# Health effects of cell phone use



## cmhardw (Jun 2, 2011)

So I'm sure some of you have already seen this CNN article about cell phone use.

I've recently been doing some other reading on cell phones and have found sites saying that cell phone radiation has negative effects on the long term memory of rats.

They're also finding that cell phones affect your brain waves during sleep up to 30 or 40 minutes after a phone has been turned off.

Even the wikipedia page on the health effects of cell phones is rather extensive.

I don't know about you all, but this feels rather similar to when cigarettes were first starting to be suspected of having negative health effects. I, for one, am very wary of using my cell phone now or even keeping it in my pocket. I'm already looking into buying one of those corded headset ear pieces so that I don't have to hold my phone to my head.

Is anyone else worried about all the evidence that cell phone radiation is affecting people, and likely in a negative way?

Discuss.


----------



## Julian (Jun 2, 2011)

Good thing I don't use my cell phone then.


----------



## JackJ (Jun 2, 2011)

I'm not overly concerned since I rarely use my cell phone. But for my friends, it's another story.


----------



## MrIndianTeen (Jun 2, 2011)

One of the reasons I'm happy not to have a cell phone.


----------



## ZamHalen (Jun 2, 2011)

That's why I mostly text and use speaker.


----------



## RaresB (Jun 2, 2011)

+1 to everything everyone already said sauf zamhalen


----------



## Clayy9 (Jun 2, 2011)

Exactly- I don't even own a cell phone.


----------



## teller (Jun 2, 2011)

Can't say...there are so many fraudulent scare stories by allegedly reputable "scientists" these days...


----------



## Edward (Jun 2, 2011)




----------



## aronpm (Jun 2, 2011)

Reading the official report they don't have sufficient evidence to say it is a carcinogen. It is under section 2B on the risk scale, alongside coffee.

bad astronomy


----------



## hatter (Jun 2, 2011)

I'm not overly concerned until more conclusive evidence and findings are published. We all expose ourselvesto really dangerous things everyday (gasoline? Cigarette smoke?). 


I'm on my phone now, ironically enough, so I can't check the stat exactly (it's at cancer.gov though), but I believe we all have a 40.77% chance of being diagnosed with cancer. And 33% of cancer patients, overall, die within 5 years of diagnosis. Really, our outlook is grim, anyway. If your phone doesn't give you cancer, something else very well may.


----------



## Dene (Jun 2, 2011)

I don't see any reason to believe that there is a significant effect.


I for one don't use a phone so my memory is intact


----------



## cuberkid10 (Jun 2, 2011)

Good thing I only text. Are there any adverse health efferct of using iPod touches (wifi)?


----------



## DavidWoner (Jun 2, 2011)

cmhardw said:


> I've recently been doing some other reading on cell phones and have found sites saying that cell phone radiation has negative effects on the long term memory of rats.


 
"Before each training session, rats from one group were exposed for one hour to pulsed microwaves, *radiation similar to that emitted by cellular telephones.*"

So they weren't exposed to actual cell phones. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the level of radiation the rats were receiving was tens or hundreds of times greater than what you would get with normal cell phone use. As far as I'm concerned this study has no relation to cell phones.

Until someone reputable publishes a study that definitively proves that cell phone use is harmful, I see no reason to believe any of this.


----------



## Jungleterrain (Jun 2, 2011)

cmhardw said:


> I've recently been doing some other reading on cell phones and have found sites saying that cell phone radiation has negative effects on the long term memory of rats.


 
Good thing I'm not a rat.


----------



## Georgeanderre (Jun 2, 2011)

I really dont know what to think... but for the meantime my memory stays intact because i never use my phone besides emailing


----------



## Waitee (Jun 2, 2011)

Everyone dies some day (except like Cthulhu or the elder gods or something(I guess they dont use cellphones)) so why should we care about a thing that gives us +2% or so possibility of getting cancer? I find my phone quite handy anyway 

On my knowledge of physics and biology, the effect of radiation is that it ionises atoms on the DNA chain which causes some genes to change or stop working which may in some cases cause a tumor. The intensity of radio waves (which cell phones use for communication) is not enough to ionise an atom. You have to go to UV-B class radiation or to smaller wavelenghts for the radiation to become intense enough.

However there might be another reasons which causes cancer, but I'm don't know about them


----------



## Zubon (Jun 2, 2011)

I think people are more inclined to jump on the bandwagon with stories like this because they don't understand a lot of the science and it just seems "right" that mobile phone radiation would cause cancer. Even the word radiation beings on images of Chernobyl and other ionizing radiation hazards.

I think that the OVERWHELMING evidence is that mobile phones do not pose any significant health risk.


----------



## Waitee (Jun 2, 2011)

Zubon said:


> I think that the OVERWHELMING evidence is that mobile phones do not pose any significant health risk.


 
When I was in junior high school a couple of my friends took a fight and one was using Nokia 3310 as a weapon

EDIT: that might cause some health risks to the other guy


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 2, 2011)

You should be wary of sentences that begin with "some believe..." and "possibly...".

