3

Possible Duplicate:
Do mobile phones have anything to do with brain cancer?

There is some discussion about the harm of electromagnetic radiation (EMR) emitted from mobile phones and other wireless devices. Is there reliable evidence for different kinds of harm? How does the distance of a baby to a wireless device affect the influence?

Community
  • 1
Jakob
  • 131
  • 2
  • 1
    Formulated in this manner this should rather go on Biology SE. – nico Jul 25 '12 at 13:11
  • We've plenty of other questions about this: http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/search?q=EM+phone+computer+cancer&submit=search – Sklivvz Jul 25 '12 at 19:22
  • I know, I know, this is specifically about babies. But we really have debunked the "EMF/dirty electricity" myth around a million times. :-) – Sklivvz Jul 25 '12 at 19:23
  • Thanks to the links. The existing question does not fully answer my question but is a good start. could you please retag it with [tag:radiation]? – Jakob Jul 25 '12 at 21:53

1 Answers1

3

Cell phones emit microwaves, which do not belong to ionizing radiation, what means they aren't able to split atoms. Ionizing radiation can cause cancer, but sometimes non-ionizing radiation can, too, like in the case of UV light. But UV light has quite a lot of energy, compared to microwaves, which aren't very energy intensive. Some people think Microwaves can cause cancer, too, but this hasn't been proven. The intensity of radio waves decreases with the square of the distance in near-field, so its a good idea to keep dangerous radio emitting devices away of the baby. However, as said there is still no proof, microwaves can cause any illness.

Jonathan
  • 31
  • 1
  • 1
    [Welcome to Skeptics](http://meta.skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/1505/welcome-to-new-users)! The phrase "split atoms" is misleading, as you are talking about separating an electron from its atom, not nuclear fission. Calling UV light non-ionizing [needs a reference](http://hps.org/publicinformation/ate/q2111.html). Even saying it causes cancer, and drops proportional to the inverse of the square of the distance should probably have a reference. – Oddthinking Jul 25 '12 at 15:05
  • 1
    Also, that [WHO release was attacked](http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/are-cell-phones-a-possible-carcinogen-an-update-on-the-iarc-report/) for using poor/misleading wording that triggered alarmist headlines. – Oddthinking Jul 25 '12 at 15:08