Posted on 02/25/2008 3:54:54 PM PST by blam
Radiation From Mobile Phones Changes Protein Expression In Living People, Study Suggests
A new study on effects of mobile phone radiation on human skin strengthens the results of the human cell line analyses: living tissue responds to mobile phone radiation. (Credit: iStockphoto/Luis Pedrosa)
ScienceDaily (Feb. 25, 2008) — A new study completed by the Finnish Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) on effects of mobile phone radiation on human skin strengthens the results of the human cell line analyses: living tissue responds to mobile phone radiation.
Earlier studies have shown that mobile phone radiation (radiofrequency modulated electromagnetic fields; RF-EMF) alters protein expression and activity in human endothelial cell line. STUK’s new study is globally unique, because for the first time it has examined whether a local exposure of human skin to RF-EMF will cause changes in protein expression in living people.
In the study, a small area of forearm’s skin in 10 volunteers was exposed to GSM signal for one hour. After that skin biopsies were collected from exposed and non-exposed areas of skin and all extractable proteins were examined. The analysis of 580 proteins identified 8 proteins that were statistically significantly affected.
”Mobile phone radiation has some biological effect. Even if the changes are small, they still exist”, says Dariusz Leszczynski, Research Professor at STUK.
According to Leszczynski it is much too early to say will these changes induced by the mobile phone radiation have any effect on health.
”The aim of this project was not detecting any possible health effects, but to find out whether living human skin responds to mobile phone radiation and whether proteomics approach is useful in sorting out this issue”, he states.
A more extensive study with 50-100 volunteers is now planned at STUK. The new study is expected to begin in 2009.
Funding for the present study was provided by Tekes - Finnish Funding Agency for Technology and Innovation and STUK, and it was a part of national HERMO project (Health Risk Assessment of Mobile Communications) finished in September 2007.
The entire article "Mobile phone radiation might alter protein expression in human skin" is available in the BMC Genomics web journal: http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2164/9/77/abstract
Adapted from materials provided by Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority, Finland.
I never knew what to make of the whole cellphone-leads-to-health-issues thing. Even so, I’ve always used a wired headset because (1) my hearing isn’t the greatest, (2) my old cellphone used to get *very* hot when used for more than 20 minutes, and (3) I need to keep my hands free for drinking coffee, corraling children, and bestowing affection upon the spousal unit. :-)
What? You mean they didn’t use the typical shielded FCC approved mobile device? I’m shocked, shocked at this...
Bump
The human race will become extinct because cell phones are worn around the whoopie areas.
“Radiation From Mobile Phones Changes Protein Expression In Living People, Study Suggests”
I am still trying to figure out that sentence. Why would dead people be using a cell phone?.
I know cell phone use by my daughter effects intelligent expression.
at some point down the road (years? decades?) the manufacturers are going to lose their grip on the publication/recognition (in the US, at any rate) of medical issues involved extensive use of cell phones, and they are going to be hounded like the tobacco companies by lawyers.
Let’s hope that good studies are done and well thought out science is performed that provide comparisons of the risk to other risks taken freely in our society.
I am still trying to figure out that sentence. Why would dead people be using a cell phone?.
I think they meant to say that mobile phone radiation affects the bodies of people and not just cultures of living cells.
I think it’s unlikely that cellphone makers thought there might be serious health issues with their product.
But I can’t help but think they never imagined a whole lot of people would keep them stuck to their heads for hours and hours every day.
I personally know of three people in my small town who have had brain tumors removed over the past few years. All of the tumors were located behind the right ear.
After between 90 and 120 years of usage, you die.
At some point you have only 8 days left and then about a week or so later only 8 minutes, then lights out.
It’s time to PUNISH cell phone users for thier callous disregard for their health, much like smokers and obese people.
SIN TAX on all cell phones and calls made.
INCREASE HEALTH and LIFE INSURANCE PREMIUMS.
/S
Maybe if people didn’t have their cellphone glued to their head 24x7 it wouldn’t be an issue.
Just maybe.
I have heard previously that neurosurgeons had not noticed any change since the start of the cell phone era in the pattern of brain tumor location. But I heard this several years ago.
I nearly died when I saw the cellphone bill.
I think they call that pain and suffering.
Phones have expressions?
How about bluetooth ear pieces, much worse I am sure.
|
can "Secondhand Radiation" be far behind???
Some data supports this observation: If you hold the phone to your right ear you will tend to buy whatever the caller is selling. If you hold the phone to your left ear you will filter out the BS.
Algore is already working on scheme to impose cellphoneyyy RF credits and tax.
"Statistical significance is a statement about conditional probability, nothing else. It does not guarantee that something important, or even meaningful, has been found." - Hays and Winkler, STATISTICS
Almost every "study" that you hear of hangs its hat on statistical significance without mentioning STRENGTH of correlation. That is, how strongly were the results correlated with the test variables? Often, the correlation is very weak, so that in many cases the individual results were in fact opposite to the affect being touted.
The quoted caveat is pointing out that the inferences are based on a hypothetical model, and the statistical significance test says that this model, which is governed by pure randomness, is unlikely to some high degree to produce the given result.
I refuse to own or use a cellphone, I firmly believe there is so much money involved that they will do anything to say they are safe.
cellphones to me are more dangerous than mis-handled guns, yes they have their usefulness but the users approach is just not hitting the mark yet.
“A more extensive study with 50-100 volunteers is now planned at STUK.”
I’m sure there will be. Especially if they all have to slip into a skimpy black negligee. (Well - at least the gals!).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.