Comments on: Cancer Docs Warn Staff Of Cell Phone Risks

University Of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute Advising 3,000 Workers To Limit Exposure

[sashenka1]

I make use of my cellular on average once per day. However, for me to use it the phone does not need to be turned on, but I do.

[asor1-2009]

Aside from all the previous arguments pro/against cell phones, my pet peeve is seeing mothers ignoring their small children. They are talking on the phone as they shop rather than talking to their precious children. Opportunity missed folks!

[talkingham]

You know if these waves do generate tiny amounts of scar tissue in areas of the brain that serves as a perfect precursor for glial brain tumors like Kennedy''s.

[endofbones]

Hooray!!

if this is true those people who are incessantly clucking and sqwauking on their cell phones and hiding from any real forms of communication will be selectively removed from the population==== a conscious populous

HAHA

[talkingham]

I don''t know how BSy it is but I understand there''s a video on U-tube with kids arranging 4 Cel-phones so their antennae are aimed at an egg and frying it--

Remember these things emit microwaves or did you forget that!

[husein_pasha]

I have decision: we will use the poste services. by peagons

[husein_pasha]

jackie, are a man or woman, I don`t know but you have very vulgar speech. If you are a woman: it`s not good for a girl to speak in this way. If you are a man- go to the nearest psychiatrist!

[babooph]

I remember well ,the congressional hearings on smoking.The tobbaco"scientists" assuring there is no "proof" of harm.The purpose ofan investigation by congress is to reinforce a lie.

[kennedy7955]

I have a feeling this is a load of BS.

[dashortround]

Even if there were only one chance in a hundred-thousand that cell phones cause cancer, that still represents a real and totally unnecessary risk, to me.

I truly can''t see any compelling reason to spend most of the waking hours of my life with a cell phone pressed to my head. My parents, who grew up in a "wired" telephone world, managed just fine without having a phone in their hands all the time. In fact, I think that being able to easily get AWAY from telephones entirely for a good portion of each day made them far more productive and far less distracted and stressed out, overall.

Most of what passes for "communication" in the always-connected cell phone world of today is really just a total waste of time anyway. It''s usually just an unnecessary and often unwelcome intrusion and annoyance.

To me, the concepts of peace and quiet and relaxation mean NOT being bugged by people and telephones. Try it sometime - it''s absolutely wonderful!

"Selling Sickness" seems to be the order of the day from Big Pharma and it''s puppets.

[medmom04]

oh and I don''t get my info from ''wiki'' either. shall we continue this dance???

[TommyCraig]

A wrong thought though. IS your phone burning you? RF energy may cook you but it will not cause cancer. If that were true a number of burns would turn to cancer and that does not happen. ionizing radiation is needed to destroy/mutate your dna to cause cancer.
Posted by cyinzl8r at 02:39 PM : Jul 23, 2008
I was merely pointing out a precaution. Is my phone burning me? It is the long-term effect of the high frequency radiation that can damage organs. I don''t believe a failed kidney whether by cancer or radiation damage (slow-cooked by oscillating atoms) is good.
We know that rf energy at higher levels most certainly will cause damage. Why not take precautions for the unknown.
It''s kind of like the smokers who were told over 30 years ago to quit! and then came the law suits...

[medmom04]

"Contact inhibition is the natural process of arresting cell growth when two or more cells come into contact with each other. Oncologists use this property to distinguish between normal and cancerous cells."

**************
not true! and what???? this is not the property used to diagnose cancer! and the oncologists don''t do the diagnosing, the pathologists do! and NO, they look at molecular properties, such as N:C ratio, mitotic state, and the basic functioning properties of the cells. but you keep right on insulting!

[medmom04]

You see, cancer cells keep growing even when pressed against each other and healthy tissue. They don''''t have contact inhibition. I suggest you examine the facts or stop feeling inferior because you can''''t.
****************
not that simple. i remember alot from my ''science'' classes too. seems smart4peace has a grasp on tumor suppressor genes and oncogenes, while you merely mumble something about ''contact inhibition'', and then keep right on insulting. not good scientific method, my friend, not good at all.

[medmom04]

thank you smart4peace. some logic. no it''s not nice to shoot folks down for a benign opinion, and it makes for poor dialogue.

to date, the research available which may point to a connect between cell phones and brain cancer is shoddy and no neurosurgical oncologist will stand by it. this argument is old, has been going on for some time. not to mention, there are multiple types of brain cancer, and it wouldn''t be so random and only associated with the radiation of cell phones. the accumulated carcinogens in the air you breath are worse for you.

[newsjunky5]

I said, "contact inhibition" because I remembered from my science classes that loss of that property, which normal cells have, is a cancer cell phenomenon. After your hollow criticism, I checked on Wiki and they back me up, -

"Contact inhibition is the natural process of arresting cell growth when two or more cells come into contact with each other. Oncologists use this property to distinguish between normal and cancerous cells."

You see, cancer cells keep growing even when pressed against each other and healthy tissue. They don''t have contact inhibition. I suggest you examine the facts or stop feeling inferior because you can''t.

[robaldrich]

Someone said, ''We won`t use cell phones, we will write letters, we will use normal phones.''
-----

Wait! If you write, use a pencil. Pens kill 100 people a year in the U.S. (people choke on them). Then again, so do bathtubs (100 children per year drown). I could only find pencils killing children, and that was lumped in with the 2800 children that die every year swallowing small objects. That''s a heck of a lot more than die from cell phone induced brain cancer.

While we are eliminating cancer risks; no sun. 11,000/yr die of skin cancer from sun exposure - 30/day - Univ. of Penn Center for Bioethics.

Forget worrying about cancer. No walking - 17,229 people die every year falling down - 47/day. National Safety Counsel - Journal of Safety Research, 2003. 80,000 die every year from NOT being on a low dose aspirin regimen - 219/day. National Center for Health Statistics - CDC (2003).

Etc. ad nauseum. Most complainers engage in many activities more dangerous than whatever they are complaining about.

[newsjunky5]

ha! because YOU are smart? not smarter than noprejudice. ''''some doctors''''. you clearly know nothing of research or the medical field. I''''m afraid Darwin''''s on you, smartee.
-----------------------------------
You''re the one calling me smartee, I never said that. Nor am I a doctor. Have worked in research (different from this subject) before.
You claim I know nothing of medicine or research, but don''t specify how you can make that claim, or where I am wrong.(I''d listen if you did) That my friend, IS an unsubstantiated claim.

[newsjunky5]

"I have never known of anyone owning a cell phone and getting a brain tumor, or any other kind of cancer for that matter."
--------------------------
So according to your logic, there is no cancer or brain tumors anywhere. The handful (or even 200 people) you know who use cell phones is not a useful sample size. That''s why they have funded studies.