Search news: View news by countries View all news

News for USA

«First  ‹Previous   Page 41 of 41

Sprint Loses $29.5 Billion In 4Q
USA	Created: 29 Feb 2008
NEW YORK -(Dow Jones)- Sprint Nextel Corp (S) posted a dramatic $29,5 billion fourth-quarter loss even as it unveiled an unlimited wireless plan in a bid to stem the flood of subscriber defections. The Overland Park, Kan., company also borrowed $2.5 billion under its revolving credit facility to increase financial flexibility, suspended dividend payments and admitted that business conditions are deteriorating, more difficult than expected and unlikely to improve soon. The news sent Sprint shares down as much as 13% to $7.75, their lowest levels since October 2002. The stock recently traded at $8.30, down 7.3% from its close Wednesday of $8.95. Sprint, the nation's No. 3 wireless carrier by subscribers, has been losing wireless customers to rivals, while sales have been falling. The company's problems stem from poor customer service, a reliance on customers who are poor credit risks and a muddled marketing message. Things aren't expected to get better. "The trends are unlikely to improve in second quarter," Chief Executive Dan Hesse told analysts in a Thursday conference call. "We are taking the customer defection issue seriously." The company expects the turnover rate to rise 20 to 30 basis points in the first quarter as it loses another 1.2 million post-paid subscribers, and the rate isn't expected to improve in the second quarter, said acting Chief Financial Officer William Arendt. The loss of 1.2 million in the first quarter is roughly equal to the total loss Sprint had in all of 2007. Sprint also expects first-quarter adjusted operating income before depreciation and amortization to be in the range of $1.8 billion to $1.9 billion. Sprint fired back at its rivals with a $100 plan that covers "simply everything," Hesse said. That includes unlimited voice, Web surfing, email, text messaging, push-to-talk services, GPS navigation and features such as access to Nascar and National Football League content. The eagerly anticipated plan follows Verizon Wireless' $100 unlimited voice- only plan, which was unveiled early last week. AT&T Inc. (T) quickly followed, and Deutsche Telekom AG's (DT) T-Mobile USA put out a plan that includes unlimited text messages. The move is a significant departure from the traditional model, in which consumers purchase "buckets" of minutes. But Hesse warned that the new plan wasn't going to be a catch-all for Sprint's problems. "I want to make it clear that it's not a silver bullet," he said. "But it's a very important piece." Indeed, few believe the new plan will significantly help Sprint. "It helps them on the margin, but not enough to make a huge difference," said Steve Clement, an analyst at Pacific Crest Securities. "It's not the sweet spot for a majority of the customers and affects a relatively small portion of the base." For the quarter ended Dec. 31, Sprint reported a net loss of $29.45 billion - more than the company's market capitalization - or $10.36 a share, compared with net income $261 million, or 9 cents a share, a year earlier. Results for Sprint included a $29.7 billion goodwill write-down. Excluding items, earnings fell to 21 cents a share from 29 cents a share, but surpassed the average analyst estimate of 18 cents a share. Revenue decreased 5.7% to $9.85 billion, below the Thomson Financial estimate of $9.92 billion. In the fourth quarter, wireless revenue fell 2% from the third quarter and 6% year-over-year. Sprint's struggling wireless operations reflect, in part, the company's difficulties in merging the Sprint and Nextel operations. When the marriage of Sprint and Nextel was announced in 2005, each company had a market capitalization of about $33 billion. Now, the combined company's market cap is slightly below $25 billion, according to FactSet Research. Hesse, who took over as CEO in December, said the company is addressing its shortcomings. Last month, Sprint announced 4,000 job cuts and the closure of 8% of its company-owned retail stores and 20% of all available locations. Hesse said Thursday that the changes are unlikely to improve operations quickly. "Given current deteriorating business conditions, which are more difficult than what I had expected to encounter, these changes will take time to produce improved operating performance, and our near-term subscriber and financial results will continue to be pressured." Sprint said losses of post-paid subscribers - customers who sign long-term contracts and pay monthly bills - have continued in the current quarter. Average revenue per post-paid user fell 4%, while post-paid churn, or customer turnover, was flat at 2.3%. The average revenue per user - typically a lone highlight for Sprint - is expected to fall sequentially by $2 to $56 in the first quarter, partly as a result of the continued loss of higher paying Nextel customers. Total wireless subscribership rose 1.3%, helped by Sprint's Boost Unlimited program, a prepaid service that provides unlimited calling and texting for a flat fee, which jumped to 7.5% from 6.2%. Hesse added that in light of current capital market conditions, "we are taking steps to increase our financial flexibility and mitigate refinancing risk by borrowing funds from a revolving credit facility and discontinuing declaring a dividend for the foreseeable future." Sprint paid an annual dividend of 10 cents a share. Sprint said it borrowed $2.5 billion under its revolving credit facility to help mitigate any potential financing risk related to $1.25 billion in bonds that mature in November, as well as the approximately $400 million outstanding under its commercial paper program and $600 million of bonds that mature in May 2009. About $500 million of borrowing capacity remains available under the revolving credit facility, the company said. While discouraging to Wall Street, obtaining more financing isn't a sign of pending disaster, analysts said. "It's certainly not good, but they're not in any near-term financial danger," said Christopher King, an analyst at Stifel Nicolaus & Co. He added that the company has enough cash to get it through 2010. Hesse remained mum on the company's WiMax plans, saying that Sprint continues to talk with Clearwire Corp. (CLWR) regarding a partnership, but no final agreement has been struck.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: CNN Money, Roger Cheng, 28 Feb 2008

Rogers Residents Angry About Proposed Cell Tower
USA	Created: 29 Feb 2008
ROGERS, Ark, Some Rogers residents are up in arms about a proposed cell phone tower in their back yard. The tower would sit in the middle of a neighborhood on Seminole Road in Rogers, which could be used by Verizon Wireless. The Rogers Planning Commission has already voted down the proposal, but the local company proposing the tower. Smith Communications of Fayetteville tried to have the Rogers City Council overturn the Planning Commission's ruling so they can build the tower. “We love our home, we love the area and we don't want it to change to the matter they want to change it,” said local resident John Desenfantz, who was in attendance at the council meeting. After hearing the proposal on appeal from the planning commission, the city council took issue with the company leasing out the tower. The council voted unanimously to keep the tower from being built. “Nobody was convinced on this council tonight to vote against the planning commission's denial of that conditional use permit,” said Rogers Mayor Steve Womack. The representative from Smith communication declined an interview with 40/29, but showed the council a map that illustrated how some areas near the proposed site have no cell phone reception. But the council didn't buy it. “I don't think we know what the true story is. I think we got one side tonight,“ said Womack. And that side is the happy ending for residents who do not want a cell phone tower in built in their neighborhood. ”Of course I'm happy. This is what I came to make sure [happened],” said Desenfantz. The communication company has been turned down twice now, but the representative says it may not be done. If the company appeals again, they'd have to take it to circuit court to force the council to consider the proposal again. Womack said he doesn't think anyone is gone to circuit court over a council ruling during his term in office.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: KHBS/KHOG 40/29 - Fort Smith,

Motorola up for sale but nobody will go near it
USA	Created: 28 Feb 2008
The equipment maker's inability to find a buyer for its beleaguered cell-phone unit revives the urgency of reforming the division from within. To many the recent announcement that Motorola (MOT) was exploring options for its troubled handset division was seen as a sign the once-legendary business would soon be sold. That seemed a better outcome than, say, a spinoff or internal overhaul for a business mired in losses. Yet almost a month later, despite rumors of acquisition interest from such heavyweights as Korean electronics maker LG and U.S. PC giant Dell (DELL), bankers, analysts, and industry executives close to Motorola say a sale is neither imminent nor likely. Several Asian handset makers have publicly said they're not interested (BusinessWeek.com, 2/4/08). One banker gives a sale a "50-50" chance, at best. And while potential buyers may have run proposals by the phone-making giant, none appears willing to offer as much as Motorola's management is seeking. Analysts say the beleaguered business is worth no more than about $8 billion—a far cry from the $10 billion it was once suggested that Motorola might be able to fetch. The lack of acceptable bids has added renewed urgency to Motorola's backup plan: an in-house revamp. Improved performance would help Motorola sell the division at a more attractive price later, spin off a higher-value asset, or even hang on to a revitalized handset maker. A Fixer-Upper From early in his tenure, Motorola CEO Greg Brown has given strong signals he's intent on tuning up the cell-phone business. He has taken operational control of the unit, replacing former head man Stu Reed. Those familiar with Brown's plans say he has been weeding out underperforming executives and those he had no hand in hiring. Meanwhile, he's attempting to attract the talent Motorola desperately needs. "He knows what to do to fix this business," says Robert Laikin, CEO of Brightpoint (CELL), a major cell-phone distributor. Plenty needs fixing. In the fourth quarter, handset sales tumbled 38%, to $4.8 billion, from a year earlier, and the division lost money. Motorola's share of global cell-phone unit shipments dropped from 22% in 2006 to 13.8% last year. Had Motorola found a buyer, "they'd certainly not be selling on a high note," says Todd Rosenbluth, an analyst with Standard & Poor's. Brown may also need to spend big to ramp up handset production. Mark McKechnie, an analyst with American Technology Research, estimates the company needs to spend $500 million to $2 billion to come out with a new and exciting product line. Adds Motorola shareholder Eric Jackson, president of Ironfire Capital: "The R&D pipeline was really bare [six months ago] and still is." As of December, Motorola had $2.75 billion in cash. Collaborative Effort Although a deal isn't imminent, the prospect of a sale or at least a partnership is not dead. Banking sources say major private equity funds, from Blackstone Group (BX) to Silver Lake, are circling the company. And lots of private buyers may be interested. Some Chinese vendors such as ZTE have long wanted to conquer the U.S. market and have talked about cultivating relationships with Motorola. "ZTE often talks with other leading telecommunications manufacturers around potential opportunities for collaboration," ZTE said in a statement. Company officials declined to comment on a potential alliance with Motorola's phone unit. Motorola told analysts during the industry's big trade show in Barcelona earlier this month that it has two parties interested in the business. Company officials would not specify which, but they acknowledged looking into partnerships as well as a sale. So it's conceivable that Motorola might enter into a joint venture with a company with a proven track record in consumer marketing. Potential partners include LG, Samsung, and even Google (GOOG). Pressure to Act Fast Nor is anyone ruling out a spinoff, now or in the future. These kinds of spinoffs are in Motorola's blood: Back in 2004, the company spun off chipmaker Freescale Semiconductor, earning its investors hefty short-term returns. Freescale was later snapped up in 2006 by a consortium of private equity firms. "We think the most likely scenario is a spinoff to shareholders," says Richard Windsor, an analyst with Nomura. "It gives [shareholders] an option to stay or go." Unfortunately for Brown, many investors are choosing to go. The company's stock is down 30% since the beginning of the year. Most analysts don't expect Motorola to sell more than 30 million handsets this quarter, which would mean even further erosion in share. "They've got to do something quick," McKechnie says. "The asset is deteriorating."
Click here to view the source article.
Source: BusinessWeek, Olga Kharif & Roger O. Crockett, 25 Feb 2008

Cell Phone Antennas Coming Down
USA	Created: 26 Feb 2008
It looks as if controversial cell phone antennas will be coming down from a Catholic elementary school. Newswatch 16 has learned that Sprint-Nextel has withdrawn an appeal to the Jessup zoning board regarding the antennas on top of LaSalle Academy. A few years ago Saint Michael's parish allowed Nextel to put up the antennas. After parents complained about health concerns, the parish decided not to allow the antennas to be activated. The issue was supposed to be addressed again tonight at a zoning board hearing. Now Sprint Nextel will be removing the antennas from the school in Jessup citing "business reasons."
Click here to view the source article.
