12.25.2011

skin care

You might be surprised to find out it's the skin, which you might not think of as an organ. No matter how you think of it, your skin is very important. It covers and protects everything inside your body. Without skin, people's muscles, bones, and organs would be hanging out all over the place. Skin holds everything together. It also:

  • protects our bodies
  • helps keep our bodies at just the right temperature
  • allows us to have the sense of touch

Don't Miss Your Epidermis

The skin is made up of three layers, each with its own important parts. The layer on the outside is called the epidermis (say: eh-pih-dur-mis). The epidermis is the part of your skin you can see.

Skin diagram

Look down at your hands for a minute. Even though you can't see anything happening, your epidermis is hard at work. At the bottom of the epidermis, new skin cells are forming.

When the cells are ready, they start moving toward the top of your epidermis. This trip takes about 2 weeks to a month. As newer cells continue to move up, older cells near the top die and rise to the surface of your skin. What you see on your hands (and everywhere else on your body) are really dead skin cells.

11.14.2011

రేడియేషన్ ౪

(CNN) -- Radiation from cell phones can possibly cause cancer, according to the World Health Organization. The agency now lists mobile phone use in the same "carcinogenic hazard" category as lead, engine exhaust and chloroform.
Before its announcement Tuesday, WHO had assured consumers that no adverse health effects had been established.
A team of 31 scientists from 14 countries, including the United States, made the decision after reviewing peer-reviewed studies on cell phone safety. The team found enough evidence to categorize personal exposure as "possibly carcinogenic to humans."
What that means is they found some evidence of increase in glioma and acoustic neuroma brain cancer for mobile phone users, but have not been able to draw conclusions for other types of cancers
"The biggest problem we have is that we know most environmental factors take several decades of exposure before we really see the consequences," said Dr. Keith Black, chairman of neurology at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles.
Cancer
The type of radiation coming out of a cell phone is called non-ionizing. It is not like an X-ray, but more like a very low-powered microwave oven.
"What microwave radiation does in most simplistic terms is similar to what happens to food in microwaves, essentially cooking the brain," Black said. "So in addition to leading to a development of cancer and tumors, there could be a whole host of other effects like cognitive memory function, since the memory temporal lobes are where we hold our cell phones."
Wireless industry responded to Tuesday's announcement saying it "does not mean cell phones cause cancer." CTIA-The Wireless Association added that WHO researchers "did not conduct any new research, but rather reviewed published studies."
The European Environmental Agency has pushed for more studies, saying cell phones could be as big a public health risk as smoking, asbestos and leaded gasoline. The head of a prominent cancer-research institute at the University of Pittsburgh sent a memo to all employees urging them to limit cell phone use because of a possible risk of cancer.
"When you look at cancer development -- particularly brain cancer -- it takes a long time to develop. I think it is a good idea to give the public some sort of warning that long-term exposure to radiation from your cell phone could possibly cause cancer," said Dr. Henry Lai, research professor in bioengineering at University of Washington who has studied radiation for more than 30 years.
Results from the largest international study on cell phones and cancer was released in 2010. It showed participants in the study who used a cell phone for 10 years or more had doubled the rate of brain glioma, a type of tumor. To date, there have been no long-term studies on the effects of cell phone usage among children.
"Children's skulls and scalps are thinner. So the radiation can penetrate deeper into the brain of children and young adults. Their cells are at a dividing faster rate, so the impact of radiation can be much larger." said Black of Cedars-Sinai Medical Center.
In February, a study by researchers at the National Institutes of Health, revealed radiation emitted after just 50 minutes on a mobile phone increases the activity in brain cells. The effects of brain activity being artificially stimulated are still unknown.
Neurosurgeon and CNN chief medical correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta says Tuesday's announcement, "dealt a blow to those who have long said, 'There is no possible mechanism for cell phones to cause cancer.' By classifying cell phones as a possible carcinogen, they also seem to be tacitly admitting a mechanism could exist."
Manufacturers of many popular cell phones already warn consumers to keep their device away from their body and medical experts say there other ways to minimize cell phone radiation.
The Apple iPhone 4 safety manual says users' radiation exposure should not exceed FCC guidelines: "When using iPhone near your body for voice calls or for wireless data transmission over a cellular network, keep iPhone at least 15 millimeters (5/8 inch) away from the body."
BlackBerry Bold advises users to "keep the BlackBerry device at least 0.98 inch (25 millimeters) from your body when the BlackBerry device is transmitting."
The logic behind such recommendations is that the further the phone is from the body, the less radiation is absorbed. Users can also use the speakerphone function or a wired earpiece to gain some distance.
Users can text instead of talk if they want to keep the phone away from their faces.
Finally, cell phones emit the most radiation when they are attempting to connect to cellular towers. A moving phone, or a phone in an area with a weak signal, has to work harder, giving of more radiation. So users can avoid using their cell phones in elevators, buildings and rural areas if they want to reduce

రేడియేషన్

Epidemiological and animal studies undertaken by the U.S. cell phone industry and others have yielded mixed results.
National Cancer Institute Statement: International Study Shows No Increased Risk of Brain Tumors from Cell Phone Use - May 17, 2010 - Interphone, an international collaboration, and the largest study of its kind to date, reported that overall, cell phone users have no increased risk of two of the most common forms of brain cancer -- glioma and meningioma. Furthermore, there was no evidence of risk with progressively increasing number of calls, longer call time, or time since the start of the use of cell phones. However, for the small proportion of study participants who used cell phones the most – measured as cumulative call time over their lifetime – there was a suggestion of increased risk of glioma, though the authors call this finding inconclusive. The study was published online May 17, 2010, in the International Journal of Epidemiology.
"No Link Between Cell Phone Use and Brain Tumors" - 12 Apr 2005. A new study has found no link between use of cell phones and the risk of developing a brain tumor. The study is published in the April 12 issue of Neurology, the scientific journal of the American Academy of Neurology.. The Danish study questioned 427 people with brain tumors and 822 people without brain tumors about their cell phone use. The study found no increased risk for brain tumors related to cell phone use, frequency of use, or number of years of use.
Finnish Study: February 2005: The amount of radiation most popular cell phones emit is well below agreed limits and largely in line with data published by manufacturers. The survey conducted by Finland's Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) covered 16 new models made by top handset makers including Finland's own Nokia, Motorola of the United States and South Korea's Samsung Electronics. At this level, the study found that head tissue does not warm significantly and no other harmful effects have been proved scientifically.
Video interviews with American Cancer Society, and other researchers.
Orebro, Sweden, 1999: No connection: In a study published in 1999, investigators at the Orebro Medical Centre in Sweden compared the past mobile phone use of 209 Swedish brain tumor patients and 425 healthy people. Conclusion: The study found no mobile phone/brain cancer link "in virtually all respects," cancer researcher John E. Moulder, Ph.D., says in the August 2000 issue of IEEE Spectrum, the official magazine of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Investigators did find that mobile phone users who got certain types of brain tumors tended to report using the phone on the side of the head where they developed the tumor. The study's limitations, according to Moulder, include a weak association between cell phone use and tumor development, as well as a possibility that the cancer patients' recollections were biased by already knowing on which side of their head the brain cancer developed.
Joshua Muscat, 1999: Glioma: In a yet-unpublished study presented at a 1999 scientific meeting, researcher Joshua Muscat looked for an association between mobile phone use and a type of brain cancer called glioma. Muscat did not find evidence that cell phone use increased people's risk of this type of brain cancer generally. He did, however, observe an increase in one rare kind of glioma, which FDA scientists say might have occurred by chance. Interestingly, with increased hours of mobile phone use, the risk tended to decrease rather than increase as might be expected.
A few animal studies have suggested that low levels of RF exposure could speed up development of cancer in laboratory animals. In one recent Australian study, for example, mice genetically altered to be predisposed to developing lymphoma got more than twice as many of these cancers when exposed to RF energy compared to mice not exposed to the radiation.
A large number of laboratory tests have been conducted to assess RF's effects on genetic material, looking for mutations, chromosomal changes, DNA strand breaks, and structural changes in blood cells' genetic material. One kind of test, called a micronucleus assay, showed structural changes in genetic material after exposure to simulated cell phone radiation. The changes occurred only after 24 hours of continuous exposure, which experts say raises questions about this test's sensitivity to heating effects and whether that sensitivity could be solely responsible for the results.
More Information
Follow-up with:
Where did the Fears start? The American Council on Science and Health
Cellular Telephone Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) - The SAR is a value that corresponds to the relative amount of RF energy absorbed in the head of a user of a wireless handset. The FCC limit for public exposure from cellular telephones is an SAR level of 1.6 watts per kilogram (1.6 W/kg). Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) for Wireless Phones and Devices Available at FCC Web Site.
EMF - Electromagnetic Radiation, Power lines and your health
* EMF FAQs
* EMF - Middle Ground
Agencies
Federal Communications Commission RF Safety Program
World Health Organization International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection
National Cancer Institute - Cellular Telephone Use and Cancer, 01/04/2002
"No Association Found Between Cellular Phone Use and Risk of Brain Tumors."
"Questions and Answers for the National Cancer Institute Study of Brain Tumors and Use of Cellular Telephones."
Basic information about brain tumors:
More cell phone usage tumor and cancer news, studies and articles
December 04, 2009: USA Today: Four-country study finds no cancer link to cellphone usage. Researchers in four Scandinavian countries found no increase in brain tumor diagnoses from 1998 to 2003 in a large new study, the latest to find no link between rising cellphone use and rates of brain cancer.
October 13, 2009 - Mobile Phone Use and Risk of Tumors: A Meta-Analysis - by Seung-Kwon Myung, Woong Ju, Diana D. McDonnell, Yeon Ji Lee, Gene Kazinets, Chih-Tao Cheng,and Joel M. Moskowitz
March 30, 2008 - 'Mobile phones 'more dangerous than smoking' - A self-published and non-peer reviewed meta-study by Dr. Vini Khurana, an Australian neurosurgeon, presented an "increasing body of evidence ... for a link between mobile phone usage and certain brain tumours" and that it "is anticipated that this danger has far broader public health ramifications than asbestos and smoking". On Larry King, on May 27, 2008, Dr. Khurana said: "the concern is not just brain tumors, but other health effects associated or reported to be associated with cell phones, including behavioral disturbances, salivary gland tumors, male infertility and microwave sickness syndrome". However, according to Wikipedia, this was criticized as ‘…an unbalanced analysis of the literature, which is also selective in support of the author's claims.'
February 2008: Tokyo Women's Medical University compared phone use in 322 brain cancer patients with 683 healthy people and found that regularly using a mobile did not significantly affect the likelihood of getting brain cancer. "Using our newly developed and more accurate techniques, we found no association between mobile phone use and cancer, providing more evidence to suggest they don't cause brain cancer," Naohito Yamaguchi, who led the research, said. His team's findings were published in the British Journal of Cancer.
December 5, 2006 - Scientists in Denmark tracked over 420,000 cell phone users over the course of 21 years in an attempt to determine if if cell phone use causes cancer. As reported in ABC News, they found the RF energy produced by the phones did not correlate to an increased incidence of the disease. From the article: 'This so-called Danish cohort "is probably the strongest study out there because of the outstanding registries they keep,' said Joshua Muscat of Pennsylvania State University, who also has studied cell phones and cancer. 'As the body of evidence accumulates, people can become more reassured that these devices are safe, but the final word is not there yet,' Muscat added."
April 2006 - the Swedish National Institute for Working Life issued a report this week, published in the International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, disputing two earlier studies that claimed cell phone use has no correlation to increased brain tumor risk. The researchers examined the cell phone usage of 905 adults who developed malignant brain tumors. They found that people with more than 2,000 hours of total talk time had 3.7 times the risk of developing brain cancer when compared with nonusers. 2,000 hours is about an hour of talk time every Monday through Friday for 10 years. The study, also found a 2 times increase for tumors specifically on the side of the head where the cell phone was generally used. But it should be noted that the study relied on the memory of the subjects for how long they used their phones, for as much as a decade ago, according to a Daily News interview with Dr. Lydia Zablotska, an epidemiologist at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health. "You're interviewing subjects in an era when everyone has a suspicion that cell phones may be harmful," Zablotska said of the study's shortcomings.
January 2006 - A four-year long British study performed by the London-based Institute of Cancer Research and three British universities found that talking on a cell phone had no effect on tumor rates. The researchers included 966 people with glioma brain tumors and 1,716 healthy respondents. Individuals were questioned on first use, lifetime years of use, cumulative hours of use, and number of calls they made.
