Cellphone and BrainTumors: 15 Reasons for Concern

Skip to first unread message


Dec 4, 2009, 12:07:12 AM12/4/09
It continues to amaze me how easily the media is manipulated.  The latest example is a study published today that purports to find no increase in brain tumors from 1974 to 2003, thereby proving that cellphone do not cause brain tumors.
Let me tell you more about this study:
A quick glance finds the following language near the end of the text, "The lack of a detectable trend change in incidence rates up to 2003 in this study suggests that the induction period for brain tumors associated with mobile phone use exceeds 5 – 10 years ...," Duh!! The induction period is at least 30 years and these authors know this
However, in the abstract (the summary of what the paper says), they state, "No change in incidence trends were observed from 1998 to 2003, the time when possible associations between mobile phone use and cancer risk would be informative about an induction period of 5 – 10 years."  The authors KNOW that no solid tumor, particularly brain tumors, has such a short latency time.  And, it is not until nearly the end of the paper where they qualify what is said in the abstract. 
Joachim Schüz, one of the authors is a notorious denier.  He is the lead author of a study of Danish cellphone subscribers.  This subscriber study, 100% funded by industry, purports to show that there is no risk of cancer, brain tumors, and various neurological problems (e.g., Alzheimer's), from cellphone use.  In fact what they found, but do not report, is a statistically significant protection from cancer,brain tumors and neurological diseases such as Alzheimer's from cellphone use.  When they report these protective results as "no risk" it is a lie (a lie of omission). 
Such protection is proof that the subscriber study is flawed, and I would suspect that industry intended it to be flawed. 
This study is OUTRAGEOUS.  I know all but one of  the authors. Each is an apologist for industry.
The funding comes from "Danish Strategic Research Council" which lists among its goals"
  • Commercialisation of research.
  • Interaction between knowledge institutions and the business community. "
Following the source of the funding there is a note, "The study sponsor did not have any role in the design of the study; the collection, analysis, or interpretation of the data; the writing of the manuscript; or the decision to submit the manuscript for publication."  This is a perfect example of what Shakespeare said so well, "The lady doth protest too loudly!"
Below this email is a typical example of what today's gullible news media reports.
Should any you wish to talk to me about this latest, but all too typical example of a study that sets up the media to write the kind of reports the authors intended when they began work on the study, I would be glad to answer any and all of your questions.
Please see our Report, Cellphones and Brain Tumors: 15 Reasons for Concern (attached) for a thorough review of what anyone in the media needs to know if they intend to write reports about the cellphones and brain tumors..

Lloyd Morgan
Berkeley, California, USA
510 841-4362
Study finds no brain tumor link with mobile phones

Maggie Fox, Reuters, Dec 3, 2009

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A very large, 30-year study of just about everyone in Scandinavia shows no link between cellphone use and brain tumors, researchers reported on Thursday.

Even though mobile telephone use soared in the 1990s and afterward, brain tumors did not become any more common during this time, the researchers reported in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. ...


15 Reasons Final Version v10 Web 8-25-09.pdf
Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages