Does cell phone rediation pose a risk to human health? Please provide reasons why you think what you think.

I just talked to someone (future physicist) who says all the talk about cell phones damaging skin tissue on a molecular basis is just bullshit. Thinking to myself, it seems to me he would be right. Where did this supposed danger originate? Cell phone radiation is basically just some low energy radiation such as radio or microwave radiation (both are non-ionizing forms of radiation). So if you are holding the cell phone to your head, the only thing that might happen is some warming of the surrounding tissue by your ear. How could this heating in any way be harmful? It's just some heat, right?


Opinions please....

In the United States, mobile phones operate in a frequency ranging from about 850 to 1900 megahertz (MHz). In that range, the radiation produced is in the form of non-ionizing radiofrequency (RF) energy. This RF energy is different than the ionizing radiation like that from a medical x-ray, which can present a health risk at certain doses.

At high enough levels, RF energy, too, can be harmful, because of its ability to heat living tissue to the point of causing biological damage. In a microwave oven, it's RF energy that cooks the food, but the heat generated by cell phones is small in comparison.

A mobile phone's main source of RF energy is its antenna, so the closer the antenna is to a phone user's head, the greater the person's expected exposure to RF energy.

Because RF energy from a cell phone falls off quickly as distance increases between a person and the radiation source, the safety of mobile phones with an antenna mounted away from the user--like on the outside of a car--has not been called into question. Also not in doubt is the safety of those so-called cordless phones that have a base unit attached to a home's telephone wiring and operate at much lower power levels than cell phones.

Many experts say that no matter how near the cell phone's antenna--even if it's right up against the skull--the six-tenths of a watt of power emitted couldn't possibly affect human health. They're probably right, says John E. Moulder, Ph.D., a cancer researcher and professor of radiation oncology at the Medical College of Wisconsin. It's true, he says, that from the physics standpoint, biological effects from mobile phones are "somewhere between impossible and implausible."
http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2000/600_phone.html

Although earlier studies had linked cell phone use with an increased risk of brain tumors, this new report and other research have found no connection.

The four-year study found that people who regularly use cell phones don't increase their risk of developing this type of tumor.

Researchers from the Universities of Leeds, Nottingham and Manchester and the Institute of Cancer Research in London report their finding in the Jan. 21 issue of the British Medical Journal.

In their study, the researchers collected data on cell phone use by 966 people aged 18 to 69 years who had been diagnosed with a glioma, and 1,716 healthy individuals.

Use of cell phones had no relationship for risk of glioma, regardless of the length of use or the geographical area where phones were used, according to lead researcher Patricia McKinney, a professor of pediatric epidemiology at the University of Leeds' Institute of Genetics, Health, and Therapeutics.

There was a significantly increased risk for tumors that developed on the same side of the head as the phone was used, the researchers found. But this was offset by a decrease in the risk on the opposite side of the head.

This disparity was probably due to people's faulty memory, the researchers suggested. People who have gliomas tend to link cell phone use to the side of the head where the tumor was found. This resulted in "over reporting" of use of a phone on the same side as the tumor, which resulted in "under reporting" phone use on the opposite side of the head, the researchers wrote.

http://www.forbes.com/lifestyle/health/feeds/hscout/2006/01/19/hscout530453.html

Although earlier studies had linked cell phone use with an increased risk of brain tumors, this new report and other research have found no connection.

The four-year study found that people who regularly use cell phones don't increase their risk of developing this type of tumor.

Only four years of study? Perhaps the horrid cancers and tumors and such occur at five years, not just four? Then what? Oh, wait, I know ..."they" would issue a new study, right? ...LOL!

Baron Max

the major problem with cell phones is the calls could not be traced.
that is fast changing.
therefor the radiation risk will decrease.
catch my drift?

NO! The layman needs to learn the distiction between microwave radiation and ionizing radiation.

It's too soon to tell. There will be more conclusive evidence 15 years down the line.

No such evidence exists for people although microwaves emitted from cell phones have fried a few rat brain cells recently!

No such evidence exists for people although microwaves emitted from cell phones have fried a few rat brain cells recently!

I'd like to see a link to the study.

The most MW radiation can do is heat your brain cells a little, and I mean a very minor amount, much less then normal body temperature fluctuations. If you are worried about this then you should be more worried about putting a hat on, or thinking to hard as both heat up your brain more then the MW radiation from your mobile phone.

RF energy is non-ionizing, which means it does not strip electrons from atoms and thus drive chemical reactions. At the absolute most it increases temperature in resonant water molecules a extremely small fraction of a degree.

You have to realize that RF energy is just light, only at a different frequency than you can see.

You're getting more warming from the light emitted by the monitor you're reading this from

No.

No.

Also, why do people protest when telecoms companies want to site masts near them? Is a mast 100yards away more of a risk than a cellphone by your ear? Well, of course not.

I would raise concern about alzheimers potentially developing from mobile use. The studies that were done did suggest that the radiation can increase a persons brainspeed which in turn could suggest that long term use will eventually cause greater wear and tear on the brain areas that are closer to the source. In this particular instance the Temporal Lobes which are commonly identified as being areas that can define both Epilepsy and Schizophrenia.

However do you think the mass marketing engine and mobile phone industry would identify risk considering how much money they actually make (and how much tax they would be charged should the risk be shown to be great?)

On top of that, what is radiology doing to the ecology? Okay radiology is absorbed by plantlife however it's also potential a chemistry catalyst in regards to atmospheric gases.

I would raise concern about alzheimers potentially developing from mobile use. The studies that were done did suggest that the radiation can increase a persons brainspeed .

IIRC that result only happened for people that were using old analogue cellphones, and there was no discernable effect when people used modern, GSM phones?

I'll try and dig out the source, but this wouldn't be a problem in Europe, as we are completely GSM now. Does the USA still have any analogue services left?

edit:

Apparently there is still analogue in the USA;

http://cellphones.about.com/cs/buyersguides/a/analog.htm

I've herad that living in a certain radiusofhigh voltage power housesand powerline increases the chance ofchildren developing leukimea

I have heard that navy radar tower operators can only have female children after 4 years and are sterile after 10

I have heard that mobilephone towers affect the development of mosquito larvea and coconuts.

I've heard that lightgigantic is a retard.
But I'm not sure if it was a reliable source.

I've herad that...
I have heard ...
I have heard that ...

Saying something doesn't make it true. And hearing something is even less reliable. Surely you don't believe everything that you hear? And if not, then why would you pass it on as if it were true?

Baron Max

Saying something doesn't make it true. And hearing something is even less reliable. Surely you don't believe everything that you hear? And if not, then why would you pass it on as if it were true?

Baron Max

I think it was sarcastic?

I heard that Baron Max was a delightfully honest person.

The thing is with cancers is that it's hard to pinpoint the cause. Theres hardly likely to be a significant coincidental increase in cancers in these microwave sorce areas anyway, but the irrational public fear of anything with the word radiation :eek: , combined with a miniscule head count of cancers means a big buck scare story.
There is no measurable rem in microwaves so it's complete lunacy for a proper honest scientist to cherry pick some incidents of increased cancer rates that just so happen to be near a microwave source and blame it on that.

I heard that Baron Max was a delightfully honest person.

Well, Nick, it's pretty damned hard to be dishonest when all one does is ask questions, ain't it? :)

Baron Max

Arrgh, to use the word radiation is misleading, its Electromagnetic Radiation, NOT nuclear radiation (no high energy neutrons or protons flying around).

I've been in military radar for 21 years, It. does. not. harm. you. Stories of people who are sterilized from EM are from idiots who stand in front of a megawatt SATCOM or Radar dish and cook (literally) their testicles.

The radar I worked with is the TPS-75 planar phased array, it pumps out 2.5 to 4.0 megawatts of RF energy.
Thats a good deal more than you encounter in a 700 watt microwave oven, which operates in about the same frequency.

RF radiation harm comes from induced heat in water bearing tissues, its the same way a microwave oven works.

There are two organs particularly vulnerable to RF radiation, testicles and eyeballs, reason being that the blood flow from them is too low to dissapate the heat induced in those tissues thus TEMPORARILY leading to a reduced sperm count and blurred vision.

Unless you really cook yourself and then you have other issues like cooked internal organs and the like. The brain, being shielded by your skull, is the last organ to take damage from induced heating.

You can also be harmed by grabbing a high power radio antenna (1000 - 3000 watt range) saw a dude get a nasty burn on his hand from it once, same principal though - he heated up the water in his skin beyond what his blood flow could cool. He was an idiot though and had been told to wait before starting to take down the antenna mast.

The only time I ever actually saw harm to the environment was when I was in Thule Greenland working with the missile warning and space tracking phased array radar there.
It used something like 1500 dipoles per face to make a 30 foot wide beam that could track a baseball in geosync orbit. Very cool EXTREMELY high powered radar.
The radar almost always operates in low power mode, once though the computer thought it might have detected something in a ground-impacting ballisic trajectory (a missile) and went to high power to track it. There happened to be an unusually thick flock of birds overhead in the beam path and it knocked down 10 or 15 birds. The artic foxes had a field day.

I've spent the last hour pretty much reading through the BBC's archives on mobile phones.

Apparently what I suggested has been said before by the Swede's. It's an interesting suggestion suggesting that even though the magnitude of radiation is too low to "Cook" tissue, it is enough to develop cell abnormalities, it doesn't say Temporal lobe shrinkage but thats pretty much the jist I get.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3605203.stm

Other than that the whole archive pretty much suggests a number of studies that seem to counter each other, some countries suggest that phones increase the risk of tumours where the UK for instance suggests that the findings had inaccurate information given by peoples biaseness. (Although recently the whole G3 thing has caused a number of companies to back peddle any anti-phone sematics in return for greater market shares)
What was also suggested was that Young children and teens should only use phones in emergencies because their skulls are thinner and their brains are still developing. However most of these sentiments stem from the last 2-3 years.

I'm not suggesting we break open the emergency tinhats, but if your not expecting a call perhaps you should save battery power by turning your phone off.

I'd like to see a link to the study.
Phones will killl us one day!

http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20030222/fob1.asp

Saying something doesn't make it true. And hearing something is even less reliable. Surely you don't believe everything that you hear? And if not, then why would you pass it on as if it were true?

Baron Max

I was meaning that I have heard them from some sources - actually I am just too lazy to surf the net to find out exactly where I read it - just testing the water whether anyone else has heard these things or not since there seems to be a few people here who seem aptly equipped to investigate such things

Mobile phones do kill people, hundreds a year if not more, the cause is well known, and a danger to anyone not just the users.

Mobile phone use while driving :mad:

Mobile phones do kill people, hundreds a year if not more, the cause is well known, and a danger to anyone not just the users.

Mobile phone use while driving :mad:

Very true, and despite it being made a specific offense to drive while using one in the UK nearly two years ago, people still do it.

I just dont understand why people think communication is so urgent it's worth risking people's lives.