Search news: View news by countries View all news

«First  ‹Previous   Page 5 of 396   Next›  Last»

Kucinich to introduce bill for cell phone radiation research, warning label
USA	Created: 2 Jul 2010
Rep Dennis J Kucinich (D-OH) said Wednesday that he will introduce a bill for a federal research program on the affects of cellphone radiation on users. The bill will also call for a warning label for mobile phones, as a growing body of research around the world indicate potential links between long-term use and cancer. The bill comes after The Post’s report Tuesday outlining the growing controversy over cellphones and health. The story looks into the lobbying effort against bills across the country that would require warning and radiation data labels for cellphone retailers and San Francisco's move as the first place in the nation to require retailers to disclose radiation levels of the phones they sell. “Some studies find links. Some don’t. But studies funded by the telecommunications industry are significantly less likely to find a link between cellphones and health effects. We need a first-class research program to give us answers,” Kucinich said in a statement. “Until we know for sure, a labeling law will ensure that cellphone users can decide for themselves the level of risk that they will accept” Kucinich, who held a hearing on the topic in 2008, said much of the current research on cellphone radiation is being done outside the United States. Federal regulations on how much radiation devices can emit – such as the Specific Absorption Rate set by the Federal Communications Commission – are outdated. His bill will call for a fresh look at regulatory standards on how much radiation a cellphone can emit. The FCC’s guidelines for SAR, an absorption limit set at 1.6 watts per kilogram of tissue, were determined in 1997 and were designed around testing for a male adult model. Those standards, according to some epidemiologists, do not take into account other affects of radiation on tissue and do not take into account the fastest-growing segment of cellphone users: children. Kucinich cited the 13-nation Interphone study (the U.S. did not participate) that found that while there is no conclusive link that long-term cellphone users were more prone to cancer, the heaviest users could be more vulnerable. “Consumers have a right to know whether they are buying the phone with the lowest – or the highest – level of exposure to cellphone radiation. They also deserve to have up-to-date standards, which are now decades old,” Kucinich said. Kucinich said in an interview that he will introduce his bill when Congress resumes session in two weeks. He said he has several co-sponsors. "There is a high degree of interest in this among my colleagues," he said.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Washington Post, Cecilia Kang, 30 Jun 2010

Mobilmast studie "är inte vetenskap - det är propaganda”: expert
Sweden	Created: 1 Jul 2010
Enligt en ny studie ska det inte innebära någon ökad risk för små barn att bo i närheten av en mobilmast. Studiens trovärdighet ifrågasätts av experten Mona Nilsson, som avfärdar den som ren propaganda för att försvara ekonomiska intressen. Studien som precis nått allmänheten via Sveriges Television (Rapport) och TT har enligt journalisten och miljöekonomen Mona Nilsson delvis finansierats av mobilindustrin och forskarna har egentligen inte kontrollerat hur mycket strålning från mobilmaster eller mobilbasstationer som de små barnen i själva verket utsatts för, menar hon. Mona Nilsson har under många år bevakat frågan om risker med trådlös kommunikation och för en tid sedan kom hennes nya bok ”Mobiltelefonins hälsorisker - fakta om vår tids största miljö- och hälsoskandal”. Boken är en efterföljare till boken ”Spelet om 3G - fakta och desinformation i det trådlösa samhället". Enligt Mona Nilsson är studien ett exempel på industristyrd forskning: ”De uppgifter beräkningarna av barnens exponering under fostertiden baserades på, vilka i sin tur utgjorde grunden för mobilindustrins nya glädjebudskap, kom helt från just mobilindustrin. Det här är inte vetenskap. Det är propaganda för att försvara enorma ekonomiska intressen. Syftet är att invagga allmänheten och beslutsfattare i en falsk trygghet om riskerna med den tvångsexponering i människors egna hem som mobiltelefontekniken ofrånkomligen innebär”, skriver hon i ett pressmeddelande. Efter att i många år har följt debatten kring mobiltelefonin har Mona Nilsson ställt sig frågande till den okritiska mediarapporteringen i Sverige. ”Detta är tredje gången på enbart några få månader som allmänheten i Sverige blivit lurad av okritiska medier som inte förmår genomskåda den manipulationen av vetenskapen. I februari påstod Strålsäkerhetsmyndigheten (SSM) att det var ”högst osannolikt” att sändare för till exempel mobiltelefoni, trådlösa nätverk eller radio och TV innebär en ökad cancerrisk. Ingen journalist granskade grunden till det grundlösa påståendet, som för övrigt är osannolikt likt BP:s påstående i februari om att det skulle vara ”osannolikt” att en oljeläcka skulle kunna uppstå i Mexikanska golfen. Upprepade studier har tvärtom visat att mobilstrålningen är cancerframkallande”, skriver Mona Nilsson. Under årens lopp har Mona studerat alla rapporter om den elektromagnetiska strålningens hälsoeffekter på människan, djur och natur, och resultatet är entydigt och nedslående, anser Mona Nilsson som är besviken över att myndigheterna och industrin tonar ner och mörklägger riskerna. – Tyvärr bekräftas också cancerriskerna av det som sedan länge observerats i verkligheten. Alltför många rapporter om onormala cancerförekomster i närhet av mobilmaster finns redan dokumenterade. Flera har tagits bort sedan onormalt många barn fått cancer i närområdet. Nu vill man använda denna studie, som inte säger något om cancerriskerna, för att hävda att onormala anhopningar av cancer runt mobilmaster inte beror på strålningen. Det är mycket cyniskt, säger Mona Nilsson till Epoch Times. Enligt den franska tidningen Le Progrès har man i Lyon beslutat att ta bort en mobilmast och stänga av tre andra under skoltid i skolan Victor Hugo, efter att barn drabbats av cancer. Mobilmasterna satt mycket nära deras klassrum och det har väckt starka protester från föräldrar till skolans barn. Man kräver även att gränsvärdet för tillåten strålning sänks och att oberoende mätningar av strålningsnivåer genomförs kontinuerligt. Mobilantenner har dessutom tagits bort från andra skolors närhet i Frankrike. I den spanska staden Valladolid ligger skolan Garcia Quintana, vilken blivit omskriven i den vetenskapliga tidskriften The Lancet. På ett tak 42 meter från skolan satt en skog av 60 antenner. Ett antal barn har där drabbats av cancer inom ett år efter att antennerna sattes upp – innan dess har det i skolans 32-åriga historia aldrig förekommit något fall av barncancer. Skolbarnens föräldrar höll sina barn hemma så länge antennerna inte stängdes av. En domare beordrade att antennerna måste stängas av. Som ett exempel på felaktig mediarapportering tar Mona Nilsson upp den internationella Interphonestudien som påstods ha kommit fram till resultatet att mobiltelefoner inte skulle öka risken för hjärntumörer trots att studien egentligen visade att dagens normalanvändare löper mellan 40 och 100 procent ökad risk att drabbas av dödlig hjärntumör. Studiens resultat bekräftade därmed den svenska Hardellgruppens forskning från Örebro som visade ökade hjärntumörrisker, och i synnerhet för ungdomar där risken var förhöjd med upp till 700 procent, vilket media inte ska ha redovisat. En månad efter att Interphonestudien kom har den australiensiska strålskyddsmyndigheten uppmanat barn att begränsa mobilanvändningen, säger Mona Nilsson. Hon berättar att myndigheter i hela världen medger att barn är känsligare för strålning, men inte de svenska strålskyddsmyndigheterna. I många länder uppmanar man barnen att minska användningen av mobiltelefonen. I Sverige har media rapporterat att Interphonestudien visade på ingen risk, men de flesta internationella medierna har skrivit att Interphone visar att mobilen ökar risken för hjärntumörer. Mona Nilsson anser att det här är helt oacceptabelt, allmänheten måste få kritisk och saklig rapportering av frågan: ”Journalistkåren måste förstå att forskningsområdet är ett minfält och börja bli medvetna om den pågående korruptionen av vetenskapen vars syfte är att skydda ekonomiska intressen”.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Epoch Times, Susanne Larsson, 29 Jun 2010

Fears over health won’t stop phone masts
United Kingdom	Created: 1 Jul 2010
Councillors now citing Imperial College "study" as evidence of no-risk. --------------------------------------- New telephone masts are set to go up after councillors dismissed fears about them harming people’s health. A newly-published study by researchers from Imperial College London seems to back up the planning councillors’ decision. They looked at almost 7,000 children and found those who developed cancer aged four or younger were no more likely to have a birth address close to a mast than their peers. Bracknell Forest Council’s planning committee has given permission for three masts to go up in Harmans Water, Great Hollands and North Ascot, despite numerous letters from concerned neighbours and even one from a school. Councillors have agreed that all three masts, which range between 12.5m and 15m high and will be used by O2 and Vodafone, can be built because there were no legal reasons for them to be denied permission. The masts will be built at the junction of Opladen Way and Harmans Water Road, in Ringmead opposite Viking in Great Hollands and near the shops in New Road, North Ascot. Councillor David Worrall, chairman of the planning committee, said: “There is a Government directive that if the masts meet the requirements of the Radiation Authority as regards non-ionizing radiation then councils don’t have to take further concerns as regards health. “There are concerns from people over health but they’ve not been held up in this country or abroad. “I believe that we can disregard the concerns over health in this instance.” Some councillors were reluctant to agree to the masts being built but accepted there was no legal reason for them not to. Cllr Shelagh Pile, who asked for the application in Harmans Water to go before the committee, said: “I know they say masts are safe but there are also statistics which say exactly the opposite. “I remember when we all thought asbestos was safe – in years to come we might have a similar situation. “We will have applications for more and more of these masts as technology increases. “I know there is no planning reason to refuse [these applications] and I know the [Government] inspector would grant this even if we turn it down but I find it sad that local councils have no say in this.” One of the objection letters to the mast in Great Hollands was sent by Easthampstead Park School which voiced concerns that public health concerns could stop people from sending their children to school there if a mast was built near it. But as the school is 390m away from the site for the mast the objection was dismissed. Council planning officer Basia Polnik said: “It is considered refusal on the grounds of perceived health risk could not be warranted.” When considering the applications councillors also discussed the effect vehicles parking to service the masts could have on traffic in the areas. The proposal to build the mast in New Road, North Ascot, caused particular concern in this respect. Cllr Tony Virgo said: “In this particular location I’m concerned that it may exacerbate the highway problem which is acute at this point. “I’m not against these masts, however – this stretch of road is extremely dangerous. It seems silly to site something where we know there is a problem.” Cllr Worrall said the phone companies had explored other sites in the area and chose that one because it was most suitable. He added: “I have a mobile phone mast outside my own house and the number of times a vehicle comes to maintain it is very small.” The masts will contain antennas operated by O2 and Vodafone. The Harmans Water mast will contain six antennas, three Vodafone and three O2, which will be pointed with their beams of greatest intensity in three directions. The other masts will contain four antennas, two O2 and two Vodafone, pointed in two directions. The purpose of the masts is to enhance the companies’ 3G internet services in the areas. Related news: Jun 2010, United Kingdom: Responses to the MTHR phone mast child-cancer study Jun 2010, United Kingdom: MTHR Childhood Cancer - Mobile Phone Base Station Mast Study "is useless" Jun 2010, Denmark: Kræft og mobil-sendmaster har ingen forbindelse (inkl. interview med Mast-Victims)
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Get Bracknell, Mike Pyle, 01 Jul 2010

Industry Funded Cell Phone Study Ignores Evidence, Whitewashes Results
USA	Created: 1 Jul 2010
A funny thing happened on the way to publication of a WHO sponsored study on cell phones and cancer risks. First the study was delayed for four years. Then a news embargo was placed on study participants. And finally, instead of reporting proof of cell phone dangers as had been reported all the way up until just days before the study was finally released, the study instead reported that it found no evidence of cell phone dangers, contradicting the study's evidence as well as the opinions of some study scientists. In actuality, the Interphone Study did discover that long-term usage increased the chance of glioma by 40 per cent, but dismissed the risk because of possible biases and errors. Six of eight Interphone studies found increased risks of glioma, the most common brain tumor, with one study finding a 39 per cent increase. An Israeli study found heavy users were about 50 per cent more likely to suffer tumors of the parotid salivary gland. Two studies into acoustic neuroma, a tumor of a nerve between the ear and brain, reported a higher risk after using mobiles for 10 years. A Swedish report reported the risk as being 3.9 times higher. Contradicting the study's conclusions, Dr Elisabeth Cardis of the Centre for Research in Environmental Epidemiology in Barcelona who led the study said: "Overall, my opinion is that the results show a real effect." Bruce Armstrong, another Interphone researcher from the University of Sydney, said: "There is evidence that there may be a risk; Interphone has made that a little stronger." Interphone has been rife with controversy almost from the day it was set up in 2000. Some of the criticism stems from the fact that mobile phone manufacturers partly funded the project to the tune of around 5.5 million euros, and there were concerns that such funding compromised the study's independence. The scope of the project was also questioned, as it had left out children and adolescents, which are the groups most vulnerable and most susceptible to brain tumors. In addition, many observers and commentators have suspected that the four year delay was due to disagreements among the researchers. Based on what has transpired, such concerns appear to have been valid. Until an embargo was placed on all news about the study, all indications had been that the study would