SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Federal scientists released partial findings Friday from a $25 million animal study that tested the possibility of links between cancer and chronic exposure to the type of radiation emitted from cell phones and wireless devices. The findings, which chronicle an unprecedented number of rodents subjected to a lifetime of electromagnetic radiation, present some of the strongest evidence to date that such exposure is associated with the formation of rare cancers in at least two cell types in the brains and hearts of rats.
There are some major caveats, though. The results were only observed in male rats; there weren't any significant effects seen in female rats. Exposure in utero didn't seem to affect cancer risk. And in male rats, the incidence of those two cancers was quite low. But even a small increase in the incidence of those cancers could have a major public health impact given how many people in the world regularly use cell phones.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 28 2016, @11:35AM
But is that really a problem with the studies themselves or the poor scientific education of the public at large?
It's a combination of publish-or-perish environment and media sensationalism. To be published and get a lot of citation (so as not to be fired), scientists overstate their claims. I'm assuming most other scientists are aware of this and take it into consideration when evaluating other research. The media, on the other hand, takes those over the top claims, turns the dial to eleventy hundred and runs with it.
And you gotta cut the people some slack.
As long as they're not actively ignoring facts even when those facts stare them in the face (cf: creationists, anti-vaxxers etc.), I do. I don't blame the ignorant; after all, we're all ignorant in a lot of things. I blame the willful idiots, the media and the suits (university administration, government "science" agencies etc).
If anything, it's an argument for making statistics a part of the core curriculum (moreso than programing).
That'd be nice, but it would ruin the gambling industry.