Source: WNEP-TV, 25 Feb 2008

Cell tower appeal goes to Rogers City Council
USA	Created: 26 Feb 2008
David Reynolds asked the Rogers Planning Commission to allow him to build a cell-phone tower - The board said no. He is not taking it for an answer. The City Council is set to vote on Reynolds' appeal at its meeting Tuesday night. Reynolds represents Smith Communications in Fayetteville, and is the project manager for the tower, which is being funded by Verizon Wireless. The Planning Commission voted to deny the request for a conditionaluse permit to put a 90-foot cell tower at 3200 Seminole St., which is in residential single-family zoning. Neighborhood residents came in droves to decry the tower, which they said would detract from the atmosphere of the neighborhood, create a visual blight and raise health concerns. City Attorney Ben Lipscomb said then and reiterated Friday that the federal Telecommunications Act allows leeway for municipalities to determine a proper location for a cell tower, unless there is no other option. The Telecommunications Act dictates that municipalities cannot interfere with cell- phone service providers' ability to provide service. "If they (the cellular company ) can enumerate a need, it really ties the hands of whatever entity the issue is before," Lipscomb said. But during Tuesday's planning meeting, Lipscomb told the commission Reynolds had not fulfilled his burden to prove a need to have the tower in that specific location. Reynolds admitted he had not examined nearby areas to determine their suitability for the tower. If the council denies the appeal, Reynolds cannot bring his current request back to the city for one year, but Lipscomb said it may be possible for him to amend the request enough to submit it as a new proposal, which he could then do at any time.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Benton County Daily Record, Tom Treweek, 25 Feb 2008

Incandescent bulbs not outlawed, only inefficient ones
USA	Created: 26 Feb 2008
The new energy bill signed this week makes it official - When 2012 hits, stores can no longer sell the cheap but inefficient incandescent light bulbs that are fixtures in most homes. Even so, light bulb manufacturers say that worries about greenhouse gases and the high cost of energy had them moving away from conventional incandescents way before Congress weighed in. For quite some time, they note, they have been trying to soften the light emitted by compact fluorescent lights, bring down the cost of light-emitting diodes — and yes, find ways to increase the efficiency of incandescents. Many of the products are already on the market, and more will be available before the deadline kicks in, “Sure, you’ll see more compact fluorescents five years from now, but you would have seen them without any energy bill,” said the chief executive of Osram Sylvania, Charlie Jerabek. Michael B. Petras Jr., vice president of GE Consumer and Industrial — the unit that includes General Electric’s lighting business — broadened the thought to all forms of lighting. “You’ll see different light sources for your decorative chandelier, for your recessed lighting and for your under-cabinet lights,” he said. “And I can assure you that all the kinds of light sources are already getting a lot more efficient.” Including incandescents. Congress has not specifically outlawed incandescent bulbs, only inefficient ones. In February, G.E. said that it was developing a high-efficiency incandescent that will radiate more than twice the light of conventional incandescents. It expects to make that one commercially available by 2010, and one that is twice as efficient a few years later. And so far, consumers have been slow to give new products a chance. Compact fluorescents, for example, are already ubiquitous in stores. Many retailers, led by Wal-Mart, have promoted the economics of the bulbs — though compact fluorescents generally cost six times what incandescents do, they last six times as long and use far less energy. The EnergyStar program of the Environmental Protection Agency has been pushing compact fluorescents for almost nine years. “People realize that incandescents are an old, inefficient technology,” an EnergyStar spokeswoman, Maria Vargas, said. The promotions have had modest success. Mr. Jerabek said Sylvania’s sales of compact fluorescents doubled in 2006 over 2005, and doubled again this year. But, he notes, they still account for 15 percent of bulbs in use in homes. Sylvania recently introduced a fluorescent that Mr. Jerabek said mimicked the light of incandescents. He concedes that incandescents are about 10 percent warmer, but he insists that “the average consumer would have trouble detecting the difference.” Compact fluorescent lights have problems beyond light quality. They contain mercury, and few recycling centers will accept them. So at the end of life, they still pose an environmental hazard. “We’re working to reduce mercury, but the amount will never go to zero,” Mr. Petras said. That is why Mr. Jerabek, for one, calls compact fluorescent lights “a temporary fix.” Manufacturers are putting a lot of stock in light-emitting diodes — or L.E.D.’s. They operate with chips made of nontoxic materials and last for about 50,000 hours, compared with 1,000 hours for an incandescent and 6,000 for a compact fluorescent. A tiny L.E.D. can shed as much light as a cumbersome bulb, which makes them easier to integrate into a home’s décor. And, they are extremely energy efficient. But today, they are too expensive to use for all lighting applications. And, while manufacturers are able to make pretty good colored L.E.D.’s — the kind that are already available for Christmas tree lights — they have yet to perfect a white L.E.D. that would be useful for lighting homes. Manufacturers are working to get the costs down and the white lighting quotient up. Most predict that white L.E.D.’s will be commercially viable in a few years. “Most C.F.L.’s meet the EnergyStar specs now, and all of us are optimistic about the prospects for L.E.D.’s,” Ms. Vargas said. But even though the energy bill has not changed the direction of lighting research, most manufacturers are relieved to have a federal standard in place. “If each state passed its own rules for light bulb efficiency, we’d have to make 50 different types,” Mr. Jerabek said. “Now we can all standardize our production techniques.”
