| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Real Reality
Joined: 10 Jan 2003
Location: Seoul
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 3:20 am Post subject: Frequent Cell Phone Use May Slow Brain Function |
 |
|
Frequent Cell Phone Use May Slow Brain Function
Matt Hamblen, Computerworld (September 18, 2007)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/pcworld/20070919/tc_pcworld/137318
| Quote: |
According to the study, frequent mobile phone users demonstrated slowed brain function, but with the caveat that the slowed brain effects are still considered within normal brain functioning....
the frequent users showed more instances of slowed activity as measured by delta and theta EEG power, as well as a slowdown in a measurement called alpha peak frequency. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 7:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Very interesting. And relevant to another recent discussion where posters confidently stated that mobile phones are not a health risk. They may be right, but it is still far too soon to tell. I avoid frequent use of my mobile for that reason. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 8:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
How exactly does cell phone technology compare to this WI-FI crap?
Totally different? Same? Similar?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Very interesting. And relevant to another recent discussion where posters confidently stated that mobile phones are not a health risk. They may be right, but it is still far too soon to tell. I avoid frequent use of my mobile for that reason. |
I would hope they're making the specific claim that cell phones do not cause cancer. Cancer is caused by things that damage the DNA: radiation, chemicals, viruses. Dangerous radiation is either in very small waves, waves small enough that they can affect the molecules in a DNA strand, or in the form of fast moving particles that can knock out bits in your DNA strand.
The cell phone waves are many, many times bigger than your DNA molecule. Based on what we know about what causes cancer, there's no biological plausibility. Maybe but it would have to be a whole new form of cancer agent if true.
Of course people who are on their cell phones a lot are also the types that need a lot of external stimulation. The correlation might be slower brains crave more stimulation.
And as far as too soon to tell, people have been very heavy cell phone users for decades now. One would think epidemiology would have noticed something if there was a substantial effect size. We detected the rye syndrome/ASA connection, after all.
Also even if a study shows a statistically positive result, if the effect size is just at the edge of detectability, I would doubt there is cause for alarm. If you have a 1 in 10 million chance of having an adverse reaction to cell phone use, would you give up your cell phone? Heck, the cancer risk from smoking is higher, people are well aware of the risks, and still they smoke. Let's put it this way, BBQing increases the content of known carcinogens in your meat. Are you willing to give up the summer BBQ for a slight health risk? And crossing the street is probably the most dangerous act we do all day.
This study uses a sample size of 300 people. That's nearly 300 anecdotes. It's the basis for a larger study but no one in the medical field would draw any conclusion from such. Good studies use very large sample sizes (as the article later notes).
(Note, I don't own a cell phone and I don't much like cell phone users. Frankly, I'd be happy as crap if they're phones were killing them. But I find too much bad science and media misunderstandings in these cell phone health stories.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
How exactly does cell phone technology compare to this WI-FI crap?
Totally different? Same? Similar? |
Why would you even ask? Any real science you would simply dismiss. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
How exactly does cell phone technology compare to this WI-FI crap?
Totally different? Same? Similar? |
Why would you even ask? Any real science you would simply dismiss. |
Gee ... thanks for all the help 
Cheap shots & childish attacks aside, why not enlighten me?  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
How exactly does cell phone technology compare to this WI-FI crap?
Totally different? Same? Similar? |
Why would you even ask? Any real science you would simply dismiss. |
Gee ... thanks for all the help
Cheap shots & childish attacks aside, why not enlighten me? |
Why should I bother? You're no doubt convinced the government is trying to use radio waves to slow us down, make us docile, control our minds. If you read, you will notice I enlightened Big Bird. Read that for more information.
Anyone think IGTG would really want honest science on something involving "radio waves"? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
Why should I bother?
You're no doubt convinced the government is trying to use radio waves to slow us down, make us docile, control our minds.
Anyone think IGTG would really want "honest" science on something involving "radio waves"? |
try me  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
Why should I bother?
You're no doubt convinced the government is trying to use radio waves to slow us down, make us docile, control our minds.
Anyone think IGTG would really want "honest" science on something involving "radio waves"? |
try me |
That you put honest in scare quotes is evidence of the futility. But again, read what I wrote to Big Bird. You have issues with that?
And why, for example, do you call wi fi "crap"? What claim are you specifically making? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| And why, for example, do you call wi fi "crap"? What claim are you specifically making? |
Ummmm ... do you know Joo ... ME-mine-22? 
Thanks btw for your theories & ideas in response to Big Bird's comments. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 5:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| And why, for example, do you call wi fi "crap"? What claim are you specifically making? |
Ummmm ... do you know Joo ... ME-mine-22?
Thanks btw for your theories & ideas in response to Big Bird's comments. |
So you have no actual claim. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 5:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Note, I don't own a cell phone and I don't much like cell phone users. Frankly, I'd be happy as crap if they're phones were killing them. |
I feel pretty much the same way. The conversational drivel quotient has sky-rocketed since the invention of the cell phone. I have no special insight to whether cell phone use slows down brain activity, but it sure as heck slows down social interaction with whoever you are with. I ask people I spend time with to turn theirs off. If there is resistance, I insist that my friends listen and repeat: "I'm busy right now. I'll call you back when I'm free ".
A couple of years ago there was a spate of newspaper articles and subsequently, a discussion of cell phone use and brain damage here at Dave's. It was pretty much dismissed then. No doubt this latest will also be dismissed. I have my fingers crossed that it will later be proven cell phone usage causes a decline in sexual potency. Or that hoards and droves of cell phone users suddenly start humping telephone poles en masse. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| So you have no actual claim. |
More questions |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 6:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
Gee ... thanks for all the help
Cheap shots & childish attacks aside, why not enlighten me? |
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Why should I bother? You're no doubt convinced the government is trying to use radio waves to slow us down, make us docile, control our minds. |
Dark mysterious forces, eh?
Hmmmm ... interesting. Is it true? You sound paranoid.
Part of some attempted paid-off "cover-up", perhaps?
Might your TEN-URE depend on it?
Now that you mention it, the very word government translates as gubern (control) ... mente (mind), hence MIND CONTROL.
So, no ... now that you asked, i guess it wouldn't be much a stretch to conclude certain sociopathic elite criminals, sadistic slavemasters of a sorts, have long been busy developing, investing in & promoting deadly oppressive technologies |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 22, 2007 10:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks MM2 for your explanation of how the size of radiation waves plays a part in cancer. I read it with interest.
Still, I tend to avoid excessive exposure to anything unnatural, as far as is reasonable, though not to the extent where it would hamper normal day to day living, of course. Several relatives (near and far) have died due to the insiduous effects of post industial revolution technologies/substances - the dangers of which were not appreciated at the time. And so I bear this in mind, especially with regard to the two tiny people who are in my keeping. I am generally more concerned with avoiding excessive use of household products and domestic pest killers, and lately my attention has also turned to cosmetics and toiletries. I don't bother using baby oils, for example, some of which contain traces of peanuts, and which some researchers believe may give rise to peanut allergies. So ho knows what other dangers may come to light? There has been some discussion of possible hidden dangers with regard to bathroom products. For example: Is your beauty regime damaging your health?
I was (unsucessfully) trying to find a recent article I read about how it appears that some cosmetic substances that have been believed to be fairly innocuous, may pose a danger when they come into contact with another seemingly innocuous toiletry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
