No more dangerous than cell phone? New study
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Programs: WN Nothing and spending the half million points from too many flights, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,043
No more dangerous than cell phone? New study
We have been told it is no more dangerous than a cell phone. Well.....
Hold the phone, Central! Cellphone radiation can cause cancer: study
I know, one of many studies and the article is brief and without a lot of detail. It does give a new slant on the old canard about "Just as safe as your cell phone..."
BTW, I'm not giving up my phone.
Hold the phone, Central! Cellphone radiation can cause cancer: study
I know, one of many studies and the article is brief and without a lot of detail. It does give a new slant on the old canard about "Just as safe as your cell phone..."
BTW, I'm not giving up my phone.
#3
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,162
We have been told it is no more dangerous than a cell phone. Well.....
Hold the phone, Central! Cellphone radiation can cause cancer: study
I know, one of many studies and the article is brief and without a lot of detail. It does give a new slant on the old canard about "Just as safe as your cell phone..."
BTW, I'm not giving up my phone.
Hold the phone, Central! Cellphone radiation can cause cancer: study
I know, one of many studies and the article is brief and without a lot of detail. It does give a new slant on the old canard about "Just as safe as your cell phone..."
BTW, I'm not giving up my phone.
Link to full report, if you want to shell out $52.00
#4
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: TPA
Programs: AAdvantage 2 million, Marriott Gold
Posts: 960
Well, smoking causes cancer and that does not stop people
Last I heard also was dental X-rays. Mentioned it to my dentist who immediately disagreed until I reminded her that they do cover me up to 'protect the junk' then why was it not possible with something that was up against my head?
Having had a glioma removed, I am convinced it is breathing.
Last I heard also was dental X-rays. Mentioned it to my dentist who immediately disagreed until I reminded her that they do cover me up to 'protect the junk' then why was it not possible with something that was up against my head?
Having had a glioma removed, I am convinced it is breathing.
#5
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SYD (perenially), GVA (not in a long time)
Programs: QF PS, EK-Gold, Security Theatre Critic
Posts: 6,766
I browsed the actual study (my company's network has free access to the informa site). The following articles sum it up pretty accurately:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/31/return-of-the-cell-phones-cause-cancer-scare/
https://www.theskepticsguide.org/sca...ut-cell-phones
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/31/return-of-the-cell-phones-cause-cancer-scare/
https://www.theskepticsguide.org/sca...ut-cell-phones
#6
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 288
We have been told it is no more dangerous than a cell phone. Well.....
Hold the phone, Central! Cellphone radiation can cause cancer: study
I know, one of many studies and the article is brief and without a lot of detail. It does give a new slant on the old canard about "Just as safe as your cell phone..."
BTW, I'm not giving up my phone.
Hold the phone, Central! Cellphone radiation can cause cancer: study
I know, one of many studies and the article is brief and without a lot of detail. It does give a new slant on the old canard about "Just as safe as your cell phone..."
BTW, I'm not giving up my phone.
#7
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SYD (perenially), GVA (not in a long time)
Programs: QF PS, EK-Gold, Security Theatre Critic
Posts: 6,766
it's also been (correctly) noted that you receive more radiation from flying -- more cosmic rays at higher altitudes -- than you do from the scanner. Both of these observations are true, but completely irrelevant, and it demomonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of simple statistical probability. Russian roulette is a form of risk exposure, and the odds of getting shot playing it are cumulative. If you play a single round with one revolver, it doesn't logically follow that there is no problem with playing another round with a second revolver because the second one is "no more dangerous" than the one you just played with. Put another way, attempying to claim that the scanners are safe because they are "no more dangerous" than the cell phone you are using is like saying cigarette smoking is safe because it's no more likely to kill you than the car you drive in every day. It's an ignorant, rubbish argument.
Comparing exposure from radio-frequency (non-ionizing) body scanners to cosmic (ionizing) radiation is scientifically rubbish.
Comparing one round of Russian roulette to two rounds of Russian roulette is statistically rubbish.
Comparing the risk of cancer due to cigarettes to the risk of a fatal car accident is logically rubbish.
However, comparing the health risk of a radio-frequency (non-ionizing) exposure from a body scanner to the health risk of a radio-frequency (non-ionizing) exposure from a cell phone (or the door sensor noted above, or other similar devices) is not rubbish.
The damage from ionizing radiation (eg cosmic radiation, or dental x-rays) is cumulative - a little bit each day adds up over time. So is the damage from cigarette smoke. So more exposure over time increases the damage. The risk from Russian roulette (or driving) increases with more events.
However, it is universally understood that any health risk from non-ionizing energy is NOT cumulative. If an exposure level does not cause damage in the short term, exposure for longer times does not increase the risk of damage. So the relevant comparison is power per sq cm of skin from the body scanner vs power per sq cm of skin from a cell phone (or other radiofrequency device). And in that comparison, the body scanner produces a lower (much lower) exposure than cell phones, etc.
A more relevant analogy (than cigarettes, Russian roulette, driving) is hot water. Boiling water will burn skin immediately, and immersion in boiling water would lead to a quick death. But a person can take a warm bath for an hour every day with no adverse effects - the effect is not cumulative and doesn't, over time, add up to the equivalent of boiling water.
I hate the body scanners as much as anybody here, but claiming health risks is not credible.
#10
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: SYD (perenially), GVA (not in a long time)
Programs: QF PS, EK-Gold, Security Theatre Critic
Posts: 6,766
True. Also, I occasionally get headaches due to the frustration of dealing with an idiot on the other end of the call.