Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, December 16, 2017

Olga Naidenko, Children's Environmental Health: This week, California officially issued groundbreaking guidelines advising cell phone users to keep phones away from their bodies and limit use when reception is weak. State officials caution that studies link radiation from long-term cell phone use to an increased risk of brain cancer, lower sperm counts and other health problems, and note that children's developing brains could be at greater risk. The state Department of Public Health was forced to release the guidelines in March after a lawsuit by University of California, Berkeley, researcher Dr. Joel Moskowitz. At the time, the department said the guidelines were only a draft, but they now are the state's official position.

Advertisement

Advertisement

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

In studies by the federal National Toxicology Program, male rats exposed to cell phone radiation had a greater chance of developing a brain cancer called malignant glioma, as well as developing a tumor found on the heart.

Based on human epidemiological studies demonstrating increased risk of brain tumors, the World Health Organization has declared cell phone radiation a possible carcinogen. Meanwhile, the telecom industry continues to fight efforts to inform the public.

In a press release, DPH Director Karen Smith said:

" ... Simple steps, such as not keeping your phone in your pocket and moving it away from your bed at night, can help reduce exposure for both children and adults. ... Children's brains develop through the teenage years and may be more affected by cell phone use. Parents should consider reducing the time their children use cell phones and encourage them to turn the devices off at night."

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Perhaps Donald's tweets are symptomatic of cell phone radiation.... naw, he was ------- crazy before cell phones.

#1 | Posted by Corky at 2017-12-15 01:32 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Can we please just break off this part of the United States? Just let them be their own brand of ------- crazy on the coast.

#2 | Posted by boaz at 2017-12-15 03:53 PM | Reply

Can we please just break off this part of the United States? Just let them be their own brand of ------- crazy on the coast.

Posted by boaz at 2017-12-15 03:53 PM | Reply

We rely upon California heavily. Only a bread dead cretin would say break it off.

#3 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-12-15 04:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Can we please just break off this part of the United States? Just let them be their own brand of ------- crazy on the coast."

John McCain

#4 | Posted by danni at 2017-12-15 04:15 PM | Reply

"Can we please just break off this part of the United States?"

But Trump has a nice golf course there.

#5 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-15 04:22 PM | Reply

We rely upon California heavily. Only a bread dead cretin would say break it off.

#3 | Posted by LauraMohr

You are right lau. where else could we get that much stupid? They are all bread dead.

#6 | Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-16 05:32 PM | Reply

where else could we get that much stupid?
#6 | POSTED BY SNIPER

We can start with your posts.

#7 | Posted by ClownShack at 2017-12-16 05:35 PM | Reply

Can we please just break off this part of the United States?

Careful what you wish for, dumb dumb.

#8 | Posted by ClownShack at 2017-12-16 05:37 PM | Reply

Can we please just break off this part of the United States? Just let them be their own brand of ------- crazy on the coast.

#2 | Posted by boaz

Yeah let's cut off the part with the most smart people, says the dumbest guy on the retort.

#9 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2017-12-16 07:12 PM | Reply

You are right lau. where else could we get that much stupid? They are all bread dead.

Posted by Sniper at 2017-12-16 05:32 PM | Reply

If you ever grew a brain you would be twice as dumb sweetie.

#10 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2017-12-16 07:18 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

-the dumbest guy on the retort.

Snippy wants a recount.

#11 | Posted by Corky at 2017-12-16 07:20 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

Can we please just break off this part of the United States? Just let them be their own brand of ------- crazy on the coast.

#2 | POSTED BY BOAZ

Sure, let's get rid of the state that makes the largest contribution to US GDP (14.17%). Why not?

#12 | Posted by WhoDaMan at 2017-12-16 11:26 PM | Reply

retort idiots, lets get rid of evil rich people

next article, you wanna get rid of rich people are you crazy?

#13 | Posted by FTP at 2017-12-17 05:28 AM | Reply

Hey, FTP, how'd you like a funboy to take the edge off of life?

#14 | Posted by madscientist at 2017-12-17 05:40 AM | Reply

Why the telecoms want to suppress this is beyond me. You can have our smart phones when you pry them from our dead cancer ridden hands.

