![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The bride of the son of the revenge of cell phones and cancer rises from the grave...again : Respectful Insolence:
The other wonder is how public perception is being manipulated because what has been put out so far has NOT been the actual study, but rather just the proposed conclusions as a press release. This means people are commenting on the conclusions (and the ignorant public and media accepting them as Fact) without the benefit of the actual scientific process which is to have such results reviewed within the scientific community before going "public" with the laymen media (and even that, that is usually done through laymen-oriented magazines like Nature and Science, not as a press release to be picked up by USA Today, which is where I saw the headline).
There are thus enough clues that this headline-grabbing approach (for some reason backed by the World Health Organization (WHO), is being timed for now for a very particular reason rather than just waiting for the study results to come out in July. Chances are the study results won't back the conclusions, but Orac concludes:
The bride of the son of the revenge of cell phones and cancer rises from the grave...again : Respectful Insolence:
Basically, the only suggestive studies all come from the same group in Sweden, which is always a red flag to me (that the studies all come from one group, not that they come from Sweden, I hasten to add). As I said before, whenever one group of researchers keeps finding a result that no other group seems able to replicate or that otherwise disagrees with what everyone else is finding, that's a huge problem. I'd also have a lot more confidence in this seeming association in "high quality" studies if the association didn't depend upon a single researcher and if this researcher was not also known for being an expert witness in lawsuits against mobile phone companies.This is a key mirror to the Andrew Wakefield - a single person comes up with a study that nobody else can verify or reproduce, and just *happens* to also be in the employ ("expert" witnesses get paid for their time on the stand) of lawyers who stand to gain a lot of money if the law ever decides that their side is right. Wakefield did exactly the same thing in the autism-vaccination cases.
The other wonder is how public perception is being manipulated because what has been put out so far has NOT been the actual study, but rather just the proposed conclusions as a press release. This means people are commenting on the conclusions (and the ignorant public and media accepting them as Fact) without the benefit of the actual scientific process which is to have such results reviewed within the scientific community before going "public" with the laymen media (and even that, that is usually done through laymen-oriented magazines like Nature and Science, not as a press release to be picked up by USA Today, which is where I saw the headline).
There are thus enough clues that this headline-grabbing approach (for some reason backed by the World Health Organization (WHO), is being timed for now for a very particular reason rather than just waiting for the study results to come out in July. Chances are the study results won't back the conclusions, but Orac concludes:
The bride of the son of the revenge of cell phones and cancer rises from the grave...again : Respectful Insolence:
Even so, in the spirit of keeping an open mind, I'll keep an eye out for the full report and perhaps blog further about it after it's released
