"Radiation from cellphone antenna boosts brain activity, study finds"

[Kuko 4000]

From here:

http://www.latimes.com/health/la-he-cell-phones-brain-20110223,0,4544944.story

Choice quote:

The study found that two areas of the brain close to the phone's antenna, which was embedded in the mouthpiece of the phone used, showed unusual increases in activity throughout a 50-minute period of live transmission. The researchers speculated that a cellphone with its antenna placed elsewhere — near the phone's earpiece, for instance — might activate different regions in the brain.

That the heightened activity occurred closest to the antenna, and not near the place where the phone was in direct contact with the head, signaled to the study's authors that the changes were a response to electromagnetic signals and not a reaction to the heat generated by the device. The FDA has taken the position that any harmful effects of cellphones are the result of tissue becoming overheated by direct exposure to the device as it warms with prolonged use.

Does anyone else think this sounds a bit strange?

I'm also wondering if they "artificially" heated up the phones in the control group as well to match the "active" phones, and if not, why? Would it really be a surprise to see changes in the brain scans when the participants realized that this time the phone is clearly "active"?

Here's the original study:

http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/305/8/808.short

 

[Kuko 4000]

Also, when radiation from cell phones "boosts brain activity" = cancer.

But when a certain branch of meditation "boosts brain activity" = cure for cancer.

Just my simplified observation from Facebook links and comments sections of this and similar news pieces.

 

[LarianLeQuella]

Or could the increased brain activity be because the person is thinking about the cell phone, or some other activity that has nothing to do with the EM? I see they only speculated about different regions, they haven't actually tested it?

 

[Kuko 4000]

LLQ:

Design, Setting, and Participants

Randomized crossover study conducted between January 1 and December 31, 2009, at a single US laboratory among 47 healthy participants recruited from the community. Cell phones were placed on the left and right ears and positron emission tomography with (18F)fluorodeoxyglucose injection was used to measure brain glucose metabolism twice, once with the right cell phone activated (sound muted) for 50 minutes (“on” condition) and once with both cell phones deactivated (“off” condition). Statistical parametric mapping was used to compare metabolism between on and off conditions using paired t tests, and Pearson linear correlations were used to verify the association of metabolism and estimated amplitude of radiofrequency-modulated electromagnetic waves emitted by the cell phone. Clusters with at least 1000 voxels (volume >8 cm3) and P < .05 (corrected for multiple comparisons) were considered significant.

Am I reading this correctly, there was no control group at all?

 

[sol invictus]

LLQ:




Am I reading this correctly, there was no control group at all?

Sounds like the control was the same group with both phones off (that's what "crossover study" means).

I'd be more impressed if they had a group with one cell off and one on but with the antenna disconnected and the battery connected to a dummy load (a passive resistor drawing the same average power as the phone when it was on and functioning normally). That would more reliably control for the effects of heat.

The fact that the brain area close to the antenna was the most active could easily be coincidence (maybe that region is more sensitive to heat).

 

[Kuko 4000]

I'd be more impressed if they had a group with one cell off and one on but with the antenna disconnected and the battery connected to a dummy load (a passive resistor drawing the same average power as the phone when it was on and functioning normally). That would more reliably control for the effects of heat.

Yep, that's along the lines I was thinking. At best, this works as a very preliminary study that might suggest something maybe. Even then, I don't understand why they didn't blind everyone properly, oh well, gets nice headlines...

 

[Sherman Bay]

Even if the study is valid, does "increased brain activity" mean good, bad, or neutral effects? For all we know, it could be the key to curing Alzheimer's.

 

[phunk]

In this case, it means nothing other than "maybe we should do another study".

 

[jayh]

...

The fact that the brain area close to the antenna was the most active could easily be coincidence (maybe that region is more sensitive to heat).

or maybe by concentrating on listening with one ear, there is more brain activity on that side?

 

[sol invictus]

or maybe by concentrating on listening with one ear, there is more brain activity on that side?

The phones were muted. And presumably they randomized which ear (left or right) had the active phone.