I’m not certain how many of you may have seen news reports during televised news programs pointing to a study that used cell telephones, PET scanners, and a mere 47 subjects to evaluate changes in the brain glucose metabolism. The Journal of the American Medical Association published the study and noted effects, and it is titled, “Effects on Cell Phone Radiofrequency Signal Exposure on Brain Glucose Metabolism“. Each volunteer in the study had a cell phone attached over each ear. Researchers turned one cell phone on and the other one off and subjects engaged in a 50 minute phone call. Subjects were monitored for any change in glucose metabolization, specifically to see changes between the cell phone on and off sides.

Overall, the study really did not have much to say. In the simplest of terms, whole brain glucose metabolism remained similar during on and off conditions. There was a 7% increase in brain glucose metabolism in the areas of the antennae, which the researchers termed “significantly higher”; as one science reporter on this topic, states, “It is important to point out that in this context, “significantly” means statistical significance, not a large increase.”

This scientist, whose specialty is physics, quotes brain-imaging physicist, Dardo Tomasi, of Brookhaven National Laboratory, a coauthor of this specific study, as saying that the glucose metabolization activity increase or change is actually several times less than seen in patients visual cortex while watching television. Finally, it is important to note that the study authors reported that their study was published as a preliminary communication, and that the study concluded that the findings were of unknown clinical significance.

With this information in hand, one has to wonder why multiple media outlets went out of their way to report on this research. Some outlets are still reporting on the study. The question on reporting a study without a conclusion by the media focuses on reason. What is responsible about reporting a study that concludes that its findings have no known clinical significance, or put in other words, demonstrated no known harmful effects?

Mr. “Ryan” believes the following to be the answer:

“Cell phones are the new danger to health, of course. Despite there being no conclusive evidence that cell phones even have the ability to cause cancer, and the fact that even with the explosion of cell phone use in recent years, cancer rates have not increased, people are still scared of their cell phone.

This is thanks to poor media coverage, and a few crackpots out there who are determined to prove that technology is going to destroy us all.” One of my favorite posting in this vein is “Ryan’s” article on a study that seems to conclude that couples have a 17.7% higher incidence of babies for those who live near a cell tower. With this information in hand, why are people experiencing difficulties in conceiving a child not flocking to homes abutting a cell tower?

If you wish to further investigate the truth about cell phones and cell phone towers, this is an excellent website to visit. To get most of his postings on this one topic in a mass format by topic, click here or type http://aquantumofknowledge.wordpress.com/?s=cell+phones