years, everybody "knew" that mobile phones
were somehow killing us with radiation. Is this an
example of a myth that became an accepted, unquestioned
fact through repetition in the media? Did people jump to
this dodgy conclusion without any evidence and in spite of
sound, well-established scientific facts? Yes, my friend,
that's pretty much exactly what happened.
To respond or send a personal message to me, please do not
reply to this message, but instead please go to my contact
page or visit me at www.johnsjacob.com.
Also, you can now see me on YouTube at TheInnovationGuru.
Why exactly does
mobile phone radiation have no effect upon us, and how can we
be so sure? It's a question of the radiation's
wavelength and power. Electromagnetic waves around the
10-cm mark don't have enough "kick" to break chemical bonds
found in human cells and DNA. Besides, the amount of
energy absorbed by the body from a mobile phone is roughly the
amount required to power a digital watch. We've all
heard the statement, "There is no
known way for mobile phone radiation to cause
cancer." But what about the ways that
Are there unknown ways that mobile phones might be damaging
our cells and our DNA? This confused and mistaken belief
was created by sloppy communication. Rather than the
above statement, a more accurate statement would be the
following, "All of the ways in
which cell phone radiation is absorbed by the human body are
known, and none of them result in cell damage of any sort,
much less cancer. All of the kinds of radiation that
cause cancer are known, and none of them can be found coming
out of your phone."
Can you see how the two versions might be interpreted in
opposite ways? The first statement might be seen to
imply that it is happening and we don't know why. The
other statement more clearly explains that it isn't
happening because it doesn't happen, and it doesn't happen
because there are no physical means by which it can
These massive European studies were done using the health
records of thousands of people over many years
during which time mobile phone usage was
exploding. It is no surprise that they were unable
to detect any connection between mobile phones and
cancer. For more information on these studies and the
reasons they "failed," visit this
The medical researchers discovered nothing more or less
than that which physicists had predicted. When a
"theory" is correct, it makes accurate predictions of things
before they are observed.
Maybe there is some kind of radiation we don't know about
yet? If that is so, then maybe there are also some new
numbers between 0 and 9 that haven't been noticed yet.
Let's see: there's 1, and of course 2, yes we know about that
one already, and 3 . . . .
All radiation has a wavelength and a frequency, and these
are represented by numbers from 0 to as high as you care to
measure. None of them are in any way hidden from our
view. Sure, there are mysteries and things in the
universe that are unknown to us at this time, but there are
also plenty of things that science has fully exposed, and
about which we know all there is to know.
What about those previous cancer studies that said there
might be a cancer-cellphone connection? Those studies
were deeply flawed in two ways. First, the correct
conclusion to draw from those studies was not that a link has
been found, but rather that a link could not be ruled out
with complete confidence using the available data.
There is a vast difference between those two
statements, yet using one for the other is a mistake that
poorly-trained scientists and untrained journalists often
Second, those studies were flawed in that they did not
propose or investigate any credible mechanism obeying the laws
of nature through which such a link might occur.
They did not address the physical facts about what
radiation is and how it works. Everyone can contribute
to scientific accuracy by asking the right questions and
holding our scientists and journalists to a high standard of
precision in their communication. When a study
claims to reach a conclusion, always ask why and how.
I'm not going to let mobile phones off the hook this
easily, however. It turns out they are in fact quite
dangerous, They kill people all the time. How?
Real-life tests have proven that drivers talking on a
mobile phone while behind the wheel are on average more
impaired and more likely to have an accident than someone who
is legally drunk. That's how using a mobile phone can
kill you or kill someone's child: by using it when you
really should be doing something else. Like predicting
the movements of cars and pedestrians in front of you.
Finally, while we're predicting things, how many of my
readers will react angrily to having yet another cherished
belief blown away by facts? 3.6%. I can virtually
guarantee it. Won't this prediction skew the
results? No. That 3.6% has stopped reading long