conclude that there was evidence of dangers from cell phones and recommend measures to decrease the danger. Last year the Daily Telegraph reported that a major WHO study will finally announce later this year that "long-term use of mobile phones can cause brain tumors." Only last month, the London Times was reporting similar information. Then came the industry spin that should have provided a strong clue that something was afoot. On May 16th, a news release from the Mobile Manufacturers Forum group which helped fund the study reported that the new study "provides significant further reassurance about the safety of mobile phones. The overall analysis is consistent with previous studies and the significant body of research, reporting no increased health risk from using mobile phones." While several other countries have strengthened warnings about cell phones, Britain's Department of Health continues to maintain that "the current balance of evidence does not show health problems caused by using mobile phones" and suggests only that children be "discouraged" from making "non-essential" calls while adults should "keep calls short". Given the Interphone Study's conclusions, it does not appear likely that Britain will be strengthening their guidelines soon. One can only conclude that the mobile phone manufacturers got their 5.5 million Euros' worth.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Natural News, Tony Isaacs, 30 Jun 2010

Health fear over new airport scanners
United Kingdom	Created: 1 Jul 2010
New X-Ray scanners at British airports could be exposing passengers to potentially dangerous levels of radiation, according to one senior radiologist. The machines are designed to "strip search" passengers by using low-level X-Rays, which produce an image of their bodies, revealing whether they are secretly carrying weapons, explosives or illegal drugs. But the scanners may not be safe for certain people, particularly children and women in the early stages of pregnancy, according to Dr Sarah Burnett, who works as an independent radiologist in London. "It is illegal to expose people to any level of radiation without medical justification," said Dr Burnett, who raised her concerns after being asked to undergo a full-body scan at Luton Airport. "So how is it that the Government is allowed to irradiate us willy-nilly at airports? "I am particularly concerned about the potential effects on women in their first trimester of pregnancy. "That is when the risks of the baby developing genetic abnormalities are highest because radiation exposure can damage the body's reproductive DNA." Called the Rapiscan Secure 1000, the device looks like a big filing cabinet and fires a low-energy X-Ray beam over the body. It has been trialled mainly at Heathrow, where four have been in use over the past couple of years. However, it has already attracted controversy for producing revealing images clear enough to make out passengers' genitalia. Indeed, U.S. airports have now refused to use them until the manufacturer can promise more privacy. The X-Rays penetrate one-tenth of an inch into the body, enough to detect any devices or drugs hidden just under the skin. According to Rapiscan Systems, the California-based company which makes the machines, each scan generates only three microrems of radiation - compared to 10,000 in a chest X-Ray. The firm claims this is no higher than the amount that the body is normally exposed to every five minutes from "natural" radiation in the atmosphere. The company also says that frequent flyers would need to have at least 5,000 scans a year before there would be any health threat. What's more, it adds that longhaul passengers will soak up more so-called radiation during the flight, from the plane's equipment, than from the scan. However, last year the Transport and General Workers Union investigated claims that five female security guards suffered miscarriages as a result of prolonged exposure to radiation from using the machines at Heathrow. "The machines are referred to as 'low-dose', but there is a school of thought that there is no 'safe' radiation dose," said Dr Burnett, who has had 15 years' experience working in the NHS. "It is true that passengers are exposed to 'cosmic' radiation within the aircraft, but there's nothing they can do about that - it can't be avoided. "We can, however, avoid deliberately exposing people to radiation." The British Airports Authority said passengers are free to refuse the X-Ray. But if they do, they will then have to be hand-searched. Dr Gill Markham from the Royal College of Radiologists urged passengers not to worry, as the dose is so low it is unlikely to cause harm. But women who think they may be in the early stages of pregnancy should tell airport staff if asked to have the scan. P.S. An article about this Health Scare was also published in the Daily Mail, but only the Hard Copy Paper issue. BUT! The Daily Mail did not seem to think it important enough to bring in the On-Line issue. Agnes Related news: Nov 2009, USA: How Terahertz Waves Tear Apart DNA
Click here to view the source article.
