 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Alternative / June 2006REUTERS: Cell phone signals excite brain, study finds
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=healthNews&storyid=2006-06-2 6T043008Z_01_N25386340_RTRUKOC_0_US-CELLPHONES.xml&src=rss&rpc=22 Cell phone signals excite brain, study finds Mon Jun 26, 2006 12:30 AM ET WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Cell phone emissions excite the part of the brain cortex nearest to the phone, but it is not clear if these effects are harmful, Italian researchers reported on Monday. Their study, published in the Annals of Neurology, adds to a growing body of research about mobile phones, their possible effects on the brain, and whether there is any link to cancer. About 730 million cell phones are expected to be sold this year, according to industry estimates, and nearly 2 billion people around the world already use them. Of these, more than 500 million use a type that emits electromagnetic fields known as Global System for Mobile communications or GSM radio phones. Their possible effects on the brain are controversial and not well understood. Dr. Paolo Rossini of Fatebenefratelli hospital in Milan and colleagues used Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation or TMS to check brain function while people used these phones. They had 15 young male volunteers use a GSM 900 cell phone for 45 minutes. In 12 of the 15, the cells in the motor cortex adjacent to the cell phone showed excitability during phone use but returned to normal within an hour. The cortex is the outside layer of the brain and the motor cortex is known as the "excitable area" because magnetic stimulation has been shown to cause a muscle twitch. The researchers stressed that they had not shown that using a cell phone is bad for the brain in any way, but people with conditions such as epilepsy, linked with brain cell excitability, could potentially be affected. "It should be argued that long-lasting and repeated exposure to EMFs (electromagnetic frequencies) linked with intense use of cellular phones in daily life might be harmful or beneficial in brain-diseased subjects," they wrote. "Further studies are needed to better circumstantiate these conditions and to provide safe rules for the use of this increasingly more widespread device." Medical studies on cell phone use have provided mixed results. Swedish researchers found last year that using cell phones over time can raise the risk of brain tumors. But a study by Japan's four mobile telephone operators found no evidence that radio waves from the phones harmed cells or DNA. The Dutch Health Council analyzed several studies and found no evidence that radiation from mobile phones was harmful. I don't share the Coward "Skeptics" opinion about cell phones. Note from Ilena: For years, I have been watching this issue ... not believing all the 'good news' put out by junkscience.com or their sister Disinformation Center, acsh.org and their sub front groups, various quackery propagandists. It seems these Propaganda Centers were hired to cover up the dangers of cell phones ... just as they have done with breast implants, aspartame, etc. STOCKHOLM (Reuters) - The use of mobile phones over a long period of time can raise the risk for brain tumors, a new Swedish study said on Friday, contradicting the conclusions of other researchers. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060331/sc_nm/phones_dc_3 The Dutch Health Council, in an overview of research from around the world, last year found no evidence radiation from mobile phones and TV towers was harmful. A four-year British survey released in January showed no link between regular, long-term use of cell phones and the most common type of tumor. However, researchers at the Swedish National Institute for Working Life said they looked at the mobile phone use of 905 people between the age of 20 and 80 who had been diagnosed with a malignant brain tumor and found a link. "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 way to get the risk down is to use handsfree," he told Reuters. He said his study was the biggest yet to look at long-term users of the wireless phone, which has been around in Sweden in a portable form since 1984, longer than in many other countries. >I don't share the Coward "Skeptics" opinion about cell phones. > > Note from Ilena: For years, I have been watching this issue ... not > believing all the 'good news' put out by junkscience.com or their > sister Disinformation Center, acsh.org and their sub front groups, > various quackery propagandists. So you remained doubtful about the beneficial effects but unquestionably accept the harmful ones as dogma. At least my skepticism is evenly distributed to both sides of the argument. > So you remained doubtful about the beneficial effects but unquestionably > accept the harmful ones as dogma. > > At least my skepticism is evenly distributed to both sides of the argument. That is exactly what Ilena Rosenthal does --- Intelligent people understand there may be