Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 41
  1. mgauss's Avatar
    Posts
    743 Posts
    Global Posts
    745 Global Posts
       #1  
    See www.microwavenews.com


    From the Field

    September 29, 2005

    RF-Induced DNA Breaks Reported in China

    Research scientists in China have found that relatively low-level RF radiation can lead to DNA breaks, according to a briefing paper prepared for the cell phone industry obtained by Microwave News.

    At the 4th International Seminar on EMFs and Biological Effects, held in Kunming China, September 12-16, Zhengping Xu of the Zhejiang University School of Medicine reported that cells exposed to a pulsed 1800 MHz RF radiation at an SAR of 3 W/Kg for 24 hours showed a statistically significant increase in DNA damage. The Mobile Manufacturers Forum (MMF), an industry lobbying group based in Brussels, circulated the news in a September 22 Research Briefing.

    Xu’s Bioelectromagnetics Laboratory now joins a growing number of other labs that have found RF-induced DNA breaks. The effect was first reported more than a decade ago by Henry Lai and N.P. Singh of the University of Washington, Seattle (see MWN, N/D94). From the outset, Lai and Singh’s work has been repeatedly assailed by the cell phone industry and their consultants —most recently by Sheila Johnston and Vijayalaxmi, two members of the board of directors of the Bioelectromagnetics Society (see March 29 entry below. They ciaimed to have refuted the Lai-Singh findings.

    Last year, the European Union-sponsored REFLEX Project announced that 1800 MHz radiation could lead to DNA breaks. Those results were published this summer in Mutation Research.

    The MMF also noted that C.K. Chou of Motorola (a member of the MMF) complained at the meeting that it is difficult to publish “negative” results in China. (WHO ’s Mike Repacholi made a similar charge at the last Chinese EMF seminar held in Guilin in 2003, according to the MMF.) Xu disputed this, the MMF added.
  2. #2  
    I kept my Treo 600 in my left pants pocket and developed testicular cancer on the left side. My oncologist told me he does not carry a cell phone because he has a hunch there is some link.
  3. mgauss's Avatar
    Posts
    743 Posts
    Global Posts
    745 Global Posts
       #3  
    Your anecdotal case is scary but the real way to study the links is with epidimiological (population) studies. Right now the USA has not "wet a test tube" for 10 years to try to find the link. The $ 80 million reserved to study were spent by politicians, and not 1 test tube got wet. But the Chinese are on the case!

    Anyway www.microwavenews.com has a lot of the research and the reports.
  4. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by Monk
    I kept my Treo 600 in my left pants pocket and developed testicular cancer on the left side. My oncologist told me he does not carry a cell phone because he has a hunch there is some link.
    Are you being truthful? If you are that is not good, for any of us. What kinda band are you using (i.e. GSM or CDMA), for documetation purposes.
  5. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #5  
    I also wonder what kinda effects the RF have via MR. Shadowboxer this is your realm, and I would love to hear your answer on this subject.
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by NRG
    Are you being truthful? If you are that is not good, for any of us. What kinda band are you using (i.e. GSM or CDMA), for documetation purposes.

    I also would like to know if he's not kidding.
  7. vw2002's Avatar
    Posts
    904 Posts
    Global Posts
    939 Global Posts
    #7  
    yes, please fill us in, monk. was it a gsm or cdma phone?
    I gotta have more cowbell
  8. cec
    cec is offline
    cec's Avatar
    Posts
    290 Posts
    Global Posts
    291 Global Posts
    #8  
    Scary stuff. However, given the ubiquity of cell phones worldwide wouldn't one expect any significant health effect to manifest itself?
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by cec
    Scary stuff. However, given the ubiquity of cell phones worldwide wouldn't one expect any significant health effect to manifest itself?
    There may be longer-term impacts that won't be realized for decades.
    A new Avatar to commemorate Silly Season.
  10. #10  
    Pardon my ignorance... but what is a DNA "break"? Does it mean my kids may have extra arms... or that I grow extra arms myself?

    Does it matter how close your "equipment" is to your "equipment"? In Monk's case maybe they were too close together---- "Is that a treo in your pocket or are you happy to see me" jokes aside- I'm sure it was no laughing matter for him. This thread was about DNA problems, not cancer, but it does have me thinking.

    If I use a breast pocket for my cell, other than the danger of it falling out when I bend over, do I risk breast cancer? Will it help or hurt my heart, being so close? And what about BT headpieces that people put up to their brains all day long, might they be worse than cell phone handsets that are only placed against your head for the duration of the call?



    Here's a danger: My coworkers threatened to put weights in my old wired phone handset, a little at a time, so over time I would use more strength to answer calls, then they'd take all the weights out at once and I would slap that phone against my head with a thud... ouch!
    "Everybody Palm!"

    Palm III/IIIC, Palm Vx, Verizon: Treo 650, Centro, Pre+.
    Leo killed my future Pre 3 & Opal, dagnabitt!
    Should I buy a Handspring Visor instead?
    Got a Pre2! "It eats iPhones for Breakfast"!
  11. #11  
    I know it's hard work, but if you really want scientific and engineering based discussion on the use of CELL PHONES and human health (as opposed to bombarding loose cells in a petri dish with high levels of radiation over a long period of time), try the following site. Of course, if you really do keep your phone transmitting in high power mode (low signal strength) and strapped to the side of your head 24 hours a day, you might want to rethink your lifestyle.

    http://www.mcw.edu/gcrc/cop/cell-pho...h-FAQ/toc.html

    It reports the results of lots of studies on both sides of the issue, not just those on one side of the argument.

