It is time for another report that states that there is no obvious health risk that originates in the use of cell phones, while the authors cover their bases by stating not to use a wireless phone more than absolutely necessary.
The report, released by a "Norwegian Expert Committee", is based on a study that was commissioned by the Norwegian government due to increasing public concern over the effects of electromagnetic radiation. In short, "the group found no evidence that the low-level fields around mobile phones and other transmitters increase the risk of cancer, impair male fertility, cause other reproductive damage or lead to other diseases and adverse health effects, such as changes to the endocrine and immune systems."
As an explanation, the group noted that "the threshold limit values for these fields are 50 times below the level that causes heating of human tissue or stimulation of nerve cells."
There was no information on how the study was conducted and the research group stated that there is no need for additional research as there are enough studies and results available to suggest that further research would simply be a waste of time and provide "little benefit" at this time. Of course, the researchers suggest that they cannot be 100 percent right and there remains uncertainty in risk assessments. However, that uncertainty is believed to be "small". For the future, it is recommended that "cancer registries should follow the development of cancer incidence in the future and research should not cease", despite the apparent lack of insight that can be gained.
Reading through the report will do little to calm those who are already concerned about wireless radiation and its potential impact. The group advised the public to exercise "general caution" in the use of wireless devices. Such general caution would be, for example, the use of hands-free devices to reduce the possible exposure of electromagnetic radiation, the expert group said. It also warned that "exposure should not be higher than needed to achieve the intended purpose."
Clear as mud?