US Government Study Shows How Cell Phone Radiation May Lead to Cancerous Tumors. We. Today is no exception, yet. A multi- million dollar government- funded study conducted by the US National Toxicology Program (NTP) shows how cell phone radiation can lead to tumor formation. Cell Phones and Brain Tumors. Leaked Insight from the U.S. National Toxicology Program? Cell Phones and Brain Tumors – Leaked Insight from the U.S. National Toxicology Program. This view is based, in part, on the lack of an established mechanism for RF radiation from cell phones to induce cancer. NTP Speaks about Cell Phone Radiation. The National Toxicology Program. A newly released study from the National Toxicology Program. Those rats were exposed to the same kind of radiation cell phones emit for nine hours a day. Radio-frequency radiation (RFR) from cell phones might be linked to heart and brain cancer in rats, according to partial findings from the U.S. The US National Toxicology Program (NTP) has released partial results of a large study it’s conducting in rats and mice to try to determine whether cell.This was never shown before. Cell phones were invented in the . A lot of fear and confusion ensued, but. Certainly, there was a consensus that statistical correlation between cell phones use and cancer exists, but the amount of data available for analysis was deemed too limited. There were so few people who actually used cell phones back then, let alone for prolonged periods of time. Since then, cell phone use proliferated. As data grew, government agencies became cautious. In 2. 01. 1, the World Health Organization. Their websites listed numerous qualifiers and cited on- going research. As Dr. Joel Moskowitz, Director of the Center for Family and Community Health at the University of California at Berkeley put it, . For the first time though, scientists know how cell phone radiation can alter the living body. They now have their proof from mice subjected to Electromagnetic Radiation. The NTP Government Study. Concluding in 2. 01. US National Toxicology Program (NTP). More than 2,5. 00 rats were exposed to varying levels of RF radiation – one type of radiation emitted by cell phones. Radiation exposure exhibited a directed dose- response relationship, as in the more radiation rats received the higher amount of rare brain and heart cancer they developed. Tumors were not found in rats not exposed to the radio frequencies. In the report released alongside the study, researchers noted . It cost the US government $2. How Cell Phone Radiation Works. For years, the understanding of the potential risk of radiation from cell phones has been hampered by a lack of good science. This report from the National Toxicology Program (NTP) is good science. This is a striking example of why serious study is so important in evaluating cancer risk. Cell phone radiation is “non- ionizing,” which has been presumed safe. Unlike ionizing radiation such as X- Rays, non- ionizing radiation is associated with extremely low energy. In non- ionizing radiation, there is insufficient energy to break chemical bonds as ions cannot form. Therefore, it was always assumed that the power generated by cell phones and other electronic devices would be too weak to produce heat and could not cause biological effects whatsoever. This was proven to be wrong. When living cells couple with radiation, the cells behave differently. Cells respond to changes in radiation. Some of the effects can be reactions like the movement of calcium across membranes or the production of free radicals or a change in the expression of genes in a cell. Important proteins can be expressed in places and times and amounts that they shouldn. This can result in a dramatic effect in the function of cells. Back in the ’9. 0s, biochemist Jerry Phillips conducted Motorola- funded research into the potential health impacts of cell phones. He and his colleagues studied the effects of different RF signals on rats and on cells in a dish while trying to understand. According to Phillips, . These effects vary depending on the nature of the signal, the length of the exposure, and the specifics of the signal itself. Brawley, M. D., American Cancer Society Chief Medical Officer stated . This is a striking example of why serious study is so important in evaluating cancer risk. This pre- clinical evidence mimics what may be expected to those of us who rely on our wireless devices heavily. Protecting Yourself. Modern technology may be unavoidable. As Phillips advises, . I would love to believe it, but I know better. He also texts and uses speakerphone. Other tools can be implemented though. His conclusion is simply that the public needs to be informed. Certainly, current research is building that Electromagnetic Radiation is a force not to be taken lightly.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
December 2016
Categories |