    But here's one excerpt: In 2004, the NRPB [217] reported that:

    "The widespread development in the use of mobile phones world-wide has not been accompanied by associated, clearly established increases in adverse health effects. "

    and

    "Epidemiological studies of radio frequency (RF) exposures and human cancers include studies of military and civilian occupational groups, people who live near television and radio transmitters, and users of mobile phones. Many types of cancer have been assessed, with particular attention given to leukemia and brain tumors. The epidemiological results fall short of the strength and consistency of evidence that is required to come to a conclusion that RF emissions are a cause of human cancer."

    "2004: Christensen et al [192] reported that use of mobile phones was not associated with an increased risk of acoustic neuromas (a benign brain tumor) in Denmark. These results are similar to those in the 2002 Muscat et al study [127] except that the Danish Study is slightly larger and includes more people with 5+ years of mobile phone use"

    "2004: Hardell et al [208] reported that use of mobile phones and/or cordless phones in Sweden was not associated with an increased risk of salivary gland tumors. "

    "2005: Lönn et al [227] reported that regular use, or long-term (greater than 10 years) use, or heavy (greater than 500 hours) use of mobile phones (analog or digital) was not associated with an increase in the incidence of malignant brain tumors. In fact, the incidence of these tumors was slightly less than expected (see figure below). The incidence of tumors in the parts of the brain where exposure to RF energy would be the highest was also slightly less than expected in long-term users of mobile phones (see figure below). "
    Bob Meyer
    I'm out of my mind. But feel free to leave a message.
  12. #12  
    Live dangerously die young have a good looking corpse, Treo forever!
  13. #13  
    Very true. Luckily it's about 99% curable in the stage I had it.

    I think that some people are more at risk to cancer than others, but that environmental factors certainly can contribute.

    My recommendation? If the phone is in your pocket, turn the radio off. Don't leave docked on your nightstand next to the bed. Reduce your exposure when possible. That's what I do. I still need a cell phone, but I keep

    The jury is still out on cell phone radiation exposure.

    Here's a thread I participated in on tc-cancer.com

    http://www.tc-cancer.com/forum/showt...ght=cell+phone
  14. TreoBoss's Avatar
    Posts
    19 Posts
    Global Posts
    30 Global Posts
    #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by Monk
    Very true. Luckily it's about 99% curable in the stage I had it.

    I think that some people are more at risk to cancer than others, but that environmental factors certainly can contribute.

    My recommendation? If the phone is in your pocket, turn the radio off. Don't leave docked on your nightstand next to the bed. Reduce your exposure when possible. That's what I do. I still need a cell phone, but I keep

    The jury is still out on cell phone radiation exposure.

    Here's a thread I participated in on tc-cancer.com

    http://www.tc-cancer.com/forum/showt...ght=cell+phone
    None of your links seem to be working for me..
  15. sledgie's Avatar
    Posts
    497 Posts
    Global Posts
    501 Global Posts
    #15  
    and lowest SAR whenever possible, which is why i use the lowest phone on the cdma market! Audiovox 6600
    on a side note, not to brush the information off, but current phones have 1.6W/kg maximum exposure, and i believe the treo was pretty high on the list, around 1.31 if i remember correctly. best is to use cell phones the least amount possible, and use wired or BT headsets when possible. i believe the lowest BT headsets are around 0.06W/kg and a little higher.
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by sledgie
    and lowest SAR whenever possible, which is why i use the lowest phone on the cdma market! Audiovox 6600
    on a side note, not to brush the information off, but current phones have 1.6W/kg maximum exposure, and i believe the treo was pretty high on the list, around 1.31 if i remember correctly. best is to use cell phones the least amount possible, and use wired or BT headsets when possible. i believe the lowest BT headsets are around 0.06W/kg and a little higher.
    wow I'm going to start exclusively using my BT headset from now on.
  17. #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by duanedude1
    Pardon my ignorance... but what is a DNA "break"? Does it mean my kids may have extra arms... or that I grow extra arms myself?
    Cells are continually replicating themselves, and on a frequent basis mistakes are made, for various reasons including the effects of radiation. However, the immune system is constantly fighting these 'rogue' cells. However, if you are unlucky this safety mechanism might fail to destroy a group of rapidly replicating 'rogue' cells and it becomes a tumour.

    If mobile phones increases the frequency that this happens, then potentially there is a greater risk that a group of 'rogue' cells might slip through the net and develop into a tumour.
  18. #18  
    Inducing "DNA Breaks" and cancer are not mutually exclusive. Many factors can cause the "DNA Breaks." Remember the sun causes "DNA Breaks." That doesn't mean that everyone who is exposed to the sun for the same period of time will get cancer. There are too many other environmental/genetic factors that and lead to cancers.
  19. NRG
    NRG is offline
    NRG's Avatar
    Posts
    3,657 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,670 Global Posts
    #19  
    I think Neutrinos "break DNA" as well. Interesting little buggers.

    http://www.phys.hawaii.edu/~jgl/graphics/neutrino.gif
  20. #20  
    This is an interesting conversation--really--and having had a number of friends of family who are either dead due to cancer or cancer survivors, I don't mean to make light of Monk's disease or recovery, but all the same, what does this have to do with a Windows Mobile Treo as opposed to any other cell phone?
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions