Cellphone cancer nonsense

[bigboxes]

Is there any scientific evidence that shows that some people are sensitive to non-ionizing radiation?

 

[Muse]

I just saw the divining rod thread revived again - annoying that people believe in bullcrap. And a few minutes ago, I saw an article written for presumably high school students saying that maybe cell phones can cause cancer. While I'd be happy if people suddenly were in fear of holding their cell phones in front of themselves and texting 22 out of 24 hours of the day, and finally put the things down. But, I prefer a little more honesty. As such, I penned this in response to the article. PLEASE poke holes in my explanation or point out errors so that I can improve the explanation.

Myself, I find it much more difficult to read italicized text than otherwise, especially if it's long or in danger of being TLDR. So, in order to make it relatively easy to read the quoted text, I present it here, unitalicized:
- - - - - - - -
People think Einstein won the Nobel Prize for his Theory of Relativity. That's not true. He won the Nobel Prize for his work on the photoelectric effect. Essentially, Einstein won the Nobel Prize for proving over 100 years ago, before anyone even conceived of cell phones, that cell phones can NOT cause cancer. The "radiation" from cell phones is non-ionizing. For anyone scared by the term "radiation" - and that scary term IS used by people trying to promote this nonsense - radiation in this case refers to electromagnetic radiation.

There are many forms of "light." What we refer to as visible light is a narrow subset out of all the frequencies of electromagnetic radiation. The only difference between the forms of light is their frequencies. You may have heard of ultraviolet light. This is not visible light to humans, though for all practical purposes, you might refer to it as a different "color" of light. In fact, some animals (birds, fish, some mammals) can actually see some frequencies of ultraviolet light, just as your eyes are able to detect things that are red. So, you can think of yourself as "color blind" to ultraviolet light, though our definition of color-blind is generally limited to colors in what to humans is the visible part of the electromagnetic spectrum. If you've ever seen a rainbow of colors, and there's no color just past purple, that's where ultraviolet lies. In fact, using special detectors just past where we see the colors is how ultraviolet light was first discovered. And at the other end of the visible spectrum, a different type of detector discovered infrared light. Again, infrared light is invisible to humans, but some animals (reptiles) can "see" infrared light. And, humans have invented devices so they can shift the frequencies of infrared light to frequencies we can see, and now you have infrared cameras or "night vision" cameras, which use infrared light to allow us to see things when there's no visible (to us) light.

Now, over the past 100 years, scientists have discovered more and more "colors" of light - that is, we have given names to parts of the electromagnetic spectrum that our eyes can't see, but which we can build detectors to "see" for us. Together, all these "colors" form the electromagnetic spectrum. At one end, gamma rays, x rays, ultraviolet light, then your familiar ROY G BIV (though, backwards - violet is next to ultraviolet, then indigo, blue, green, yellow, orange, red; then infrared, microwaves, and radio waves.

Now, you may know that ultraviolet light is bad for you - it's the component of light from the sun that reaches the earth and damages your skin - it is the component that leads to sun burns and can lead to skin cancer. Ultraviolet light is higher frequency light than visible light. And scientists have known for a long time that the higher the frequency, the more damaging it is. You can spread a sunblock lotion on your skin and stop ultraviolet light from reaching your skin and damaging it. X-rays have even higher frequency and are more damaging. That's why if you ever have a dental x-ray to take a picture of your teeth, they put a heavy shield on you to prevent exposing more of your body than necessary to the x-rays. To stop the x-rays requires this thicker lead shield; you can't stop them with a lotion. And, gamma rays are the most ionizing/damaging of light. Gamma rays are electromagnetic radiation with the highest frequencies. Scientists have known for a long time (with a great deal of certainty) that the higher the frequency, the more dangerous the electromagnetic light. (Electromagnetic radiation; the two words are interchangeable in this context, as long as we agree that not all light is visible to human eyes.)

And scientists know that green light is generally not damaging to humans. Though, someone could make a laser and burn your skin due to the intensity of the green light - a very high intensity also can have a high amount of energy. But, even the lowest intensity of gamma radiation is bad for you, while a low intensity of green light is completely harmless. And, the lower the frequency of electromagnetic light, the more harmless it is. The radiation (invisible light) from your cell phone is around 1 million times lower in frequency. That is, it's about 1 million times more harmless than harmless green light. And, the intensity of radiation (light) from your cell phone is also very low.

In short, there is no mechanism by which the electromagnetic light from your cell phone can cause cancer. So, why this article that I'm responding to? Imagine that you randomly throw 100 darts at a checkerboard on a wall. They will NOT be spread out perfectly. You count the darts in each little square and note that one of the squares has more darts in it than any other square. You can do one of two things: you can repeat the experiment again and again and see if each time, or even a lot more times than can be explained by pure chance, that this square gets more darts than the rest of the dart board. Or, you can print a click-bait "news" article like the one I'm responding to, and declare that the science isn't settled - there might just be a link. This article searched for that one time when one particular square got more hits, and is attempting to draw a conclusion based on that, rather than looking at the hundreds upon hundreds of trials where that square didn't get more hits; and calling the conclusion "good science." It's not.

 

[Muse]

I don't know about you guys but I:

1. Stand at least 4 feet away from my microwave oven. At times closer, but I only stay there for a moment. At ~4' the EMFs are about 4 milligauss (I have personally measured them), considered to be around the threshold of where you want to start being careful.

2. I seldom leave my cellphone in my pocket without being in AIRPLANE MODE. This saves battery power bigtime and probably completely mitigates any radiation damage to my body cells. I do not care that I will not receive hot calls, it's no concern to me.

 

[Ichinisan]

A good friend of mine had a cancerous tumor removed from his foot.
That on that same foot he has worn a shoe for 10-12 hours a day since we was a child!

 

[agent00f]

I don't know about you guys but I:

1. Stand at least 4 feet away from my microwave oven. At times closer, but I only stay there for a moment. At ~4' the EMFs are about 4 milligauss (I have personally measured them), considered to be around the threshold of where you want to start being careful.

2. I seldom leave my cellphone in my pocket without being in AIRPLANE MODE. This saves battery power bigtime and probably completely mitigates any radiation damage to my body cells. I do not care that I will not receive hot calls, it's no concern to me.

Microwave penetration of tissue is limited and mostly only heat, and at that level heats just about nothing.

An interesting aside for this sub-forum that it's not hard to calculate the aperture sizes on microwave doors to attenuate what's going on inside enough to be "safe".

 

[John Connor]

Stand at least 4 feet away from my microwave oven.

I have an EMF meter that measures EMF and electric fields. That thing picks stuff up from the nuker about 4 feet away!

The frequencies used are similar to cell phone antenna sites and they have RF hazard signs all over the place.

 

[disappoint]

Remember, the CERN collider is said to simply be the power equivalent of only 14 mosquitoes, but at the subatomic level it is creating energies claimed to rival the "big bang"...

I'm going to have to nope that more than I would a spider until you provide evidence to substantiate your claims.

So a teacher and a physicist have a discussion about radiation, and all I can do is post the 1st line of what might have potentially become a funny joke.

A priest a rabbi and a Higgs Boson walk into a Catholic church. The rabbi asks the priest "Why did you invite him?" while gesturing to the Higgs Boson. The priest exclaims "We can't have mass without him!"

 

[WelshBloke]

It's possible something is going on, but the risk is fairly low.

https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/update/2016/6/cellphones/index.html

Ionising radiation is not the only trigger for cancer.

 

[Selenium_Glow]

<snip>
Ionising radiation is not the only trigger for cancer.

That is the point. Most people fail to realize and appreciate this fact. Cancer can also be caused by paints and chemicals from objects people use daily. Or even junk food. Who knows. If Medical experts knew exactly why and when cancer can happen, we would have 100% prevention if not a 100% cure.

 

[WelshBloke]

So I thought that it's odd for DrPizza to post an OP then not follow up any replies.
He's not been on for a while. Anyone know if he's OK?
He's definitely in the "Decent Chap" list.

 

[MongGrel]

I hope DrP is just taking a vacation myself.

He hasn't been around in awhile.

 

[Red Storm]

Funny enough, I remember on my Galaxy Note 7 box it said "This product contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer". From the wording I understood that to mean there are chemicals within the phone itself that if ingested or exposed to for sufficient periods can lead to cancer or some such, and some California law required them to put it on there.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Funny enough, I remember on my Galaxy Note 7 box it said "This product contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer". From the wording I understood that to mean there are chemicals within the phone itself that if ingested or exposed to for sufficient periods can lead to cancer or some such, and some California law required them to put it on there.

That probably applies to most electronics in general. Quantity is never stated on those warning labels, so yes, if downing a pound of silicon a day can cause cancer, by definition they have to say that 'this chemical can cause cancer'. I'm sure half the stuff in a phone can cause cancer if you eat it over an extended period of time, or implant it under your skin, or something.

 

[Ichinisan]

Funny enough, I remember on my Galaxy Note 7 box it said "This product contains chemicals known to the State of California to cause cancer". From the wording I understood that to mean there are chemicals within the phone itself that if ingested or exposed to for sufficient periods can lead to cancer or some such, and some California law required them to put it on there.

Yes. It's on practically everything.

1. Plastic

2. Everything causes cancer.

Whatever body cells are responsible for processing or passing that material will die/wear-out and need to be replaced by new cells. As cells multiply, there's always a chance of a DNA transcription error that will lead to runaway reproduction.

It's true: Practically EVERYTHING can cause cancer.

 

[William Gaatjes]

Yes. It's on practically everything.

1. Plastic

2. Everything causes cancer.

Whatever body cells are responsible for processing or passing that material will die/wear-out and need to be replaced by new cells. As cells multiply, there's always a chance of a DNA transcription error that will lead to runaway reproduction.

It's true: Practically EVERYTHING can cause cancer.

The whole world is polluted with this stuff : PFOA aka C8
And that is just one carcinogenic. I would not be surprised if there are many many more that have been dumped in the environment for many years.
I worry about those much more than any cellphone radiation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfluorooctanoic_acid

 

[Ichinisan]

The whole world is polluted with this stuff : PFOA aka C8
And that is just one carcinogenic. I would not be surprised if there are many many more that have been dumped in the environment for many years.
I worry about those much more than any cellphone radiation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfluorooctanoic_acid

"Carcinogen" doesn't mean much when PRACTICALLY EVERYTHING is carcinogenic. In general, the dose is the poison. The primary reason more people die from cancer now than 50 or 100 years ago is that we're treating more illnesses. As we are less likely to die from other things, more of us live long enough to develop cancer and die from that.

 

[William Gaatjes]

"Carcinogen" doesn't mean much when PRACTICALLY EVERYTHING is carcinogenic. In general, the dose is the poison. The primary reason more people die from cancer now than 50 or 100 years ago is that we're treating more illnesses. As we are less likely to die from other things, more of us live long enough to develop cancer and die from that.

Well, i agree to that partially but, is there not a rising trend the last 30 years as well ?
Compared to 30 years ago people in general do not live much longer, i would think.
But consuming to much and being exposed to toxins and have the always present pathogenic infections is i believe more reason people die more of cancer.
Having the wrong diet and living in a toxic all your live can weaken your immune system to the point that you would statistically are more prone to develop cancer.
A given dose maybe not an issue for a healthy person who has had a healthy lifestyle all his live. But for someone with the wrong lifestyle that dose may be lethal.
Or for a person who lived a healthy lifestyle in a hazardous environment.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Well, i agree to that partially but, is there not a rising trend the last 30 years as well ?
Compared to 30 years ago people in general do not live much longer, i would think.
But consuming to much and being exposed to toxins and have the always present pathogenic infections is i believe more reason people die more of cancer.
Having the wrong diet and living in a toxic all your live can weaken your immune system to the point that you would statistically are more prone to develop cancer.
A given dose maybe not an issue for a healthy person who has had a healthy lifestyle all his live. But for someone with the wrong lifestyle that dose may be lethal.
Or for a person who lived a healthy lifestyle in a hazardous environment.

Define the following terms/phrases, please:
'do not live much longer'
'consuming too much'
'toxins'
'pathogenic infections'
'wrong lifestyle'
'hazardous environment'

Define the correlation between the following phrases, please:
'exposed to toxins' 'compared to 30 years ago'
'wrong diet' 'weaken your immune system'
'weaken your immune system' 'develop cancer'
'toxins' 'pathogenic infections' 'given dose'
'wrong lifestyle' 'lethal'
'lethal' 'hazardous environment'

 

[William Gaatjes]

zZz zZz

 

[Gibsons]

Yes. It's on practically everything.

1. Plastic

2. Everything causes cancer.

Whatever body cells are responsible for processing or passing that material will die/wear-out and need to be replaced by new cells. As cells multiply, there's always a chance of a DNA transcription replication error that will lead to runaway reproduction.

It's true: Practically EVERYTHING can cause cancer.

FTFY

But yes, if you look close enough, you can find a 'link' to cancer for just about anything.

 

[BarkingGhostar]

I think the cell phone cancer is a decoy. Most idiots with cell phones are bound to die from being distracted while driving or something similar. Its a good thing, though.

 

[William Gaatjes]

FTFY

But yes, if you look close enough, you can find a 'link' to cancer for just about anything.

It is more that in the EU, there is a more cautious approach towards chemicals that are known to be carcinogens (I am ignoring the lethal amount for a moment and the possible ability to accumulate in the fatty tissue of a lifeform such as for example mammals. The difference between acute and chronic effects.)
And if i am not mistaken, i noticed that in the US chemicals are not toxic until proven toxic in court. Even though research strongly indicate toxic effects (At least in smaller mammals.).

I totally agree that the acute lethal amount needed for toxicity for a human may be subject to debate.
But also the chronic exposure is important.

Another example for a carcinogenic pollutant found often in the environment is chromate.

 

[iamgenius]

Here are my two cents:

My mother died of stomach cancer. Back then, I read a lot about cancer. The OP is superb, but I would say that the mysteries of cancer have not been all unfolded yet. Scientists still don't understand cancer fully. Many assumptions are based only on statistics. We don't know for certain. There are many very active people doing sports all the time and eating only healthy food who got cancer at young age. We don't really understand cancer. Because of this, we can't really consider mobiles 100% safe. There is more to it than only radiation. My 2 cents.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Here are my two cents:

My mother died of stomach cancer. Back then, I read a lot about cancer. The OP is superb, but I would say that the mysteries of cancer have not been all unfolded yet. Scientists still don't understand cancer fully. Many assumptions are based only on statistics. We don't know for certain. There are many very active people doing sports all the time and eating only healthy food who got cancer at young age. We don't really understand cancer. Because of this, we can't really consider mobiles 100% safe. There is more to it than only radiation. My 2 cents.

Cell phones are not magic. While we might not understand cancer fully, we know a lot about how microwave radiation works. We also know that phones are not putting out much else other than microwave radiation. If that microwave radiation or the electromagnetic fields around cells phones cause cancer then our whole civilization is doomed.

 

[C1]

Cell Phones, Brain Cancer and Public Health with Katie Singer
https://www.naturalstacks.com/blogs...katie-singer?_ke=bWlsYW5kZWtpY2hAZ21haWwuY29t


U.S. life expectancy drops for 1st time in two decades!!!!!!
http://www.nj.com/healthfit/index.s..._1st_time_in_two_decad.html#incart_river_home