> "Ah, the ever present fear of non-ionizing radiation." On the cdc.gov resource you provided, I clicked on the link about "NIEHS research on possible health r

> "Ah, the ever present fear of non-ionizing radiation." On the cdc.gov resource you provided, I clicked on the link about "NIEHS research on possible health risks from cell phones". There I read this: The NTP studies found that high exposure to RFR used by cell phones resulted in: - Clear evidence of tumors in the hearts of male rats. The tumors were malignant schwannomas. - Some evidence of tumors in the brains of male rats. The tumors were malignant gliomas. - Some evidence of tumors in the adrenal glands of male rats. The tumors were benign, malignant, or complex combined pheochromocytoma. I get that this study involved higher levels than what my cell phone should be exposing me to, "mice are not humans", etc., etc. But then here come some journalists saying my phone emits much higher radiation than I thought... are they really just evoking a bogeyman and nothing more? I'm not sure. It takes a lot to win over my skepticism on a variety of topics -- particuarly when large corporations stand to gain or lose billions of dollars hinging on whether their product is GRAS or not -- and I suspect many others are the same. I'd be very grateful for links to additional research on the topic of cell phones and non-ionizing radiation, if anyone has good ones to share.