Studies Find Harm From Cellular and Wi-Fi Signals 474
Over the years we've discussed the possible health risks of cellphone and other microwave radiation: studies from Israel and Sweden indicating a link between cellphone use and cancer, one from England exonerating cell towers as a cause of "microwave radiation sensitivity," and a recent 30-year Swedish study that found no link to cancer. The question won't go away though. Reader Artifice_Eternity writes "I've always tended to dismiss claims of toxicity from cell phone and Wi-Fi signals as reflecting ignorance about microwave radiation. However, this GQ article cites American and European studies going back decades that have found some level of biological harm caused by these signals. Why haven't they gained more attention? Quoting: 'Industry-funded studies seem to reflect the result of corporate strong-arming. Lai reviewed 350 studies and found that about half showed bioeffects from EM radiation emitted by cell phones. But when he took into consideration the funding sources for those 350 studies, the results changed dramatically. Only 25 percent of the studies paid for by the industry showed effects, compared with 75 percent of those studies that were independently funded.'"
WooHoo! I'm safe! (Score:5, Funny)
GQ? (Score:5, Funny)
I know I always go to Gentleman's Quarterly for my journal articles regarding the dangers of electromagnetic radiation exposure.
I know I'm safe... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Anti-science groups fund studies too. (Score:4, Funny)
And if you consider that many of these so-called 'independent' studies are in fact paid for by fringe anti-science groups, then perhaps their results are aren't as unbiased as they would have you believe.
That seems strange - I'm having trouble imaging what an anti-science directed study would consist of. And how unbiased would they have you believe their study is, if it's anti-science by definition? It seems like they would want to show off their own maximizing of bias if it's really anti-science.
Re:Anti-science groups fund studies too. (Score:5, Funny)
And if you consider that many of these so-called 'independent' studies are in fact paid for by fringe anti-science groups, then perhaps their results are aren't as unbiased as they would have you believe.
That seems strange - I'm having trouble imaging what an anti-science directed study would consist of. And how unbiased would they have you believe their study is, if it's anti-science by definition? It seems like they would want to show off their own maximizing of bias if it's really anti-science.
Check with the people behind these sites for some excellent examples:
http://www.creationstudies.org/ [creationstudies.org]
http://www.creationbiology.org/ [creationbiology.org]
http://www.icr.org/ [icr.org]
http://theflatearthsociety.org/ [theflatearthsociety.org]
Watch the WiFi protesters have a field day (Score:5, Funny)
I'm fairly sure we'll get this study used a lot in the near future.
Like my neighbor, who recently nearly beat my door down to inform me that if I don't turn off my WiFi AP she'll call the police because she gets headaches from my radiation. Then the cellphone in her pocket rang...
Re:MODULATIONS ARE EATING MY BRAIN (Score:2, Funny)
Meta-studies: beloved of the soft sciences (Score:2, Funny)
Results: The mice appear to be done approximately "medium."
Conclusion: Microwave radiation is quickly fatal at doses two orders of magnitude beyond cellphone level (meta-conclusion: effects were found).
This is the problem with statistical analyses such as sociologists like to perform: aggregating papers, attributing some binary conclusion to every paper, and then producing nearly meaningless percentages. This one was compiled by a biologist, but that's the next thing to sociology anyway
One of the scary references in the article is to a early 2000s study purporting that cellphone EM caused Alzheimer's in mice. But wait...Cellphones reduce mouse Alzheimer's (2009). [newscientist.com] (meta-conclusion: effects were found). Now, you might say that researcher is working for The Man, but he claims he was expecting the opposite result when he began. Someone else could write a meta-study "Microwave study results rarely replicated: are biologists bad at designing and properly controlling physics experiments?"
Re:GQ? (Score:3, Funny)
They still sell the Enquirer? I haven't actually SEEN a copy in ages.
They still exist, including online [nationalenquirer.com]. Which wouldn't be so bad, except that the reason tabloids are still around is that people BUY them. That's the real tragedy. Remember that cultural crap doesn't exist in a vacuum - people create a market for it. (This is ss even true in politics [slate.com].)
Wait - I get it. Man evolves slowly, because he retarded. Or, at least experiencing retarded evolution.
Shhhhhhh! You'll anger Sarah Palin. Better call it mentally challenged evolution.
Re:WooHoo! I'm safe! (Score:4, Funny)
Ethan, seriously. How much will it take for you NOT to post a porn of you and a "female" "acquaintance" online?
I'm willing to start a collection right now.
I understand that you plan to wear masks, but believe me, seeing your face is not our biggest concern. Good lord, man - think of the children! If god forbid some young girl should accidentally stumble upon the video while googling "ethanol + fuel + internal + combustion" for a school project, it might put her off men for life. And if a young boy were to see it, well, it would also put him off men for life.
Regarding the "masks"... You're not a furfag, are you? I mean, if this video shows you with a bunny head on, I may have to hunt you down.
Re:"independently funded"? (Score:4, Funny)
If you want something to panic about, be more concerned about the huge unshielded fusion reactor that's bathing you in ionizing radiation with a power of hundreds of watts per square.
Hundreds of watts per square...? Square what?
Or do you actually mean, per square, as in, per slashdotter?
Re:WooHoo! I'm safe! (Score:4, Funny)
You wish. Put your phone close to a CRT monitor and a analog radio receiver (powered on), and watch both go *bzzt*bzzt* from time to time. ;)
Now imagine the same going on in your pocket, close to your balls... aaah, what's the point... you don't need them anyway. ;)
Re:WooHoo! I'm safe! (Score:4, Funny)
867-5309
Re:WooHoo! I'm safe! (Score:3, Funny)
As if anyone's going to share a phone number online, this isn't a credit card we're talking about.
Re:Basic physics guys (Score:4, Funny)