The real story here is apparently some people still use cell phones to talk on instead of just texting everyone.

#15 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2017-12-17 06:25 AM | Reply

"In studies by the federal National Toxicology Program, male rats exposed to cell phone radiation had a greater chance of developing a brain cancer called malignant glioma, as well as developing a tumor found on the heart.

Based on human epidemiological studies demonstrating increased risk of brain tumors, the World Health Organization has declared cell phone radiation a possible carcinogen. Meanwhile, the telecom industry continues to fight efforts to inform the public."

Everything I've been reading about the NTP study show it to be highly flawed. It has not yet been submitted nor accepted by a peer-reviewed journal. The NIH article can be found here, and the study itself can be found here. There were some peer-reviews by scientists picked by the NTP included as an appendix to the study, but even the hand-picked reviewers find the methodology to be questionable. The primary criticism of the study, as it is described in the paper, is it seems to be highly susceptible to false positives.

It is especially important to note that there are no peer-reviewed, repeatable studies showing any significant connection between cellphone use and cancer. There have been some studies, but others have not been able to replicate the findings. The World Health Organizations designation of "possible" carcinogen itself indicates there is no strong link known. This blog seems to be a very well-written discussion of the available evidence. I'm not really familiar with the blog, so I don't know if there is a bias there, but it seems to be a rational discussion.

Personally, I've always felt like holding a radiator like that to your head for a long time just can't be good for you, but there is no real scientific basis for it, including no good proposed mechanism. The wavelengths involved aren't short enough (high enough energy) to cause direct damage to DNA, and thus unlikely to be able to cause cancer. With the amount of cellphone use over the last 20-30 years, you would have expected to see significant effects by now. There is no scientific consensus at the moment, but studies will continue.

To give California credit here, they had to be sued to release these guidelines. The state had determined there wasn't enough credible science behind the risk to release them otherwise.

#16 | Posted by StatsPlease at 2017-12-17 10:00 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Everything I've been reading about the NTP study show it to be highly flawed."

What are the flaws?

"It is especially important to note that there are no peer-reviewed, repeatable studies showing any significant connection between cellphone use and cancer."

That doesn't mean much, unless you've got a whole file cabinet full of studies showing no connection, not funded by Qualcomm et. al.

#17 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-17 01:06 PM | Reply

Hey, FTP, how'd you like a funboy to take the edge off of life?

#14 | POSTED BY MADSCIENTIST

Share your plan, good man.

#18 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2017-12-17 01:08 PM | Reply

Only a bread dead cretin would say break it off.

#3 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR

did you mean to say a bread dead crouton?

#19 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2017-12-17 01:09 PM | Reply

---- me. I am off this morning. Three straight weeks of 65 degrees with more in sight. Off.

#20 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2017-12-17 01:10 PM | Reply

"Everything I've been reading about the NTP study show it to be highly flawed."

What are the flaws?

#17 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-17 01:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

It's right in my original post: the methodology as stated in the study is prone to false positives. The specifics can be found, among other places, in the reviews by the scientists the NTP themselves picked to provide "peer review". There are also many questions on how the populations were chosen, if the researchers were really blind, and strange results regarding sex differences in outcomes. Why would the male rats be more prone to cancer from the radiation but not the female? If I read it correctly, they also had results where the radiated rats lived longer than the controls, and the controls were developing cancer at a lower rate than normal for the particular breed of rats used. These are just from my casual readings of the study and some of the critiques.

I'm one of the first to question industry-funded studies on things like this, and they may yet find a link, but so far, there is no good evidence for a link, nor a good proposed mechanism for how it could cause cancer. That doesn't mean it's impossible, just reduces the likelihood of low-correlation data being significant.

#21 | Posted by StatsPlease at 2017-12-17 05:38 PM | Reply

I thought the sample size was too small to be convincing. Especially when there are so many other ways to get cancer. I think that's the least convincing part.

Maybe I missed it but I'd like the researchers to be blinded to which mice they're measuring.

#22 | Posted by snoofy at 2017-12-18 01:21 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2018 World Readable

Drudge Retort