Click here to view the source article.
Source: New York Times, CLAUDIA H. DEUTSCH, 22 Dec 2007

Wiretapping Made Easy
USA	Created: 26 Feb 2008
Silently tapping into a private cellphone conversation is no longer a high-tech trick reserved for spies and the FBI - Thanks to the work of two young cyber-security researchers, cellular snooping may soon be affordable enough for your next-door neighbor. In a presentation Wednesday at the Black Hat security conference in Washington, D.C., David Hulton and Steve Muller demonstrated a new technique for cracking the encryption used to prevent eavesdropping on global system for mobile communications (GSM) cellular signals, the type of radio frequency coding used by major cellular service providers including AT&T (nyse: T - news - people ), Cingular and T-Mobile. Combined with a radio receiver, the pair say their technique allows an eavesdropper to record a conversation on these networks from miles away and decode it in about half an hour with just $1,000 in computer storage and processing equipment. Hulton, director of applications for the high-performance computing company Pico, and Muller, a researcher for mobile security firm CellCrypt, plan to make their decryption method free and public. In March, however, they say they'll start selling a faster version that can crack GSM encryption in just 30 seconds, charging between $200,000 and $500,000 for the premium version. Who will be the customers for their innovative espionage technique? Hulton and Muller say they aren't sure yet. But they plan to offer the method to companies that will integrate it with radio technology, not sell it directly to the law enforcement and criminal customers who will undoubtedly be interested in putting it to use. "We're not creating the technology that does the interception," Muller says. "All this does is crunch data." Hulton and Muller will likely make a tidy profit from the fruits of their research work, which they've personally patented. The companies they work for may profit less directly; Pico makes the high-performance processors necessary to do heavy-duty encryption work. CellCrypt makes software for encrypting mobile phone conversations, patching the security flaw that Hulton and Muller's research has uncovered. As for the moral question of chipping away at the privacy of cellphone users around the world, Muller gives an answer common to security researchers: He and Hulton didn't invent the hackable technology; they just brought attention to its vulnerabilities. In fact, Muller argues, GSM encryption was cracked--theoretically--in academic papers as early as 1998. "Active" radio interceptors, which impersonate cell towers and can eavesdrop on GSM phone conversations, have also been sold by companies like Comstrac and PGIS for years. (Active techniques, however, only allow eavesdropping from within about 600 feet and are easily detectable, Muller notes.) Undetectable, "passive" systems like the one that Muller and Hulton have created aren't new either, though previous technologies required about a million dollars worth of hardware and used a "brute force" tactic that tried 33 million times as many passwords to decrypt a cell signal. All of that means, Hulton and Muller argue, that their cheaper technique is simply drawing needed attention to a problem that mobile carriers have long ignored--one that well-financed eavesdroppers may have been exploiting for years. "If governments or other people with millions of dollars can listen to your conversations right now, why shouldn't your next-door neighbor?" Muller says. The new technique may serve as a wake-up call for mobile carriers, which have long been in denial about the vulnerabilities of GSM security, says Bruce Schneier, encryption guru and chief technology officer of BT Counterpane. "This is a nice piece of work, but it isn't a surprise," he says. " We've been saying that this algorithm is weak for years. The mobile industry kept arguing that the attack was just theoretical. Well, now it's practical." David Pringle, a spokesman for the GSMA trade association, which represents 700 GSM carriers around the world, said in a statement that “the mobile industry is committed to maintaining the integrity of GSM services, and the protection and privacy of customer communications is at the forefront of operators’ concerns.” He also pointed out that decrypting GSM still requires special equipment and is more secure than a typical landline. The GSMA, he noted, has developed and is working on implementing a higher level of encryption; Newer 3G cell carriers are also immune from the attack. Although their exploit doesn't target the competing CDMA cellular technology used by carriers like Verizon (nyse: VZ - news - people ) and Sprint Nextel (nyse: S - news - people ), Muller argues it's not necessarily less secure. GSM was only decrypted first because it's more popular worldwide: Few cellphone subscribers outside North America use CDMA carriers. So how do Hulton and Muller ensure that their own phone conversations aren't intercepted? Muller responds to that question, posed by an audience member at Black Hat's gathering of hackers and security professionals, with a smile. "We don't use phones," he says.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Forbes.com, Andy Greenberg, 21 Feb 2008

Radiation From Mobile Phones Changes Protein Expression In Living People, Study Suggests
USA	Created: 25 Feb 2008
A new study completed by the Finnish Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) on effects of mobile phone radiation on human skin strengthens the results of the human cell line analyses: living tissue responds to mobile phone radiation. Earlier studies have shown that mobile phone radiation (radiofrequency modulated electromagnetic fields; RF-EMF) alters protein expression and activity in human endothelial cell line. STUK’s new study is globally unique, because for the first time it has examined whether a local exposure of human skin to RF-EMF will cause changes in protein expression in living people. In the study, a small area of forearm’s skin in 10 volunteers was exposed to GSM signal for one hour. After that skin biopsies were collected from exposed and non-exposed areas of skin and all extractable proteins were examined. The analysis of 580 proteins identified 8 proteins that were statistically significantly affected. ”Mobile phone radiation has some biological effect. Even if the changes are small, they still exist”, says Dariusz Leszczynski, Research Professor at STUK. According to Leszczynski it is much too early to say will these changes induced by the mobile phone radiation have any effect on health. ”The aim of this project was not detecting any possible health effects, but to find out whether living human skin responds to mobile phone radiation and whether proteomics approach is useful in sorting out this issue”, he states. A more extensive study with 50-100 volunteers is now planned at STUK. The new study is expected to begin in 2009. Funding for the present study was provided by Tekes - Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation and STUK, and it was a part of national HERMO project (Health Risk Assessment of Mobile Communications) finished in September 2007. The entire article "Mobile phone radiation might alter protein expression in human skin" is available in the BMC Genomics web journal: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2164/9/77/abstract Adapted from materials provided by Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, Finland.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: ScienceDaily, 25 Feb 2008

Fertility study builds buzz around cellphones
USA	Created: 25 Feb 2008
Are men speed-dialing infertility by talking for hours a day on their cellphones?. A new study suggests that might be the case, but before potential papas ditch the devices, they should know that lead author Ashok Agarwal says the data are "quite preliminary." Cellphones emit radiofrequency electromagnetic waves. Scientists have reported potential adverse effects of the waves on the brain, heart, endocrine system and DNA, Agarwal, director of the andrology lab at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation, and his co-authors write in the journal Fertility and Sterility. Agarwal's team studied 361 men under 40 who were being evaluated for infertility; men whose personal or family history might explain a low count or other sperm abnormalities were excluded. The scientists divided the patients into four groups, based on how long they said they talked on a cellphone each day. Then they analyzed the men's semen and found a strong association between length of time spent on a cellphone and sperm count and quality. Those who talked more than four hours a day had lower counts and more poor "swimmers" and abnormally formed sperm. One reason could be the heat generated by the phones; sperm production is sensitive to temperature, Agarwal says. The researchers didn't ask the men about other potential sources of electromagnetic wave exposure, like laptop computers, or where the men usually kept the phone when they talked. Next to their ear? In a pocket while using a headset? Says Agarwal: "There are hundreds of variables that can affect our conclusions." Location, location, location makes a big difference, says British infertility specialist Iwan Lewis-Jones, who, like Agarwal, is conducting laboratory studies of cellphones' impact on sperm specimens. "To get an effect, I think you've got to have the phone very close to the sperm." In research still ongoing, Agarwal says, he has found that sperm quality decreases in semen specimens left sitting next to a phone in talk mode for as little as an hour. Lewis-Jones says he isn't ready to report results from his research, in which phones in talk mode are left next to semen specimens. "We are not saying that mobile phones affect fertility," he says. "All we're trying to do is see what effect they have on the sperm cell." In other words, he says, changes seen in laboratory experiments probably are not occurring in real life. The only way to answer that question definitively, he says, is to randomly assign men to use a cellphone or not. But, he says, considering "I don't know anybody who hasn't got a mobile phone now," few men would volunteer to go without one.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: USA Today, Rita Rubin, 25 Feb 2008

Mobile Phones: Do they pose a health risk to users?
