Study Says No Cancer Link From Mobile Phones... But Don't Expect The Controversy To Die
from the it-just-won't-die dept
The debate over whether cellphones cause cancer has been an endless game of scientific ping-pong, where a study will spring up supporting the conclusion, only to quickly be contradicted by a study that disagrees. A new Danish study tracked 420,095 people who've been using mobile phones for up to two decades or more, and found absolutely no evidence of a substantial cancer risk. The study is the largest yet disproving any cancer link, but the debate over the topic is like a b-horror film villain, who just keeps popping up after you're sure the last blow killed him. Science means little to the significant number of people who have made cancer via wireless their personal techno-bogeyman, so no study in the world is likely to change their minds and put this debate in the morgue.Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
I'll never live to find out...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Only if...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There aren't many affirmative studies...
Of course, there will always be those people who say "science doesn't know everything". But the only reason they think it could cause cancer is because it's a form of "radiation", and science says "radiation causes cancer". A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: There aren't many affirmative studies...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Other obscure but real dangers
The stairway may collapse on your way down. A fish bowl or glass jar next to the window in the kitchen may start a lens-effect fire, which starts a backdraft in the kitchen, and you may promptly die in a fiery explosion as you open the door. A metal bowl left on the porch may similarly start a fire. That's if an overhead electric wire doesn't come crashing through the window and electrocute you, and an escaped zoo animal does not jump out of your closet when you reach for your jacket.
If you go to a yoga class, you may die of positional asphyxiation, as a vasovagal effect suddenly kicks in while bent over. Whenever you enter a building, the difference in air pressure between the building may cause the door to decapitate you. That's if a truck carrying commercial bee hives doesn't overturn in front of you, causing thousands of angry bees to descend on you. A spontaneous mutation among the 1 trillion bacteria that live on your skin may turn into a flesh-melting infection. That's if you do not succumb to the 1-in-6 lifetime probability of prostate cancer, and you die leaking blood out of your dick. That's if your cell phone battery does not spontaneously explode and spray hot acid all over your face, and the workplace air conditioner does not get contaminated with Legionnaire bacteria, causing you to die from pneumonia.
Your computer's DVD drive may spit out a spinning disc that slices your carotid artery, or a falling aircraft component may crack your skull. A smokehouse barbecue grill may cause you to die from carbon monoxide poisoning, while a sewer may spontaneously explode from methane accumulation and bring a manhole cover come flying down on top of you. That's if the street doesn't spontaneously collapse, so you fall into the sewer and die, or a window cleaning rack doesn't come falling down on top of you. Police may mistake you for a criminal and shoot you, an ambulance may run you over, a stranger from the internet may mistake you for someone else and shoot you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Other obscure but real dangers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Other obscure but real dangers
actually they fixed that problem and it wasn't the intact disc that was the problem it was the shrapnel from a shattered disc that was spun too rapidly. that's why there's a fixed limit on how fast the disc can spin in the drive :)
Whenever you enter a building, the difference in air pressure between the building may cause the door to decapitate you.
have you ever seen and used a door? or maybe you're just 7 feet tall...
That's if a truck carrying commercial bee hives doesn't overturn in front of you, causing thousands of angry bees to descend on you.
o.O where the hell are you getting these examples? you started out strong but c'mon... now you're stretching it...
A fish bowl or glass jar next to the window in the kitchen may start a lens-effect fire, which starts a backdraft in the kitchen, and you may promptly die in a fiery explosion as you open the door. That's if an overhead electric wire doesn't come crashing through the window and electrocute you, and an escaped zoo animal does not jump out of your closet when you reach for your jacket.
now that's all just funny :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Other obscure but real dangers
http://dailysoy.blogspot.com/2004_03_01_dailysoy_archive.html
[bees]o.O where the hell are you getting these examples? you started out strong but c'mon... now you're stretching it...
http://www.abc.net.au/news/australia/sa/renmark/200501/s1277441.htm
http://www.osp.state .or.us/html/march_26__2002.html
A fish bowl or glass jar next to the window in the kitchen may start a lens-effect fire
You're the physics guy. What happens when a spherical object with a positive refraction index is placed next to a curtain in sunlight?
http://www.primitiveways.com/ice-fire.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Other obscure but real dangers
You're the physics guy. What happens when a spherical object with a positive refraction index is placed next to a curtain in sunlight?
This will probably be one of the few times I agree with dorpus, but yes, it can happen.
Pagan friend + sunworship + crystal ball in living room in direct sunlight = house burned to the ground and me laughing at (& with) said pagan friend.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cancer? Who cares?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Cancer? Who cares?
Cancer is not fun.
Who cares? I do, my spouse, kids, grandkids...etc..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Backgroiund Noise?
It appears that none of the studies showing hazards from non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation (cellphones, power lines etc) turns out to be reproducible. When one study claims to find a link, others try to repeat it, but come up empty.
It seems to me that these random intermittent positive results are nothing more than background noise. They are purely chance correlations, which is why they cannot be reproduced. They are of the level of spurious positive results you would expect if there is no hazard.
This pattern has been repeated for about 20 years now. If there really were a hazard, then so many years of hunting for it would have turned it up quite unambiguously by now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Backgroiund Noise?
It is also known as the alpha level, which is the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis given that the null hypothesis is true. By convention, alpha is set to 0.05. (i.e. you can expect 1 out of 20 scientific papers to be wrong, by chance alone.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Backgroiund Noise?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Other obscure but real dangers
i'm well aware this is a possible scenario, that's what makes it funny...
the rotating door didn't decapitate the kid, it crushed his skull. nobody died from the bee truck incident (frankly i'm amazed that one was a true story...)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Other obscure but real dangers
He is talking possibilities, and it is valid, I had to haul live bees for a job once, they had to be in the cab. I have never driven so cautiously in my life.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Other obscure but real dangers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
nice waffle wording there
With wording like that, you can say that even when there is undeniable evidence of increased cancer risk and still be right.
This is the best way to decrease the dangers of cell phone drivers (who as we know are a substantial risk to all other drivers, worse than legally drunk drivers). Kill them with cancer that is not substantial and the problem solves itself. It is their right to expose their brain to not-substantial cancer risk. Hooray for freedom.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No significant...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Danish Cancer Study
http://www.electromagneticradiationblues.com/Newsletters/12-2006_web.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Do we have to wait?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Duh...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]