Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Brain Cancer [From cell phones]
- Thread starter Orangeman13
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Respectfully...You are in the wrong place to spread that nonsense.
You're in the wrong place to declare nonsense...
Whenever I see the phrase "think about it," I anticipate some crazed conspiracy theory that's likely to follow.
Walkie Talkies also send out radiation for miles. As do ham radios. Lanterns send out radiation in the form of light. It's all in the dose, and although it's not conclusive, it seems that for most people in most use-scenarios there is not enough radiation to raise one's cancer risk significantly (particularly above other environmental risks).
Cigarette smoking exploded in the US with the invention of the machine rolled cigarette and the free distribution of cigarettes to WW 1 soldiers as part of their rations. It peaked in the late 1950s, early 1960 which was just after the UK version of the Surgeon General Report came out which implicated smoking as the main cause of lung cancer (the US version would come out a few years later). The increase in lung cancer rates, a formerly rare disease, paralleled the increase in smoking at a 20 year lag.
Nearly everyone in the world owns a cellphone. Per capita cellphone ownership is higher (near 100%) than peak smoking rates. This trend started heading upward around the mid 1990s. One would expect, some 20 years later, to see a corresponding explosion of brain cancer.
"FORTUNE — During the 1980s, just as Americans began pumping low-frequency radiation through their skulls with cell phones, brain cancer rates in the U.S. slowly increased. At the beginning of the decade, doctors delivered the devastating diagnosis of brain cancer to 63 out of every 1 million Americans every year; by 1990 that number had risen to 70 per million. And that’s when cell phone usage really took off.
"Yet while the link between phones and tumors may have seemed certain to grow, a strange thing happened. Beginning in 1991 the rate of brain cancer incidence reversed course and began to slowly fall. By 2008, the last year for which the National Cancer Institute has data, 65 out of every 1 million Americans got a brain cancer diagnosis annually."
So brain cancer rates have not changed significantly over the same period. (And I wonder whether the downward trend of smoking among women beginning in the late 1960s, early 1970s -- their peak years -- accounts for some of the 20-year-later downward trend of brain cancer.)
Study cited in wikipedia:
In 2006, a large Danish group's study about the connection between mobile phone use and cancer incidence was published. It followed over 420,000 Danish citizens for 20 years and showed no increased risk of cancer.[22] A 2011 follow-up confirmed these findings.[23]
You can read more studies below. Most find no association. A few do. Like I said, it's not conclusive but you're probably more at risk for dying from heart disease and/or diabetes from the typical American diet than brain cancer from typical cellphone use.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phone_radiation_and_health#Cancer
A PhD in cellular biology yet spelling, punctuation, and grammar errors? I'm the President.
I also noticed that after At least two of us who have access to the ERIC database that he is claiming the peer reviewed research is in asked him to cite it he has gone from being fairly active in this thread to not posting anything for a couple hours.
It's already been proven in hundreds of studies that cell service does not cause brain damage.
As noted above, the RF waves given off by cell phones don’t have enough energy to damage DNA directly or to heat body tissues. Because of this, many scientists believe that cell phones aren’t able to cause cancer. Most studies done in the lab have supported this theory, finding that RF waves do not cause DNA damage.
http://m.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/cellular-phones
You people can no longer post nonsense without being challenged!!!!
As noted above, the RF waves given off by cell phones don’t have enough energy to damage DNA directly or to heat body tissues. Because of this, many scientists believe that cell phones aren’t able to cause cancer. Most studies done in the lab have supported this theory, finding that RF waves do not cause DNA damage.
http://m.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/athome/cellular-phones
You people can no longer post nonsense without being challenged!!!!
Learn to science . This is common sense amongst the intellectuals that your cell phone does not give you brain cancer.
Respectfully...
You're in the wrong place to declare nonsense...
CAUTION!! this post will give you brain cancer
One of my closest friends is a neurologist at one of the best hospitals in my city. He actually treats people with brain tumors every day--and many of them are terminal. He uses an iPhone next to ear all the time.
I'm not saying there isn't a possibility that a cellular phone can cause cancer, but I believe that the people who might be affected are vanishingly small. I don't think we would be able to do very much if we couldn't tolerate even the slightest risk.
