4 ms·

WHO: Cell phone use can increase possible cancer risk

7 points by nicksergeant 15y ago

GiraffeNecktie 15y ago
Please don't try and spice up a submission with your own "more interesting" headline. Usually it winds up being inaccurate or misleading. The original CNN headline is "Cell phone use can increase possible cancer risk". The actual quote where the new "headline" apparently came from is "The agency now lists mobile phone use in the same "carcinogenic hazard" category as lead, engine exhaust and chloroform." The new title doesn't even make any kind of logical sense.
- Bud 15y ago
  I mostly disagree. The average reader here is smart enough to read that headline, notice that part of it is quoted, and infer that the article states that some health authority has recently said that cell phone signals are about as dangerous as lead, etc. The average reader is also more than smart enough to discern that the article is not, in fact, stating that cell phone radiation is the exact same thing as, say, lead. It's a bit ludicrous to even think that folks would assume this. That said, I also prefer original headlines, as a rule.
  - bxr 15y ago
    >and infer that the article states that some health authority has recently said that cell phone signals are about as dangerous as lead, etc. They would be inferring the wrong thing if they did that. When someone thinks of the dangers of lead, they think of lead poisoning, not lead as carcinogenic. The dangers of exhaust, asphyxiation not as a carcinogen. Chloroform? Kidneys and liver damage from too high a dose, not cancer.
- nicksergeant 15y ago
  At the time I posted (before the "dupe" was later posted), the article headline reflected an earlier article (the same URL) about the WHO to report its findings later in the day. My title was reflective of the CNN news alert, and I had no possible way to know what the original title would be. From the article: "Radiation from cell phones can possibly cause cancer, according to the World Health Organization. The agency now lists mobile phone use in the same "carcinogenic hazard" category as lead, engine exhaust and chloroform." As you might notice, that's far too long for a title. Since there are char limits on titles, its up to us to create one. I read the above as "Radiation is the same or similar to other things in the same category, such as lead, engine exhaust, and chloroform". No need to police this.
aw3c2 15y ago
dupe of http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2603309 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2603309

7 points by nicksergeant 15y ago

Please don't try and spice up a submission with your own "more interesting" headline. Usually it winds up being inaccurate or misleading. The original CNN headline is "Cell phone use can increase possible cancer risk". The actual quote where the new "headline" apparently came from is "The agency now lists mobile phone use in the same "carcinogenic hazard" category as lead, engine exhaust and chloroform." The new title doesn't even make any kind of logical sense.

Bud 15y ago
I mostly disagree. The average reader here is smart enough to read that headline, notice that part of it is quoted, and infer that the article states that some health authority has recently said that cell phone signals are about as dangerous as lead, etc. The average reader is also more than smart enough to discern that the article is not, in fact, stating that cell phone radiation is the exact same thing as, say, lead. It's a bit ludicrous to even think that folks would assume this. That said, I also prefer original headlines, as a rule.
- bxr 15y ago
  >and infer that the article states that some health authority has recently said that cell phone signals are about as dangerous as lead, etc. They would be inferring the wrong thing if they did that. When someone thinks of the dangers of lead, they think of lead poisoning, not lead as carcinogenic. The dangers of exhaust, asphyxiation not as a carcinogen. Chloroform? Kidneys and liver damage from too high a dose, not cancer.
nicksergeant 15y ago
At the time I posted (before the "dupe" was later posted), the article headline reflected an earlier article (the same URL) about the WHO to report its findings later in the day. My title was reflective of the CNN news alert, and I had no possible way to know what the original title would be. From the article: "Radiation from cell phones can possibly cause cancer, according to the World Health Organization. The agency now lists mobile phone use in the same "carcinogenic hazard" category as lead, engine exhaust and chloroform." As you might notice, that's far too long for a title. Since there are char limits on titles, its up to us to create one. I read the above as "Radiation is the same or similar to other things in the same category, such as lead, engine exhaust, and chloroform". No need to police this.

aw3c2 15y ago

dupe of http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2603309 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2603309