Sorry you got taken in by this scaremongering, Chris.


----------



## BrainOfSweden (Jun 2, 2011)

DavidWoner said:


> "Before each training session, rats from one group were exposed for one hour to pulsed microwaves, *radiation similar to that emitted by cellular telephones.*"
> 
> So they weren't exposed to actual cell phones. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the level of radiation the rats were receiving was tens or hundreds of times greater than what you would get with normal cell phone use. As far as I'm concerned this study has no relation to cell phones.
> 
> Until someone reputable publishes a study that definitively proves that cell phone use is harmful, I see no reason to believe any of this.


I agree with you. We shall remember that the legal SAR for cellphone radiation is a lot lower than what is considered dangerous. A few months ago, a study was released that proved phones to be harmless. I will not believe any of them until someone get's cancer from a cell phone in real life.


----------



## Cubenovice (Jun 2, 2011)

BrainOfSweden said:


> We shall remember that the legal SAR for cellphone radiation is a lot lower than *what is considered dangerous*.



With *current* knowledge...


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 2, 2011)

Cubenovice said:


> With *current* knowledge...


 
The radiation from bacon is lower than what is considered dangerous with *current* knowledge.


----------



## Owen (Jun 2, 2011)

Don't ever use cellular phones. If you really want to talk to someone, just call them on a normal phone.


----------



## Edward (Jun 2, 2011)

Owen said:


> Don't ever use cellular phones. If you really want to talk to someone, just call them on a normal phone.


 
And your reasoning for this?


----------



## Julian (Jun 2, 2011)

Wow. I'm surprised by the overwhelming consensus in this thread.


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 2, 2011)

Julian said:


> Wow. I'm surprised by the overwhelming *consensus* in this thread.


 
I don't think that word means what you think it means.


----------



## JBCM627 (Jun 2, 2011)

Just thought I'd put this out there:





From: http://xkcd.com/radiation/

Note the cell phone usage dose.


----------



## krnballerzzz (Jun 2, 2011)

Kirjava said:


> The radiation from bacon is lower than what is considered dangerous with *current* knowledge.


 
Delicious radiation.


----------



## izovire (Jun 2, 2011)

I agree there needs to be a much better study of this before saying it's dangerous... but then if illness starts to pop up, people will complain that no one warned them. People use to think that looking too close at Televisions led to eye problems or even cancer (my grandmother told me when I was 7).

We are exposed to some radiation every day. Sunlight is probably more dangerous than cellphones.


----------



## Stefan (Jun 2, 2011)

JBCM627 said:


> Just thought I'd put this out there:
> http://xkcd.com/radiation/


 
What? Why?

From the first article Chris linked to:
_"The type of radiation coming out of a cell phone is called *non-ionizing*."_

From the image you posted:
_"This is a chart of the *ionizing *radiation..."_



JBCM627 said:


> Note the cell phone usage dose.



Yeah it explicitly says they don't produce *ionizing* radiation. So? Are bombs harmless because they're not poison?


----------



## Julian (Jun 2, 2011)

Kirjava said:


> I don't think that word means what you think it means.


Right then. I'm surprised by the general agreement.


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 2, 2011)

Yeah. People are not agreeing with each other.


----------



## Cubenovice (Jun 2, 2011)

izovire said:


> I agree there needs to be a much better study of this before saying it's dangerous...


 
Perhaps you meant to say: I agree there needs to be a much better study of this before saying it's *not *dangerous?


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jun 2, 2011)

Stefan said:


> What? Why?


I thought maybe Jim was putting it out there because of the comment about cellphones (especially the part that goes with the asterisk!):


> a cell phone's transmitter does not produce ionizing radiation* and does not cause cancer.
> * Unless it's a bananaphone


Delicious radiation indeed!



Kirjava said:


> Yeah. People are not agreeing with each other.


I thought Julian was right on track - to me it looks like there's a clear consensus in this thread that cell phones are not anything to worry about. Consensus doesn't require everyone to agree, just most parties.


----------



## Kirjava (Jun 2, 2011)

Mike Hughey said:


> I thought Julian was right on track - to me it looks like there's a clear consensus in this thread that cell phones are not anything to worry about. Consensus doesn't require everyone to agree, just most parties.


 
You can see how I could disagree with his statement though. It is not unanimous.


----------



## Mike Hughey (Jun 2, 2011)

Kirjava said:


> You can see how I could disagree with his statement though. It is not unanimous.



After rereading the thread, I suppose it isn't quite as one-sided as my initial impression was of it, but it's still mostly on the side that cell phones are not anything to worry about.


> Definition of CONSENSUS
> 1a : general agreement : unanimity <the consensus of their opinion, based on reports … from the border — John Hersey> b : the judgment arrived at by most of those concerned <the consensus was to go ahead>


Definition 1b is probably my primary use of the word. Certainly my initial impression on reading the thread was that it was agreed on by most of those concerned.

As for me, I think the bigger worry about cell phones from a public safety perspective is driving while using them. That surely currently has more impact on public health than any potential cancer risk, doesn't it?


----------

