on cell phones and biased press releases...

[acroyear]

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

Comments

[dawntreader]

i think it causes harm. just look how stupid people are when they try driving! :P

because IT CRACKS ME UP that the media and other people are making more of a stink about this study than the millions of other studies that show driving while talking and/or texting impairs your judgement while driving.

but no! this has the word (possible) "cancer" in it instead of "you could die by car accident and kill someone else" in it. that sort of neglectfulness and watching people weave all over the road while they have their oh-so-important conversations pisses me off.

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

here's the difference and why this is "important" - responsibility.

if you crash your car while texting/calling someone it is your own damn fault.

BUT if you get cancer and some jury of 12 ignoramuses decides they collectively hate big companies, you can collect millions in a lawsuit. remember what I wrote up there: the guy who's doing this "research" has been an expert (re: paid) witness in these kinds of trials. He, like Wakefield, stands a lot to gain if the public perception is against the corporations regardless of the actual science because of how jury trials work. If he can make it look like his stuff is "scientific fact" to people who don't know any better, he makes a killing as a witness in these kinds of suits.

[thelongshot.livejournal.com]

if you crash your car while texting/calling someone it is your own damn fault.

Unless, of course, you are on the other side of that accident...

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

i said "while texting/calling" implying "while YOU are..." - if the other person does, its their damn fault, but that's not what i described excepting that they still fit into that general "you" where you (on the other side) don't.

and in either case, it can't be said to be the "fault" of the phone company (maker or network) which is the assertion of this guy on the cancer possibilities.

[dawntreader]

1. i agree it is your own damn fault if you kill yourself while talking/texting and driving. but if someone else crashes into you killing you while THEY are texting, it's not. (like drunk driving, that's what pisses me off the most. OTHER PEOPLE suffer from the "oh well" attitude and carelessness.) but hey!!! it's only death or dismemberment. woo hoo!

2. even IF cell phones cause cancer, i doubt you're going to get cancer from it unless you are talking on it 24/7 and sleeping with it in your ear which some people seem to be doing. and they don't *have* to be doing it. again, they *choose* to be on the phone 24/7.

but i agree with you, the research seems shaky at best. it annoys me the media is jumping all over it without pointing out that more research needs to be done.

however, if it is proven, cellphones = cancer, i doubt that the people who are addicted to cell phones will change their habits.

[bkleber.livejournal.com]

The part that I like is hearing which news reporting agencies only mention that cell phones are now put by the world health organization in the same category as lead and chloroform, and which ones also inform us that other items in this same category are coffee and pickled vegetables.