Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: foundation who wrote (19743)	3/1/2002 9:27:45 AM
From: foundation	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196674

Two Scientists Back RF Health Risk Claims In Court BY ALLYSON VAUGHAN FEBRUARY 28, 2002 BALTIMORE - Two scientists told a courtroom here yesterday that wireless phone use may be linked to cancer. “It is my opinion that RF exposure has caused Dr. Newman’s tumor,” Jerry Phillips, staff biologist and project director of the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study in Colorado Springs, and director of contracts for the National Institutes of Health, told a packed courtroom in U.S. District Court in Maryland. Christopher Newman, a Jarrettsville, Ma.-based neurologist who has a brain tumor, claims he contracted it from wireless phone use and names Motorola and Verizon Wireless, among others, in his $800 million lawsuit. High-profile Baltimore attorney Peter Angelos, renowned for winning millions of dollars in tobacco and asbestos litigation, represents Newman. The weeklong hearing in U.S. District Court here will weigh the science to determine what evidence, if any, a jury may hear in the lawsuit. If the judge rules against the industry, the claims could gain credibility and increase in volume. This week alone, five new cases have been filed against industry carriers, vendors and supporters by plaintiffs making similar allegations. Garrett Johnson, a defense attorney for Motorola, countered in court that Phillips is not a medical doctor with authority to give opinions on the causes of cancer. Similarly, CTIA says that Newman’s lawyers offer “unfounded opinions” and “speculation” at odds with the overall views of the scientific community, according to a statement. CTIA declined to comment on the new cases filed this week. U.S. District Court Judge Catherine Blake ruled Wednesday that some scientific papers containing peer-reviewed comments would remain under seal for the sake of full disclosure. If scientists knew their peer-review comments could eventually become part of the public record, they might not be as frank, Blake said. wirelessweek.com