Source: This is London, 22 Maj 2007

Double Tinnitus risk after 4 years cellphone use
Austria	Created: 1 Jul 2010
Users of cell phones have another reason to be cautious. An Austrian team has found that the risk of developing tinnitus, a ringing in the ears, doubled after four years. This is one of the first epidemiological studies to investigate the long-term effects of mobile phones on hearing. Hans-Peter Hutter of the Institute of Environmental Health at the Medical University of Vienna, and coworkers report that the observed association is "unlikely" to be spurious and could have important implications for public health. Their new epidemiological study, based on 100 cases and 100 controls, will appear in an upcoming issue of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. Read the entire story at Microwave News: http://www.microwavenews.com
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Microwave News, Louis Slesin, 30 Jun 2010

Europeans don't trust industry funded science - EU survey
Belgium	Created: 30 Jun 2010
Special EUROBAROMETER 340 on “Science and Technology” shows that Europeans are wary of privately funded science. (from page 24 in the document - get it via the source link below) 2.3 Science and the influence of private funding Europeans tend not to trust scientists who depend on money from industry. When looking at the influence of private funding, we see that Europeans tend to agree that scientists can be unduly influenced if their work is funded by industry. Close to three in five Europeans (58%) agree that "we can no longer trust scientists to tell the truth about controversial scientific and technological issues because they depend more and more on money from industry" while only 16% of respondents at the EU27 level disagree. The figure below shows that there are countries where respondents express a stronger view, with Cyprus in the lead at 72%. In Finland, Germany and Slovenia, seven out of ten respondents agree with the statement, also considerably higher than the EU27 average of 58%. Very few countries have less than 50% of respondents who agree that they cannot trust scientists who depend on money from industry. Ireland has the lowest rate of agreement at 36% and five other countries have fewer than 50% of respondents in agreement: Malta (41%), the Czech Republic (45%), Turkey (46%), Poland (48%) and the United Kingdom (49%). The same countries are also amongst those whose respondents disagree the most, led by the United Kingdom (26% disagreeing), the Czech Republic (25%) and Ireland (24%). When we look at the socio-demographics we see that most groups are around the EU27 average. Again, we see that there is a more polarised view for those respondents who are very interested in science. Six out of ten (61%) agree while the corresponding figure for Europeans who are not at all interested in science is 53%. In addition, 20% of those who are very interested in science disagree while for those who are not at all interested only 13% disagree. This shows that those who are more interested in science will have a stronger view that scientists are influenced by their benefactors, be it positive or negative. - Private funding of scientific and technological research limits the ability to understand things fully. When we further investigate the influence of private funding on scientific research16, we find that one European in two agrees that such funding limits our understanding, while only 19% at the EU27 level disagree that this is the case. The figure below shows that respondents in some countries show more suspicion and have a stronger view. This group of countries is led by Greece and Lavia (65% each) and followed by Croatia (61%) and Lithuania (60%). Respondents in the Netherlands and Norway have the most faith that private sources of funding would not unduly influence our understanding. In the Netherlands 31% of respondents disagree with the statement, which is near to the total of 35% of Dutch respondents who agree with the statement. In Norway 30% of respondents disagree, although there are significantly more Norwegian respondents (43%) who agree that scientific and technological research may be limited by the consequences of private funding. When we look at the socio-demographic data, we again see that most groups are around the EU27 average of 50% who agree and 19% who disagree. The pattern is also similar. When we look at those respondents who are very interested in science we see that a higher percentage agrees compared to those who are not interested (55% vs. 43%). Furthermore, those very interested in science are more likely to disagree (23%, compared to only 14% of respondents who are not interested in science). There is evidence again that those who are more interested in science are more likely to have a view, good or bad, on whether private funding of scientific and technological research limits our ability to understand things fully than those respondents who are not interested in science.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: EU Barometer, Jun 2010

Wireless Industry Manual on how to respond to health questions
USA	Created: 30 Jun 2010
In a recent article by the Washington Post, the US Wireless Industry (CTIA) manual for questions on public health was leaked. It's called "Respresenting the Wireless Industry: Procedures and Resource Manual for Public Health and Safety Issues" and gives a list of anticipated questions and recommended (ie. coordinated) responses to those. This seems to be an older version, created during the 90's when Dr. George Carlo's WTR research programme was ongoing. In any case it's interesting to see how the industry juggles the words "evidence" and "proof" around - interchanging the two words as if they should mean the same. It's a photo scan of an hardcopy document, downloadable here in PDF format: Download PDF
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Washington Post / Mast-Victims, 30 Jun 2010

Concern on mobile phone risks
Malta	Created: 30 Jun 2010
The majority of Maltese are worried about the potential health hazards of radiation from mobile phones and antennae while nearly four in 10 say they do not trust the Malta Communications Authority to do a good job protecting them. EU citizens were surveyed to gauge their concerns about exposure to electromagnetic fields. The results of the local survey show that the majority of respondents do not really understand the risks at play, however mobile phones and antennae are the devices that most concern them. A total of 57 per cent of the 500 Maltese respondents said they were concerned about the effects of radiation from mobile phones and antennae, with 31 per cent qualifying that they were "very concerned". But this still does not compare to the scepticism seen in Europe, where in some countries as many as 70 per cent said they were concerned about the possible effects of radiation. Asked whether they felt informed about the potential health hazards, 82 per cent of Maltese respondents said they did not feel informed and complained that they had not received any information on the subject. They were then asked whether they felt Malta's regulator was doing a good job at informing and protecting them effectively, with 39 per cent saying it was not. However, the majority did not express an opinion on this question while only 18 per cent said they were satisfied with the MCA's work. While the survey focuses on the concerns regarding mobile phone technology, there are other potential hazards, such as high tension power lines and wireless computer networks, which many seem to be oblivious about. There are also many home appliances, such as computers, hair dryers, vacuum cleaners, microwave ovens, cookers and heaters which emit an electromagnetic field. The potential effects of electromagnetic fields on human health vary widely depending on the frequency and intensity of the fields, however details are still scarce as studies on this potential health hazard are still inconclusive. In fact, the potential health effects of the very low frequency radiation surrounding power lines, mobile antennae and electrical devices are still the subject of ongoing research. In workplace environments, where electromagnetic field exposures can be up to 10,000 times greater than the average, the US has issued some cautionary advisories but still stresses that the data is currently too limited to draw good conclusions.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Times of Malta, Ivan Camilleri / Brussels, 26 Jun 2010

Interview with Ron Herberman
USA	Created: 30 Jun 2010
Dr Ron Herberman, former director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, was online Tuesday, June 29 at 11 am ET to discuss the research into the effects of cellphone radiation on adults and children. A transcript follows. ____________________ Give it to me straight doc: Do we need to be worried about using our cellphones? What can we do to mitigate the risk of cancer? Ron Herberman: The evidence is not definitive, but I believe there is sufficient basis for concern about possible risk for cancer, especially for children and for long term (more than 10 years), heavy users. It are quite straightforward ways to greatly reduce the possible risk for cancer: Avoid holding the phone directly against your ear, especially during a long conversation. Rather: use speaker mode or wear a wired earpiece; or text since that keeps the phone in your hand and away from your ear. Also, please note that it is not good to keep the cell phone, when turned on, in your pocket or anywhere else in direct contact with your body. Cell phones continuously receive and emit radiofrequency radiation, and long term exposure against your body can contribute to health risks. _______________________ Headsets: Are bluetooth headsets really any better than using a cellphone? Don't they use the same frequencies to transmit data? Ron Herberman: It seems very likely that bluetooth headsets reduce exposure to radiofrequency radiation, since instead of the full strength of the radiation coming from the cell phone tower to the antenna on your phone, there is only much shorter distance radiation from the phone to the headset. However, bluetooth headsets can still carry health risks if one wears the headset, turned on, all day, since the lower level of such radiation is cumulative. _______________________ Anonymous: Does cellular phone technology rely on microwave frequencies in the same manner as telephone operations in the northern parts of the continent where no phone lines exist? If