Cell phone radiation

[green.pixel]

How dangerous it really is and what are the best ways to combat it?

Here's an oldish article about it.
http://www.electricsense.com/775/how-to-protect-yourself-from-cell-phone-radiation/

 

[BRiT]

Don't use cell phones?

 

[I.S.T.]

Oh no.

No no no.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

 

[cheapchips]

I was going to say that there's no harmful effects. The fact that its fodder for bulshit pseudo science web sites suggests there's at least a negative effect on the sum of human knowledge. [emoji53]

 

[green.pixel]

I was going to say that there's no harmful effects.

These studies disagree with you.

Estimating the risk of brain tumors from cellphone use: Published case–control studies

This paper reviews the results of early cellphone studies, where exposure duration was too short to expect tumorigenesis, as well as two sets of more recent studies with longer exposure duration: the Interphone studies and the Swedish studies led by Dr. Lennart Hardell. The recent studies reach very different conclusions. With four exceptions the industry-funded Interphone studies found no increased risk of brain tumors from cellphone use, while the Swedish studies, independent of industry funding, reported numerous findings of significant increased brain tumor risk from cellphone and cordless phone use. An analysis of the data from the Interphone studies suggests that either the use of a cellphone protects the user from a brain tumor, or the studies had serious design flaws. Eleven flaws are identified: (1) selection bias, (2) insufficient latency time, (3) definition of ‘regular’ cellphone user, (4) exclusion of young adults and children, (5) brain tumor risk from cellphones radiating higher power levels in rural areas were not investigated, (6) exposure to other transmitting sources are excluded, (7) exclusion of brain tumor types, (8) tumors outside the cellphone radiation plume are treated as exposed, (9) exclusion of brain tumor cases because of death or illness, (10) recall accuracy of cellphone use, and (11) funding bias. The Interphone studies have all 11 flaws, and the Swedish studies have 3 flaws (8, 9 and 10). The data from the Swedish studies are consistent with what would be expected if cellphone use were a risk for brain tumors, while the Interphone studies data are incredulous. If a risk does exist, the public health cost will be large. These are the circumstances where application of the Precautionary Principle is indicated, especially if low-cost options could reduce the absorbed cellphone radiation by several orders of magnitude.

http://www.bioinitiative.org/table-of-contents/

Overall, more than 1800 or so new studies report abnormal gene transcription (Section 5); genotoxicity and single-and double-strand DNA damage (Section 6); stress proteins because of the fractal RF-antenna like nature of DNA (Section 7); chromatin condensation and loss of DNA repair capacity in human stem cells (Sections 6 and 15); reduction in free-radical scavengers - particularly melatonin (Sections 5, 9, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17); neurotoxicity in humans and animals (Section 9), carcinogenicity in humans (Sections 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 and 17); serious impacts on human and animal sperm morphology and function (Section 18); effects on offspring behavior (Section 18, 19 and 20); and effects on brain and cranial bone development in the offspring of animals that are exposed to cell phone radiation during pregnancy (Sections 5 and 18). This is only a snapshot of the evidence presented in the BioInitiative 2012 updated report.

Martin Pall, PhD-How Wireless Devices Cause Cell Harm: Voltage Gated Calcium Channels

Dr. Pall is Professor Emeritus School of Molecular Biosciences, Washington State University and author of numerous scientific papers on oxidation and inflammation. At this Wireless Technology and Public Health conference in Mountain View, California Oct 10, 2015 he discusses the cellular mechanisms of action that explain the adverse biological effects of wireless devices on the human body. Dr. Pall demonstrates how wireless EMF can cause harm to the heart, brain and reproductive organs via a cell membrane changes in Voltage Gated Calcium Channels(VGCC). In addition he cites important research that underscores the need to change current safety standards for EMF radiation from our wireless devices and cell towers.

Council of Europe: The potential dangers of electromagnetic fields and their effect on the environment

 

[Malo]

Oh no.

