Dear EMF-Health Concerned Friends,
Here is the abstract of my latest paper which is now In-Press for publication in Pathophysiology. This paper identifies why the industry-funded Interphone Study on the risk of brain tumors from cellphone has consistently shown that use of a cellphone protects the user from a brain tumor and why the studies by Dr. Hardell reporting risk of brain tumors from cellphone use and cordless phone use have an internal consistency if cellphones and cordless phones are a risk for brain tumors.
Best to all,
Lloyd Morgan
510 528-5302
Estimating the risk of brain tumors from cellphone use:
Published case–control studies
L. Lloyd Morgan ∗
1324 Solano Ave. Apt. 11, Albany, CA 94706, United States
Received 21 November 2008; accepted 30 January 2009
Published case–control studies
L. Lloyd Morgan ∗
1324 Solano Ave. Apt. 11, Albany, CA 94706, United States
Received 21 November 2008; accepted 30 January 2009
Abstract
This paper reviews the results of early cellphone studies, where exposure duration was too short to expect tumorigenesis, as well as two sets of more recent studies with longer exposure duration: the Interphone studies and the Swedish studies led by Dr. Lennart Hardell. The recent studies reach very different conclusions. With four exceptions the industry-funded Interphone studies found no increased risk of brain tumors from cellphone use, while the Swedish studies, independent of industry funding, reported numerous findings of significant increased brain tumor risk from cellphone and cordless phone use. An analysis of the data from the Interphone studies suggests that either the use of a cellphone protects the user from a brain tumor, or the studies had serious design flaws. Eleven flaws are identified: (1) selection bias, (2) insufficient latency time, (3) definition of 'regular' cellphone user, (4) exclusion of young adults and children, (5) brain tumor risk from cellphones radiating higher power levels in rural areas were not investigated, (6) exposure to other transmitting sources are excluded, (7) exclusion of brain tumor types, (8) tumors outside the cellphone radiation plume are treated as exposed, (9) exclusion of brain tumor cases because of death or illness, (10) recall accuracy of cellphone use, and (11) funding bias. The Interphone studies have all 11 flaws, and the Swedish studies have 3 flaws (8, 9 and 10). The data from the Swedish studies are consistent with what would be expected if cellphone use were a risk for brain tumors, while the Interphone studies data are incredulous. If a risk does exist, the public health cost will be large. These are the circumstances where application of the Precautionary Principle is indicated, especially if low-cost options could reduce the absorbed cellphone radiation by several orders of magnitude.
This paper reviews the results of early cellphone studies, where exposure duration was too short to expect tumorigenesis, as well as two sets of more recent studies with longer exposure duration: the Interphone studies and the Swedish studies led by Dr. Lennart Hardell. The recent studies reach very different conclusions. With four exceptions the industry-funded Interphone studies found no increased risk of brain tumors from cellphone use, while the Swedish studies, independent of industry funding, reported numerous findings of significant increased brain tumor risk from cellphone and cordless phone use. An analysis of the data from the Interphone studies suggests that either the use of a cellphone protects the user from a brain tumor, or the studies had serious design flaws. Eleven flaws are identified: (1) selection bias, (2) insufficient latency time, (3) definition of 'regular' cellphone user, (4) exclusion of young adults and children, (5) brain tumor risk from cellphones radiating higher power levels in rural areas were not investigated, (6) exposure to other transmitting sources are excluded, (7) exclusion of brain tumor types, (8) tumors outside the cellphone radiation plume are treated as exposed, (9) exclusion of brain tumor cases because of death or illness, (10) recall accuracy of cellphone use, and (11) funding bias. The Interphone studies have all 11 flaws, and the Swedish studies have 3 flaws (8, 9 and 10). The data from the Swedish studies are consistent with what would be expected if cellphone use were a risk for brain tumors, while the Interphone studies data are incredulous. If a risk does exist, the public health cost will be large. These are the circumstances where application of the Precautionary Principle is indicated, especially if low-cost options could reduce the absorbed cellphone radiation by several orders of magnitude.
© 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Electromagnetic field; Cellphone; Brain tumor; Mobile phone; Cellular phone; Cordless phone; Glioma; Acoustic neuroma; Meningioma; Funding;
Interphone
Submitted by Dr. David Fancy
-------------------------------------------------
Meeting over antennas on apartment buildings
See the video on youtube
Queens NewYork
Apartment buildings meet on antennas - Part 1
"North Shore Towers Shareholders Association Town Hall on Rooftop Antennas"
July 2008
- Intro shows images of roof tops
- Two years to pass a bill to just Track the number of antennas (11minutes)
- Number of Antennas constantly increased, in excess of permit allowances
- 250 ANTENNAS claimed to be on these buildings
- contract started in March 29 1988, extended in 2001
- company requests to extend for 10 more years
- FCC shows up in March 2008 and claims "no excess radiation"
Part 2
Questions from Residents ( 31 minutes )
5 minutes
Lady tells about other building that did remove antennas (Verizon)
23 minutes
29 minutes
joke about Santa not being able to land because of all the antennas