risk with vaccinations, but are usually willing to accept some risk, because they understand the protection against horrid disease is likely greater than the risk. They understand there may be some risk with cell phones, but also realize there is great benefit in the convenience of having one. As consummers of medical treatments, or products of convenience, we all make choices on a daily basis. The best consummers can hope for, is full disclosure as best as science will avail it. Ilena is unwilling to debate both sides of the argument, or visit all material pertaining with an open mind. It's one thing when her narrow views and input of information, affects her personal life --- but it's overbearing when she imposes her limited narrow views on others. >> So you remained doubtful about the beneficial effects but unquestionably >> accept the harmful ones as dogma. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > her personal life --- but it's overbearing when she imposes her limited > narrow views on others. Ilena is not an intelligent or reasonable person. That aside, here we have yet another gadget of the 21st century. It is coming under fire and the thing that really gets me is that thousands, possibly millions of dollars by the time this will all be over will be spent to look for rare diseases "caused" or "linked" to cell phone usage. I remember when microwaves came out that we were all going to die of some nasty cancer from "nuking" our food. Now, of course, you can't build a new kitchen without a microwave as a standard equipment. On my desk right now I have an Ipod, digital camera, desktop, laptop with wireless, PDA with wireless, speakers, and a lamp and under it I have a wireless modem and a printer. I don't glow at night. We have to approach these topics with a little bit of common sense and we need to take these "studies" with more than a grain of salt. As much time as Ilena Rosenthal has spent in front of a computer monitor, while creating libelous webpages, on her non-profit webspace, I'm surprised she hasn't died from brain cancer. A few years ago, she claimed to be unplugging from the matrix --- But she's probably one of the most 'wired' people we know. She complains --- but doesn't unplug. > As much time as Ilena Rosenthal has spent in front of a computer > monitor, while creating libelous webpages, on her non-profit webspace, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > she's probably one of the most 'wired' people we know. She complains > --- but doesn't unplug. What else would ... could she do? If she is ANYTHING at all in real life as she comes off in her posts, she is a complete social retard incapable of meaningful human to human contact. Gawd knows she's too ugly (based on her web site picture which is fair game since she keeps linking to it) to do anything that involves working with small children ... unless it's playing the "Wicked Witch" from Oz without the need for makeup. > Ilena Rosenthal Ilena Rosenthal Ilena Ilena Now if this weren't the most useless waste of a post... Jan, darling, people usually POST something in their POSTS. > Ilena Rosenthal > > Ilena > > Ilena > Now if this weren't the most useless waste of a post... > > Jan, darling, people usually POST something in their POSTS. Since Jan no longer is the lie cop here, and thus can't yell "LIAR," and because she is incapable of writing anything in coherent English, she is reduced to posting nothing at all.  Signature--Rich Recommended websites: http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles http://www.acahf.org.au http://www.quackwatch.org/ http://www.skeptic.com/ http://www.csicop.org/ > Now if this weren't the most useless waste of a post... > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > > > Ilena She did. It doesn't have to make any sense though...... Alfred Hitchcock. President Carter Ilena Rosenthal Yee-haw !! Jan, thank you very much for the email you sent to my personal account, posted below, that did not contain one single letter that you actually typed... just some tag lines. >> "Skeptic" wrote: >>> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >> >> Ilena Again, thank you very much for that email. In the future, however, since I can read other people's posts all by myself, maybe you can just refrain from sending me any more emails. Super, thanks. >>>So you remained doubtful about the beneficial effects but unquestionably >>>accept the harmful ones as dogma. [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > We have to approach these topics with a little bit of common sense and we > need to take these "studies" with more than a grain of salt. People should read up on the stories of the dangers of steamtrains that were going around when the first trains started rolling down the track. Horrible things would happen to the cows grazing alongside the track and their milk. If the train went too fast, all the air would be sucked out of the carriages and people would suffocate. People's brains would be affected because humans aren't made to travel that fast. Etc. History repeats itself time after time. I think it was the German poet Goethe who said something like: 'even the Gods' battle against stupidity is futile'. > >>>So you remained doubtful about the beneficial effects but unquestionably > >>>accept the harmful ones as dogma. [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] > Goethe who said something like: 'even the Gods' battle against stupidity > is futile'. I remember when all those tree huggers complained about carbon dioxide and global warming. > I remember when all those tree huggers complained about carbon dioxide > and global warming. Dumbfucks are everywhere, and they is you. http://cosmic.lifeform.org > > I remember when all those tree huggers complained about carbon dioxide > > and global warming. > > Dumbfucks are everywhere, and they is you. > > http://cosmic.lifeform.org sorry my sarcasm button was on at the time. The point is we don't know the consequences fully on this issue. (least I don't). The tree huggers were right concerning emissions and now we have a bigtime problem with global warming. I would not take lightly the research concerning cell phones and the impact they may or may not have. >>> I remember when all those tree huggers complained about carbon dioxide >>> and global warming. > > sorry my sarcasm button was on at the time. > > The point is we don't know the consequences fully on this issue. Sure we do. See below. > (least I don't). The tree huggers Probably the tree hugger term has something to do with that. > were right concerning emissions and now we > have a bigtime problem with global warming. I would not take lightly > the research concerning cell phones and the impact they may or may not > have. Your brain cells contain water, sodium, potassium and calcium. Cations are dissolved in water, microwaves excites water molecules. It's a very easy result. http://cosmic.lifeform.org > >>> I remember when all those tree huggers complained about carbon dioxide > >>> and global warming. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > http://cosmic.lifeform.org googling around abit, to say more research is needed is quite obvious...think I'll use mine for emergencies only. Q: Is there any evidence that cell phones can cause cancer, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, memory loss, etc.? A: Dr. Lennart Hardell, a Swedish cancer specialist, has recently announced the results of a yet unpublished study showing that right-handed cell phone users have a two-and-a-half times increased risk of brain cancer in the right-hand side of the head where they hold their phones. Left-handed cell phone users have the same risk elevation of a brain cancer in the left-hand side of the brain. There is a substantial body of epidemiological studies reporting an association between ELF fields and cancer. This caused a 28 member scientific panel, convened by the US National Institute of Health Sciences (NIEHS), to conclude in July 1998 that "extremely low frequency (ELF) electromagnetic fields should be regarded as possible carcinogens". As cell phones, in addition to the microwaves from the antenna, also emit ELF fields from the internal circuitry of the handset body, the research relating to ELF effects also applies to cell phones. Regarding Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, epidemiological data are scarcer; there have been studies conducted by Dr. Sobel, UCLA, in Finland and Los Angeles, reporting a consistent and significant increase in the risk of Alzheimer's for occupationally exposed individuals (ELF-type fields) such as seamstresses, power station operators, TV-repairmen, etc. In addition, laboratory studies on cell and tissue cultures report that EMFs induce effects similar to the biological mechanisms believed to be involved in the development of these diseases. Many users of cell phones have claimed that they feel the radiation from the handsets makes them confused and more forgetful. There is substantial laboratory evidence from studies of animals supporting these claims. Maze experiments with rats have shown that the animals have difficulties locating food in the maze when they have been exposed to cell phone radiation. In addition, scientific studies have revealed that EMF exposures change the production of neurochemicals in the brain and central nervous system, indicating a potential induced change in brain function. http://www.emf-health.com/faqs-emf.htm#mobile >>>>>So you remained doubtful about the beneficial effects but unquestionably >>>>>accept the harmful ones as dogma. [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > I remember when all those tree huggers complained about carbon dioxide > and global warming. And I recall that nobody ever disputed that higher CO2 levels would raise temperatures. The only discussion was (is) about how much influence man had on the whole process and the speed of the process. The mechanism is well understood and generally accepted by science. The cellphone scare isn't. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.