 |
|
Feature Article:
Cell Phone Cancer
Reports on cell phone cancer
didn't cover tumor risk.
Cell phones - do they cause
cancer?
By Tamara Traubman, Haaretz
Correspondent
"Among those who used cell phones for more than 10 years,
the risk of developing acoustic neuroma, a nervous system tumor, was almost
twice that of people who did not use them"
|
|
Some Interesting Facts about Cell Phones
 |
|
The world's approximately 1
billion cellular telephone users received good news at the end of August: New
research showed the devices did not increase the chance of cancer, even among
those who used them for a decade or more. But the research included another part
not reported in the press that experts have called "a warning light."
Among those who used cell phones for more than 10 years, the risk of developing
acoustic neuroma, a nervous system tumor, was almost twice that of people who
did not use them.
The good news was reported by hundreds of media outlets worldwide, including
Haaretz. Cellular carriers could not have hoped for better PR: "Cell phones
don't cause cancer!" However, the press all relied on a press release penned by
the researchers that did not include the worrisome findings.
|
|
What can I use to
protect myself from cell phone cancer and radiation

 |
|
Cell phone radiation and cell
phone cancer.
Television news reporter Chico
Menashe uncovered the story, which will be reported Friday. Menashe, who
reported the complete findings, said he began to look into the matter when
Channel 2 newsroom staff began to wonder why his report differed from those
published worldwide.
The findings do not unequivocally determine that cell phones are dangerous to
health. According to the researchers, the study did not include enough subjects,
and suffers from methodological weaknesses.
Scientists in four Scandinavian countries and the United Kingdom conducted the
research. It is part of a larger World Health Organization study involving
scientists in 15 countries, including Israel. Some researchers began releasing
the results of the studies in their own countries, including Professor Anthony
Swerdlow's study published in the British Journal of Cancer. The scientific
journal reported the entire findings; however, a press release only mentioned
the "good news." The first to report the study was Reuters, a central news
source for thousands of newspapers and television and radio stations. About 300
media outlets around the world picked up the story.
Dr. Sigal Sadetzki, who heads the Israeli team participating in the WHO study,
says: "A 10-year study is insufficient to determine if cell phones increase the
chances of cancer. Even the results of smoking are not evident in such a time
period. To examine the effect of cell phones, 20 or even 40 years must be
examined," she says.
"The results aren't strong enough for me to accept as a scientist," she
explains. "On the other hand, they are a red warning light."
Swerdlow responded to a Haaretz email inquiry, explaining that the findings that
suggest a connection between cellular use and morbidity were omitted from the
press release in order to use language clear to the general public. "Press
releases are inevitably compressed and simplified," Swerdlow writes. "The
article gave full details of the research, and the press release included a link
to the full results."
Sadetzki refrains from criticizing Swerdlow, but believes the entire findings
should have appeared in the press release, with the requisite explanations and
reservations. "A scientist can say `don't take these results as carved in
stone,' but must publish complete findings. There's a difference between
publishing partial findings and the interpretation of findings."
A comment by Reuters was unavailable by press time.
|