“Hot” phones and toys: tough on kids’ bodies!
Developing bodies are far less dense with fast growing cells, so they’re penetrated far more deeply by close-up radiating RF! In fact, data shows that cell phones near any head can, over time, cause deadly brain, salivary and thyroid tumors. The same near any waist can affect the reproductive and digestive organs, and near any chest can cause breast cancer. Fact: colo-rectal cancer is rising even in kids and teens now–almost unheard of even 10 years ago. And as of May 2021 clinician leaders urge that colon cancer screenings begin at age 45 instead of 60 in previous decades! They sound puzzled as to the cause. Cell phones are almost universally in pockets of most youths now–hmmm! Same with breast cancer in young adults: increased steadily this century in women under 50; steeper increases in more recent years. Phones widely present in shirt pockets, even bras…hmmm. (Locations of tumors have been often correlated with customary carrying spots.)
The FCC, in typical industry-protective feigned ignorance, still flouts a 2020 DC high court decree that called its mega-permissive standards “arbitrary and capricious” while issuing a command to revise them to widely known modern science findings. It’s current quaint flesh-heating standard is rejected by all modern non-industry-paid-off researchers. Yet it still gives a “no=problem” rating and hidden, tepid warnings, if any, on most every radiating product for kids and adults.
If you (probably) have a cell phone. Or if you also have a child with one.
Cell phones used improperly are dangerous for those who carry or locate them close to the body, for those who are using them for many hours per day, and even more for children as they are far less resistant to the powerful radiation for a variety of reasons. For your start here is some very good short-answer reading on this subject provided by The Environmental Health Trust of acclaimed scientist Devra Davis provided in 2014-5. Much more has been discovered and written since this was printed (also available within our pages) but, to get a good start, browse among those questions for an answer to the one that has often bothered you! Cell Phone Questions? Click here.
Two more angles on the subject of cancer risk (though there are at least a dozen other health effects as well):
Clear Evidence of Cell-Phone RF Radiation Cancer Risk
1. Denmark, Sweden, and The Netherlands have an early record of cell phone usage compared to many countries. There is strong evidence of the glioblastoma brain cancer (a fingerprint of close-up cell radiation) doubling to tripling in each country (and growing in many other countries) in the last 10 years. (Link)
2. Article by James C. Lin on groundbreaking peer-reviewed cell-frequency cancer study
During 26–28 March 2018, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) National Toxicology Program (NTP), a part of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, convened a three-day technical reports peer-review panel meeting in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, to review the NTP’s draft reports on its carcinogenesis studies of cell-phone RF radiation in mice and rats. The invited 14-member peer review panel included three electrical engineering professors, ten pathologists and toxicologists (three from academia and seven from industry), and one biostatistician. None of the participants were from the cell-phone industry.
…In addition to the malignant schwannomas in the heart tissue and, to some degree, the gliomas in the brain of male rats, the review panel concluded that there was “some evidence” for carcinogenicity in the adrenal gland….There were also findings of “equivocal evidence” for carcinogenicity in other tissue or organs, such as adenoma of pars digitalis in the pituitary gland and adenomas and carcinomas in the liver of both RF-exposed male and female rats…
…Now that the NTP review panel has concluded there is clear evidence of carcinogenicity from long-term RF exposure in rats, is it conceivable that the IARC would upgrade its epidemiology-based classification of RF exposure to the next level of carcinogenicity to humans?