Author Options:

The cell phone signal controversy ? Answered

Now, we have long been told that cellphone signals can cause or trigger brain tumor and its pretty much fallen on deaf ears because we cant possibly disconnect ourselves from the cell phones and mobile devices. But is it true that you can prevent them from boosting the cell phone signal like this article states.


While there might be slight disagreement about whether heavy use of mobile phones is associated with a miniscule increased risk of tumors, there is no scientific disagreement with the assertion that no large effect exists. For example, this group thought that they had found an association, then did further study and demonstrated that they had not.

There are major difficulties in conducting a cell phone study that may invalidate the results. This article comments on some of them. For example, in certain situations, people will remember things in vivid detail that never actually happened. Also, studies that lump together unrelated diseases and dissimilar people may be losing important information.

It also points out that (in the US) the risk of getting any kind of brain tumor at any time in your life is only 4 to 8 per 1000 people. (By comparison, the risk of being killed in a motor vehicle accident is 10 in 1000. ) So even if the increased risk were not imaginary, it would still not necessarily be cause for alarm.

There is little or no risk from the RF emitted by cell phones. And, by the way, the video on the site you link to (where the phones apparenly cause the corn to pop) is a viral advertisment and is a fake - you cannot pop corn using the antannae of mobile phones.

rofl, cell phones are fine. They can't help your health (mental or physical) but they won't kill you, they want even cause headaches, stress causes that.

You might find something like this. but that's just another case of "researchers" connecting causation and correlation. They think "more likely to use cell phone" + "more likely to get tumor" = "cellphones cause brain tumor". There's WAY more things to consider, like maybe people that use cellphones are more likely to encounter pollution or are less clean, idk. Here, i'll make another; "The researchers discovered that people that drive cars are 400% more likely to have stress-related headaches, cars must cause headaches." <<<NO!!!! Bad researchers! BAD, no treats for you!

This is only 1/2 of the scientific method. They have only made an assumption, this data does not prove anything, it only shows a trend. There is NO proof that taking a cell phone away from one of these people for their life will have ANY effect.

I absolutely agree that the fallacy of "correlation equals causation" runs rampant among popular science reporting.

But in my experience, the problem is not the researchers, but the people who write newspaper headlines without bothering to even read the abstract of the paper that they are reporting on.

Key things to look for: The reporter keeps mentioning "researchers," "scientists," or "experts" without actually providing their names, qualifications, and places of employment. The reporter mentions a "study" without actually providing the title of the article in question.

If mainstream journalists would report on review articles, which are generally the thoroughly retested and uncontroversial results, the journalism would be much improved. But no, they have to impress their publisher with gross exaggerations of the importance of a hot new study fresh off the press, even though the researchers themselves cautiously explained the ways in which they might be wrong.

"We have long been told" by people who don't have any sensible evidence or data to back up their fear-mongering.

I've just reviewed the citations, and surprisingly, the Wikipedia article is reasonable and useful. None of the purported mechanisms are consistent with the actual power output of cell phone (and note that "signal boosters" are receiver amplifiers, not transmitters).

I wouldn't believe what that site implies, as they're obviously trying to sell the things. L

thank god someone posted this i would like to here it does not with lots of evidence because my friend wants a phone but can't get one because his mom doesn't want him to get a tumor. but reasons why it does would be interesting too. i hope u get a ton of comments!!!!!!