General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Reminder: Cell phones do not cause cancer, nor do radio waves make you sick. [View all]DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)But I will, at least for this post, and I do appreciate you giving me insight into your character, even though this was unintentional on your part. Read on.
You state that a lie has been told, so it was either told by me, or by scientists conducting studies. You've already told me that these studies don't claim to have inconclusive results (you're incorrect here, but bear with me). If, as you say, these studies don't claim that the results are inconclusive, then who is left to utter the "lie"? That would be me. Make friends with logic--it will serve you well. And don't accuse me of lying on a page that everyone can see and then attempt to be a worm and pretend you never said it.
Exaggeration also doesn't do much for the points you'd like to make. When I spoke of the handful organizations at the link I provided, I mentioned that three of them talked of the need for more study on the matter, so your insertion of "massive number of studies" was made up in your own predisposed head. Not a great idea if you're arguing about accuracy and precision, but it is a favorite tactic of some "news" organizations I can readily think of.
I can see that you like to snipe, and would like to prove me wrong, but you offer not one scintilla of information to suggest that you're right, about anything. On the other hand, I've made the most accurate and precise statement that can be made about possible health risks of cell phone usage: tests to date are inconclusive, and more studies need to be done. Moreover, if there is a risk of glioma and other cancers from cell phones, it does not appear to be great, not at some epidemic level, but again, more studies are needed. Yep, I said all that stuff...just go back and look if you're interested enough. That doesn't make me Albert Einstein, it just means that I'm paying attention, and I have opted to go with what has been stated, and not with whatever it is that compels you to need to believe conclusively in one particular way. Again, you're off in the realm of dogma and opinion, which is ok if that's what you're about, but it's not relevant in a conversation that deals with science and research.
Now onto the positions staked out by the first three organizations listed in our link.
International Agency for Research on Cancer:
Lyon, France, May 31, 2011 ‐‐ The WHO/International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer1, associated with wireless phone use.
Conclusions
Dr Jonathan Samet (University of Southern California, USA), overall Chairman of the Working Group, indicated that "the evidence, while still accumulating, is strong enough to support a conclusion and the 2B classification. The conclusion means that there could be some risk, and therefore we need to keep a close watch for a link between cell phones and cancer risk."
"Given the potential consequences for public health of this classification and findings," said IARC Director Christopher Wild, "it is important that additional research be conducted into the long‐term, heavy use of mobile phones. Pending the availability of such information, it is important to take pragmatic measures to reduce exposure such as hands‐free devices or texting. "
----------
The American Cancer Society
"This report comes from a very credible group, and reaches reasonable conclusions about electromagnetic radiation from cellphones and other devices. It is critical that its findings be interpreted with great care. The working group reviewed a large number of studies and concluded that there was limited evidence that cell phones may cause glioma, a type of brain tumor that starts in the brain or spine. A 2B classification means that there could be some risk, but that the evidence is not strong enough to be considered causal, and needs to be investigated further. The bottom line is the evidence is enough to warrant concern, but it is not conclusive.
"The American Cancer Society does not independently judge the carcinogenicity of different exposures. Instead, we rely on IARC reviews of available evidence for our recommendations. At first glance, these new recommendations are very much in line with the American Cancer Society's current information that the evidence is limited, that further research is needed, and that there are things people who are concerned about radiofrequency exposure can do to limit their exposure, including using an ear piece and limiting cell phone use, particularly among children.
"Given that the evidence remains uncertain, it is up to each individual to determine what changes they wish to make, if any, after weighing the potential benefits and risks of using a cell phone.
-------------------
National Institutes of Health
The weight of the current scientific evidence has not conclusively linked cell phone use with any adverse health problems, but more research is needed.