28 years of research confirms mobile phones don't cause brain cancer

[Cray]

So the bright answer is to add more to it?

If you think all radiation is harmful then cell phones are the least of your worries.

 

[Okty]

So the bright answer is to add more to it?

As mentioned above, the visible light range and infra red range are still photons, i.e electromagnetic radiation that you are expose to (electrons of your cells on the outside absorb and then reflect/emit photons themselves).

So the questions is not whether you are being 'irradiated', it is what frequency ranges are you being irradiated with (the bad ones are above violet light frequency - well ok, high wattage/amplitude microwave radiation can also damage your cells via 'cooking/heating' ).

 

[Brian_G]

... - well ok, high wattage/amplitude microwave radiation can also damage your cells via 'cooking/heating' ).

That's all we're talking about here AFAIK.

BUT...
There is some fear about 60 GHz radiation as well, as you no doubt know. Is it just something about nothing? Who knows, jury's still out and I'm no expert, but there is a lot of noise about that.. fortunately(?) though, our 5G only uses the lower frequencies options for now.

 

[Jet-Fighter7700]

To put your mind at ease, 2.4 and 5 GHz is way below the visible spectrum of photons (i.e. light) that you are exposed to.

To put in perspective, the frequency range of visible light, which you are expose to everyday, is 400 - 790 THz (Also, you and other objects around you are emitting photons in the infra red range, i.e. 300 GHz to 399 THz)

Above violet light you start getting getting the dangerous photon frequencies ranges (UV, x-ray and gamma) that can damage your cells and cause cancer etc. So, as long as the cellphone is not emitting any of those photons, you should be fine.

The only real danger a cell phone in close proximity can have is to 'microwave' some of your cells if the amplitude (wattage) is too high, i.e. cells get damages by 'cooking'.

what if they are wrong?
what if some new research comes out showing that cancer can develop at lower frequencies?

like I said, smoking was cool, smoking was accepted, smoking was even enjoyable,
now however, total 180.

 

[Brian_G]

what if they are wrong?
what if some new research comes out showing that cancer can develop at lower frequencies?

like I said, smoking was cool, smoking was accepted, smoking was even enjoyable,
now however, total 180.

Two very different circumstances. First is a stretch at best, second is just the usual political etc. manipulations.

 

[Hemi300c]

Article sponsored by Vodacom, MTN, Telkom and Cell C

 

[Neuk_]

That one actually worked for me many years ago. Was in Cape Town with an old Jetta and the clutch started slipping on pull away a couple of days before heading back to Boksburg. No way was I going to do a clutch replacement there. My brother in law was an old mechanic and he suggested the coke. There is a hole in the top of the gearbox flange on the Jetta so slowly poured a litre of coke in there and let it settle in. It worked except if you tried pulling away on a very steep incline. Got all the way back to Boksburg without incident. Obviously only a very temporary fix. Also quite a mess to clean up afterwards...

Edit: Was also 28 years ago.

Admittedly I have heard of a few people using it on older Golfs.

 

[notayoba]

What changed in recent years?

In the old days, you always knew when a phone was about to ring, or someone was about to get a message, because everything in the house with a speaker went' bhup bhupp beep beep bhup' before the phone rang.

I haven't heard that sound in ages. I wonder of those old school phones didn't maybe fry your brain, but new ones are better.

EdIt:

why smartphones don't cause noise on the around speakers

Before the smartphones (or maybe before the some new tech) when a cell phone rings, the speakers around it made noises. Hovewer, nowadays they do not. Why? What changed?

electronics.stackexchange.com

 

[c3n0byt3]

For those that cannot access the paper, or not be bothered to read...

Conclusion
Consistently with the published protocol, our final conclusions were formulated separately for each exposure-outcome combination, and primarily based on the line of evidence with the highest confidence, taking into account the ranking of RF sources by exposure level as inferred from dosimetric studies, and the external coherence with findings from time-trend simulation studies (limited to glioma in relation to mobile phone use).

For near field RF-EMF exposure to the head from mobile phone use, there was moderate certainty evidence that it likely does not increase the risk of glioma, meningioma, acoustic neuroma, pituitary tumours, and salivary gland tumours in adults, or of paediatric brain tumours.

For near field RF-EMF exposure to the head from cordless phone use, there was low certainty evidence that it may not increase the risk of glioma, meningioma or acoustic neuroma.

For whole-body far-field RF-EMF exposure from fixed-site transmitters (broadcasting antennas or base stations), there was moderate certainty evidence that it likely does not increase childhood leukaemia risk and low certainty evidence that it may not increase the risk of paediatric brain tumours. There were no studies eligible for inclusion investigating RF-EMF exposure from fixed-site transmitters and critical tumours in adults.

For occupational RF-EMF exposure, there was low certainty evidence that it may not increase the risk of brain cancer/glioma, but there were no included studies of leukemias (the second critical outcome in SR-C).

The evidence rating regarding paediatric brain tumours in relation to environmental RF exposure from fixed-site transmitters should be interpreted with caution, due to the small number of studies. Similar interpretative cautions apply to the evidence rating of the relation between glioma/brain cancer and occupational RF exposure, due to differences in exposure sources and metrics across the few included studies.

Other
This project was commissioned and partially funded by the World Health Organization (WHO). Co-financing was provided by the New Zealand Ministry of Health; the Istituto Superiore di Sanità in its capacity as a WHO Collaborating Centre for Radiation and Health; and ARPANSA as a WHO Collaborating Centre for Radiation Protection. Registration: PROSPERO CRD42021236798.

 

[Jet-Fighter7700]

What changed in recent years?

In the old days, you always knew when a phone was about to ring, or someone was about to get a message, because everything in the house with a speaker went' bhup bhupp beep beep bhup' before the phone rang.

I haven't heard that sound in ages. I wonder of those old school phones didn't maybe fry your brain, but new ones are better.

EdIt:

why smartphones don't cause noise on the around speakers

Before the smartphones (or maybe before the some new tech) when a cell phone rings, the speakers around it made noises. Hovewer, nowadays they do not. Why? What changed?

electronics.stackexchange.com

was about to ask, havent heard that sound in a good few years, are cellphones more advanced now, or become better isolated.

also, where are those little LED lights that are powered by the cell signal, or those stickers that light up and start flashing,
I even remember you could buy a replacement aerial for a 5110/6110 that would flash to remind you to answer a call, if the ringer is off.

 

[Bliksis]

Well tell that to the people who got brain cancer from mobile phones.

/lol

 

[Bliksis]

was about to ask, havent heard that sound in a good few years, are cellphones more advanced now, or become better isolated.

also, where are those little LED lights that are powered by the cell signal, or those stickers that light up and start flashing,
I even remember you could buy a replacement aerial for a 5110/6110 that would flash to remind you to answer a call, if the ringer is off.

I think it had to do with the GSM frequency, nothing sinister.

 

[Jet-Fighter7700]

I think it had to do with the GSM frequency, nothing sinister.

but still enough power to make a LED light flash

 

[Cosmik Debris]

but still enough power to make a LED light flash

The phone's battery did that when it received the incoming call signal. The signal just told the battery to flash the light. The signal didn't flash the lights.

Like when you turn the air con in your car on. The switch on signal tells the compressor to start. The signal is far too weak to start and run an air conditioning compressor.

 

[Bliksis]

but still enough power to make a LED light flash

Oh. Cancer.

 

[Jet-Fighter7700]

The phone's battery did that when it received the incoming call signal. The signal just told the battery to flash the light. The signal didn't flash the lights.

Like when you turn the air con in your car on. The switch on signal tells the compressor to start. The signal is far too weak to start and run an air conditioning compressor.

not per my understanding, as if you look at the sticker, no connection to the phone battery at all, and still it flashes the LED.

 

[Cosmik Debris]

not per my understanding, as if you look at the sticker, no connection to the phone battery at all, and still it flashes the LED.

Where do you see this?

 

[notayoba]

Where do you see this?

Here’s How Those Battery-Free Flashing Phone Stickers Worked

The late 90s and early 2000s were a breakout time for mobile phones, with cheap GSM handsets ushering in the era in which pretty much everybody had a phone. Back then, a popular way to customize on…

hackaday.com

 

[Cosmik Debris]

Here’s How Those Battery-Free Flashing Phone Stickers Worked

The late 90s and early 2000s were a breakout time for mobile phones, with cheap GSM handsets ushering in the era in which pretty much everybody had a phone. Back then, a popular way to customize on…

hackaday.com

That's the same principle as an RFD chip in a shopping centre. It's called induction. The chip on the product has no power source.



The vertical lines act as an antennae and if they add up to the correct length corresponding to the frequency of the signal a voltage is induced that will light up the diodes.

That same signal went through your entire body when it lit up the diodes. But there was no effect on you as you don't have specific length conductors to act as an aerial. Millions of neutrinos pass straight through your body every second too. Some collide with and damage DNA. You can't hide, they pass straight through the earth too.

 

[notayoba]

That's the same principle as an RFD chip in a shopping centre. It's called induction. The chip on the product has no power source.

View attachment 1756499

The vertical lines act as an antennae and if they add up to the correct length corresponding to the frequency of the signal a voltage is induced that will light up the diodes.

That same signal went through your entire body when it lit up the diodes. But there was no effect on you as you don't have specific length conductors to act as an aerial. Millions of neutrinos pass straight through your body every second too. Some collide with and damage DNA. You can't hide, they pass straight through the earth too.

Which is exactly what someone has been trying to tell you. Yet you claim it's somehow connected to the phone battery.

It harnesses the energy from the phone's transmit signal.