The Story Behind Cell Phone Radiation Research

XopherMV writes "A study by Lai and Singh, published in a 1995 issue of Bioelectromagnetics, found an increase in damaged DNA in the brain cells of rats after a single two-hour exposure to microwave radiation at levels considered "safe" by government standards. The idea behind that study was relatively simple: expose rats to microwave radiation similar to that emitted by cell phones, then examine their brain cells to see if any DNA damage resulted. The news was apparently unwelcome in some quarters. According to internal documents that later came to light, Motorola started working behind the scenes to minimize any damage Lai's research might cause even before the study was released. In a memo and a draft position paper dated Dec. 13, 1994, officials talked about how they had "war-gamed the Lai-Singh issue" and were in the process of lining up experts who would be willing to point out weaknesses in Lai's study and reassure the public. To this day, the cell phone industry continues to dispute Lai and Singh's findings although half of about 200 studies say there is a biological effect from cell phone radiation. Read more in UW Columns."

Well

[Anonymous Coward]

We'll all find out later in life when we're 40 and slobbering all over ourselves and mumbling incoherent nothings.

Murder

[Anonymous Coward]

Cell phones kill! Digital technology kills! Analog is our only hope to survive long enough to see our planet be eaten by outer space monsters.

Take off every ZIG.

Re:Trivial solution ...

[Random Chaos]

Oh great. Leave the phone in your pocket where it will damage the DNA you pass on to your children.

Bravo - great idea!

Bugger.

[ben0207]

Turns out it was the phone itself, and not the bills that were trying to kill me.

ob simpsons

[SpongeBobLinuxPants]

me loose brain? why me laugh?

Re:Well

[TummyX]

We'll all find out later in life when we're 40 and slobbering all over ourselves and mumbling incoherent nothings.


You're new around here aren't you?

Finally

[WormholeFiend]

Science validates my tinfoil beanie.

Re:Murder

[stupidfoo]

The key to our survival is to kill off those mutated brain cells with plenty of alcohol!

Re:I wonder.

[Not_Wiggins]

This is almost tinfoil hat territory...

Ironically, your tinfoil hat may actually help in this instance! 8)

Re:I wonder.

[TVC15]

>This is almost tinfoil hat territory, but this sounds remarkably similar to the way tobacco companies once behaved.

Except, in this case, a tinfoil hat actually _would_ help. ;-)

Does this mean....

[barks]

I shouldn't be talking on my cell phone while waiting for my eats infront of the microwave oven?

this calls for a double-blind study

[tuffy]

Let's issue standard cel phones to one group, placebo cel phones to another and see if there's any difference in cancer rates.

Re:Trivial solution ...

[Anonymous Coward]

> Oh great. Leave the phone in your pocket where it will damage the DNA you pass on to your children.

If you don't have kids - hey, this is Slashdot. We're not gonna mate, let alone breed. No big deal.

If you already have kids - umm, eewwww. Sick, dude!

Hard to know

[CleverNickedName]

Fifty years from now our grandkids could be laughing at us for holding such dangerous devices up to our heads.

That's why I keep my mobile in my front trousers-pocket. There's no chance I'll be laughed at by grandkids.

Re:Half of 200?

[erlenic]

Any bets on how many each side will have by 2020? I'm guessing 1000.

Re:So ?

[Orgazmus]

They don't even answer the ultimate question, they just claim there is a dispute. Very useful.

42
On a serious note. The reason that you cant answer this one with a yes or no is because nobody knows for sure. Some scientists says that there is undeniable proof, others say maybe, and the rest calls it FUD.

Re:Biological effects on chick embryo

[untaken_name]

Well, I guess my 'FoetalFone, Cellular Phones for the Unborn' concept is going to fail. *Snap*. Oh well, back to the ol' drawing board.

Re:Trivial solution ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh great. Leave the phone in your pocket where it will damage the DNA you pass on to your children.

After four kids, I had a vasectomy, use a condom and my wife is on the pill. After reading this, I'm going to make a habit of putting my phone between my legs when I have my headset. Yay for radiation-induced sterility!

Don't get me wrong... I love my kids and wouldn't give them up for anything (most of the time). But I do *not* want any more.

Re:Trivial solution ...

[RubberDogBone]

Kids, hell. I was given a new winter jacket for Christmas. A well-meaning relative was involved.

The jacket has a nice inside pocket for a cellphone... directly over your heart. WTF!?

Worse, it's buried under flaps and zippers and crap so if you have dared to carry the phone in that spot and it actually rings -and you survive- you stand there waving arms like an idiot trying to unzip and unflap just to get AT the phone before it rolls to voicemail.

It's especially fun if the ringer is set to vibrate. Is it a heart attack or a booty call?

[Oh, Tea] Sell Phone Now!

[asliarun]

Considering the general decline of manners and overall public behaviour, we can confidently say that cellphone usage has caused cerebral damage.

Not commonly known outside scientific circles, the radiation specifically targets the cellula oblongata. Keeping it in the pocket, on the other hand, causes the Ericsson dysfunction syndrome.

Re:this calls for a double-blind study

[mugnyte]

"...and when we compared the content of the cell phone conversations, we found no difference"

Re:So ?

[Mr. Underbridge]

There is a reason for that. The sky can't suddenly develop a crack or leak and expose him to deadly doses of radiation in minutes.

True dat, although if same happens to a nuke worker, the dosimeter won't tell him much more than "Dude, you're fucking dead."

Mutant

[Ranger]

It's obvious that cell phones cause mutations. Ever watch anyone talk on a cell phone while driving a car? They are turned into inconsiderate, oblivious assholes.

"Wonder twin powers, Activate! Form of a cell phone user driving a car! Oh, wait. Make that from of an asshole."

Re:So ?

[Kainaw]

I know it sounds weird, but ... I did some work at the nuclear reactor on campus.
Yeah. Weird, man. You working at a nuclear reactor? ;)
Well, I figured if Homer can do it...

Re:Half of 200?

[espressojim]

I've seen instances where people massage their data in pop gen papers as well. They're what we call 'fun' when we have occasional journal discussions. There's nothing like ripping the #$(*#$(* out of a paper that uses crappy statistics.

Usually, that manipulation is fairly obvious in the paper. I'd hope that the more reputible journals would learn to filter out more of this garbage over time.

All my statistical homies can now give me a shout out for Bonferroni correction, empircal p-value generation via permutation, etc. Conserative estimates on statistics make me feel all fuzzy, and I don't instantly feel like shouting out "Winner's Curse!"

--Jim
(my last p-val was 4E-27. I can correct that all day. Comming to a journal near you soon, I hope!)