What does the evidence say?
There have been many studies looking for a possible link, but a lot of them are small or have problems with their design. However there have been a few larger studies that, while they also have some problems, help to give us a clearer idea of where the evidence is pointing.
The IARC decision in 2011 was mainly based on the results of two sets of studies - research conducted by the Swedish Hardell group and a very large international study called InterPhone - but it's important to remember that IARC didn't feel this was enough hard evidence to come to a decision.
The Hardell studies suggest a link between using a mobile phone and a few specific types of brain tumour, particularly in heavier users. The InterPhone study, which included over 6,000 people across 13 countries, largely found no link between mobiles and brain tumours, apart from in the ten percent of people who used their phones the most - but this could be explained by problems with the study design.
Each of these studies has its own drawbacks, and they are also both case-control studies, that are less reliable as they ask patients and people without the disease to remember back over time about how and when they used mobile phones. But they may not be able to accurately remember the details about their phone use. And, more importantly, some people's answers may be subconsciously affected by their beliefs about mobile phones and cancer. Brain tumours could also affect study participants' memory or cause other symptoms, like effects on hearing, that could affect mobile phone use.
There is a more reliable type of study, known as a cohort study, which instead asks people about their habits and then follows them up over a period of time to see who develops a particular disease and then looks for patterns. There have been two notable cohort studies on mobile phones and brain tumours published since the IARC meeting.
The largest study so far on mobile phones and cancer is part of the Million Women Study and included around 790,000 women. It found no link between use of mobile phones and brain tumours or 18 other types of cancer. There was also no increased risk for most types of brain tumour, including the two most common (glioma and meningioma). But they did see a raised risk of one rare type of brain tumour (acoustic neuroma) for women who had used mobile phones for at least five years. But in an update to the findings, based on including another two years of data in their analysis, there was no longer a raised risk of acoustic neuroma.
And a Danish cohort study based on mobile phone subscriber data, which looked at over 420,000 people, found no link between mobile phones and any type of cancer including acoustic neuroma, other brain tumours and leukaemia.
Interestingly, a case-control study on acoustic neuroma from a different Swedish group, published in 2014, suggested that people who use mobile phones are more likely to notice symptoms of acoustic neuroma, such as hearing loss, and be diagnosed. So mobile phone use could increase the chance of having the disease detected but not affect the chance of developing it in the first place.
Research in this field is still ongoing and we will continue to look for any new evidence.
There have been many studies looking for a possible link, but a lot of them are small or have problems with their design. However there have been a few larger studies that, while they also have some problems, help to give us a clearer idea of where the evidence is pointing.
The IARC decision in 2011 was mainly based on the results of two sets of studies - research conducted by the Swedish Hardell group and a very large international study called InterPhone - but it's important to remember that IARC didn't feel this was enough hard evidence to come to a decision.
The Hardell studies suggest a link between using a mobile phone and a few specific types of brain tumour, particularly in heavier users. The InterPhone study, which included over 6,000 people across 13 countries, largely found no link between mobiles and brain tumours, apart from in the ten percent of people who used their phones the most - but this could be explained by problems with the study design.
Each of these studies has its own drawbacks, and they are also both case-control studies, that are less reliable as they ask patients and people without the disease to remember back over time about how and when they used mobile phones. But they may not be able to accurately remember the details about their phone use. And, more importantly, some people's answers may be subconsciously affected by their beliefs about mobile phones and cancer. Brain tumours could also affect study participants' memory or cause other symptoms, like effects on hearing, that could affect mobile phone use.
There is a more reliable type of study, known as a cohort study, which instead asks people about their habits and then follows them up over a period of time to see who develops a particular disease and then looks for patterns. There have been two notable cohort studies on mobile phones and brain tumours published since the IARC meeting.
The largest study so far on mobile phones and cancer is part of the Million Women Study and included around 790,000 women. It found no link between use of mobile phones and brain tumours or 18 other types of cancer. There was also no increased risk for most types of brain tumour, including the two most common (glioma and meningioma). But they did see a raised risk of one rare type of brain tumour (acoustic neuroma) for women who had used mobile phones for at least five years. But in an update to the findings, based on including another two years of data in their analysis, there was no longer a raised risk of acoustic neuroma.
