Still to be observed on humans...
-
-
-
The interphone study made that observation already; the question is about how much we should trust it and how much of it can be explained away.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This is so unlikely to be true and has been repeatedly disproved that I'm not sure I can be bothered. Nonionising radiation can't "cause cancer". No mechanism.
-
I don't think that there is a physical law that says that ionizing radiation is the only way to cause changes in cells that could lead to an increased risk of cancer.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Wait, "equivocal evidence" magically becomes "some/clear evidence" after peer review? What is that? Scientific method or reviewer mood of the day?
-
Just journalists wanting clicks. If this is referencing the same study I read about lately, they had MORE cancer in the control group not exposed to high levels of RF.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
"Red meat has been found to cause cancer in white rats. Maraschino cherries have been found to cause cancer in white rats. Cellular phones have been found to cause cancer in white rats. Has anyone examined the possibility that cancer might be [...]" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0745614/quotes/qt0248706 … ;-)
-
This is why there is peer review. I hope that the reviewers that put their reputation on the line when a Billion dollar industry is ready to eviscerate them knows about the cancer base rates in the animal model.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Still gonna be addicted to my phone, hopefully immunotherapy can treat GBM by the time I get it.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yet, the cellphone rats lived longer...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.