The WHO, that unelected, unaccountable body that seems to think it has a say over how we run our lives has turned its attention to mobile phones. Sure, the “mobiles cause cancer” bollocks has been touted for some time now, so is hardly new. Despite there being no hard evidence for the idea that mobile phone use causes cancer, over at the BBC they are carrying on regardless.
The World Health Organization’s cancer research agency says mobile phones are “possibly carcinogenic”.
A review of evidence suggests an increased risk of a malignant type of brain cancer cannot be ruled out.
However, any link is not certain – they concluded that it was “not clearly established that it does cause cancer in humans”.
A cancer charity said the evidence was too weak to draw strong conclusions from.
So, once we get to the nitty gritty, we have “possibly” and “probably” and “cannot be ruled out” eventually we come to “to weak to draw conclusions”. In other words, nothing to see here. So we could turn the BBC’s headline;
Mobiles ‘may cause brain cancer’
To something more sensible, like “Mobiles most likely don’t cause cancer, so nothing to worry about, folks”. But, then, there would be nothing to scare the proles in that.
A telling quote from Cancer Research UK in the article kills it stone dead:
Ed Yong, head of health information at Cancer Research UK, said: “The WHO’s verdict means that there is some evidence linking mobile phones to cancer but it is too weak to draw strong conclusions from.”
“The vast majority of existing studies have not found a link between phones and cancer, and if such a link exists, it is unlikely to be a large one.”
“The risk of brain cancer is similar in people who use mobile phones compared to those who don’t, and rates of this cancer have not gone up in recent years despite a dramatic rise in phone use during the 1980s.”
“However, not enough is known to totally rule out a risk, and there has been very little research on the long-term effects of using phones.”
So, no increase in cancer rates despite the proliferation of mobile phone use in the past three decades, but there may be some small risk for some people. Well, yes, we could work that one out for ourselves. We don’t need a team of epidemiologists to explain to us that life holds potential risk, and we certainly don’t need them to tell us that an epidemic of brain cancers caused by mobile phone use hasn’t happened.
This is a non-story. There is no news here. One again, piss-poor reporting from the BBC.
“This is a non-story. There is no news here.”
So when should we expect to see draconian mobile phone legislation? Six months? Less?
Less 👿
With asbestos sometimes it took 40 years to identify that it was exposure to the asbestos that had caused an individuals’ cancer. EMFs work on the body long term. More than 2000 studies point to the dangers of electromagnetic fields. Are these 2000 studies all wrong?
We’ve been using radio transmitters for somewhat more than forty years without a cancer epidemic in radio operators – so, yes, I treat such studies with extreme scepticism.
Although that wasn’t the point of this post; rather that there is nothing being reported as such. There may be a risk. Well, yes, common sense tells us this, we don’t need a study full of ifs, buts, maybes and can’t be ruled outs to tell us nothing that we couldn’t figure out for ourselves.
One has to ask who is financing the research? It is inreasing the case that modern ‘science researchers’ tend to find the answer that their paymasters were seeking. Not always because they are dishonest, but as quantum mechanics has shown, theree is no such thing as true objectivity.