A very large, 30-year study of just about everyone in Scandinavia shows no link between mobile phone use and brain tumours, researchers reported on Thursday.

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/mobiles/no-tumour-link-to-mobile-phones-says-study-20091204-kaqs.html

Yet this urban legend continues to circulate in spite of all the evidence to the contrary.

This testimount to the nature of humans to take action based on perception rather than fact.

Further holy cows that have been disproven:

Long term studies in the UK have shown no nutritional benefit to organic food,

Genetically modified food has yet to be shown to be harmful.

Nuclear power has been shown to be the safest electrical power source with a fraction of the fatalities of even solar or wind power.

Numerous studies of people living near power lines have yet to show any negative effects.

Etc, etc.

The greens are very quick to claim scientific validity for climate change, but quickly resort to anecdotal evidence when it comes to nuclear power or GM food.

When will we get a government that has the spine to stand up to the lunatic fringe and govern according to the science and not just the perception?

Back in the early days of GSM (late 80's) there was research done that proved that the RF generated by Mobile phones when they were "polling" (ie getting signal strength readings from adjacent cells - that di-dit-di-dit sound you sometimes pick up on the radio sometimes) - caused genetic damage.

However, the relationship between genetic damage and cancer was "outside the scope of the research" so it could be argued that there was no DIRECT connection between RF and cancer.

The scientists wanted indemnification from future findings (unusual?)and instead of calling a press conference to announce the findings, the research was "leaked" to the Illawarra Mercury where it was published and dismissed as typical sensationalsim by the rest of the media.

In this way, if a direct cause could be proven then the Telcos and scientists could argue that the research was in the Public Domain and that there was no cover-up.

This was all printed in Electronic Australia during the pre-Internet days so there are no links unless somebody wants to go digging for it and put it out there.

That's how it works sometimes in the real world and this could be the tobacco/asbestos industry of the 21st century.

Yet despite any negative findings, people will continue to use them - just as they continue to smoke, drink, speed, take drugs and live otherwise unhealthy lifestyles.

Telcos and manufactures will continue to do research - which is odd if it's been so conclusively disproven - and people will continue to self-justify their own beliefs despite any evidence either way.

Great, we are supposed to take a “leaked” report to a newspaper as the “proof’ that mobile phones cause genetic damage in cells? With the research in question never having been published, presumably because of some giant conspiracy? Have you ever stopped to think how unlikely the scenario you have painted is?

There are indeed research studies out there finding DNA damage from the radiofrequencies as used in mobile phones. These used isolated cell cultures and 16 hours or more of continuous exposure. How realistic this research is to real people is hard to say. It is even harder to interpret, because other studies trying to repeat the research failed to find any damage.

The importance of the Scandinavian study is it has taken data on real people and real mobile phone usage conditions and found no increase in brain tumours relating to mobile phone use.

SM
You're smarter than this lame excuse for a comparison.

yes. I read it on a science web site too.
What you neglect to say is that the conclusion is statistically arrived at, as determined by *one* investigation. It, unlike AGW is not a synthesis of a number of different independent measuring sources, countless peer reviewed papers and well established physics concepts. There is no sensible comparison, I suggest this is driven by ideological prejudice rather than reason.

As for GM food issue there is still some scientific question such as spreading to weed species and crop contamination.

Personally my objection to GM is more the venders acting as gatekeepers to the most basic commodity, food. To me some license conditions to GM grain are just one step too far. This to me is primarily an ethical issue. AGW is an belief in the science issue.

Clearly trying to make comparison between these issue is plain poor reasoning. You are trying to compare lemons, grapefruit with oranges.
You can do better.

Shadow Minister

<< When will we get a government that has the spine to stand up to the lunatic fringe and govern according to the science and not just the perception? >>

I don't think there's anything settled about either the science or the perception and those who choose to be sensibly cautious don't deserve to be labelled the 'lunatic fringe'. The same label was applied thirty years or so ago to the small number of people who first started warning of human-induced climate change, and now the vast majority accept that fact as reality.

Same too will be the case with many of these issues you've listed here. The jury's still out on all of them, especially mobile phones. One study doesn't negate in my mind the doubts raised by people like brain cancer surgeon, Charlie Teo.

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,26270050-952,00.html

I think the real time bomb is yet to be realised. When today's kids - whose developing brains have been subjected to prolonged mobile phone usage from a very young age - start to feature in the statistics, the story could well be very different.

Since 1988, researchers in the laboratory of a Swedish neurosurgeon, Leif Salford, have been running variations on a simple experiment. They expose young laboratory rats to either a cell phone or other source of microwave radiation, and later they sacrifice the animals and look for albumin in their brain tissue. Albumin is a protein that is a normal component of blood but that doesn't normally cross the blood-brain barrier. The presence of albumin in brain tissue is always a sign that blood vessels have been damaged and that the brain has lost some of its protection. These researchers have consistently found for eighteen years now that microwave radiation, at doses equal to a cell phone’s emissions, causes albumin to be found in brain tissue. A one-time exposure to an ordinary cell phone for just two minutes causes albumin to leak into the brain.

http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/sepp/2006/04/20/mobile_and_wireless_largest_biological_experiment.htm

For every study you hold up as 'proof', there'll be other studies that will just as legitimately cast very real doubt.

Agronomist,

It was indeed real research and despite your assertions (not mine) that it's part of some giant conspiracy, it was published. I've given you the leads - look it up if you wish.

I never said it was "proof", only questioned the interpretation of the findings and the subsequent media related events.

However you must have noticed that the industry only makes a public announcement or holds press conferences if it's good news.

Strangely, any negative or inconclusive results just don't happen except by researchers outside the industry. What is their motive I wonder? Only one party seems to have a vested interest in any outcome.

Yet despite such overwhelmingly conclusive evidence of inherent safety, research continues.

Whether people continue to use mobile phones or smoke or whatever is of no personal concern to me. Give them to young children too by all means - it's good for my Telstra dividends.