# It's right to have worries, says expert
# 'Don't buy phones for primary pupils'

The Times Sat 21 Jan 07 - Article

Lawrie Challis of the Health Protection Agency - '...mobiles the new tobacco?'

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2556550,00.html

but listen to him revert to the 'no evidence' mode on subsequent Radio 4 'Today' prog. Sat 20 Jan 07 - at 0722hrs - (listen again) -

http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ram/today0_mobilephones_20070120.ram

(Arthur)

--------

Phone Safety
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,542-2555967,00.html

Phone Safety?
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Phone+Safety

--------

Five-year cancer study on mobiles
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=430162&in_page_id=1770

My comments to the Mail online

Perhaps Prof Challis should read Dr George Carlo's book. "Cell phones, invisible hazards in the wireless age" [ http://omega.twoday.net/stories/418854/ ]. It details the results of his 5 year investigation heading up the US phone industry research programme between 1993 and 1999. He had 200 scientists working for him and completed 56 studies at a cost of $28 million. His book details the industry's reaction when they found evidence for genetic damage and an increase in risk of brain tumour as a result of mobile phone use. Dr Carlo also advocates that wireless computers whould not be put in schools because of the risk of genetic damage to children from the microwave radiation constantly emitted by the laptops and wireless access points.

S

--------

BEWARE THE HEADLINES ONCE AGAIN

There has been an interesting article circulating in the past couple of days
( http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2556768,00.html -- Cancer study ordered into mobile phones http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2556768,00.html ). And once again, what you read on the surface betrays what is below the surface.

When you read the article behind this link, please understand that the mobile phone industry is behind it. In the UK, the mobile phone mast issue is gaining a great deal of momentum. Whenever that happens, the political solution involves putting some money into a study -- a study that will take years to complete -- to assuage the public concern. The tactic is part of the industry's overall strategy to "buy time". With the mobile phone health risk issue, this goes back to the very early days of the WTR when the industry funded our research program, in their mind, "as an insurance policy to buy time". With research going on, the argument can be made in public that the "jury is still out" and from the industry's perspective, "the heat is off". In this case, note specifically that the studies mentioned at the end of the article -- a very selected few from the numerous studies now in the open literature -- are only the studies funded by the industry, with results that mute the present day concern. Don't fall for it.

More research is always a good thing. But, research does not help people who are being exposed to dangerous ICRW (Information-Carrying Radio Waves) today. Research always should be joined with surveillance of high risk groups and the implementation of primary, secondary and tertiary interventions in those high risk groups as appropriate.

G. L. Carlo

--------

http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Challis
http://omega.twoday.net/search?q=Carlo