5 ms·

It appears some health authorities are in agreement? > In 2001, based upon the biologic and human epidemiologic research, low-frequency fields were classified

It appears some health authorities are in agreement? > In 2001, based upon the biologic and human epidemiologic research, low-frequency fields were classified as “possibly carcinogenic” by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) of the World Health Organization. In 2011, the IARC classified radiofrequency radiation as “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” based upon studies of cellphone radiation and brain tumor risk in humans. Currently, we have considerably more evidence that would warrant a stronger classification. > Most recently, on March 1, 2021, a report was released by the former director of the National Center for Environmental Health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which concluded that there is a “high probability” that radiofrequency radiation emitted by cellphones causes gliomas and acoustic neuromas, two types of brain tumors. And why this? > Our government, however, stopped funding research on the health effects of radiofrequency radiation in the 1990s

wizzwizz4 5y ago
> It appears some health authorities are in agreement? In 2011 (maybe 2013?[1]), the IARC put radiofrequency electromagnetic fields in group 2B,[0] which is basically “we're a little worried there might be a problem, but we haven't actually replicated it”. I thought I remembered them taking it off that list sometime around 2017, but apparently they didn't. Nonetheless, this isn't them agreeing with the claim. [0]: https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.pdf https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.... [1]:
- poorjohnmacafee 5y ago
  Per the 2021 citation, here is the former CDC director claiming he believes RF tech in cellphones causes types of brain tumors. This was part of a lawsuit by plaintiffs with alleged brain tumors from heavy cell phone use: https://www.publicnewsservice.org/2021-03-24/health/prominent-scientist-links-cellphone-radiation-to-brain-tumors/a73655-1 https://www.publicnewsservice.org/2021-03-24/health/prominen... https://www.saferemr.com/2021/03/expert-report-by-former-us-government.html https://www.saferemr.com/2021/03/expert-report-by-former-us-... The CDC guy at least seems to think there's plenty of evidence at this point. There are also citations claiming government tests are outdated fwiw, .e.g. maybe we're not appropriately testing the health effects. All mostly new to me.
- wizzwizz4 5y ago
  [1] should be https://monographs.iarc.who.int/list-of-classifications https://monographs.iarc.who.int/list-of-classifications by the way.
loceng 5y ago
> Our government, however, stopped funding research on the health effects of radiofrequency radiation in the 1990s Regulatory capture?

wizzwizz4 5y ago

> It appears some health authorities are in agreement? In 2011 (maybe 2013?[1]), the IARC put radiofrequency electromagnetic fields in group 2B,[0] which is basically “we're a little worried there might be a problem, but we haven't actually replicated it”. I thought I remembered them taking it off that list sometime around 2017, but apparently they didn't. Nonetheless, this isn't them agreeing with the claim. [0]: https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.pdf https://www.iarc.who.int/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/pr208_E.... [1]:

poorjohnmacafee 5y ago
Per the 2021 citation, here is the former CDC director claiming he believes RF tech in cellphones causes types of brain tumors. This was part of a lawsuit by plaintiffs with alleged brain tumors from heavy cell phone use: https://www.publicnewsservice.org/2021-03-24/health/prominent-scientist-links-cellphone-radiation-to-brain-tumors/a73655-1 https://www.publicnewsservice.org/2021-03-24/health/prominen... https://www.saferemr.com/2021/03/expert-report-by-former-us-government.html https://www.saferemr.com/2021/03/expert-report-by-former-us-... The CDC guy at least seems to think there's plenty of evidence at this point. There are also citations claiming government tests are outdated fwiw, .e.g. maybe we're not appropriately testing the health effects. All mostly new to me.
wizzwizz4 5y ago
[1] should be https://monographs.iarc.who.int/list-of-classifications https://monographs.iarc.who.int/list-of-classifications by the way.

loceng 5y ago

> Our government, however, stopped funding research on the health effects of radiofrequency radiation in the 1990s Regulatory capture?