Alzheimers and the Cell Phone

[Joesitz (RIP)]

http://emf.mercola.com/sites/emf/archive/2010/02/16/how-the-media-lies-to-you-about-cell-phones.aspx

Check it out. We may be breeding a whole lot of mindless people.

 

[Tonichelle]

oh a whole bunch of mindless people were bred long before the cellphone

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

^^^
Not that I disagree with you, but you do have a knack for changing subjects when you do not want to discuss a subject.

 

[CARA]

Joesitz:

I'm not sure what you mean by "We may be breeding a whole lot of mindless people." Isn't the gist of the study being thougthe potential cognitive enhancing effect of the cell phone usage? Though I agree the result of harm vs. beneficial effect of cell phone usage is inconclusive. I read the abstract of the original study - far less info for me to conclude either effect. So what"s the point you are trying to make?

 

[CARA]

FYI: http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100302/full/464019a.html. I know this cell phone study was, just like many experimental studies, done by lab rats. The title of this study is "Fat rats skew research results." Some of the excerpts state: "Failure to recognize that many laboratory animals live unhealthy lives may be leading researchers to misinterpret their findings, potentially misdirecting efforts to develop theraputic drugs..."

Having done experimental studies myself, I am naturally skeptical of sweeping claims made by single and/or few studies. This article is a good example.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

FYI: http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100302/full/464019a.html. I know this cell phone study was, just like many experimental studies, done by lab rats. The title of this study is "Fat rats skew research results." Some of the excerpts state: "Failure to recognize that many laboratory animals live unhealthy lives may be leading researchers to misinterpret their findings, potentially misdirecting efforts to develop theraputic drugs..."

Having done experimental studies myself, I am naturally skeptical of sweeping claims made by single and/or few studies. This article is a good example.

I can't imagine a rat using a cell phone, but some scientists do believe that holding the cell phone close to the ear can cause some disturbance in the brain waves. What do I know? I thank you for bringing some food for thought. There are several reasons for forgetfulness: Age, Stroke, Accident, etc.. Alzheimer's is the worst.

 

[Tonichelle]

I've never heard of the Alzheimers one, but I have read about the theory that some cancers are connected to cell phone use...

I try to not use mine unless I absolutely have to. I hate the phone.

 

[CARA]

Ok, let's see if I can clarify my points. I understood that the main thesis of http://emf.mercola.com/sites/emf/arc...ll-phones.aspx, "The Big "Hidden Cell Phone Lie" Companies Will Never Admit" is that the cell phone companies' latest claim that cell phone usage has protective effect against Alzheimer’s disease might not hold water. The beneficial, and potencially cognitive enhancing effects cell phone companies claim is based on a single study done by lab rats who were genetically engineered to develop beta amyloid plaques in their brains, which are thought to be the primary culprits in Alzheimer’s disease. Those genetically engineered rats were "exposed to "cell phone"-level microwave radiation for two one-hour periods daily for seven to nine months." The result contracted with the popular belief: the lab rats becoming "dumb." Instead, those lab rats became "smarter," indicated by shrinkage of beta amyloid plaques, main culprit of Alzheimer’s disease. However, Joesits, your article argue that the result is not conclusive.

However, results of adversarial cell phone usage, despite claim by some, are to this day, still inconclusive. Knowdege based on scientific studies are cumulative and rarely conclusive. Meanwhile, we can all take common sense solution and minimize cell phone usage. Okay, try Skype!

I'm sorry for sounding nerdy. But I don't have much patience on sweeping claims, including now increasingly debunked global warming doomsday scenario.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

Cara you should not feel nerdy, The claims for an association between Alzheimer's and Cell Phone usage are fairly new. I believe the people who have sweeping claims do not suggest that there is an immediate cause. It probably means later in life. I remember my brother and I smoked cigarettes at age 14 and continued. There were nerdy warnings in the 40s. I stopped at 45 but he went on until his death at 74 from lung cancer. So, I believe the warning about cell phones does not have to be heeded when one doesn't care about their senior years.

That's the best way to handle it, as you say, limit the use to emergencies. Nothing worse than sitting on a bus and hear someone shouting into the cell phone that she does not like the results of her hairdresser, and what she can do about it before Wednesday's party. It's anoying to listen to one sided conversations.

Some people believe there is global warming and some do not. President Bush never believed in it either. Yet there are arctic scenes that are changing, and questions raised about warming up the earth causing Quakes. I have patience for sweeping claims until results is firmly established.

 

[CARA]

By the way, one of the few beneficial effects of smoking is that it has preventive effect on Alzheimer's disease. I should know. I, too, am a former smoker who had done an extensive research on Alzheimer's disease.:thumbsup:

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

By the way, now recent studies have shown that the amyloid plaque is not the cause of Alzheimers. Have we really debunked that the World is flat so quickly?

also not sure if the Global Warming has been debunked. It could halt the way of mining oil in the oceans if something can be done about it. So who debunked it? Scientists paid by the Oil interests?
I've heard Gore is making a great deal of money pushing global warming. I don't know if that is true,and if so, why not?

 

[CARA]

now recent studies have shown that the amyloid plaque is not the cause of Alzheimers.

You are confirming my argument. As I mentioned previously, scienctific knowldege is cumulative; later studies fairly loutinely refute previous findings. That's why I am skeptical of sweeping claims and prefers common sense solutions most of the times.

As for Al Gores becoming a "fat cat" off of global warming claim - I have no problem enterprising people becoming rich. I am a recycling fanatic, as I believe in leaving a cleaner planet to our younger generation. I've also donated unused household items to Goodwill twice a year for as long as I remember. I can take tax deduction, and persons with tight budget can stretch their pennies by shoping inexpensively. To me, it's a win-win proposition, and part of my common sense solutions.

I do, however, have problem with Al Gore alarming global warming while he travel around the world with his private jet, which emit carbon dioxide many more times than us lowly common persons cosume in a year. He is also an enthusiastic meat eater, when, according to PETA, raising cow greatly contribute to global warming. Al Gore's "mansion" is also carbon dioxide hog, I'm told.

Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with his life style, had he not preach other not to do what he does. It's the hypocricy and the double standard, "do as I say not as I do" that I can't abide by.

You might also want to check http://hotair.com/archives/2010/01/...-student-dissertation-and-a-magazine-article/. Climategate scandal articles are too numerous to enumerate, but here is a nice compilation if you are interested: http://hotair.com/?s=climategate

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

I've never heard of the Alzheimers one, but I have read about the theory that some cancers are connected to cell phone use...

I try to not use mine unless I absolutely have to. I hate the phone.

Good that's as it should be. The ban in airplanes is great.

 

[Joesitz (RIP)]

You are confirming my argument. As I mentioned previously, scienctific knowldege is cumulative; later studies fairly loutinely refute previous findings. That's why I am skeptical of sweeping claims and prefers common sense solutions most of the times.

But, we differ on the adjective sweeping. It would seem all those sweeping alerts regarding smoking in the 30s and 40s meant that there was no problem until the 80s when the tobacco interests were being sued left and right.
People died before that.

I believe the alert on global warming is there to accept or reject, and if proven true in later years, we will understand the misgivings. If never proven, well,then we can enjoy our memories for life. As long as you can believe that the pipelines are in no danger aside from ruining the natural look of the land, then the fat cats of the oil business will be happy.

 

[CARA]

First of all, it is a pleasure to be able to engage in civil and intellectual discussion and disagreement. I thank you for that.

I'm not certain what you mean by

But, we differ on the adjective sweeping. It would seem all those sweeping alerts regarding smoking in the 30s and 40s meant that there was no problem until the 80s when the tobacco interests were being sued left and right. People died before that.

I am not certain where you got the idea that smoking was no problem in the 30s and 40s.

I don't subscribe to that view. When you perceive warning signs, it is us each individual's responsibility to either heed or not heed to warning signs. The operative term for me is "responsibility." For instance, both you and I are former smokers. I don't know about you, but it was very, very, very difficult for me to kick my smoking habit. It took me many attempt, but I kep trying to quit till I succeeded. That was my choice.

I know. People say smoking is an addiction. Certainly. But addiction and free will are not mutually exclusive. Both my experience and professional observation confirm that you cannot kick addiction without free will presicely because physical and psychological addictions are hard to eradicate. That's how I understand the saying, "you have to hit the bottom" for you to be able to get out of addiction.

Anyway, legal settlement of tobacco cases do not change the fact of human responsibility in relation to nicotin addiction.

Regarding global warming, I don't think this concept is the matter of either accept or not accept. I found another interesting article of global warming after I posted my previous post. It is: http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/denial. Also do you really believe that I think "pipelines are in no danger aside from ruining the natural look of the land?"

By the way, i used to hear the notion "global warming" a lot, but lately that notion is somehow morphed into "climate change." Wonder why:think: