Ominous Study: Kids Using Cell Phones Five Times More Likely to Get Cancer
Posted 09/23/08 at 04:30:41 PM | by Paul Lilly
The way things are shaping up, you might as well take your cell phone and toss it in a river. That is, if you put much stock into the most recent studies. Yesterday we learned that the quality of our little olympic swimmers (yes, even Maximum PC's sperm is hardcore) might turn out to be duds if forced to sit in close proximity to our cell phones while in talk mode, and in another blow to procreation, another study has emerged suggesting that mobile phone users under 20 years of age may be more susceptible to cancer.
Professor Lennart Hardell from the University Hospital in Orebo Sweden conducted the study and found a five-fold increase in particular types of cancer, including brain cancer (glioma) and cancer of the auditory nerve, among sub-20 year olds who use mobile phones. And when it comes to young children, he warns that the thinner and still developing skulls makes kids more susceptible to electromagnetic radiation.
This isn't the first time the safety of cell phone use has come into question, and likely won't be the last given the conflicting results. Last year a study in Denmark failed to show any connection between mobile phone use and the onset of cancer among the 420,000 participants involved.
Are cell phones safe? Hit the jump and post your thoughts.
Image Credit: Eco Warrior
Comments
Print
Email
I always use hardline phones
Submitted by hogkill on Wed, 2008-09-24 07:08
I always use hardline phones anyhow, cellphones are for women.
Submitted by Queenof1 on Thu, 2008-09-25 15:07
the "queen" in my username doesn't mean that I'm female :/
Dude!!! :) ROFLOL I do
Submitted by Wildebeast on Thu, 2008-09-25 11:24
Dude!!! :)
ROFLOL
I do enjoy a good totally non-PC comment. It must be the male WASP in me (like that leaves me anything else to be).
Cell Phone causes cancer, Take 2.
Submitted by Talcum X on Wed, 2008-09-24 05:25
I thought this went away with the 80's. The reason is sprung up back then is those phones were analog and had HUGE batteries to continuously keep in contact with the towers. These days, we have digital phones, lot smaller batteries as they dont have to braudcast constatantly and with much less power. Now, we do have headsets and the such, but wouldnt that lessen the "effect" as the actual phone is away from the body (or melon in this case). We as a society are bombarded with RF waves and electromagnetic fields every day of our lives, from radio, TV, braudcast antennas of all sorts, power lines ( that one was a big topic in the 90's) We cant escape our technology unless you want to live like Grizzly Adams, which by the way, wouldn't bother me a bit.
***********
Every morning is the dawn of a new error.
"In Ireland, there are more drunks per capita than people." - Peter Griffin
Submitted by Wildebeast on Tue, 2008-09-23 22:34
The signal to/from a celular phone is a form of radiation. If you're holding the antenna next to your head, you get 100,000x the radiation exposure that you get if the same antenna is an arm's length away.
He also told us that there was a study in the '80s that said cell phone users had a tendancy to develope brain tumors, which happened to usually occur right near where the antenna sat, when they talked on the phone. They stopped talking about the study, because they [I've no clue who "they" might be] decided the people who use the phones just didn't care about the risk(s). (Remember, it really was a luxury, back then.)
Maybe he was just repeating Urban Legends [outside his area of expertise], with the force of his expertise behind it --because, in my experience, Profs do tend to that. Maybe the technology has changed, so that this is less of a problem...
In any case, the argument for "dangerous radiation," makes sense to me. I don't want to be like the elderly people who had been life-long smokers in the '70s & '80's ---and find out that my 40 year habit has been slowly killing me. It could well take that long, to find get medical proof for/against this idea.
If you want to find out how much risk there is, find out how many minutes OSHA allows cell tower repair guys to spend within 25 feet of the junk at the top of the tower. (remember how many minutes you spend on the phone, each month)
Until/unless they improve the technology, all you really need to do to reduce the risk is not hold stuff like within a foot of your head.
Also, person's under 20 are generally accepted to get more damage from the same exposure, because their bodies are still developing.
If you wonder, in any case, the shorter range wireless network signals are all lower risk --in proportion to their signal range--- so much lower risk.
so, my wireless router is
Submitted by AndyYankee17 on Wed, 2008-09-24 15:36
so, my wireless router is between my feet right now, should I throw on some lead underwear?
http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/radiation_lectures/introrfr_1.ppt
couldn't info about time limits within 25 feet.
by the way, don't know when that presentation was made but judging by images long time ago.
Submitted by Wildebeast on Thu, 2008-09-25 12:03
That looks like some (somewhat cheap, or at least quick & dirty) college student's power-point slide show. The equation is there, on page 31. The diagram is there, on page 64. I don't see anything that says what the Exposure Limit (EL) is, or remotely ties R1 and R2 to EL, ML, or PG though. (No clue what PG is.) No mention of the OSHA recommendation...
I guess, according to that, you're fine --until you literally "begin to hear a clicking sound..."
http://www.osha.gov/SLTC/radiofrequencyradiation/hazards.html
"Talcum X" could be totally correct about a major reduction of broadcast power in the newer technology. People should still be given the same quality of warnings they'd get from a step-ladder or a lawn mower, though.
We should know how long it's advisable to allow a 12 year old to go around with the thing "glued to their head."
It looks as though all the real numbers are tied to specific model numbers from various manufacturers. I really can't believe that when they install or work on an antenna, they have no recommendation at all.
To be compleatly safe, you might want to have a sheild in your chair seat. Maybe something in Mylar? (You know you like the mylar...)
You can risk your junk, however you like. I really do think people should be appraised of the risk levels, though.
Submitted by yagisencho on Tue, 2008-09-23 20:57
I don't know if cellular phones cause cancer, but I know that my head gets warm and begins to throb near the spot where I hold the phone if I speak on it for more than a couple minutes at a time.
So...less cell phone use == goodness in my book.
Submitted by Queenof1 on Tue, 2008-09-23 17:42
I'm not sure about the cancer claim, but anything overdone is not good for you. I mean, think about it - cellphones were a convenience - a quick call to wifey from hubby because he forgot the shopping list, overproctive mom wondering where irresponsible teen brat is, calling the tow truck because car won't start. It can't be healthy holding up a phone to ear all day, just like it's not good for anyone to have loud music constantly blasting in his ears (think headsets with volume way up) or eating fast food 3x a day for the rest of your life.
What about those folks running around with the bloo-toof on their ears like erstaz fbi agents? Isn't that thing transmitting something even though one may not be on a call at the time?
Submitted by Vegan on Tue, 2008-09-23 17:01
Call me an old geezer for what I'm about to say (I'm 26), but I can't stand it when I see kids as young as 6 with cell phones. They do NOT need those. Spoiled brats. I don't know, maybe I'm jealous because I didn't have things like cell phones and Wikipedia and broadband when I was in school. Hell, I didnt' even HAVE the Internet until I was a senior. Oh, the missed opportunities... Now get off my lawn (that I don't have because I live in the Big City)!
Submitted by Queenof1 on Tue, 2008-09-23 17:49
I agree with you about pre-schoolers having cellphones. (If you are old I must be ancient!) However, I made the decision for my 'tween to have a cellphone because I need my sanity. 1. My son would always miss his curfew to come in the house. No amount of punishment could fix this. Enter cellphone-buddy. I call, and within minutes he's in the house. 2. I can't stand his sperm donor. I do not wish to talk to him ever. When he's feeling like a responsible father, he wants to talk to my son. With cellphone-buddy, he can call him direct. Mom keeps sanity. Everyone is happy.
PS Said cellphone-buddy is the Firefly with parental controls. There will be no constant yakking on this phone!
Submitted by sdcat on Tue, 2008-09-23 16:25
Everything may cause cancer includng yourself it is a sadly fact, the question here is do you want to increase the chance of getting one or more?
Submitted by Budgetperson on Tue, 2008-09-23 16:21
Don't kill me for this - but they definetly can cause cancer.
Dr. Mercola on www.mercola.com has posted a lot about this. It is on other sides too.
The water thing.. well... that may be a bit out of hand :P.
Submitted by AndyYankee17 on Tue, 2008-09-23 15:24
it's all bullshit, radiowaves do not cause cancer. you don't hear of DJs dropping dead from brain tumers do you?
Submitted by hogkill on Wed, 2008-09-24 07:10
yes you do.
Just about everything modern
Submitted by avanish11 on Tue, 2008-09-23 14:49
Just about everything modern somehow causes cancer. Toner, Cell phones, TV, coke, Computers, some plastics, etc. Hell, even water might be added to the list
Submitted by marudd2002 on Tue, 2008-09-23 15:07
Drinking a bottled water that went from cool or cold to warm or hot with the cap closed may lead to cancer and/or other illnesses, even if the water is back to cool when you drink it. Yummy right? I love my tap water and all it's wonderfulness (even the trace amounts of prescription and non-prescription medicines and vitamins recently found in it).
----
Fanboys are annoying. Price/Performance is top priority. Patience=Awesome.
Submitted by avanish11 on Tue, 2008-09-23 15:42
Yeah that just proves my point even further. The so called "analysists" need to stop doing these pointless studies
RESOURCE CENTER
MOST COMMENTED ARTICLES
NewsNew Forceware 180.48 Drivers Released, Claims up to 80% Improvement, Enables SLI Multi-Monitor Support
1 NEW COMMENT(S) | 29 TOTAL COMMENTS
FeaturesRip DVDs for Playback on Your iPhone, PSP, Xbox 360, PS3, AppleTV, or Any H.264-Enabled Player
2 NEW COMMENT(S) | 25 TOTAL COMMENTS
THIS MONTH's ISSUE 
FEATURE Windows Tips: Find out what works and what doesn't as we test the most commonly prescribed Windows tipsHOW TO Customize and streamline your Windows desktop Core i7 Check out Intel's next-gen chip, up close and personal The Reactor We preview the first production-ready oil-immersed PC
Technology News
Computer Cooling Fans
Computer Cases
PC Game Controllers
PC Games
Computer Hardware
Headphones
MP3 Players
Stream Video
Computer Mouse
Monitors
Motherboards
NAS Storage
Networking
Laptop Computers
DVD Burner
Digital Cameras
Portable Storage
Computer Accessories
Smartphone
Antivirus Software
Sound Cards
Speakers
Computer Systems
Thumb Drives
Video Cameras
Video Card Reviews
Water Cooling
Gadgets
- Keyboards
© 2008 Future US, Inc. All Rights Reserved.