5 ms·

Mother Jones posted this link: http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/05/26/055699.full.pdf http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/05/26/055699.f.

by joshvm 10y ago

Mother Jones posted this link: http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/05/26/055699.full.pdf http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2016/05/26/055699.f... Key points: - The rats were exposed in utero and throughout their lifetimes - They did pilot studies to find what radiation level did not cause a body temperature rise to remove that as a confusing factor - 900MHz CDMA and GSM signals - SAR of 0, 1.5, 3, 6 W/kg. For comparison the FCC limit is 1.2 W/kg in 1 gram of tissue. In the UK/EU it's 2 W/kg. - 18 hour cycle each day, 10 minutes off, 10 minutes on (i.e. a 9 hour 50% duty cycle) - 90 rats per gender per group (I think 1260 total) - 106 week study - Litter weights were slightly lower in exposed groups (~10%), but over time there was no significant weight difference between the exposed and control groups - For the things they studied, the exposed rats had a defect rate of a few percent compared to control values of zero. Historic control values were (in my opinion) comparable to the exposed group and it seems to be barely statistically significant. The exception seems to be heart schwannomas which were as high as 7%. - More will be published this and next year. Here's a fun statement: At the end of the 2-year study, survival was lower in the control group of males than in all groups of male rats exposed to GSM-modulated RFR. Survival was also slightly lower in control females than in females exposed to 1.5 or 6 W/kg GSM-modulated RFR. In rats exposed to CDMA-modulated RFR, survival was higher in all groups of exposed males and in the 6 W/kg females compared to controls.

alex_duf 10y ago
Thanks for the summary, very interesting!
carlesfe 10y ago
Thanks for the summary, I just read the article and I feel like you touched the main points. Regarding survival, I also noticed it, surprising. Could you define "survival rate" for someone who's not in the field? Does it mean what it looks like it means, i.e., survival rate is higher when rats die at an older age in average?
- joshvm 10y ago
  Not a medic or biologist (or a statistician!) so I don't know the specific definition, but I assumed it simply means the number of rats still alive at the end of the 106 week period.
  - astazangasta 10y ago
    This is correct. Because you can't know the future, 'survival' means up to a certain point (whenever you stop looking), beyond which adverse events are not counted (even if you know they happened).
TeMPOraL 10y ago
> At the end of the 2-year study, survival was lower in the control group of males than in all groups of male rats exposed to GSM-modulated RFR. Survival was also slightly lower in control females than in females exposed to 1.5 or 6 W/kg GSM-modulated RFR. In rats exposed to CDMA-modulated RFR, survival was higher in all groups of exposed males and in the 6 W/kg females compared to controls. Part of me wants to spam every genpop I know now with this link and the phrase: "scientists prove cellphone radiation makes you live longer!".
- tomp 10y ago
  Wait until you see tomorrow's headlines!
- hobbes78 10y ago
  I see a pattern here: everything that slows aging increases the chance of cancer. Take e.g. anti-oxidants, which fight ageing agents (free radicals) but cause cancer to spread faster. Take reducing the role of telomeres, which stops putting a limit on cell division (thus allowing cell replacement on old people as it happens on young people), causes any appearance of cancer to spread way more quickly.
taneq 10y ago
Oh great, now those damn people with CDMA phones are going to be even more smug. :P
- nashashmi 10y ago
  I was always more comfortable with CDMA than GSM, partly because the speakers near a GSM phone can pick up on the GSM transmission code, what code is being sent, the duration sent, and the time in between transmissions. It was literally like hearing the morse code. I immediately correlated the electromagnetic feelings in my body to this signal. And never trusted GSM phones again.
  - grkvlt 10y ago
    > electromagnetic feelings What do you mean by this? And also, I'm sure I won't be the only one to point out the lack of a link between correlation and causation.
- bkmartin 10y ago
  Give Verizon another reason to raise my rates... GREAT!
- p1mrx 10y ago
  Pretty much everyone uses CDMA these days. 3G/UMTS and 4G/LTE are both based on CDMA, which transmits continuously, unlike 2G/GSM/EDGE, which transmits in pulses and makes the dit-dit-dit-bzzz sound in nearby speakers. Edit: actually LTE uses OFDM, which is mathematically distinct from CDMA, but a naive receiver is unlikely to notice the difference.
  - mkehrt 10y ago
    "CDMA" means something different than "code division multiple access" multiplexing when contrasted with GSM. Instead it refers to the CDMA2000 family of telephony protocols (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CDMA2000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CDMA2000), which are a series of whole stack (radio modulation all the way up to text encoding schemes) protocols. Calling it "CDMA" is a branding thing than rather than having anything to do with multiplexing.
CorvusCrypto 10y ago
>At the end of the 2-year study, survival was lower in the control group of males than in all groups of male rats exposed to GSM-modulated RFR... ex-biologist here. Re: the last statement, if radiation is actually affecting tissues (I don't personally really believe the data shows a de-facto effect) then there is a hypothesis among some scientists that study radiation exposure that small chronic doses actually prime your body for dealing with minor changes in genetic structure (if you're into it, the mechanism is hypothesized to be via epigenetic up-regulation of DNA-repair protein coding genes[1]). Since Sprague-Dawley rats are known to develop spontaneous tumors after one year regardless of treatment, this is my hypothesis for explaining the apparent effect of shortened life in the control group. [1] - just google scholar the keywords "radiation upregulation dna repair". there are tons of papers on this effect.

by joshvm 10y ago

alex_duf 10y ago

Thanks for the summary, very interesting!

carlesfe 10y ago

Thanks for the summary, I just read the article and I feel like you touched the main points. Regarding survival, I also noticed it, surprising. Could you define "survival rate" for someone who's not in the field? Does it mean what it looks like it means, i.e., survival rate is higher when rats die at an older age in average?

joshvm 10y ago
Not a medic or biologist (or a statistician!) so I don't know the specific definition, but I assumed it simply means the number of rats still alive at the end of the 106 week period.
- astazangasta 10y ago
  This is correct. Because you can't know the future, 'survival' means up to a certain point (whenever you stop looking), beyond which adverse events are not counted (even if you know they happened).

TeMPOraL 10y ago

> At the end of the 2-year study, survival was lower in the control group of males than in all groups of male rats exposed to GSM-modulated RFR. Survival was also slightly lower in control females than in females exposed to 1.5 or 6 W/kg GSM-modulated RFR. In rats exposed to CDMA-modulated RFR, survival was higher in all groups of exposed males and in the 6 W/kg females compared to controls. Part of me wants to spam every genpop I know now with this link and the phrase: "scientists prove cellphone radiation makes you live longer!".

tomp 10y ago
Wait until you see tomorrow's headlines!
hobbes78 10y ago
I see a pattern here: everything that slows aging increases the chance of cancer. Take e.g. anti-oxidants, which fight ageing agents (free radicals) but cause cancer to spread faster. Take reducing the role of telomeres, which stops putting a limit on cell division (thus allowing cell replacement on old people as it happens on young people), causes any appearance of cancer to spread way more quickly.

taneq 10y ago

Oh great, now those damn people with CDMA phones are going to be even more smug. :P

nashashmi 10y ago
I was always more comfortable with CDMA than GSM, partly because the speakers near a GSM phone can pick up on the GSM transmission code, what code is being sent, the duration sent, and the time in between transmissions. It was literally like hearing the morse code. I immediately correlated the electromagnetic feelings in my body to this signal. And never trusted GSM phones again.
- grkvlt 10y ago
  > electromagnetic feelings What do you mean by this? And also, I'm sure I won't be the only one to point out the lack of a link between correlation and causation.
bkmartin 10y ago
Give Verizon another reason to raise my rates... GREAT!
p1mrx 10y ago
Pretty much everyone uses CDMA these days. 3G/UMTS and 4G/LTE are both based on CDMA, which transmits continuously, unlike 2G/GSM/EDGE, which transmits in pulses and makes the dit-dit-dit-bzzz sound in nearby speakers. Edit: actually LTE uses OFDM, which is mathematically distinct from CDMA, but a naive receiver is unlikely to notice the difference.
- mkehrt 10y ago
  "CDMA" means something different than "code division multiple access" multiplexing when contrasted with GSM. Instead it refers to the CDMA2000 family of telephony protocols (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CDMA2000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CDMA2000), which are a series of whole stack (radio modulation all the way up to text encoding schemes) protocols. Calling it "CDMA" is a branding thing than rather than having anything to do with multiplexing.

CorvusCrypto 10y ago

>At the end of the 2-year study, survival was lower in the control group of males than in all groups of male rats exposed to GSM-modulated RFR... ex-biologist here. Re: the last statement, if radiation is actually affecting tissues (I don't personally really believe the data shows a de-facto effect) then there is a hypothesis among some scientists that study radiation exposure that small chronic doses actually prime your body for dealing with minor changes in genetic structure (if you're into it, the mechanism is hypothesized to be via epigenetic up-regulation of DNA-repair protein coding genes[1]). Since Sprague-Dawley rats are known to develop spontaneous tumors after one year regardless of treatment, this is my hypothesis for explaining the apparent effect of shortened life in the control group. [1] - just google scholar the keywords "radiation upregulation dna repair". there are tons of papers on this effect.