Although I agree with most of your points of view about religion and pseudoscience, I disagree with you in terms of a cartoon like this and about how you see environmental issues. Scientific studies have shown that cell phones and TSA airport scanners could cause cancer (though maybe not a higher rate than obesity, but everyone shares the same point of view about that). It is the same thing with many of the environmental predictions you criticize(although I understand where you are coming from in being skeptical of Doomsdays).
I don’t he’s being dismissive of the risk, just highlighting that all of these little risks are nothing in the context of general health in comparison to largely worries like obesity. Which is an important point to raise, it’s easy to panic about these things and avoid certain technologies. It’s far harder to make big changes to your lifestyle to actually be healthier.
Except that cell phones emit non-ionizing radiation, which isn’t carcenogenic at all. The worst damage it could possibly do is warm the side of your head a thousandth of a degree. A leaking microwave does approximately the same (and a properly sealed microwave emits no radiation at all). As best I can tell, high-voltage wires emit no radiation at all. I’m not certain about the airport scanners, though.
I am a physicist and an accredited radiation specialist and I was flicking through the comics, I’ll try to keep this brief and simple.
1. Cell phones: non ionising radiation, no known mechanism by which they could cause cancer. That doesn’t mean they don’t cause cancer but the evidence gathered indicates strongly that they don’t. Recently cell phones were moved into category 2B by the IARC in it’s catalogue of carcinogenic risks. 1 is causes cancer. 2A is weak evidence that it may cause cancer in humans and good evidence it causes cancer in animals. 2B is weak evidence that it causes cancer in anything. Cell phones were put in that category after a study in the American Journal of Epidemiology that showed that cell phones did not cause cancer. The reason the study is used to support a link between cell phones and cancer is that if you poke around in the data you can find groups where there was a bigger incidence of cancer in mobile phone users. It’s called subgroup analysis, it’s like cutting an irregular shaped slice of cake so that your piece will have more cherries on top. In this case they took cell phone users who claimed to be using their phones for twelve hours a day. Not 12 hours on and off but actually spending 12 hours in an actual phone conversation. At the point one of the types of cancers they were testing for just barely becomes statistically significantly linked to cell phones. You may be able to tell that I was not convinced by this.
Airport scanners: most do emit carcinogenic radiation, about the same amount as you will get if you spend 20 mins at cruising altitude. You’re actually exposed to a small amount of carcinogenic radiation all the time but larger amounts the higher your altitude gets. You are getting a much bigger dose of radiation from your flight then you are from the scanner. Still if you stayed at altitude permanently your dosage would not rise to a level that has been shown to be dangerous.
Anyway that’s my answer to the question no one asked. I’ll shut up now.
June 6th, 2011 at 1:50 pm
Although I agree with most of your points of view about religion and pseudoscience, I disagree with you in terms of a cartoon like this and about how you see environmental issues. Scientific studies have shown that cell phones and TSA airport scanners could cause cancer (though maybe not a higher rate than obesity, but everyone shares the same point of view about that). It is the same thing with many of the environmental predictions you criticize(although I understand where you are coming from in being skeptical of Doomsdays).
June 6th, 2011 at 9:31 pm
I don’t he’s being dismissive of the risk, just highlighting that all of these little risks are nothing in the context of general health in comparison to largely worries like obesity. Which is an important point to raise, it’s easy to panic about these things and avoid certain technologies. It’s far harder to make big changes to your lifestyle to actually be healthier.
June 7th, 2011 at 9:27 am
Весьма и весьма..
June 7th, 2011 at 10:57 am
Exactly !!!!!
June 8th, 2011 at 1:12 am
Indeed, scientific studies have classified cell phones as possible cause for cancer. Just as coffee and vinegared vegetables…
June 9th, 2011 at 2:56 pm
Except that cell phones emit non-ionizing radiation, which isn’t carcenogenic at all. The worst damage it could possibly do is warm the side of your head a thousandth of a degree. A leaking microwave does approximately the same (and a properly sealed microwave emits no radiation at all). As best I can tell, high-voltage wires emit no radiation at all. I’m not certain about the airport scanners, though.
July 10th, 2011 at 12:50 am
I am a physicist and an accredited radiation specialist and I was flicking through the comics, I’ll try to keep this brief and simple.
1. Cell phones: non ionising radiation, no known mechanism by which they could cause cancer. That doesn’t mean they don’t cause cancer but the evidence gathered indicates strongly that they don’t. Recently cell phones were moved into category 2B by the IARC in it’s catalogue of carcinogenic risks. 1 is causes cancer. 2A is weak evidence that it may cause cancer in humans and good evidence it causes cancer in animals. 2B is weak evidence that it causes cancer in anything. Cell phones were put in that category after a study in the American Journal of Epidemiology that showed that cell phones did not cause cancer. The reason the study is used to support a link between cell phones and cancer is that if you poke around in the data you can find groups where there was a bigger incidence of cancer in mobile phone users. It’s called subgroup analysis, it’s like cutting an irregular shaped slice of cake so that your piece will have more cherries on top. In this case they took cell phone users who claimed to be using their phones for twelve hours a day. Not 12 hours on and off but actually spending 12 hours in an actual phone conversation. At the point one of the types of cancers they were testing for just barely becomes statistically significantly linked to cell phones. You may be able to tell that I was not convinced by this.
Airport scanners: most do emit carcinogenic radiation, about the same amount as you will get if you spend 20 mins at cruising altitude. You’re actually exposed to a small amount of carcinogenic radiation all the time but larger amounts the higher your altitude gets. You are getting a much bigger dose of radiation from your flight then you are from the scanner. Still if you stayed at altitude permanently your dosage would not rise to a level that has been shown to be dangerous.
Anyway that’s my answer to the question no one asked. I’ll shut up now.
July 10th, 2011 at 4:38 pm
Awesome, thanks for the info!