What is Digg?136 Comments
- kinerry, on 07/24/2008, -7/+46No scientific basis...no story here
- u8muhrice, on 07/24/2008, -8/+46Seriously, what doesn't cause cancer these days?
- FarSide792, on 07/24/2008, -2/+37So...can I start to complain about 2nd hand cell phone cancer when I'm in ANY public place?
- marx2k, on 07/24/2008, -3/+35Heh... I rarely ever use my cell phone. Now I'm glad I have no friends!
- buckchoris, on 07/24/2008, -11/+37Another paid propaganda research to scare people.
Buried. - WhiskeyLemur, on 06/30/2009, -2/+25FTA: "Herberman is basing his alarm on early unpublished data. He says it takes too long to get answers from science, and he believes people should take action now." Screw you, science - screw you for taking the time to determine what's _actually_ going on.
- dondara, on 07/24/2008, -9/+27Buried as inaccurate. ***** fear mongering
- ekday, on 07/24/2008, -3/+20I can't wait to see the stories saying cell phones help keep cancer cells at bay.
- WhiskeyLemur, on 06/30/2009, -4/+18....I put on my hazmat robe and tinfoil hat....
- dnields, on 07/24/2008, -5/+19"Seriously, what doesn't cause cancer these days?"
Cell phones. - Chairboy, on 07/24/2008, -0/+8"He says it takes too long to get answers from science"
This is the most important part of the entire article. There is no scientific data to support this, and it's impossible to constantly "err on the side of caution" in life because that would leave you at home in bed. Wait, even THAT wouldn't work, because statistically, most accidents happen within 5 miles of the home.
You gonna die. It might not be because of cell phones or the terruhrists, but at some point, your brain will deactivate and disorganize back to its component elements.
In the meantime, if "it takes too long to get answers from science", then it obviously takes too long to get answers from crackpots too. - tumbaba, on 07/24/2008, -1/+9"it takes too long to get answers from science".
Much faster to make ***** up. - Narcism, on 07/24/2008, -0/+7I don't think I'm going to worry about 10 minutes a day of cellphone use when I bake in front of dual monitors for 8 hours a day.
- inactive, on 07/24/2008, -2/+9Loneliness will also cause cancer.
- grungegbunny, on 07/24/2008, -5/+12Any supporting evidence? No? Fear tactics.
- tcpip4lyfe, on 07/24/2008, -1/+7The HPV virus causes cervical cancer.
- Totz83, on 07/24/2008, -5/+11Celine Dion is the single largest cause of cancer of the ears
- elipabst, on 07/24/2008, -0/+6I'm a researcher at the Pittsburgh Cancer Institute as well and while I have a lot of respect for Dr Herberman, there is a reason science is subjected to peer review instead of simply issuing press releases. Personally I'll wait to see the peer-reviewed article in a scientific journal before I change my view on the danger of cell phone use. I could see if this was some kind clinical trial that pulled the plug on a drug during testing because it was found to be dangerous, but there have been a number of large studies looking at this and found no effect. So I find it hard to believe that cell phones significantly increase risk, otherwise those studies would be finding it too.
- jonshipman, on 07/24/2008, -0/+5newsflash: Bluetooth is still radiation!
:o - sesstreets, on 07/24/2008, -8/+12Read the article, no actual proof.
- ApokalypseNow, on 07/24/2008, -0/+4"It is already known that the radiation emitted from cell phones heats up (cooks) the brain of the user."
Have you even read any studies on the subject? Cell phone use causes a raise in temperature on the SURFACE OF THE SKIN of a fraction of a degree, and does not penetrate further than that. This is NON-IONIZING RADIATION. - supermanly, on 07/24/2008, -3/+7Sex.
Looks like Digg is doomed then - RX9735, on 07/24/2008, -1/+4Not holding a cell phone next to your head seems to not cause cancer. I wonder if the blue-tooth headsets cause cancer?
- irishjays, on 07/24/2008, -0/+3Excuse me sir, can you please put out your cellular communication, the radiation is making a few of the guests a little queasy, There are designated cellular talking areas on the balcony.
- anonym02147979, on 07/24/2008, -0/+3Germany recently banned wi-fi in schools and mobile phones are not advised to be used by children there.
Even if you are completelly ignorant fool, from common experience, running phones use can easily "warm" things around it,
try to get buzzing phone near to a CRT tube to see some phenomena you would never have guessed exist. - loneBoat, on 07/24/2008, -1/+4I'm not saying I believe the study (in fact, I haven't even read the article yet), but who are you suggesting would benefit from spreading "propaganda" that cell phones are bad? Most of the major land-line names are also cell-phone providers. The USPS?
- Threlly1, on 07/24/2008, -3/+6As a qualified Electronics & Radio engineer and former Electronics/Instrumentation engineer for the M.O.D, I can categorically state this has no basis in established fact.
Consider this.
Your old style 32" C.R.T type tv has an electron gun at the base of the tube that can emit anywhere from tens of watts of R.F energy to hundreds of watts.
Did you think for one moment that the shadow mask it was illuminating was stopping all of that lovely non-ionizing radiation ?
Think again.
So, if we have been happily bathing ourselves in amounts of R.F energy that far exceed that of a cellular, day-in-day-out for decades, how would you rate the effect of a small transmitter that can at best produce 5-6 watts of R.F.
Of course, this smaller transmitter is nearer to the head, but the ability of the blood vessels in the head to dissipate the associated heating effect of nearfield & non-ionising radiation, far exceeds the ability of the cellular to produce it.
Ergo, for a cellular to be capable of any tissue damage, it would have to be left turned on, at full ouput for approx 6 hours while the user was placed into a near catatonic state, one sufficient enough to slow blood flow to a minimum.
In other words, much simpler words, poppycock. - compguy101101, on 07/24/2008, -0/+3This is what I got when I went to the page. Check out the ad.
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f153/compguy1011 ... - jpstanle, on 07/24/2008, -1/+4Buried as baseless fear-mongering.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-ionizing_radiatio ... - diecastbeatdown, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2FCC causes cancer.
Federal Cancer Causers - VitriolAndAngst, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2The prevalence of people getting brain cancer, on the side of the head where they hold their phones -- should be enough of a statistical anomaly that we should investigate. My old cell phone used to make my head feel warm -- heck, this is a microwave receiver folks.
In today's corporate-run Media and Government there is no more independent studies and investigations. The FDA can't track down where the e-Coli laced food is anymore, and Eli Lilly can't get sued over mercury in their immunizations as long as Bill Frist has pockets to fill. In 2008, you couldn't prove that smoking caused cancer, because someone would call the person making the charge a hypocrite and make some false claim about them that must be true, because you heard about it 100 times on the TV.
Folks, being happy will give you a long life. And worrying about everything will shorten it. But, we live in a toxic world that is less and less natural, and unless we grow up, and actually pay attention to what is harmful and what isn't, we will get sick and have shorter lives regardless of whether it is from Asbestos, microwaves next to our ears, mercury in our water, or fuel exhaust on our roads. I'm sick of the same people knocking everything that raises alarm bells. Yes, there are false alarms -- but the ones I keep hearing seem to be real causes for concern. - CoreyHalliwell, on 07/24/2008, -4/+6Wasn't this idea defeated like 15 years ago? If cell phones caused cancer every teenager would have dropped dead by now.
- inactive, on 07/24/2008, -4/+6Just take up smoking instead
- Paulish, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2Text messaging for the win! Keeps the phone away from the head.
- evetsleep, on 07/24/2008, -3/+5Why is this posted in money.cnn.com? Am I the only one who finds this a little strange?
- mrburgundy, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2@tcpip4lyfe yeah, but there aren't any girls on digg, duh!
- sholt, on 07/24/2008, -1/+3If your cellphone uses radium (or any other radioactive element), I think you have bigger issues on your hands.
- elipabst, on 07/24/2008, -1/+3"Erm, they most definitely are radioactive, tests have been conducted. Geiger counters go crazy when a cellphone is monitored during usage."
A cell phone emits non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation, so it's only "radioactive" in the same sense that a light bulb or a lightning bug is "radioactive". A cell phone does not register anything on a standard Geiger counter. - sark666, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2We'll only definitively know, when it's definitely too late.
- inactive, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2Yes, and when you're within range of a WiFi, or any computer, you're at risk.
- SpinozaQ, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2It's likely not a cover up ;) We know "what" cancer is, damaged DNA in a cell that causes it to multiple uncontrollably. What type of damage is done dictates what kind, and how bad, the cancer is. Cancer is so generic that it's likely cause by a multitude of factors. People don't want to hear that. The unwashed masses want a black and white world. For them, or against them, they say.
Cost benefit analysis is beyond comprehension for most people. ( Ironically this is a good thing, or no one would vote. ) The great majority of cancer cases are likely caused by chemical forcing. A bit of Dioxin here, a bit of Benzine there. Cigarette smokers are the largest known common chemical forcing cancer group. Coal miners are another high cancer group. It's likely very mundane. - megamod, on 07/24/2008, -1/+3Why play russian roulette with your brain when you can use bluetooth headset instead. Sure you'll look like you're talking to yourself and an overall stuck-up douche but at least you'll have your brain intact.
- noen, on 07/24/2008, -1/+3Cell phones emit microwave radiation and they are therefore radioactive in that sense. The larger point is still valid -- holding a device that emits microwave radiation next to your head is only bound to be problematic. It should hardly come as a surprise to anyone that it might cause health problems.
- inactive, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2You can buy lead-lined cellphone cases. Ridiculous, yes, but when you're paranoid...
- jbmcb, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2Satellite TV dishes don't transmit.
- noen, on 07/24/2008, -1/+3"for a cellular to be capable of any tissue damage, it would have to be left turned on, at full ouput for approx 6 hours while the user was placed into a near catatonic state"
Sounds like most cell phone users I know. - aserer511, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2So, why haven't they issued a warning on being within +- 100 feet of a satellite dish? even a DirecTV one has got to be outputting more intense radiation than a cell phone, and yes, even adjusted for distance, unless you use yoru cell 4 hours a day
- Nothlit, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2I see what you did there.
- CoreyHalliwell, on 07/24/2008, -0/+2dude the ***** SUN causes cancer. Come off it already. The head of a prominent cancer research institute issued an unprecedented warning to his faculty and staff Wednesday: Limit cell phone use because of the possible risk of cancer.
"Possibility of a Risk" wtf? "Well i mean it COULD happen, its possible..."
I'm no doctor, I'm really not but cell phone use has gone up like 20 fold in the last 10 years and i haven't heard ***** about tumors. Scientists and doctors and the media love to milk the "COULDS" because it scared people into buying their *****. - hiramperez, on 07/24/2008, -0/+1Spending time on Digg?
-
Show 51 - 100 of 137 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 