Right. So a ten year study into the possible link between mobile phones and brain tumours finds no evidence that phones cause cancer. How do you report that then, newspapers of the word?
The Daily Mail: “Long conversations on mobile phones can increase risk of cancer, suggests 10-year study”
Daily Express: “CANCER LINK TO HEAVY USE OF MOBILE PHONES”
The Daily Telegraph: “Half an hour of mobile use a day ‘increases brain cancer risk'”
The Times: “Heavy mobile users risk cancer”
The Age: “Study unable to rule out link between mobile phones and brain cancer risk”
Leave it to the excellent NHS Choices blog to talk some sense, with its usual sober and sensible reporting of the actual science behind the tabloid hysteria. I do hope that they survive whatever massive cuts are on their way for the NHS under the new regime…
[Take home quote for me from the NHS Choices report, btw, was this one: “The researchers say that much of the research into a supposed link between mobile use and cancer is to address public concern rather than any particular biological principle: the frequency of radio waves used in mobile phones does not break DNA strands, and therefore cannot cause cancer in this way.” Hmm. I wonder where the public got that idea?]