Swimming In A Deadly Sea:
Awash In Radiation
Part Two
By Kathleen Deoul
(Page: 7 of 7)
Kathleen Deoul: You said that the risk of all types of
brain tumors was greater for rural residents who use cell
phones. Is the overall figure different from malignant
tumors?
Copulos: I'm glad you brought that up. Yes, the risk is
greater - a lot greater. In fact, rural residents who use
cell phones are eight times as likely to develop a malignant
brain tumor as city dwellers. In other words, the increase
in risk is twice as great for malignant tumors as it is
for all forms.
Kathleen Deoul: You said there were several studies.
What other recent research are you aware of?
Copulos: There is a third study from Sweden, where much
of the best research on cell phone hazards is being conducted,
because they have been in general use there much longer than
in most countries. What is interesting about this third study
is that it not only involved cell phones, but also cordless
telephones that are used with a land line. The study looked
at 910 people with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and a control group
of 1,016 healthy individuals. They ranged in age from 18 to
74, and the study was conducted over a period of two and a
half years between December of 1999 and April of 2002. What
the researchers found was that there was an increased risk
of developing T-cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma among both cell
phone and cordless phone users. Moreover, they also found
that the risk increased with the duration of the exposure,
and that the ten-year benchmark seemed, as in other studies,
to be a threshold.
Kathleen Deoul: That's amazing. So what these three studies
seem to say is that there is a link between cell phone use
and brain cancer, and that the more you use a cell phone, the
greater the risk.
Copulos: I couldn't have put it better, Kathleen.
Kathleen Deoul: Of course, the industry still claims
there is no danger, and that their studies support their
contention.
Copulos: That's true Kathleen, but there may be a logical
explanation. Cell phones simply haven't been in widespread
use that long. If, as appears to be the case, there is a
ten-year threshold, as well as a connection between the amount
of use and the increase in risk, that could explain the
difference. It could be that more time needs to pass before
the full extent of the dangers becomes evident. Of course,
if that is the case, we've got a hidden cancer epidemic
brewing.
Kathleen Deoul: That's perhaps the most frightening
aspect of the problem. We could be poisoning a generation
and not know we are doing it! So, by the time we know
it's happening, it will be too late!
But the industry keeps saying that there's no scientific
basis for a possible link between non-ionizing radiation
and brain cancer. Is this true?
Next month in part 3 of Swimming in a Deadly Sea: Awash
in Radiation, we'll look at the possible causes of the link
between non-ionizing radiation and cancer and things you can
do to protect yourself.
Swimming In A Deadly Sea:
Awash In Radiation
(Part II)
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7
Part 1 | Part 2 |
Part 3 | Part
4
Contact
Kathleen Deoul, Media Matters
Email:
admin@cancer-coverup.com
|
Click here to order
