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: A.J. Mullen who wrote (79263)	7/28/2008 12:18:17 AM
From: 2sigma	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196568

Another useful way to gather relevant data about a possible link is to require hospitals to compile data on their head and neck tumor patients including their history of cell phone usage. This data gathering should be done in all industrialized nations. This would offer correlative and cross-cultural evidence, but like all low-level radiation induced injury it is very difficult to rule out other causes. Haps.

To: A.J. Mullen who wrote (79263)	7/28/2008 1:02:56 AM
From: techlvr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196568

My assumption in a study like that one would simply be an increased brain blood flow due to the slight heating effect. ?? Techlvr

To: A.J. Mullen who wrote (79263)	7/28/2008 1:24:28 AM
From: kelseysuncle	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196568

Ashley: Since you already seem to believe the psuedo-science reports that link cell phone usage with effects on the brain, I doubt that my post will reassure you(or Mq) that there is none. Nevertheless, I will reiterate that there are NO known interactions of 800 Mhz-2.4 GHz frequencies with any kind of biological or organic material other than heating at high powers. Cell phones, particularly multiple access or any other kind of multiplexed broadcast scheme do not reach the level of heating at high power. The reports that continue to appear are largely based on (IMO) dubious interpretations of statistical data that only indicate possible correlation rather than causality. There is a strong statistical correlation that I wear blue shirts on Tuesdays but there is no causality. The "scientists" that publish with only correlations of data have not completed their studies and (again IMO) are publishing to satisfy ulterior motives. FWIW, ku