5 ms·

And yet the second bullet in that article: > The electromagnetic fields produced by mobile phones are classified by the International Agency for Research on Ca

And yet the second bullet in that article: > The electromagnetic fields produced by mobile phones are classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as possibly carcinogenic to humans. So it's not settled science, even though there is some evidence pointing toward it not causing cancer.

steve19 8y ago
There is a lot of evidence, long term studies, showing they do not do cancer. So the question is why are they listed as a possible cause? It invalidates the entire list. My car keys may well "possibly" cause cancer if the bar is so low.
- JonathonW 8y ago
  The specific item that is on the IARC Group 2B ("possibly carcinogenic") is "radiofrequency electromagnetic fields", which includes exposures due to cell phone use-- cell phone radiation specifically is not classified. So, if your car has keyless entry, your car keys would technically also be on the list.
wbl 8y ago
What has IARC excluded from causing cancer?
kevhito 8y ago
From wikipedia, it says "limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and less than sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. It may also be used when there is inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans but there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. In some instances, an agent, mixture or exposure circumstance for which there is inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans but limited evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals together with supporting evidence from other relevant data may be placed in this group." Anecdotally, I see alongside some unpleasant-sounding items, a lot of common things on that same list like: aloe vera, Ginkgo biloba, engine exhaust, pickled vegetables, and cocamide DEA. It seems to me that mere presence on that list doesn't mean much without further context -- why it was put on the list, the relative danger of it compared to other things on that list, etc.

steve19 8y ago

There is a lot of evidence, long term studies, showing they do not do cancer. So the question is why are they listed as a possible cause? It invalidates the entire list. My car keys may well "possibly" cause cancer if the bar is so low.

JonathonW 8y ago
The specific item that is on the IARC Group 2B ("possibly carcinogenic") is "radiofrequency electromagnetic fields", which includes exposures due to cell phone use-- cell phone radiation specifically is not classified. So, if your car has keyless entry, your car keys would technically also be on the list.

wbl 8y ago

What has IARC excluded from causing cancer?

kevhito 8y ago

From wikipedia, it says "limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and less than sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. It may also be used when there is inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans but there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. In some instances, an agent, mixture or exposure circumstance for which there is inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans but limited evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals together with supporting evidence from other relevant data may be placed in this group." Anecdotally, I see alongside some unpleasant-sounding items, a lot of common things on that same list like: aloe vera, Ginkgo biloba, engine exhaust, pickled vegetables, and cocamide DEA. It seems to me that mere presence on that list doesn't mean much without further context -- why it was put on the list, the relative danger of it compared to other things on that list, etc.