October 19, 2011 - Over the Edge > |HANNA PETERSEN NEWS EDITOR UNBC MEDIA THE JURY IS STILL OUT ON THE DANGER OF CELL PHONES ls My Cell Phone Going to Give Me Cancer or Nof? HANNA PETERSEN NEWS EDITOR Do cell phones really cause cancer? The nasty rumour that our beloved cell phones are actually little cancer time bombs in our pockets has been floating around for a while now, but how true is it? The National Institute of Health, an American organization, states that studies have not yet shown a consistent link between cell phone use and cancers of the brain or nerves. The Institute stresses that more re- search is needed because both cell phone technology and the way people use it has been changing rapidly. Although the evidence is inconclu- sive as to whether cell phone usage is proven to cause cancer or not, no one is denying that a chance for it really exists. This is basically because cell phones cause radiofrequency energy exposure. Radiofrequency energy is radio waves, a form of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation, which is emitted from such things as micro- waves, radar, and TV signals. The other type of ionizing electromagnet- ic radiation is the one we absolutely know to be nasty and is found emit- ting from x-rays and radon. The one thing we know radiof- requency energy does for certain is produce heat (as in a microwave heating up food). So if we cook food with the same radiation, is it going to be that much worse near our heads? Health Canada seems to think so, as they have published advice on mobile usage that states that parents should encourage children under 18 to limit the time they spend talking on cell phones. The advice by Health Canada is a response to a World Health Organ- ization (WHO) report released in May that reminded people that limiting the length of their cell phone calls and using text message instead would reduce their exposure to radiofre- quency energy. The WHO has clas- sified radiofrequency as “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” based on limited evidence from human studies, and limited evidence from studies on rodents, among other studies. Other large health bodies like the Amer- ican Cancer Association and the U.S. Centre for Disease Control are also ambivalent on the issue. While the re- lationship between cancer and radio- frequency cannot be directly proven, no one wants to give the green light for having marathon long conversa- tions on a cell phone. The question also remains as to whether the link between cancer and cell phone usage does not exist or just has not been discovered yet. Cell phone technology evolves faster than a superbug. Combining this fact with the difficult nature of studying human habits and the question as to whether or not the studies are lengthy enough to give us a clear picture, we can see how it might be hard to pin down a concrete answer. When it is esti- mated that 5-billion people owned a cellphone in 2010, knowing whether or not this technology is harmful be- comes all the more important. Having 5-billion people exposed to a possible carcinogen on a daily basis is not an ideal situation for the human race. But then again, people still don’t seem to mind the proven cancerous risks as- sociated with smoking either. “We want to make people aware that there is some uncertainty in the science, particularly for children. Be- cause there have been no long-term studies, or very, very, few long term studies with children,” says James McNamee a division chief for Heath Canada. “They are often more sensi- tive to a variety of agents than adults. Their brains are still developing. Their immune systems are still de- veloping.” What’s one more addition to the long list of possible carcinogens any- ways? A conclusion can be drawn that as long as the person using the cell- phone is not a kid and not talking for five straight hours, she or he is out of the woods. And if cell phone cancer is really that scary, you can always just text instead. UNBEC psychology professor Ken Prkachin has concluded an interesting study on pain and likeability. The research has been published in the latest edi- tion of Pain, the official journal of the International Association for the Study of Pain. “When we dislike a person, we tend to underestimate the amount of pain they are in,” says Prkachin. “This can include health professionals when they gauge pain in their patients. People who should be in a position to accurately gauge levels of pain are often poor at it.” Dr. Prakchin worked with five other researchers from the University of Ghent in Belgium. The research involved showing photos of patients and giv- ing corresponding personality traits to study participants. The participants were then shown recordings of the same people in various levels of pain ranging from moderate pain, severe pain, to no pain at all. Participants were then asked to rate the pain level of each patient. The study had set out to answer the question, “What are the impediments to a patients ability to communicate pain to their doctor?” Dr. Prkachin concluded that, “people associated with negative traits - egotism, arrogance, hypocrisy - had their level of pain consistently under-rated even when they were, in fact, in considerable pain.” Dr. Prkachin continued that, “if a clinician underestimates a patient’s pain, the course of action they take runs the risk of doing harm.” Dr. Prkachin stresses that this area of research has contributed to an increas- ing awareness among heath professionals. “Communications about pain have the potential to complicate and worsen an already complex clinical problem. Other findings suggest that surprisingly minimalist interventions, like encour- aging people to view the world from the sufferer’s perspective, can diminish and even eliminate biases.” The research can be found in the article “When You Dislike Patients Pain is Taken Less Seriously” which can be found in the journal Pain. Dr. Prkachin is the Director of UNBC’s Psychophysiology Laboratory and his research in- cludes health and clinical psychology, pain expression, and the bio-behavioral determinants of heart disease.