No no no.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO

This

 

[Pixel]

Here is a study with radiofrequency radiation on rats - it does increase inflammation
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/RS012i06Sp00179/abstract

Here is another:
The Effects on Cells Mobility Due to Exposure to EMF Radiation
Abstract: Under the effect of RF exposure, significant change observed in Leukocytes movement direction to be perpendicular to the chemotactic direction and in parallel with the mobile phone position. Also significant change in leukocytes behavior, include changing shape much faster. The cells were shrinking, expanding, and rolling.
http://airccse.org/journal/acij/papers/2411acij01.pdf

 

[Pixel]

The societal zeitgeist and focus is about carcinogenic effects of rf and emf radiation, but there does appear to be some negative effects to cells, that may not lead to increased mortality nor cancer.

 

[digitalwanderer]

I used to fear radiation from my cellphone, that's why I keep it wrapped in tinfoil. Keeps the radioactivity from leaking out.

Also, be wary venturing when the Daystar is out! It leaks MASSIVE amounts of radiation that just rain down on all these witless fools! That's why I covered an umbrella with tinfoil and always use it when I go out during the Daystar hours.

 

[orangpelupa]

Some people even worshipped it and bask in the radiation!

Heck, my teacher even thinks it gives us vitamins!

 

[green.pixel]

I used to fear radiation from my cellphone, that's why I keep it wrapped in tinfoil. Keeps the radioactivity from leaking out.

Also, be wary venturing when the Daystar is out! It leaks MASSIVE amounts of radiation that just rain down on all these witless fools! That's why I covered an umbrella with tinfoil and always use it when I go out during the Daystar hours.

What are you talking about?

 

[orangpelupa]

What are you talking about?

sun

 

[milk]

sun

well, the sun does hand out cancer like there's no tomorrow...

 

[orangpelupa]

well, the sun does hand out cancer like there's no tomorrow...

and they are daily mailed

 

[green.pixel]

I wanted thread's subject to be taken seriously and provided scientific evidence for it. Why the sarcastic reply by digiw?

 

[milk]

I wanted thread's subject to be taken seriously and provided scientific evidence for it. Why the sarcastic reply by digiw?

yeah, I apreciated your efforts. I am I'll informed on the subject, and have always heard the whole cell phone radiation paranoia was pseudo-science before too, but in faced with all of the comprehensive amount of data you presented and the lazy sarcastic replies from others, your side seems much more convinsing to me. Again, as an interested ill informed person on the subject, I wish someone could refute your data more competently...

 

[orangpelupa]

But seriously, anybody remembers using old big as brick cellphone?

Calling using that results in minor headache

 

[pcchen]

The thing is that worrying about cellphone radiation is like worrying about water poisoning (as in drinking too much water) when drinking from sewage.

 

[cheapchips]

I wanted thread's subject to be taken seriously and provided scientific evidence for it. Why the sarcastic reply by digiw?

I'm afraid you didn't get off to a great start. The first link is a flim flam merchant so you set the tone of replies from the off.

There might be more helpful replies people could post, but patience for this stuff wears pretty thin, pretty quickly.

(speaking as someone who's Dad spews out 'health news' with little prompting. Lovely though he otherwise is, I delete 99% of his emails. [emoji5]️).

 

[Fred]

Basic physics allows one to safely reject the harmful cell phone radiation hypotheses.
1) The radiation isn't ionizing bc of quantum mechanics and the photoelectric effect.
2) The effect is at best thermal in origin on the outskirts of the skull. But that can't cause a problem. Sleeping on your pillow for instance would be a larger effect that were it to be harmful would have been observed long ago and evolution wouldn't permit us from being there.
3) Dose/effect relationship has to be violated in order for this to be true. Again lots of studies on humans who have lived in radio towers, that have been subjected to orders of magnitude larger intensities with no obvious impairments over and above the populace.

All of the silly papers by people arguing the opposite are basically fringe scientists.

The analogy would be the following. Imagine you are kicking a soccer ball at a house with a brick wall. Your goal is to move a glass of water sitting on a table in the house. The first thing u note is that u can't kick the ball hard enough to knock a brick down. So you try kicking lots of balls. But all you do is heat up the outer wall by doing that. Then you get clever, and try to set up a resonance so that the vibration of the struck wall sets up a reaction so that the resonant frequency matches the glass. But then you realize that the conspiracy of frequencies would have to be fine tuned to a fantastic accuracy, far more likely to simply achieve that by random natural sources, and even then it would impossible to last for longer than a split second.

So there are no plausible physical mechanisms. And indeed there is no credible evidence for the effect and every proper study has failed to demonstrate anything.