SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the wrap-it-in-aluminum-foil-AND-tin-foil-before-using dept.
Study of Cellphone Risks Finds 'Some Evidence' of Link to Cancer, at Least in Male Rats
For decades, health experts have struggled to determine whether or not cellphones can cause cancer. On Thursday, a federal agency released the final results of what experts call the world's largest and most costly experiment to look into the question. The study originated in the Clinton administration, cost $30 million and involved some 3,000 rodents.
The experiment, by the National Toxicology Program, found positive but relatively modest evidence that radio waves from some types of cellphones could raise the risk that male rats develop brain cancer. "We believe that the link between radio-frequency radiation and tumors in male rats is real," John Bucher, a senior scientist at the National Toxicology Program, said in a statement.
But he cautioned that the exposure levels and durations were far greater than what people typically encounter, and thus cannot "be compared directly to the exposure that humans experience." Moreover, the rat study examined the effects of a radio frequency associated with an early generation of cellphone technology, one that fell out of routine use years ago. Any concerns arising from the study thus would seem to apply mainly to early adopters who used those bygone devices, not to users of current models.
[...] The rats were exposed to radiation at a frequency of 900 megahertz — typical of the second generation of cellphones that prevailed in the 1990s, when the study was first conceived. Current cellphones represent a fourth generation, known as 4G, and 5G phones are expected to debut around 2020. They employ much higher frequencies, and these radio waves are far less successful at penetrating the bodies of humans and rats, scientists say.
Previously: Major Cell Phone Radiation Study Reignites Cancer Questions
First Clear Evidence Cell Phone Radiation Can Cause Cancer In Rats
Related: Dim-Bulb Politician Wants Warning on Cell Phones
California Issues Warning Over Cellphones; Study Links Non-Ionizing Radiation to Miscarriage
Mill Valley, California Blocks 5G Over Health Concerns
(Score: 5, Informative) by Alphatool on Saturday November 03 2018, @12:14PM (10 children)
The scientists at the NTP may think that the cancers in rats were caused by RF exposure, but this is not a universal opinion. In particular there is no obvious reason why male rates would get cancer from RF exposure but mice and female rats don't. It's also odd that the heart is the most sensitive organ without any real reason. There hasn't been much published analysis of the final results yet, but there has been plenty of analysis of the pre-release results and that's pretty damning. A good starting point is https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/no-a-rat-study-with-marginal-results-does-not-prove-that-cell-phones-cause-cancer-no-matter-what-mother-jones-and-consumer-reports-say/ [sciencebasedmedicine.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Knowledge Troll on Saturday November 03 2018, @12:49PM (3 children)
Don't worry the SJWs will show up soon and make sure we are getting equal results. Cancer for everyone!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 03 2018, @02:10PM
If it's only white make rats that means trouble for the Republican Party.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 03 2018, @03:04PM (1 child)
#WSJKillsKids [twitter.com]
(Score: 2) by takyon on Sunday November 04 2018, @03:19AM
What's this, some spicy YouTube drama?
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Bobs on Saturday November 03 2018, @01:16PM (1 child)
FYI:
(Score: 2) by Knowledge Troll on Saturday November 03 2018, @04:23PM
One variable here is the amount of tissue between the heart of a person and the heart of a rat.
Though at least the first thing I found suggests that 900 mhz penetrates "deep" into "human skin" -- well, that's not going to be so deep into the body then.
for frequencies of 900, 1800 and 2450MHz.
That would suggest the skin alone protects all parts of a body in rats and humans. It seems at most this should accept blame for skin cancer rates.
(Score: 2) by rleigh on Saturday November 03 2018, @10:02PM (3 children)
Why are you so certain that there can't be sex-specific differences here? We already know there are significant differences in e.g. wound repair between males and females. That might also be true of radiation-induced damage repair mechanisms. It might be due to more effective clearance of damaged cells in female mice by macrophages. (It's immune cell differences between males and females which cause the difference in wound repair.)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday November 03 2018, @11:09PM
Males and females are equal and interchangeable... didn't you get the memo?
(Score: 2) by Alphatool on Sunday November 04 2018, @12:18PM (1 child)
There absolutely are sex specific differences in cancer - they're actually quite common. There are still reasons that this is a problematic result:
Ultimately, the study shows that if RF exposure causes cancer it isn't a very strong carcinogen. The effect that the NTP is claiming is so small that it's very hard to separate from noise, only a handful of changes in either the control group or study group would have eliminated the statistical significance of this finding. Given the design of the experiment I expected that if it was to find something it would be a very clear signal, but this is a borderline result that I highly doubt will be reproducible.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday November 04 2018, @01:34PM
While it may not be a strong carcinogen, it seems to be a stronger one than tobacco smoke, which still gets a huge deal made about it.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S094029930500045X [sciencedirect.com]