what the stupid media has again prematurely reported on? When will journalists ever learn?

[Safe-Keeper]

Quote:

Wanna bet that the actual study results will be completely opposite of what the stupid media has again prematurely reported on? When will journalists ever learn?

Cynical me fears they'll never "learn", given that it's fear that sells newspapers.

YOUNG GIRL DIES AFTER RECEIVING NEW VACCINATION

probably gets the ratings far higher than

AFTER MILLIONS OF CANCER VACCINATIONS GIVEN,
A SINGLE PERSON DIES WITH THERE PROBABLY BEING NO LINK AT ALL

[HeyLeroy]

There was a good article in the recent Skeptical Inquirer; the article is online.

The article carried a sidebar article written by forumite tkingdoll which, unfortunately, is only in the print edition and not online.

[Eos of the Eons]

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

Cynical me fears they'll never "learn", given that it's fear that sells newspapers.

YOUNG GIRL DIES AFTER RECEIVING NEW VACCINATION

probably gets the ratings far higher than

AFTER MILLIONS OF CANCER VACCINATIONS GIVEN,

A SINGLE PERSON DIES WITH THERE PROBABLY BEING NO LINK AT ALL

Yah, and it sells woo woo crap too!

*gag*
http://www.debkitt.com/index.php?opt...-emr&Itemid=69

[casebro]

You all know that "a significantly increased risk" might be .oooo1 ?

By my calculations, 99.7% of us will NOT die of brain cancer. A "significantly increased risk" of 10% would mean that 99.687% of us will still not die of brain cancer.

Or "use a cell phone. Shorten your life by two hours." IF the stats are real.

Those rates mean nothing to an individual. They are only meaningful to epidmiologists.

By the way, I did find that brain cancer death rates are down in the last decade. Not up in any relation to cell phone usage. Negative correlation. Perhaps all those gighertzs are actually killing cancers? Like radiation treatments?

[bigred]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Just because Fox News says a thing, that doesn't mean you have to accept it uncritically

Unlike many others, I don't buy something just because a particular source reports it. All I "accepted uncritically" was that a report is forthcoming which says there is a link to cell phone usage and cancer. I cannot nor did I try to say or imply how airtight the study is or isn't.

[Eos of the Eons]

It's on more than Fox news. Just google it. It's quite appalling how many others are picking it up. Gack.

[MattusMaximus]

Are you surprised? The media loves to hype things that'll scare the pants off people.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by bigred

Unlike many others, I don't buy something just because a particular source reports it. All I "accepted uncritically" was that a report is forthcoming which says there is a link to cell phone usage and cancer. I cannot nor did I try to say or imply how airtight the study is or isn't.

And now that the threads have been merged, and the title changed, it looks like you never actually stated that the study was conclusive.

My kingdom for a screenshot.

[geni]

Originally Posted by Safe-Keeper

Cynical me fears they'll never "learn", given that it's fear that sells newspapers.

YOUNG GIRL DIES AFTER RECEIVING NEW VACCINATION

probably gets the ratings far higher than

AFTER MILLIONS OF CANCER VACCINATIONS GIVEN,
A SINGLE PERSON DIES WITH THERE PROBABLY BEING NO LINK AT ALL

Well the first one allows a bonus headline of "it was actualy an undetected tumor".

[Richard Masters]

Sweet! When I can I sue my cell phone company, and what's their phone number? I'll call them right now from my cell phone