USA	Created: 25 Feb 2008
Mobile telephones, also known as cellular phones, have revolutionized global telecommunications by making it easy to communicate while moving, contrary to landline telephones which are fixed. With additional functions such as Short Message Service (SMS) for sending text messages and Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS) for sending pictures and videos, mobile phones have become necessary both in the corporate world and among ordinary users. However, there are conflicting reports about possible health risks for those who use them to talk for many hours. Various studies conducted in the past have indicated that there is a health risk among heavy mobile phone users because they are exposed to radiofrequency (RF) emissions or radiation. But other reports indicate otherwise. For instance, a major study sponsored by the UK government in 1999 published its results titled the Stewart Report in May 2000, which had no evidence that mobile phones caused any health risk. Instead, users were cautioned to limit their usage to short calls. It was recommended that children should be kept away from using them, unless during emergencies. Children have less developed skulls which might be penetrated by radiowaves compared to adults, who have more developed ones. These results were reiterated by Sir Stewart, the research leader, in a follow-up report in 2005. Nevertheless, Stewart’s clean bill of health is not shared by the results of other studies which warn that those who have used mobile phones consistently for 10 years run the risk of developing brain tumor, various cancers, stroke, headaches and memory loss. Interestingly, the results of these studies also depend upon the sponsors/funders, the group studied and location. Certain laboratory tests on mice exposed to RF waves have revealed disease links, but it is not known whether human beings would be similarly affected. According to a 2003 report by cbcnews (Canadian Broadcasting Centre), in a six year research sponsored by the American cellphone industry amounting to $28 million, scientist George Carlo concluded that there were no adverse side effects in using mobile phones. In 1997 Dr. Carlo headed the Washington-based Wireless Technology Research group, which carried out the study. His findings were dismissed by other scientists as skewed in favor of the industry. Interestingly, his research on rats found out that mobile phones could cause genetic damage, leading to tumors which may develop into cancer. In addition, the findings of a smaller study on humans conducted during the 6-year research period indicated increased tendency of tumors among users. Dr. Carlo then recommended that the industry should caution users about possible health risks, but the sponsors were not amused. “When they found that we had findings of genetic damage and increasing risk of cancer they cut off our money completely.” Dr. Carlo’s recommendations were shelved and the industry began lobbying for studies by respectable world health bodies within the United Nations, to allay the cellphone fears. Meanwhile, the industry made booming business by selling add-ons like hands-free gadgets to enable users keep the handsets away from their heads. It is claimed that the further away one’s head is from the handset, the lesser the exposure. Years later, Dr. Carlo has turned out to be a critic of the cellphone industry who writes and speaks openly about his findings. RF safety guidelines In its fact sheet updated in 2000 on the adverse effects of exposure to RF by mobile phone users, the World Health Organization (WHO) identified certain areas of research to improve risk assessment. This was informed by results from its own findings in November (1999); the Royal Society of Canada (1999) and the Stewart Report (IEGMP, 2000). The following were related to health factors: * Cancer: Current scientific evidence indicates that exposure to RF fields, such as those emitted by mobile phones and their base stations, is unlikely to induce or promote cancers. Several studies of animals exposed to RF fields similar to those emitted by mobile phones found no evidence that RF causes or promotes brain cancer. While one 1997 study found that RF fields increased the rate at which genetically engineered mice developed lymphoma, the health implications of this result is unclear. Several studies are underway to confirm this finding and determine any relevance of these results to cancer in human beings. Three recent epidemiological studies found no convincing evidence of increase in risk of cancer or any other disease with use of mobile phones. * Other health risks: Scientists have reported other effects of using mobile phones including changes in brain activity, reaction times, and sleep patterns. These effects are small and have no apparent health significance. More studies are in progress to try to confirm these findings. * Driving: Research has clearly shown an increased risk of traffic accidents when mobile phones (either handheld or with a "hands-free" kit) are used while driving. * Electromagnetic interference: When mobile phones are used close to some medical devices (including pacemakers, implantable defibrillators, and certain hearing aids) there is the possibility of causing interference. There is also the potential of interference between mobile phones and aircraft electronics. RF safety guidelines are also recommended at country levels, depending on research findings and improved levels of radiation on newer models of mobile phones. For instance, Canada has the following recommendations: * When you see only one or two bars on your phone's display, it means the signal is weak and your phone is trying harder to connect with the tower. That's when radiation is highest. Wait until all the bars are there for less radiation. * Radiation is also higher when you first place a call, as your phone seeks a connection. If you wait until the call has connected, your exposure will be lower. * Keep your calls short — shorter calls means less exposure. New findings, more confusion, more fear On October 24, 2006 the Guardian reported that chatting too long on the mobile phone may reduce male sperm count. This was based on the results of a study on 361 men who attended a fertility clinic in the US. Those that spent over four hours a day on the phones had a steady decline of sperm quality and ability to swim. Probably the radiation from cellphones damage human DNA and interfere with cells producing testosterone. However, another scientist outside this group disputed the findings because the handset is normally on the ear, which is far from the groin. If users held them closer to the groin in cases where they had sedentary jobs, or while traveling, then heat could impact sperm quality. This study was not conclusive, calling for further research, but urged men to remain cautious. The results of another study reported on October 7, 2007 by The Independent asserted that talking on a mobile for one hour each working day, increased the risk of getting a malignant tumor on the side of the brain mostly used. This study, carried out by two Swedish Professors, analyzed the results of 11 studies that had investigated the prevalence of tumors among people who have used mobile phones for more that 10 years. The results showed that all had increased risk. Similar risks were found in the long-term use of cordless phones. Users were cautioned to limit their talking period and use landlines for long calls. Various cancers develop within a minimum of 10 years, although some may develop later, raising fears of a global epidemic, especially among current young users. It may take many years to know if this group will be affected because of their heavy use. Despite these results, the British Health Protection Agency and the Mobile Operators Association said that they were not conclusive and posed no health risks according to phones that comply with international guidelines. Radiation from mobile phones, their masts and Wi-Fi installations was indicative of a risk, but not harmful. Other recent studies using various groups and methods concluded that there were no increased risks of brain tumor or cancer among users. Some selected URLs: the BBC (November 6, 1999); Powerwatch (December 7, 2006); the BBC (January 20, 2006); The Independent (September 13, 2007); Newsweek (December 17, 2007) and The Guardian (February 6, 2008). The Mobile Operators Association website has a collection of reports on mobile phone research since 1996. The latest study conducted in Israel and reported by the BBC on February 18, 2008 concluded that heavy users were likely to develop a salivary gland tumor on the side of the head exposed to handsets. A control group of 500 Israelis was compared to 1,300 healthy ones. Another key finding indicated that rural users were exposed to higher risk, compared to urban users because of the weak transmission signals due to the distances to base stations. Therefore, strong signals were required to work effectively, which increased radiation. Conclusion Regardless of all the contradicting study outcomes which indicate risks or no risks in using mobile phones, it is important for manufacturers and users to abide by the safety guidelines by the WHO and other relevant authorities. African users need to be informed of possible risks because the majority do not have landlines and signals are very weak even in urban areas, because base stations are not as many, compared to those in the developed countries. There are no known studies assessing risks in Africa, which is a lucrative market for key players from the Western world. If it turns out that mobile phones are really dangerous, then a global public health catastrophe may take place. Therefore, more research is required to understand the risk phenomenon in using mobile phones for long hours.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: African Path, Jared Odero, 24 Feb 2008

«First  ‹Previous   Page 41 of 41

News item: