How about a hopefully safe subject?
 

Cell phones now linked to brain tumors. Again released in the UK. This subject will not get the same play as in Europe because the lobbyists have already gotten our government (under any POTUS) to disagree with the findings.
The link is now documented to the point some Europeans governments are considering putting the risk of tumors from cell phones on a par with the risk of getting lung cancer from smoking.
Remember the resistance of the cigarette manufacturers here in the USA?
The cell phone industry has just as much to lose. The big difference is the cell phone manufacturers can employ newer technology to minimize or make the problem go away. They are on a roll with all the other new gadgetry and new phones which is their priority.
The most vulnerable? All the youngsters who spend way too many hours per day on their phones.
A comparison of concern? MADD...mothers against drunk driving....a prevalent movement here in the USA. Mothers can get behind such a program because the majority are not into drinking, hence they have nothing to lose. Statistics show that cell phone useage while driving kills more per year than drunk driving. Now why is there not a movement by the concerned mothers? Because THEY are not prepared to give up their use of cell phones....so the risk is more acceptable.
A classic hypocritical scenario.
How many mothers are willing to make the sacrifice to assure their children....grandchildren are not exposed? To date not many.

This problem will be kept low profile just like the other risks we are all aware of....like energy independence....the do nothing if it affects my life style criteria is prevalent.

If not hypocracy what would you call it.

Don't look for a hidden political agenda in the question. Feel free to make non partisan commentary. A challenge.....no doubt!!!

btk

The study referred to is/has been a long one. It has been going on for 10 years (thus would doubt that bluetooth or anything else has been examined) !

There is also a report today mentiong that there have been 27 different studies on the same subject but nothing conclusive. Perhaps the WHO study which is the one referred to in the UK will be THAT definitive study.

I dont find fault with the government for not making any great waves on this as there has been no definitive evidence thus far !

I certainly cant speak for the cancer but the use of cell phones has breeded a lot of unsafe drivers, rude people and another dependency for folks in this country (and throughout the world)

Two Sides.
 

Before you think I'm putting these studies down, I'm not! I'm just playing devil's advocate. I completely agree with the driving risk, etc. But, just to state the flip side of the coin, I know many many parents that feel safer when their children have a cell phone with them. Not only so they can keep tabs on them, but for emergency reasons. Again, like with everything else, it's the over-use that becomes the problem.

I personally only use my cell phone when it is absolutely necessary, but if I had a young child, I'd make sure they had one for safety reasons.

ALL of the studies are based on LONG TIME use and are only geared toward any cancer possibility.

Key is the word in every study I have seen, including the one referenced in this thread from the WHO, is LONG TERM USE !

Bluetooth earbud. Problem solved.

It will be interesting to see how this correlates to the Danish study of 421,000 cell phone user over 21 years that found no causal link.

Never mind that cell phones emit less power today than they used to.

I'd be interested in seeing who funded the WHO study and what it's methodology was. Also, they say "increased risk" - what does that mean? For example, if it turns out that now 2 out of 10,000 people might get a tumor where it used to be 1 in 10,000 (numbers I'm completely making up for the purposes of example) - you can bet that we'll hear "Cell phones DOUBLE your risk of CANCER!"

And what happens when further studies show that, perhaps, it some people who are more genetically susceptible to it (assuming the previous study was accurate). You know, kind of like how smoking can kill someone at 45 while we've all seen the 90-year old still smoking a pack a day.

Changed My Mind
 

I was never a fan of the cell phone and originally vowed never to have one. I resisted for as long as I could. Now I would be lost without it. My reason: My husband suffered a stroke 7 years ago that left him unable to speak coherently most times (this is known as expressive aphasia). He has regained 95-96% mobility, plays golf, etc. He wears a medic alert bracelet with emergency contact information in it which lists my cell # first. Without this, we would have to do everything together. The phone allows both of us some independence and space. They can be a real blessing when used properly. When we're together (movies, etc.) it is usually turned off.

Isn't it amazing how a little common courtesy can make something a non-issue? :)