so, is it these low frequencies that are a danger? bwc Ron Herberman: Yes, radiofrequency radiation is in the microwave range. Note that the amount of radiation coming into your phone is considerably greater in areas where there are fewer cell phone towers and the phone needs to constantly search to pick up the needed signal. Also, there is more radiation when using the phone in a moving vehicle, since the phone needs to search from one cell phone tower to the next. _______________________ Cell phone industry: Why do you think the cellphone industry is so opposed to releasing this data? Do they think it's fear mongering, or do they have something to hide? Ron Herberman: I believe that the cell phone industry is concerned about bad publicity, which certainly could decrease its business. However, the responsible position should be to protect the public from potential risks by supporting the advice for taking simple precautions to keep the cell phones away from the body. It's of note that the main cell phone manufacturers themselves provide such warnings in small font notices in the brochures that come with the cell phones. They, however, don't want people to readily see such warnings. _______________________ Smartphones?: Are smartphones a bigger cancer risk since they transmit so much more data than regular cellphones? Ron Herberman: One can't generalize completely, and that's why it is useful to look at what the SAR is, which is shown in small font in the brochures that come with each cell phone. The SF law simply makes that information more readily accessible to the public. _______________________ What if it's true?: If cell phones really do cause cancer, can we do anything about it? Or do we have to give up the technology altogether? Ron Herberman: There is no need to avoid use of cell phones. One just needs to follow the simple precautions to keep the phone at least a few inches away from the ear or other parts of the body. _______________________ New York City: I live directly underneath a cellular base station. It was built on the roof of the circa 1897 tenement building I live in. There are at least 13 antennas on the roof, and 3 large battery cabinets. Please address the dangers of radiation from such constant and close range exposure. And also address the dangers of exposure to sulphuric acid and other chemicals if the battery cabinets catch on fire. Ron Herberman: There is much less evidence for health risks from exposure to cell phone towers. The extent of radiation drops off quickly with increasing distance from the towers. Danger from sulfuric acid is a possibility, if it gets directly on the skin or into breathing passages. _______________________ No independent studies?: Why have there been so few independent studies of the dangers of cell phones? Is this a taboo topic for researchers, or can they just not get the funding from independent sources? Ron Herberman: Other countries, particularly some of the European countries such as Sweden, support such independent research. However, to date, there has been very little US funding for the needed research. It's not taboo, but there is a need to press for more federal funding. A recent report from the President's Cancer Panel called upon the President and Congress to provide more funding for this and other potential risks from the environment, such as from chemicals. _______________________ Microwaves are microwaves: Don't we get hit with microwaves all the time from TV and radio? Why are the microwaves from cellphones any different/worse? Ron Herberman: Microwaves actually span a wide range of frequency, and the waves from TV and radio are different from the bands used for cell phones. In addition, since the effects on the body drop off very quickly as the distance rom the body increases, any potential riask is usaully very low. The main concern about cell phones is the very close range effects when the cell phones are held directly against the ar or other parts of the body. _______________________ Arlington, VA: Where can I find resources for choosing low-radiation cellphones? Ron Herberman: All of the cell phones publish this information with each phone, but the information is in very samll font and difficult to find. Several months ago, the Environmental Working Group published on the Internet a very helpful listing of the SAR ratings for most of the currently available cell phones. _______________________ Boston: The pushback from the cell phone industry reminds me of the pushback from the cigarette industry in the 70's. And we all know how that went! Ron Herberman: This is a very good point. I believe strongly that we need to utilize the principle of simple precautions until evidence one way or the other becomes definitive. _______________________ Bethesda, Md.: Just wanted to let everyone know about EWG's cell phone radiation database: http://www.ewg.org/cellphoneradiation/Get-a-Safer-Phone Ron Herberman: I agree. This is a very helpful database. _______________________ Ron Herberman: It was a pleasure to have participated in this chat room. I will log out now.
Click here to view the source article.
Source: Washington Post, Ronald B. Herberman, M.D. Chief Medical Officer, Intrexon Corporation, 29 Jun 2010

«First  ‹Previous   Page 5 of 396   Next›  Last»