Cellular Phone Use and Risk of Tumors: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis | Hacker News Reader

Cellular Phone Use and Risk of Tumors: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

mdpi.com

14 pointsmasijo10 comments

MDPI is a low-quality journal with a sham peer-review process.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDPI#Controversial_articles

https://www.universityaffairs.ca/features/feature-article/be...

Meta-analyses in their best form are subject to many biases, but this one seems particularly guilty. It mentions causation only once, in a single sentence referencing this study.

https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-9-77

13 years is a long time. Have these results been reproduced?

Cell phones use Radio Frequency (RF) signals, and so emit RF "radiation". This is non-ionizing radiation, which cannot strip electrons from your cells, ergo cannot cause cancer.

RF can burn you, physically because of heat, if the RF signal is strong enough and you're next to the source. Cell phones are not powerful enough to do this.

Of all the critiques I've read, this one is most arrogant. "We found this great way to cause cancer. Cell phones can't do it this way, so they must not cause cancer." Cancer may be caused, or abetted, by yet undiscovered mechanisms, and it's hubris to presume we know enough about cancer, or the human body, to say these mechanisms can't exist. Cell phones might inhibit DNA repair mechanisms, for example.

and for all we know, there's a teapot, too small to be observed by telescopes, in orbit right now between Earth and Mars.

1. I don't expect anyone to believe me just because I say this and 2. I don't expect anyone to spend time or money proving me wrong, either.

you aren't responding to someone proposing that cell phones cause cancer. they were refuting a weak argument that it is impossible, with an example of one kind of unanticipated interaction that could cause such an effect.

ie, saying that cell phone radiation doesn't cause cancer (or other negative effect) because the radiation is not ionizing, is a straw man- like saying that cigarettes cannot possibly cause cancer because the red glow of the cherry is also of sub-ionizing frequency.

Moskowitz is a known crank.

“especially among cell phone users with cumulative cell phone use of 1000 or more hours in their lifetime (which corresponds to about 17 min per day over 10 years)”

I don’t think I know anyone who doesn’t use their cell phone for at least 17 mins a day. Ages 12 to 99 included.

I assume it refers to holding a cell phone to your ear while transmitting continuously on cellular radio. Not reading Twitter, etc.

Meta-Analysis of metastatic media machines. Say that one three times fast.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com