May 17, 2005 - Swedish Study Finds Cell Phone-Brain Tumor Link - A Swedish study finds that users of digital phones in rural areas may be at greater risk of brain cancer. Its authors say the link is troubling, although they acknowledge that the amount of data is small and wider research is needed to amplify the findings. The chance of developing a malignant brain tumor was roughly eight times higher for cell phone users in the Swedish countryside than in urban areas. The risk of developing any brain tumor was four times higher for country dwellers using mobile phones for five years or more, compared with those who did not use the devices. The BBC present a program (Panarama) which countered Dr Lennart Hardell's claims (see this page on the BBC website), " The National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB), which advises the government on safety levels, said the study "the study did not involve enough people to offer compelling evidence, and any difference in risk it did find was not statistically significant. . "
March 21, 2005 - Fox news and CNN News both report that on March 16, 2005, a federal appeals court in Maryland reinstated five class-action lawsuits that allege that the cell phone industry has failed to protect consumers from unsafe levels of radiation. Fox quotes a Dr. Henry Lai, a bioengineering professor at the University of Washington, as saying that electromagnetic radiation emitted from cell phones may damage DNA and cause benign brain tumors. Dr. Lai also agrees with EHSO's recommendation to use a headset to minimize potential exposure.
Study: Cell phones pose no cancer risk Long-term research still needed, scientists say - MSNBC - The Associated Press - Jan.14, 2004 - LONDON - There is no evidence linking mobile phones to cancer or other health problems, but more research needs to be done to be sure, a panel of experts said Wednesday. The scientists, who are advising the British government, said existing research into the health effects of cell phones “does not give cause for concern” that the devices cause cancer “nor any other adverse health effect.”
Cell Phone Suit Gets Bad Reception - Friday, October 04, 2002 - Fox News
Cell Phones Don't Cause Cancer, Rat Study Finds -Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, June 25, 2002 — Radiation from cell phones doesn't appear to cause cancer in rats, according to a study by researchers at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. The research team exposed rats to the two most common types of cell phone radiation for four hours a day, five days a week for two years. “We tried to mimic a high level of exposure that humans might experience,” says study leader Joseph L. Roti Roti, Ph.D., professor of radiation oncology, of biochemistry and molecular biophysics and of cell biology and physiology. “We found no statistically significant increases in any tumor type, including brain, liver, lung or kidney, compared to the control group.”
"No Association Found Between Cellular Phone Use and Risk of Brain Tumors."- National Cancer Institute - 12-21-2000 - Researchers at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) found that people who used cellular phones did not have an increased risk of brain tumors compared to non-users. The study, due to be published in the Jan. 11, 2001, issue of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM)*, was released on Dec. 19, 2000.
Questions and Answers for the National Cancer Institute Study of Brain Tumors and Use of Cellular Telephones - National Cancer Institute - 12-21-2000 - The results pertain primarily to patterns of cell phone use in the United States during the early to middle 1990s. During the period of this study, there was no evidence that use of hand-held cellular phones caused tumors of the brain and nervous system. The findings suggest that, if there was any increase in risk, it was small, particularly for malignant tumors (glioma).
Cell phones increase convenience, but are they really safe? - Spring 2001 - Berkley Medical Journal
Cell Phones and Brain Tumors - ABC News - May 29, 2001 - A Neurosurgeon's Thoughts - a recent report from the General Accounting Office found that federal agencies do not always provide the latest information and research on cell phone radiation to consumers, and often the information they do provide is too technical for the average consumer to fully understand. Dr. Ted Schwartz, a neurosurgeon from New York Presbyterian Hospital, speaks to the popular concern about the possible connection between cell phones and brain tumors.
Huge study can't link cancers to cell phones - Danish results add to research that shows no danger - The Associated Press - Wednesday, February 7, 2001 - Scientists who tracked the health of 420,000 Danish cell phone users found no sign the devices increase cancer risk -- the biggest study yet to provide reassurance about the phones' safety, but one that won't end the controversy. The study, published in today's Journal of the National Cancer Institute, found cell phone users are no more likely than anyone else to suffer brain or nervous system cancers, leukemia, or salivary gland tumors.
Are mobile phones safe? Research intensifies as the public grows wary of one of its favorite communications tools - IEEE Spectrum Online - August 2000 - By Kenneth R. Foster, University of Pennsylvania & John E. Moulder, Medical College of Wisconsin - A MOTORIST USING A WIRELESS TELEPHONE might be worried about having an accident, even while being reassured that if one were to happen, he or she could call for help. Recently some scientists and lay people have expressed alarm at another possible danger--that the use of mobile phones itself may harm the user's health, perhaps even causing cancer.
Don't get fooled again - USA Today - 08/09/99- Before rushing to judgment, consider the nature of the media and the nature of science. The media essentially created the cell phone scare when CNN's Larry King Live hosted widower David Reynard in 1993. Reynard was suing several phone companies because his wife, who used a cell phone, died of a brain tumor. Reynard and his lawyer didn't have much of what you might call evidence, which is why they didn't get very far in the courts. But the issue has hung around as a media fascination. Television shows and news reports can, in a matter of moments, leave a lasting impression. Science is different. It takes years to collect and analyze data, and that's just for one study
Positions by Authorities...
...that conducted their own research or are credible to offer a meaningful opinion
Cell Phones Are Dangerous
Note: It has been very difficult to find credible sources that have taken the position that cell phones are dangerous. This may be because this position is unsupportable (like taking the position that the earth is flat) or that there is new evidence that contradicts current thinking (like Copernicus' calculations that the earth revolves around the sun) . Credible sources means persons of institutions whose education, practice, past performance, and affiliations would lead a logical person to conclude that they are knowledgeable about the subject and have conducted thorough, accurate and unbiased research. If you would like to recommend a source, please
Dr. Mercola - Cell Phones and Cancer He has an extensive website, but he is an an osteopathic physician, not a medical doctor. He also has not conducted any research himself; he just reviewed a study conducted by a television program (20/20) and we have all seen from Dan Rather's performance lately that the news media are not to be trusted as credible sources - they are meant to report the news objectively, not create research.
Cell Phones Do Not Cause Cancer
Tokyo Women's Medical University compared phone use in 322 brain cancer patients with 683 healthy people and found that regularly using a mobile did not significantly affect the likelihood of getting brain cancer. "Using our newly developed and more accurate techniques, we found no association between mobile phone use and cancer, providing more evidence to suggest they don't cause brain cancer," Naohito Yamaguchi, who led the research, said. His team's findings were published in the British Journal of Cancer.
American Cancer Society - "Considerable research has also found no clear association between any other electronic consumer products and cancer. Cell phones, microwave ovens and related appliances emit low-frequency radiation—the part of the electromagnetic spectrum that includes radio waves and radar. Ionizing radiation such as gamma rays and X-rays can increase cancer risk by causing changes to DNA in cells of the body. Low frequency, non-ionizing radiation does not cause these DNA changes"
Medical College of Wisconsin - A very detailed page, with a considerable amount of information, including both FAQs and citations to references; it can be technically overwhelming for non scientists.
National Institute of Health / National Cancer Institute - April 2000. "There was no evidence of higher brain tumor risk among people who use hand-held cellular phones compared to those who do not use them."
The Independent Expert Group chaired by Sir William Stewart published its report on the health implications of mobile phones in 2000. Two later reports by the independent Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation (AGNIR) and the most recent “Mobile Phones and Health 2004” by the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB), have endorsed Stewart's findings. All three reports can be found at: www.nrpb.org.uk.

రేడియేషన్ ౩

Cell Phones, Cancers and Brain Tumors. Do cell phones cause Cancer?What is the REAL story?
Introduction
Cell phones and cancer are in the news all the time now it seems. But almost everyone uses cell phones. All over the world, tens of millions of people are pressing them against their heads for hours every day. Worldwide, the number of cell phone users is estimated to be approximately 5 billion in 2011 and that number has continued to climb.
So what's the fuss? Is cancer caused by cell phones a serious concern, or the media's panic-du-jour?
A cell phone, and a household cordless phone, use a low level form of microwave radiation to send and receive their signals. (see "How do cell phones work" here.) Microwaves, as you know, are used to cook food. As the radiation penetrates tissue it causes it to heat.
Is this a problem for us with cell phones? That is the current debate. Let's examine the positions and the known evidence, without hype or prejudice. As always, EHSO will provide citations and links to the sources of any evidence provided, so you can verify it for yourself.
Positions, pro and con:
Cell phones are dangerous:
They emit microwaves.
They produce heat.
You hold the source of the emission close to your brain.
There are claims that people have had brain tumors in the exact size, shape and position as the antenna on their cell phone.
Cell phones are safe:
Cell phones use a very, very low level of radio frequency (rf) energy - too low to cause damage.
The type of energy emitted is non-ionizing - meaning it doesn't cause damage to chemical bonds or dna.
Hundreds of millions of people have been using cell phones and cordless phones for years. If there were a problem, we would have seen it by now.
Latest News:
October 21, 2011 - Largest Study Ever on Cell Phones and Cancer Finds No Link - The biggest study to look for any connection has found no link between cell phones and cancer. It followed more than 358,000 people for 13 years and concluded heavy cell phone users have the same cancer rates as people who don't use cell phones. The study, out of Denmark, confirms a smaller one reported on last year. It also contradicts the WHO-IARC study and confirms the assessments of the Food and Drug Administration and the Federal Communications Commission.
May 31, 2011 - WHO (World Health Organization) IARC just announced that radiation from cell phones can possibly cause cancer, as reported by CNN. The agency now lists mobile phone use in the same "carcinogenic hazard" category as lead, engine exhaust and chloroform. Note that this is a reversal of WHO's previous position. According to CNN, the Apple iPhone 4 safety manual warns users, "When using iPhone near your body for voice calls or for wireless data transmission over a cellular network, keep iPhone at least 15 mm (5/8 inch) away from the body." and Blackberry Bold advises users to, "keep the BlackBerry device at least 0.98 in. (25 mm) from your body when the BlackBerry device is transmitting." See this page for the IARC's page on the subject.
February 22, 2011 - Cell Phone Calls Alter Brain Activity, Scientists Say; Fox News, Reuters. Spending 50 minutes with a cellphone plastered to your ear is enough to change brain cell activity in the part of the brain closest to the antenna. But whether that causes any harm is not clear, scientists at the National Institutes of Health said on Tuesday, adding that the study will likely not settle recurring concerns of a link between cellphones and brain cancer.
May 17, 2010 - According to the International Agency for Research on Cancer (funded in part by WHO, the World Health Organization) using a cell phone for as little as 30 minutes may increase your risk of getting a brain tumor (glioma). The study is reported to have included 13,000 participants over 10 years. But we have not seen the details of this study. As soon as we find a source, we'll publish a link to it.
March 03, 2010 - Yahoo News and CNN reports that Maine may require a warning about cell phones being a possible cause of brain cancer. Dr. Derva Davis Mt Sinai Medical center, and Dr. David Carpenter Albany University spoke in favor of the proposed bill.
January 2010: Cell Phones may protect against Alzheimer's. Study by Dr. Gary Arendash at the Florida Alzheimer's Disease Research Center. For the complete story, see Business Week's report or Fox News report.
Studies, Facts and Evidence
What is the radiation produced by a cell phone?
Like televisions, alarm systems, computers, and all other electrical devices, Cell phones (also called mobile phones) are radio devices that use Radiofrequency (Rf) energy emit electromagnetic radiation. They operate at low power (less than 1 watt) by transmitting and receiving electromagnetic radiation in the radiofrequency (RF) end of the spectrum. Radiation which is called "ionizing" can be absorbed by tissue and break molecules apart, such as gamma rays and x-rays, are known to cause cancer. The concern is that the cell phone and it's antenna (the source of the radiation) are held close against the head)
The damage to the dna molecules is thought to be the cause. The radiation that a cell phone uses is also part of the same electromagnetic spectrum, but is not ionizing. For this reason, the US FDA can regulate these devices to ensure that the radiation doesn't pose a health hazard to users, but only once the existence of a public health hazard has been established. (See "It's Not a Food or Medical Product, So Why FDA?") , RF energy was mistakenly thought to similarly cause cancer.
Power
Newer phones are digital. The older analog phones are expected to be phased out by 2006. The major difference is that analog phones use much more power than digital. Analog use about 1.3 Watts, while a digital mobile phone is designed to operate at a maximum power level of 0.6 watts (see http://www.telecom.globalsources.com/MAGAZINE/TS/0209/PANALOG.HTM By comparison, a household microwave oven uses between 600 and 1,100 watts.
Frequency
In the United States, mobile phones operate in a frequency ranging from about 850 to 1900 megahertz (MHz). In that range, the radiation produced is in the form of non-ionizing radiofrequency (RF) energy. This RF energy is different than the ionizing radiation like that from a medical x-ray, which can present a health risk at certain doses.
Ionizing gamma rays and x-rays can cause cancer when their energy is absorbed by the tissue and chemical bonds are broken, damaging DNA. RF energy, on the other hand, produces heating of tissue. Although there is a small amount of experimental evidence that suggests RF energy can impact DNA in rats, this data has been contradicted by several other animal studies and is not well substantiated. Even if true, the doses administered in these animal studies were much larger than the exposure in humans and may have no relevance to cell phone use at all. So although the RF energy emitted by cell phones is in the electromagnetic spectrum, and other forms of electromagnetic radiation can cause cancer, RF energy is very different and has not been shown to cause cancer.
At high enough levels, RF energy, too, can be harmful, because of its ability to heat living tissue to the point of causing biological damage. In a microwave oven, it's RF energy that cooks the food, but the heat generated by cell phones is small in comparison.
A mobile phone's main source of RF energy is its antenna, so the closer the antenna is to a phone user's head, the greater the person's expected exposure to RF energy.
Because RF energy from a cell phone falls off quickly as distance increases between a person and the radiation source (actually, by the distance squared), the safety of mobile phones with an antenna mounted away from the user, like on the outside of a car, has been presumed to be safe. The distance and the effect of the car acting as a Gaussian cage would virtually eliminate the radiation inside the car. Also not presently in doubt is the safety of those so-called cordless phones that have a base unit attached to a home's telephone wiring and operate at much lower power levels than cell phones.
Many experts say that no matter how near the cell phone's antenna--even if it's right up against the skull--the six-tenths of a watt (typically) of power emitted couldn't possibly affect human health.
Scientific Studies to Date
Some mobile phone users have been diagnosed with brain cancer, and many others who have not used mobile phones have gotten the disease, too. Each year in the United States, brain cancer occurs at a rate of about six new cases per 100,000 people. Among the 100 million Americans who own mobile phones, then, about 6,000 cases of brain cancer would be expected among them in a year, even if they had not used mobile phones.
Scientific studies have focused on the question of whether the statistical risk of getting brain cancer is increased in those who use mobile phones compared to non-users, leaving to the courts the judgment of whether Chris Newman or other individuals would have gotten the disease had they not used a cell phone.
Two types of studies are generally used to investigate suspected cancer causes: epidemiological studies, which look at the incidence of a disease in certain groups of people, and animal studies. This fact sheet from the National Institute of Cancer provides references to more studies.
Epidemiological studies are sometimes difficult to carry out in a way that can determine whether a cause-and-effect relationship exists between a single variable in a person's life (in this case, cell phone use) and the person's disease (brain cancer). Some factors that complicate research into the asserted link between cell phones and brain cancer: Brain cancer can take years or even decades to develop, making possible long-term effects of mobile phone use difficult to study; mobile phone technology is ever-evolving; and so many lifestyle factors--even down to the precise position in which a person holds the phone, as well as his or her own anatomy--can affect the extent of radiation exposure.
Studies in animals are easier to control, but entail complications of their own. For example, how should results obtained in rats and mice be interpreted in terms of human health risks? And how can scientists account for the fact that these studies sometimes expose animals to RF almost continuously--up to 22 hours a day--and to whole-body radiation, unlike people's head-only exposure?
While studies generally have shown no link between cell phones and brain cancer, there is some conflicting scientific evidence that may be worth additional study, according to FDA. (See "Studies"). The FDA says on their website that they are closely following ongoing research into whether there might be any association between cell phones and cancer.
A long-term study begun in 1994 by the government's National Cancer Institute is already under way to examine possible risk factors for brain cancer. It compares past usage of mobile phones (as well as other environmental, lifestyle, and genetic factors) by 800 people with brain tumors compared with 800 others who don't have tumors.
The study, the first part of which is expected to be published early next year, will provide a "snapshot" of what the risks from cell phones could be, says Peter Inskip, Sc.D., one of the study's principal investigators. But this research, he cautions, has its own limitations. For one thing, the study was started in 1994 and it considers radiation exposures from cell phones that occurred between the mid-1980s and 1998. That time frame in large part predates the explosion in the popularity of cell phones, as well as the introduction of digital phones that work on a fraction of the energy compared with older analog varieties.
Recently, FDA announced that it will collaborate with the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA) on additional laboratory and human studies of mobile phone safety. A "Cooperative Research and Development Agreement" signed in June provides for research to be conducted by third parties, with industry funding and FDA oversight to help ensure the studies' quality.
Specifically, FDA will identify the scientific questions that merit attention, propose research to address those questions, review study proposals from those interested in doing the research, make recommendations on the selection of researchers, and oversee the development of study design. Once research is begun, FDA will review the progress of ongoing studies, review the results of completed studies, and issue a report to the CTIA.
Beyond this planned research, according to the industry association, there are hundreds of scientific studies completed or in progress around the world to investigate RF's possible health effects, with half of them specifically addressing the frequencies used by wireless phones. FDA is a leading participant in the World Health Organization's International EMF (electric and magnetic fields) project to coordinate research and the harmonization of international radiation standards.Ziff-Davis reports that researchers in Australia have reported their hypothesis that normal mobile phone use can lead to cancer. The research group, lead by radiation expert Dr Peter French, principal scientific officer at the Centre for Immunology Research at St Vincent's Hospital in Sydney, said that mobile phone frequencies well below current safety levels could stress cells in a way that has been shown to increased susceptibility to cancer.
The paper, published in the June 2001 issue of the science journal, "Differentiation", says that repeated exposure to mobile phone radiation acts as a repetitive stress, leading to continuous manufacture of heat shock proteins within cells.
Their theory is that these proteins, which are sensitive to heat, are always present in cells at a low level, but are manufactured in larger amounts when the cell is stressed by heat or other environmental factors. These proteins repair other proteins that are adversely affected by the conditions, and are part of the cell's normal reaction to stress. However, if they are produced too often or for too long, they are known to initiate cancer and increase resistance to anti-cancer drugs.
However, this group has reported absolutely evidence nor studies to substantiate this - it is only a theory.
More recently, a Finnish survey of some of the world's most popular mobile phones found the amount of radiation they emit is well below agreed limits and largely in line with data published by manufacturers. The survey conducted by Finland's Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) covered 16 new models made by top handset makers including Finland's own Nokia, Motorola of the United States and South Korea's Samsung Electronics. At this level, the study found that head tissue does not warm significantly and no other harmful effects have been proved scientifically. STUK said the SAR levels in all the 28 models tested so far ranged from 0.45 to 1.12 watts per kilogram. "It is important that also in the future the limits set for radiation from mobile phones and base stations are based on current and confirmed scientific proof of the effects of radiation on health," Kari Jokela, a researcher at STUK, said in a statement. STUK also said that some of its studies have indicated that microwave radiation from mobile phones may cause small changes in how cells operate, but the findings were insufficient for concluding what effects of this radiation had on health. STUK will start testing third-generation UMTS-standard mobile phones during 2005, focusing on the most popular models. Other phones in the current study were made by Sony Ericsson and Siemens.
Finally, as the non-ionizing radiation does have a small heating effect, it is postulated that the effect would be greatest on the eyes and testes, due to the lower amount of blood vessels to help cool these areas.
Perceptions and Concerns
The latest studies may support the generally held position that cell phone radiation is not a substantial hazard, but they will never be able to prove cell phones to be absolutely safe. It is logically impossible to prove a negative, that cell phones can not cause cancer.
Conclusions
EHSO has seen no credible evidence to date that cell phones cause cancer or brain tumors. It is illogical to believe that evidence of unusual brain tumors is covered up when there are hundred's of millions of people using cell phones worldwide. There is a TREMENDOUS amount of junk science and thoroughly ignorant (as in untrained, uneducated) people running around naming themselves as experts and publishing their opinions on the internet. This hype and fear-mongering has only one goal: to puff up the egos and wallets of those propagating nonsense.And the supposed link between mobile-phone use and cancer is even listed among the American Cancer Society's "Top 10 Cancer Myths,"
However, cell phones are still relatively new, and while science does not support that the radiation may not be likely to cause cancer, time may prove differently! And in any case, it may cause some other type of damage (certainly accidents in cars from being distracted while fumbling with the phone!)
So common sense suggests that we each take some prudent precautions; see below.
Precautionary Steps To Take
There are some simple steps that cell phone users can take to reduce any remaining risk:
First, use a headset or speakerphone mode. That moves the phone (and it's antenna) away from your head.
Second, consider reserving the use of mobile phones for shorter conversations or when a conventional phone is not available.
Third, the effects of cellular damage are greatest on growing, developing organisms (i.e., the young), so limit children's use of cell phones!
Finally, in a car, use an external antenna mounted outside the vehicle to move the source of the radiation farther from you!
And don't believe the claims of conmen preying on people's fear of radiation, selling fraudulent devices that they say protect against radiation. These useless items are mostly sold as "shields" on the Internet. Experts says none of these devices work.
To reduce the risk of an accident while driving, here's a simple tip: enter the several numbers you call the most often in a way that brings them to the top of the list, so you can use fewer keystrokes to dial them. For example, the Motorola V60 starts with an alphabetized list when you press the multi-function button; so start your most commonly called number with "AAA", Like "aaaParents" and the next number with "AAB", like "aabHusband", then they will always appear at the top of the list, which should take fewer keystrokes and less time to dial!
Below are a variety of headsets that will allow you to use your cellphone without the potential risks of having the transmitter close to your ear. The blooth versions work with any mobile phone that is bluetooth enabled, which includes Apple iPhones and most Android and smartphones. If your phone does not have blooth, one of the wrired versions will work justthe same. If you play music from your phone, there are steroe headset versions that work both as a headset for talking on the phone and for playing music. These below have the highest customer satistfaction for both safety, reliability and voice / sound quality:

రేడియేషన్ రోగాలు ౨

Thumbnail
Effects
Many scientific studies have investigated possible health symptoms of mobile phone radiation. These studies are occasionally reviewed by some scientific committees to assess overall risks. A recent assessment was published in 2007 by the European Commission Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks (SCENIHR).[4] It concludes that the three lines of evidence, viz. animal, in vitro, and epidemiological studies, indicate that "exposure to RF fields is unlikely to lead to an increase in cancer in humans".
[edit] Radiation absorption
Part of the radio waves emitted by a mobile telephone handset are absorbed by the human head. The radio waves emitted by a GSM handset can have a peak power of 2 watts, and a US analogue phone had a maximum transmit power of 3.6 watts. Other digital mobile technologies, such as CDMA2000 and D-AMPS, use lower output power, typically below 1 watt. The maximum power output from a mobile phone is regulated by the mobile phone standard and by the regulatory agencies in each country.[citation needed] In most systems the cellphone and the base station check reception quality and signal strength and the power level is increased or decreased automatically, within a certain span, to accommodate different situations, such as inside or outside of buildings and vehicles. The rate at which radiation is absorbed by the human body is measured by the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR), and its maximum levels for modern handsets have been set by governmental regulating agencies in many countries. In the USA, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has set a SAR limit of 1.6 W/kg, averaged over a volume of 1 gram of tissue, for the head. In Europe, the limit is 2 W/kg, averaged over a volume of 10 grams of tissue. SAR values are heavily dependent on the size of the averaging volume. Without information about the averaging volume used, comparisons between different measurements cannot be made. Thus, the European 10-gram ratings should be compared among themselves, and the American 1-gram ratings should only be compared among themselves. SAR data for specific mobile phones, along with other useful information, can be found directly on manufacturers' websites, as well as on third party web sites.[5]
[edit] Thermal effects
One well-understood effect of microwave radiation is dielectric heating, in which any dielectric material (such as living tissue) is heated by rotations of polar molecules induced by the electromagnetic field. In the case of a person using a cell phone, most of the heating effect will occur at the surface of the head, causing its temperature to increase by a fraction of a degree. In this case, the level of temperature increase is an order of magnitude less than that obtained during the exposure of the head to direct sunlight. The brain's blood circulation is capable of disposing of excess heat by increasing local blood flow. However, the cornea of the eye does not have this temperature regulation mechanism and exposure of 2–3 hours duration has been reported to produce cataracts in rabbits' eyes at SAR values from 100-140W/kg, which produced lenticular temperatures of 41°C. There were no cataracts detected in the eyes of monkeys exposed under similar conditions.[6] Premature cataracts have not been linked with cell phone use, possibly because of the lower power output of mobile phones.
[edit] Non-thermal effects
The communications protocols used by mobile phones often result in low-frequency pulsing of the carrier signal. Whether these modulations have biological significance has been subject to debate.[7]
Some researchers have argued that so-called "non-thermal effects" could be reinterpreted as a normal cellular response to an increase in temperature. The German biophysicist Roland Glaser, for example,[8] has argued that there are several thermoreceptor molecules in cells, and that they activate a cascade of second and third messenger systems, gene expression mechanisms and production of heat shock proteins in order to defend the cell against metabolic cell stress caused by heat. The increases in temperature that cause these changes are too small to be detected by studies such as REFLEX, which base their whole argument on the apparent stability of thermal equilibrium in their cell cultures.
Other researchers believe the stress proteins are unrelated to thermal effects, since they occur for both extremely low frequencies (ELF) and radio frequencies (RF), which have very different energy levels.[9] Another preliminary study published in 2011 by The Journal of the American Medical Association conducted using fluorodeoxyglucose injections and positron emission tomography concluded that exposure to radiofrequency signal waves within parts of the brain closest to the cell phone antenna resulted in increased levels of glucose metabolism, but the clinical significance of this finding is unknown.[10][11]
[edit] Blood-brain barrier effects
Swedish researchers from Lund University (Salford, Brun, Persson, Eberhardt, and Malmgren) have studied the effects of microwave radiation on the rat brain. They found a leakage of albumin into the brain via a permeated blood-brain barrier.[12][13] This confirms earlier work on the blood-brain barrier by Allan Frey, Oscar and Hawkins, and Albert and Kerns.[14] Other groups have not confirmed these findings in in vitro cell studies[15] or whole animal studies.[16]
[edit] Cancer
In 2006 a large Danish study about the connection between mobile phone use and cancer incidence was published. It followed over 420,000 Danish citizens for 20 years and showed no increased risk of cancer.[17] The German Federal Office for Radiation Protection (Bundesamt für Strahlenschutz) considers this report inconclusive.[18]
The following studies of long time exposure have been published:
The 13 nation INTERPHONE project – the largest study of its kind ever undertaken – has now been published and did not find a solid link between mobile phones and brain tumours.[19]
The International Journal of Epidemiology published[20] a combined data analysis from a multi national population-based case-control study of glioma and meningioma, the most common types of brain tumour.
The authors reported the following conclusion:
Overall, no increase in risk of glioma or meningioma was observed with use of mobile phones. There were suggestions of an increased risk of glioma at the highest exposure levels, but biases and error prevent a causal interpretation. The possible effects of long-term heavy use of mobile phones require further investigation.
In the press release[21] accompanying the release of the paper, Dr Christopher Wild, Director of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) said:
An increased risk of brain cancer is not established from the data from Interphone. However, observations at the highest level of cumulative call time and the changing patterns of mobile phone use since the period studied by Interphone, particularly in young people, mean that further investigation of mobile phone use and brain cancer risk is merited.
A number of independent health and government authorities have commented on this important study including The Australian Centre for Radiofrequency Bioeffects Research (ACRBR) which said in a statement that:[22]
Until now there have been concerns that mobile phones were causing increases in brain tumours. Interphone is both large and rigorous enough to address this claim, and it has not provided any convincing scientific evidence of an association between mobile phone use and the development of glioma or meningioma. While the study demonstrates some weak evidence of an association with the highest tenth of cumulative call time (but only in those who started mobile phone use most recently), the authors conclude that biases and errors limit the strength of any conclusions in this group. It now seems clear that if there was an effect of mobile phone use on brain tumour risks in adults, this is likely to be too small to be detectable by even a large multinational study of the size of Interphone.
The Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA)which said in a statement that:
On the basis of current understanding of the relationship between brain cancer and use of mobile phones, including the recently published data from the INTERPHONE study, ARPANSA:
concludes that currently available data do not warrant any general recommendation to limit use of mobile phones in the adult population,
continues to inform those concerned about potential health effects that they may limit their exposure by reducing call time, by making calls where reception is good, by using hands-free devices or speaker options, or by texting; and
recommends that, due to the lack of any data relating to children and long term use of mobile phones, parents encourage their children to limit their exposure by reducing call time, by making calls where reception is good, by using hands-free devices or speaker options, or by texting.
The Cancer Council Australia said in a statement that it cautiously welcomed the results of the largest international study to date into mobile phone use, which has found no evidence that normal use of mobile phones, for a period up to 12 years, can cause brain cancer.
Chief Executive Officer, Professor Ian Olver, said findings from the Interphone study, conducted across 13 countries including Australia, were consistent with other research that had failed to find a link between mobile phones and cancer.
This supports previous research showing mobile phones don’t damage cell DNA, meaning they can’t cause the type of genetic mutations that develop into cancer,” Professor Olver said.
However, it has been suggested that electromagnetic fields associated with mobile phones may play a role in speeding up the development of an existing cancer. The Interphone study found no evidence to support this theory.
Thumbnail

మొబైల్ ఫోన్ రేడియేషన్ వల్ల కలిగే రోగాలు

Research on cancer risk in cell phone users
Researchers and public health experts worldwide are engaged in a vigorous debate about whether cell phone radiation can lead to brain cancer (American Cancer Society 2008; FDA 2003; Hardell 2009; IARC 2008, 2009b; Kundi 2009). While earlier, short-term studies did not find an increased risk of brain cancer (Ahlbom 2009; Croft 2008; FDA 2003), studies of long-term cell phone use, published over the last four years, have found an increased risk of developing two types of brain tumors on the ipsilateral side (the side of the brain on which the cell phone is primarily held) among people who used a cell phone for longer than 10 years (Hardell, Carlberg 2006b; Hours 2007; Lahkola 2007; Lonn 2005; Schoemaker 2005; Schuz, Bohler, Berg 2006; Takebayashi 2008):
Glioma – a typically malignant tumor of the brain that arises from glial cells that provide physical support for the central nervous system;
Acoustic neuroma – a benign tumor of the vestibulocochlear nerve that innervates the ear.
Two recent studies also reported increased risk of salivary gland (parotid gland) tumors among cell phone users (Lonn 2006; Sadetzki 2008).
In the late 1990s, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) developed a multinational case-control study, INTERPHONE, to address strong public concerns about cell phone safety (Cardis 1999). The goal of the INTERPHONE study was to investigate whether the radiofrequency radiation emitted by cell phones is carcinogenic (IARC 2009b). Thirteen countries participated in the project (Australia, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden and the UK). The study ran from 2000 to 2006, cost 30 million U.S. dollars (Economist 2008) and involved 14,078 study participants, among them 2,765 glioma, 2,425 meningioma, 1,121 acoustic neurinoma, 109 malignant parotid gland tumour cases and 7,658 controls (Cardis 2007).
The publication of final results and conclusions of the entire INTERPHONE study has been delayed for three years since the conclusion of the study (IARC 2009a; Microwave News 2009). Scientists have questioned whether the study design methods were adequate for detecting increased cancer risk, and whether recall biases might have impacted the quality of the data and resultant conclusions (Cardis 2007; Kundi 2009; Vrijheid, Armstrong 2009; Vrijheid, Cardis 2006; Vrijheid, Deltour 2006; Vrijheid, Richardson 2009). Meanwhile, scientists from different international centers have begun to publish their findings independently (Cardis 2007; Lonn 2005; Schlehofer 2007; Schoemaker 2005; Schuz, Bohler, Schlehofer 2006; Takebayashi 2006).
As described in the article published by the Economist in September 2008:
“Delays in releasing the report have been due to “the difficulty of interpreting the findings due to potential biases” and to the “conducting of additional analyses to try and disentangle the potential impacts of selection and recall errors on the risk estimates”. The Interphone researchers are split into three camps. One believes any increased incidence of tumours shown in the study is purely the result of the biases. Another thinks it really has found increased risks of certain tumours and wants to call for precautionary measures. A third group is just keeping quiet. One person who knows many of the scientists, but prefers not to be named, describes the relations between members of the three groups as “strained”—harsh language in the world of scientific research.”(Economist 2008)
The latest update of the INTERPHONE study results, published on October 8, 2008 (IARC 2008), included 6 publications that found some increase in the risk of glioma for long-term cell phone users, especially on the ipsilateral side (Christensen 2005; Hours 2007; Lahkola 2007; Lonn 2005; Schuz, Bohler, Berg 2006). This side of the head absorbs 97-99% of the total electromagnetic energy deposited in the brain during calls (Cardis 2008), which supports the link between cell phone use and ipsilateral brain tumor development. Only two of the INTERPHONE studies did not find an increased glioma risk (Hepworth 2006; Takebayashi 2008). Increased risk of glioma associated with long-term cell phone use has been also reported by the Hardell group in Sweden (Hardell, Carlberg 2006b; Hardell 2009).
INTERPHONE results for acoustic neuroma are more varied. Of the 7 INTERPHONE reports on acoustic neuroma, 5 publications based on less than 10 years exposure did not detect an increased risk (Christensen 2004; Hours 2007; Klaeboe 2007; Schlehofer 2007; Takebayashi 2006). In contrast, two publications that were based on longer than 10-year exposure reported an increased risk of acoustic neuroma (Lonn, Ahlbom 2004; Schoemaker 2005). Similar to glioma, the risk for developing acoustic neuroma appears to be strongest for tumors on the ipsilateral side and long-term exposures (Hardell, Carlberg 2006a; IARC 2008).
A meta-analysis that combined results from all brain tumor studies published to date reported that among people who had used cell phones for more than 10 years, the risk of ipsilateral brain tumor increased by 90% for glioma and 60% for acoustic neuroma (Hardell 2009; Kundi 2009). Some studies have also reported an increased risk of the benign brain tumor meningioma, although the risk appears to be smaller and thus much harder to detect (Hardell 2009; Kundi 2009; Takebayashi 2008). Authors of the study noted that the risk appears to be higher in rural areas where phones typically radiate at higher intensities to allow signals to reach distant transmission towers (Hillert 2006).
While the publication of the final INTERPHONE summary is pending (IARC 2009a), detailed post-study analysis suggested that some of the negative findings may have been related to the study design and methods for determining past personal patterns of cell phone use (Hardell and Hansson Mild 2006; IARC 2008; Vrijheid, Cardis 2006; Vrijheid, Deltour 2006; Vrijheid, Mann 2009; Vrijheid, Richardson 2009). For example, among studies where the observed effects were weak, an increased risk of brain tumor was nevertheless reported for long-term users, users with the largest number of calls, and users with the largest numbers of telephones (Hours 2007; Schoemaker 2009).
Recently, a large-scale, multi-center study in Israel also found an association between salivary (parotid) gland cancer and heavy use of cell phones, especially for rural areas where cell phones typically transmit at higher power (Sadetzki 2008). As reported by the team of Israeli scientists, the anatomic location of the parotid gland just below the ear would makes it vulnerable to cell phone radiation exposure. Parotid tumor occurs at a relatively young age (43-55 years of age), so that many current cell phone users may already be at risk for these tumors (Sadetzki 2008).
Researchers found a 48-58% increased risk of salivary gland tumors among people who make the greatest total number of calls or who log the most time on the phone without a hands-free device compared to others in the study group, on the side of the brain on which the cell phone was held (ipsilateral). No increased risk was seen for tumors on the other side of the head (Sadetzki 2008). The Israeli findings are in close agreement with an earlier study conducted in Sweden and Denmark; this study, based on a cohort about 1/3rd the size of the Israeli cohort, observed a 40% increased risk of ipsilateral benign tumors (Lonn 2006).
The fact that scientists have observed increased tumor risk in so many studies of cell phone users is even more powerful given that people have used cell phones widely for only about a decade, while cancer typically requires 15-20 years to develop. It seems likely that studies conducted in future years may find more consistent and higher cancer risks (Ahlbom 2004; Ahlbom 2009; Krewski 2001; Krewski 2007; Kundi 2009; Kundi 2004).
Strikingly, the field of research on the health effects of cell phone use has exhibited the signature pattern of a so-called “funding effect,” a biased outcome due to source of funding, observed in studies funded by tobacco companies or the manufacturers of industrial chemicals such as the endocrine disrupting plasticizer BPA (vom Saal 2005). In 2001, the U.S. Government Accountability Office voiced a strong concern about the reliability of results from industry-funded studies conducted without government oversight (GAO 2001). A recent systematic review of the source of funding and results of studies of health effects of cell phone use indicated that studies funded by the cell phone industry were ten times more likely to report no adverse effects compared to studies funded by public agencies or charities (Huss 2007; Huss 2008). Thus, some of the heterogeneity in the earlier literature could be related to the source of funding, whereby research sponsors could influence the design of the study, the nature of the exposure, and the type of outcome assessed.
Cell phones and health effects other than cancer
New lines of research are examining central nervous system diseases other than brain tumors in relation to cell phone use:
A recent Danish study noted an increased risk for neurological symptoms such as migraine and vertigo for cell phone users (Schuz 2009);
Scientists have found an increased risk for Alzheimer disease associated with electromagnetic radiation (Huss 2009);
A study from the University of California, Los Angeles found a correlation between prenatal exposure to cell phone radiation and behavioral problems in children (Divan 2008).
Six studies from the U.S., Australia, Japan and Europe reported that exposure to cell phone radiation has an adverse effect on sperm counts, motility and vitality (Agarwal 2009; De Iuliis 2009; Erogul 2006; Fejes 2005; Salama 2009; Yan 2007).
In animal studies, scientists have found that exposure during gestation to radiofrequency radiation like that emitted by cell phones is associated with decreased fetal growth, developmental abnormalities, and death of offspring (BioInitiative 2007; Heynick 2003). In occupational health studies for female physiotherapists, conducted in Sweden, Israel, and Finland, scientists found that workplace exposure to radiofrequency radiation during pregnancy is associated with low birth weight, congenital malformations, fetal death, and spontaneous abortions (Kallen 1982; Lerman 2001; Taskinen 1990).
The key question in the cell phone research field is how radiofrequency radiation like that from cell phones affects biological tissues and cells. Scientists have proposed and explored a number of possible mechanisms:
A number of studies examined the potential for genotoxicity of elecromagnetic fields (harm to genetic material in body cells that can lead to mutations and cancer) (BioInitiative 2007; Phillips 2009). While the evidence is not yet conclusive, one quarter of studies published on this issue found a genotoxic effect from low-level exposures (Vijayalaxmi 2008).
Scientists have reported that cell phone radiation affects levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS) inside the cell (Irmak 2002; Zmyslony 2004). In turn, higher ROS levels trigger intracellular signaling cascades that interrupt the smooth functioning of the cell. Changes in the activation status of molecules within these signaling cascades can lead to inflammation, heart disease, cancer and other chronic health conditions (Boutros 2008; Muslin 2008; Skaper 2007).
Cell phone radiation-induced reactive oxygen species may well be the causative agent that induces DNA damage, which is a precursor to cancer (Phillips 2009) and a potential mechanism of toxicity to sperm cells (De Iuliis 2009).
Radiofrequency radiation has been associated with a change in the activity of white blood cells (Aly 2008).
Exposure to cell phone radiation has been associated with cell death and activation of intracellular signaling molecules (Lee 2008). There is a vigorous debate in the literature regarding the types of conditions under which radiofrequency radiation would cause cell death (Guney 2007; Nikolova 2005; Palumbo 2008; Zhao 2007).
As described in a recent expert review, “In a living cell, many important processes occur by electron transfer across membrane structures in a well-organized manner, ions cross selective channels, proteins get activated and deactivated by cascades of precisely regulated enzymes” (Kundi 2009). These electronic processes would likely be affected by the electromagnetic fields, leading to altered cellular function, growth, and differentiation (Karinen 2008; Moisescu 2008; Zareen 2009). While none of these processes individually can be considered equivalent to the development of disease, all of them are associated with chronic adverse health effects and need to be considered in the assessment of radiofrequency radiation impact on biological organisms.

7.28.2011

know how to save ur skin


know how to save ur skin hno:12-10-416/5/1, ramalayam road, sitaphalmandi, secuderabad. ph:9391285535 visit: http:ayurveda-vyasa-film-trust.blogspot.com.

constipation causes all kinds of diseases

Thumbnail0:౩౬
constipation causes all kinds of diseases hno:12-10-416/5/1, ramalayam road, sitaphalmandi, secuderabad. ph:9391285535 visit: http:ayurveda-vyasa-film-trust.blogspot.com