And a Danish cohort study based on mobile phone subscriber data, which looked at over 420,000 people, found no link between mobile phones and any type of cancer including acoustic neuroma, other brain tumours and leukaemia.
Interestingly, a case-control study on acoustic neuroma from a different Swedish group, published in 2014, suggested that people who use mobile phones are more likely to notice symptoms of acoustic neuroma, such as hearing loss, and be diagnosed. So mobile phone use could increase the chance of having the disease detected but not affect the chance of developing it in the first place.
Research in this field is still ongoing and we will continue to look for any new evidence.
You have a PhD in cell biology yet you seem to lack the skills entailed in such a qualification. Scientific research is founded on evidence-based reasonings and testable hypotheses, yet what you are doing here is spreading FUD. Studies have been done on this topic and have been shown to be inconclusive. If you are going to make an argument like this, at least provide some citations to existing literatures so we can have a meaningful discussion. (but I'm sure that would be too inconvenient for you)
Let's not forget all the fumes you inhale while you're driving your car daily and enjoying that intoxicating aroma of gas as you fuel up! Never mind all the pesticides and pharmaceuticals that are in food these days. I could give two craps about radiation from my phone that is nothing compared to sitting in the sun on the beach for 6 hours. I have better things to worry about.
I rarely use my mobile device as a phone. Mostly speakerphone, headset. Everything else is texting, web and all that.
I'm getting the feeling that he is a freshman in college, chose a random database from his school's library and hoped that nobody here would have access to it, and now that some people do is running away instead of providing a source.
28 people out of 100,000 were shot last year. And every one of them was shot with a gun of some type. And that's conclusive, no questions about it. Yet we don't get rid of guns.
2,575 people out of 100,000 were injured or killed in automobile accidents last year. All conclusively related to motor vehicle use. No study needed. Yet we don't get rid of automobiles.
Perhaps concentration should be places on conclusive proven higher value targets of concern. As opposed to stirring up nonsensical, inconclusive, low volume possibilities. And Mr. PhD OP should first avoid all guns and automobiles while he studies cell phone induced brain tumors, as statistics show he is at much higher risk getting run over after being shot.
What you all think?
Oh, and I got my data by asking Siri on my iPhone and some simple math assuming US population of 350 million. And I only have a Masters Degree ........ in science.
2,575 people out of 100,000 were injured or killed in automobile accidents last year. All conclusively related to motor vehicle use. No study needed. Yet we don't get rid of automobiles.
Perhaps concentration should be places on conclusive proven higher value targets of concern. As opposed to stirring up nonsensical, inconclusive, low volume possibilities. And Mr. PhD OP should first avoid all guns and automobiles while he studies cell phone induced brain tumors, as statistics show he is at much higher risk getting run over after being shot.
What you all think?
Oh, and I got my data by asking Siri on my iPhone and some simple math assuming US population of 350 million. And I only have a Masters Degree ........ in science.
Last edited:
Hey, paid tens of thousands for each letter. Let them brag, after all after they get home from working at Burger King can't afford much else with that massive student loan.
I have a PhD from BSU*, and it's just a legit as yours from Syracuse bc we're both anonymous internet entities.
*Bull **** University
With all of the microwave radiation flying around us all the time, it's a wonder we don't all burst into flames.
If that's true--everyone will have cancer in twenty years!
You're saying that like it's something we should be observing right now. Like we should know exactly right this moment whether or not someone will develop cancer 20 years from now and that we don't know that it's obviously not true.
I have to wonder if you saw this being referred to with an Android phone if you'd be more receptive to it
I highly doubt it considering if one cell phone is dangerous they all are. However at the most the research is inconclusive, and it appears there is no link.
Seriously, it's all about the studies. If the studies don't say it, it's impossible.
At the end of the day, we can't use common sense in deciding whether or not placing devices that emit radiation on our heads is good or bad.
Seriously, who needs a study to make a decision about this? Use speakerphone. Done.
At the end of the day, we can't use common sense in deciding whether or not placing devices that emit radiation on our heads is good or bad.
Seriously, who needs a study to make a decision about this? Use speakerphone. Done.