Swimming In A Deadly Sea:
Awash In Radiation
Part Three
By Kathleen Deoul
(Page: 4 of 8)

Select From Previous Newsletters The Anthrax Vaccine: Hiding The Truth They're Back! Swimming In A Deadly Sea: Awash In Radiation Weapons Of Mass Destruction [Pt. 1] Weapons Of Mass Destruction [Pt. 2] Brave New World? [Pt. 1] Brave New World? [Pt. 2] The Autism Epidemic [Pt. 1] The Autism Epidemic [Pt. 2] Kill The Messenger Cell Phones, The Invisible Threat [Pt. 1] Cell Phones, The Invisible Threat [Pt. 2] Turning Tragedy Into Hope [Pt. 1] Turning Tragedy Into Hope [Pt. 2] Turning Tragedy Into Hope [Pt. 3] The Flu Epidemic: Made In Washington? Dealing With The Nursing Home Crisis Big Pharma's Dirty Little Secret Health Care Quality: Big Medicine’s Big Lie The Alternative Answer An Herbal Miracle Drug? The Unholy Alliance (Part One) The Unholy Alliance (Part Two) Big Pharma Cooks The Books Again The Devil's in the Detail (Men) Pt. I The Devil's in the Detail (Men) Pt. II The Devil's in the Detail (Men) Pt. III Are Clinical Trials Breeding Federal Frankensteins? [Part I] An Out Of Control Bureaucracy Threatens Public Health Drug Research [Pt. 1]: A Corporate Con Job Drug Research [Pt. 2]: The Rising Tide Of Prescription Drug Costs Are Clinical Trials Breeding Federal Frankensteins? [Part 2]: The Anthrax Vaccine: Making Our Soldiers Guinea Pigs [Pt 1] The Anthrax Vaccine: Making Our Soldiers Guinea Pigs [Pt 2] The Anthrax Vaccine: Making Our Soldiers Guinea Pigs [Pt 3] Drug Company Ads: Selling A Product Or Selling Out The Public BIG PHARMA: Takes On The Net Will The WTO Take Your Vitamins And Supplements Away? The Prescription Drug Benefit: Boon or Boondoggle? With A Stroke Of The Pen With A Stroke Of The Pen: Part II Unnecessary Risk Part: I Unnecessary Risk Part: II Drugging Our Children

Click for Print Version

Kathleen Deoul: But doesn't that work both ways? Isn't it true that if you can't absolutely prove that something causes cancer, you also cannot prove absolutely that it does not?

Copulos: That's absolutely correct, Kathleen, and that's why epidemiologists use probabilities and similar statistical tools in their work. They realize that you can't be 100% certain, but if you can be 90% certain, or even 51% certain, that's probably enough to justify action. It stems from something called "the precautionary principle."

Kathleen Deoul: What do you mean by "the precautionary principle?"

Copulos: It's pretty straightforward. In plain English, it's the notion that we should not take unnecessary chances. It holds that if it is more likely than not that some action will result in harm, it makes sense to avoid taking that action as a precaution. It's sort of like the old joke in which a man goes to a doctor and says "My arm hurts when I do that." And the doctor replies "Then don't do that."

Kathleen Deoul: Well, that makes sense to me. But let me ask you this. Even though there are studies that say cell phones and other sources of non-ionizing radiation are harmless, there are also studies that come to the opposite conclusion. As you noted, the split is about 50/50, with most of the positive studies funded by industry. So how would the precautionary principle apply?

Copulos: Well, Kathleen, let's look at some very recent studies and see how they would fit into this line of reasoning.

First is a study from Europe which was published in June of 2005 in the journal Mutation Research. It looked at the effect of mobile phone radiation on DNA, using both human and rat cells. The researchers found that the radiation did cause DNA breakage and that the breakage could be passed on to subsequent generations of cells. This is a very important finding for two reasons. It included human cells, and demonstrated that the damage could be passed on.

A second study, from Sweden looked at the effect of cell phone radiation on brain tissue in rats. It found that exposure to cell phone radiation did cause damage to brain cells of adolescent rats, and more important to the areas that governed memory, sensation and movement. Their results were published in the June 2003 issue of the journal Environmental Perspectives.

The third study, again from Sweden, you probably are familiar with. It looked at cell phone radiation and the increased risk of Acoustic Neuroma, a type of benign tumor. This study found that people who had used cell phones for at least ten years had a markedly increased risk of developing this type of tumor.

Swimming In A Deadly Sea: Awash In Radiation
(Part III)

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4

Contact Kathleen Deoul, Media Matters
Email: admin@cancer-coverup.com