I've been reading with interest this discussion and appreciate those of you who have provided sources of research and data regarding this topic. One thing that does bother me is the un-substantiated and un-trackable claims and suppositions made by some. This only gives fuel to the misinformation and hysteria culture in our media.
There are people who claim, with full sincerity, that they have been abducted and probed by aliens. There are people who claim to have seen Big Foot, and have photos. There are people who claim to have seen the Loch Ness Monster, and have photos. There are people who claim to have seen a puff of smoke on the grassy knoll. There are people who claim that smoking causes lung cancer and heart disease. There are people who claim that a diet with too many calories and too little exercise causes obesity. There are people who claim that use of seat belts save lives. There are people who claim that use of bicycle helmets reduce brain injuries. People can make many claims -- some valid and some not, and many have evidence to prove their claim. Most people will believe what they want to believe and filter whatever information they receive to prove their point. (How many people keep smoking, drinking, doing drugs, over eating, not wearing seat belts, etc. regardless of the evidence that these things are harmful to one's health?) The more aggressive ones will take that filtered message and use it to promote their beliefs without regard to contradicting data. They can always point to the 110 year old person who smoked all of their life and ate any and every thing they wanted. If the government or big business was ever involved, at any time in history, in a cover-up or conspiracy, then everything that does not fit into a persons belief about a topic becomes a cover-up or a conspiracy. (Too many X-Files episodes.) People overstate their position to allow for compromise. If I want to slow down logging of the virgin forests, I call for a complete ban on logging. If I want to clear cut a section of land, I point to all the remaining trees in the world. If I want to sell my product for $10, I put a list price of $13 on it and put it on sale. Whenever any claims are made, one needs to look at the whole picture. Who is making the claim and what are the possible motivations behind those claims. Do they stand to gain personally from their position (financial, political power, promotion, public attention). There are also a lot of well meaning, but misguided individuals that do not take the time to become informed about the subject to which they are committed. True researchers don't come to conclusions or make claims until all the data is collected, all the variables are factored out, and proper conclusions are able to be made. Credible reporters don't report on incomplete test data/results or improperly conducted research. (Of course that narrows down the field significantly.) That is not to say that certain precautions should not be taken when there is reason to suspect a risk. But we should be wary of those who speak the loudest and most. Snake oil comes in many sizes and shapes of bottles. React but don't over-react. Stephen Covey, in his "Seven Habits" books discusses the pause between action and reaction. The more time between the two events, the better and more appropriate the reaction. True research takes time. Besides, I have more concern about the number of deaths caused by people using cell phones while driving. Life is too important to be taken this seriously. Just my nickel's worth. 'Nuff said. OO The previous is just my opinion (humble or otherwise) and should not be construed as the opinion of my employers (past, present, and future) ; spouse, offspring, or blood relatives; local, state, federal, international, galactic, or universal law, nor any entity of creation - living, dead, or resurrected. rbusche%[email protected] on 12/09/99 05:12:28 PM Please respond to rbusche%[email protected] To: emc-pstc%[email protected] cc: (bcc: Oscar Overton/Lex/Lexmark) Subject: RE: Cell Phone Hazards? Interestingly enough, today on one of the independent radio networks, a commentator interviewed numerous persons associated with the investigation of radiation on the human body from Cell phones. One professor from the University of Washington (Seattle) claims to have evidence that radiation in rats has been proven to alter chromosomes. Another claims that no one in the US would test Cell Phones for power output and report on them by brand name. The phones were taken to Europe for testing. Yet another claims that research money was granted to study the issue and then withheld once the evidence started to point towards this destructive chromosome problem. Another man whose wife spent 150 hrs a month on the cell phone believes that her fatal brain tumor was a direct cause of the phone. He claims that the tumor (CAT scan) when held near the antenna was a halo of the antenna itself. He went on to say that the US government had evidence for the risk of radiation published in Mil Hdbk 239. This document was subsequently withdrawn and the replacement document no longer addresses that risk. Who knows... Just wanted to add more fuel to the discussion. --------- This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to [email protected] with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], or [email protected] (the list administrators). --------- This message is coming from the emc-pstc discussion list. To cancel your subscription, send mail to [email protected] with the single line: "unsubscribe emc-pstc" (without the quotes). For help, send mail to [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], or [email protected] (the list administrators).
