|
[ Eye Problems Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |
Can Cell Phones Damage Our Eyes?
I'm sure you've read dozens of stories about how our cell phones could be dangerous to our health, causing brain tumors for example. But so far, there is not a definitive answer. But now, according to IsraCast, a team of Israeli researchers has discovered that the microwave radiation used by our cell phones could destroy our eyes by causing two kinds of damages to our visual system, including an irreversible one. If the researchers are right, and even if you only occasionally use your cell phone, the lenses in your eyes can suffer from microscopic damages that won't heal themselves over time. Now, let's wait until another scientific team says it's not true...
Here is the introduction of the IsraCast article.
In a recent scientific study conducted by a team of researchers from the Technion, a possible link between microwave radiation, similar to the type found in cellular phones, and different kinds of damage to the visual system was found. At least one kind of damage seems to accumulate over time and not heal, challenging the common view and leading the researchers to the assertion that the duration of exposure is not less important than the intensity of the irradiation. The researchers also emphasized that existing exposure guidelines for microwave radiation might have to change.
The article contains several illustrations, but here is the most spectacular (Credit: The Ruth and Bruce Rappaport Faculty of Medicine at the Technion).
[SEE WEBSITE LINK BELOW FOR PHOTOS]
Lenses damaged by microwave radiation
[Above are] microscope photographs of lenses incubated in organ culture conditions for 12 days. Right frame shows Control lens with no damage. Bottom frame demonstrates the effect of microwave radiation on bovine lens sutures for a total exposure of 192 cycles (1.1GHz, 2.22mW). Each cycle lasts 50min followed by 10 min pause.
The potential risks from radiation on our visual system have previously been studied, but until recently, the effects of microwave radiation have not been evaluated.
Before going further, I need to introduce two concepts here. Cell phone companies use the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) to measure microwave radiation -- "it is the average power density absorbed in a given volume per average weight density (Watt/Kg)." "A less common measure is called Specific Energy Absorption (SA), and is defined as the energy density absorbed in the tissue divided by its weight density."
Now we can look at the experiments.
Eye lenses of one-year-old male calves obtained from a slaughterhouse were exposed to microwave radiation - one eye from each pair used for control. Each exposure session lasted about two weeks. Both control and exposed lens were kept in an incubator at a constant temperature. During this period each exposed lens had experienced up to 2mW of 1.1GHz radiation virtually around the clock, and each hour it was exposed for a 50 minute session followed by a 10 minute break.
And the researchers were able to measure two different effects:
* macroscopic damages affecting the optical quality of the lens, which can gradually heal
* and microscopic damages, which don't heal after the experiments stopped, and are even growing when a new exposure starts
Here are some warnings from one of the researchers.
Professor Levi Schächter, [of the Department of Electrical Engineering at the Technion,] who worked on the research, told IsraCast that attention should be paid not only to the Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) but also to the total energy absorbed by the tissue (SA), which is not currently under supervision by the appropriate regulative authorities.
The latest research work on this subject has been published by Bioelectromagnetics under the name "Localized effects of microwave radiation on the intact eye lens in culture conditions" (Volume 26, Issue 5 , Pages 398-405, May 10, 2005). Here is a link to the abstract, which I reproduce below.
A novel experimental system was used to investigate the localized effects of microwave radiation on bovine eye lenses in culture for over 2 weeks. Using this setup, we found clear evidence that this radiation has a significant impact on the eye lens. At the macroscopic level, it is demonstrated that exposure to a few mW at 1 GHz for over 36 h affects the optical function of the lens. Most importantly, self-recovery occurs if the exposure is interrupted.
At the microscopic level, close examination of the lens indicates that the interaction mechanism is completely different from the mechanism-causing cataract via temperature increase. Contrary to the latter's effect, that is particularly pronounced in the vicinity of the sutures and it is assumed to be a result of local friction between the edges of the fibers consisting the lens. Even if macroscopically the lens has recovered from the irradiation, microscopically the indicators of radiation impact remain.
Finally, as this study has not been done -- yet -- on humans, I guess the controversy can begin. And whether you think that cell phones can damage our eyes or not, feel free to post your comments below.
Sources: Iddo Genuth, IsraCast, July 25, 2005; and various web sites
In Reply to: Can Cell Phones Damage Our Eyes? posted by Sapphire [422.2214] on August 16, 2005 at 14:22:46:
Sapphire,
Not so much because of the " dangers "..They are way over used..People walking around with a phone to their ear look stupid, IMOP.." Hi, I'm stuck in trafic "..So what, your stuck in trafic everyday..I keep mine turned off and check it once a day..
Silver Fox!
In Reply to: Re: I use mine as little as possible.. posted by Steve [3019.1399] on August 16, 2005 at 15:31:07:
Steve,
I know... at the gym I see lot of people on the "stair machine" or bicycles, or even on the weight machines talking on their cell phones. It's too much.
I use mine only rarely, once a month or so....
Sapphire
In Reply to: Re: I use mine as little as possible.. posted by Steve [3019.1399] on August 16, 2005 at 15:31:07:
Hi Steve! Those people drive me crazy. Is it necessary to be talking every single second of the day?! I always get this picture that those with the cell phones attached to their ears, will become a permanent mutation of the human race. Soon you'll be able to be born with a cell phone genetically grafted onto their heads.
Time for a little silence and actually concentrating on what you are doing!!!
Just my two cents.
Naya
In Reply to: Re: I use mine as little as possible.. posted by Naya [120.14] on August 16, 2005 at 18:17:02:
Naya,
Some states are baning the use of cell phones when driving a car..I know New York is one and I think Ohio is another..
They claim driving and using a cell phone is the same as drinking and driving..
Silver Fox!
In Reply to: Re: I use mine as little as possible.. posted by Sapphire [422.2214] on August 16, 2005 at 15:34:18:
Hi Sapphire,
If you are going to a gym like that, maybe you should switch before tha bad habit rubs off.
I never ceases to amaze me that so many people who have cel phones can't seem to afford the belt clip or holster for them. How can one function with that toy gripped in their hand all day long? Surely, it must fall into their coffee
once in a while?
Ring tones area another way to spend money. Why doesn't someone build a realistic-looking toy phone that is programmable to ring at random times in a choice of annoying
movie theme songs... That way, they can look important and be annoying without spending a fortune on air time.
Have you ever seen a person pretending to be in a heated phone-call with the phone glued to their head, when the
phone rang? Goodness!.. what an embarassed look that puts on their face! *:>(
One good thing about the hands-free systems that are often used in cars... It allows people with psychosis to talk to themselves without looking like they need their meds. &:(
In Reply to: Re: I use mine as little as possible.. posted by Steve [3019.1399] on August 16, 2005 at 15:31:07:
My biggest pet peave is the over use of cell phones. At one time, they were used primarily for business. I think we (as a society)have come to the point where we fear the quiet and solitude. It's good for the soul to be alone sometimes.
In Reply to: Re: I use mine as little as possible.. posted by bob [2997.218] on August 17, 2005 at 08:31:33:
Bob,
The cell phone is just another way people stay under stress..
Silver Fox!
In Reply to: Re: I use mine as little as possible.. posted by Sapphire [422.2214] on August 16, 2005 at 15:34:18:
The gym I go to had to ban cell phones in the locker rooms because of the picture taking ability of phones now. Someone has way to much time on their hands!
In Reply to: Can Cell Phones Damage Our Eyes? posted by Sapphire [422.2214] on August 16, 2005 at 14:22:46:
Thanks, Sapphire.
Walt
In Reply to: Re: I use mine as little as possible.. posted by Steve [3019.1399] on August 17, 2005 at 07:47:19:
Hi Steve,
So far all NY has banned is hand held phones...
Some say it is a money grab, since they are not making enough money from seatbelt and radar enforcement..
Another study has come out saying that merely talking on the phone is sufficient distraction to ban the use of the phones entirely when driving.. Wh knows.. maybe next year.
(They are considering banning smoking in vehicles if there is a child in it. Last summer, I heard that South Carolina was trying to ban the smoking, but saner heads must have prevailed.
(Amazing that anyone in a gun-carrying state would worry about cigarette risks.)
So far they have not banned CB radio, which is still a good way to hear about radar traps.
"10-4 Good Buddy.. See you on the flip-flop!"
In Reply to: Re: You are so right.. posted by Steve [3019.1399] on August 17, 2005 at 09:15:04:
Hi Steve,
A cel national phone provider based in Toronto (Rogers)
has come out with a children's cel phone with no dial on it..
pre-programmed numbers only can be called.. Got to get 'em while they are young.. and set the stage for the future customers.
This must already be available in some states....anyone know?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050808.gtfirely0808/BNStory/Technology
In Reply to: Re: You are so right.. (Get 'em while they are young) posted by Ron [2014.1989] on August 17, 2005 at 16:47:18:
Hi Ron,
That sounds so cool..I need to get one for each of my grandkids, so they can bug me all the time..
Silver Fox!
P.S. Fat chance..
In Reply to: Re: I use mine as little as possible.. posted by Ron [2014.1989] on August 17, 2005 at 16:39:22:
Ron,
Does anyone still have CB's in their car? Why worry about speed traps, I just set the cruise control and could care less where the " Staties " are..
Silver Fox!
In Reply to: Re: CB radio.. posted by Steve [3019.1399] on August 18, 2005 at 10:04:27:
Hi Steve,
Does the cruise help when you drive through reduced speed school zones and towns with a desire for out-of-state revenue?
What ewver happened to those old Buicks with a pointer on the speedometer face that you could set to buzz an alarm when you exceeded the set point?
1962 Buick Roadmaster is one that had such a thing.
It was so simple and effective... If the kids borrowed the car, you always knew it because the pointer was forgotten
(set at 90 mph).
Shhhhh!!! Don't tell anyone... we were those kids. ;>)
Ron
In Reply to: Re: CB radio.. posted by Ron [1013.1989] on August 18, 2005 at 18:33:05:
Ron,
LOL, I had forgoten about the pointer..What kept my dad from driving to fast, was my brother and I would say, " boy was dad driving fast, must have hit 100 "..
Silver Fox!
|
[ Eye Problems Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |