I just read an article on the FDA review of this research. Unless the FDA is wrong about their methodology, the research can be dismissed as worthless. They got their data from responses to a mailed survey. Self selection is an obvious problem here.
http://tinyurl.com/nf7o7 <quote> The Food and Drug Administration said that finding was inconsistent with the conclusions reached by other studies and pointed out several shortcomings, including the design of the study, which was conducted by surveys distributed by mail, and the lack of supporting data from laboratory animals. That makes the conclusion "difficult to interpret," the FDA said on its Web site. <end quote> Dan M. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of The Fool > Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2006 9:05 PM > To: Killer Bs Discussion > Subject: Re: Another study show cell-phone tumor link > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > In a message dated 3/31/2006 6:28:23 PM Eastern Daylight Time, > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > > A total 85 of these 905 cases were so-called high users of mobile > > > phones, that is they began early to use mobile and, or wireless > > > telephones and used them a lot," the study said. > > > "The study also shows that the rise in risk is noticeable for > tumors on > > > the side of the head where the phone was said to be used," it > added. > > > Kjell Mild, who led the study, said the figures meant that heavy > users > > > of mobile phones, for instance of who make mobile phone calls for > 2,000 > > > hours or more in their life, had a 240 percent increased risk for a > > > malignant tumor on the side of the head the phone is used. > > > > The relationship between location of tumor and side of phone use > would have > > to be more than noticable. It should be incredibly strong. For > instance > > radiation therapy can induce brain tumors but it occurs in the > radiiation field and > > at the site where the radiation enters the skull. The inverse square > rule would > > have to hold. In addition there has to be a mechanism by which the > radiation > > causes mutations. I no of no evidence that the energy associated > with cell > > phone use can cause cellular damage in particular since it must first > penetrate > > the skin and skull. I think this is like the famous power line > causing cancer > > myth. While there certainly can be unknown effects these effects > cannot be > > mystical. If brain tumors are more frequent then there must be energy > that can > > cause mutations. This energy must get to the brain cells in the way > that all > > energy does; that is it must obey the rules of physics. > > <<http://www.mccmedia.com/pipermail/brin-l/Week-of-Mon-20041011/008449.h > tml>> > > "Acoustic neuromas are slow-growing noncancerous tumors that develop on > a nerve linking the brain and the inner ear." > > ""We looked at DNA damage in animals, not in humans, and found that > cell phone radiation can damage DNA," he said. The body's immune system > has the ability to repair DNA breaks, but sometimes it can make a > mistake and cause a mutation, which could be the first step toward > cancer, Lai said." > > _______________________________________________ > http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
