According to the British Journal of Cancer(2005), long term exposure to radio frequency (RF) waves from cellphones increases the risk of tumor growth in the brain. This research was further supported by the pooled study showing 96 cases with malignant brain tumor by using a cellphone 1 hour a day for a period of ten years or more.This study also showed there is a higher risk of developing a tumor on the side of the head frequently used when making a call. From the Australian Newspaper,1997 by Steward Fist, A Swedish study showed that heavy users of cellphone had a 240 % increase chance in brain tumor development on the side of their head where the phone is used on. According to REFLEX study funded by several European Nations from the Environmental Health Journal(2006), they found that RF waves from cellphones causes an increases in single and double stand DNA breaks which causes mutation and can lead to cancer and was reported to activate certain genes involved in cell division causing uncontrolled cell growth. This study was further supported by the study conducted by Dr. Singh and Dr. Henry Lai from the Washington State University which revealed same result in rats. RF waves causes thermal and non-thermal effects which adversely affects health and can lead to cancer.
Mice were commonly used in the experiments because they can produce offspring in a shorter time. Man will not expose himself to hazardous conditions in the laboratory and neither he desires to do so. Survey is then used as an alternative to study human beings having cancer associated with cellphones. The basis for comparative medical effects is that mice and human are mammals. DNA level experiments which showed accompanied mutations were the basis of experimental inferences and conclusions. What can be true to mice can be in some ways extrapolated to man but not at all times. This remains a controversy in the field of gene technology and biomedical research especially to those research groups trying to prove that indeed cellphone waves might trigger cancer. In addition, they have to consider the bioethics and animal rights. On the other hand, corporate research groups are also using this method but they are using engineered strain of mices which shows to have tolerance against cancer.
In economics and political terms, unprecented magnitude of the potential effects or consequences of modern Science and technological innovations is popular justification Societal Control of Science and Technology(SCOST). According to McGinn(2002), one major justification of SCOST appeals to the importance of freedom in the form of voluntary choices. It is said that the consumer cannot truly make a voluntary choice because important informations about product choices like features,ingredients, performance and possible effects on health and safety are witholded by companies, then an external party will arise to combat the ignorance by providing the people the access to relevant and important products about the product. In this case, cell phone companies conducts their own experiment to show that their products poses no harm to people.
In the book of McGinn (2002), it states that companies like in this case telecommunication companies are afraid to provide relevant information due to economic reasons because if they reveal those information , it may disclose property trade secrets about the product and will surely increase the price of the product.The mere presence of such information would create unwarranted alarm or anxiety rather than educating the people.This entail a decrease in profit in the case of the firm.One of the possible SCOST intervention points in the life cycle of a scientific or technological endeavor is the emergence of alleged consequence of product which is affected by legislative limitation , product ligatation and regulation.
In the major Western countries, the privates sector influence on Science and Technology is at least as important as the national government. It is the sphere in of business where the primary but not the sole source of societal influence in the private sector came from. It is said that the consuming public is conditioned by corporate advertising. Due to economic reasons and to counteract the results of non-for-profit groups that cell phone can cause cancer, cell phone companies funded their own research groups to prove that cellphone cannot cause cancer.
The issue of 1.6 as SAR(Specific Absorption Ratio) as safe is still questionable. According to some scientist , the 1.6 SAR value is already too high but cellphone companies insist that it is safe.
No comments:
Post a Comment