Cell Phones and the Anatomy of a Cancer Scare

Cell Phones and the Anatomy of a Cancer Scare

Faye Flam writes about science, mathematics and medicine. She has been a staff writer for Science magazine and a columnist for the Philadelphia Inquirer. She is author of “The Score: How the Quest for Sex has Shaped the Modern Man.”
Read More.

June 2, 2016 9:00 AM EDT
a | A

The latest study supposedly linking cell-phone radiation to cancer was meant to serve the public good. But its effect on the public has been bad. The $25 million government-funded experiment produced confusion and scary headlines, but little in the way of useful information — beyond perhaps an indication of where the science publicity machine is broken.

This wasn’t necessarily a case of bad science. The researchers, from the National Toxicology Program, subjected one group of rats to high doses of radiation of a frequency similar to that emitted by cell phones. Following accepted protocol, they compared the radiation-exposed rats to a control group. The pathologists looking for cancer didn’t know which animals came from which group.

But last week, the scientists released partial, unpublished results in a rush, suggesting some public health urgency. They claimed to have identified a link between the radiation and a type of brain cancer called a glioma as well as a non-malignant growth called a schwannoma. Adding fuel to their health scare, they offered up sound bites such as “breakthrough” and “game changer.”

Only after the first round of scary headlines did critics get a chance to explain why the result was statistically weak, riddled with unanswered questions and somewhat implausible.

It’s not clear why scientists are carrying out these studies in the first place. There’s no compelling theoretical or empirical reason to suspect that cell-phone use has anything to do with cancer. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer for the American Cancer Society, said investigations of possible links are done because people are interested in the question. That interest, he said goes back to 1990, when Republican political strategist Lee Atwater was diagnosed



ARIZONA-ACC Public Records Lawsuit Bombshell + Corruption at the AG Office?

Lawsuits Update: ACC Public Records Lawsuit Bombshell + Corruption at the AG Office?
Information & Perspective by Warren Woodward
Sedona, Arizona ~ June 5, 2016

Public Records Case Against the ACC at Superior Court

A couple weeks ago the judge in my public records lawsuit against the Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) surprised everyone by sending me a copy of the documents that the ACC had sent him for review. These are documents that the ACC had redacted. In the version the judge got from the ACC the documents were unredacted so he could determine if the redactions the ACC had made were legitimate.

In his Order that accompanied the copy of unredacted documents that he sent me, the judge gave no explanation except to say that the Court thought it “appropriate” that I should have a copy. As far as I know, it is unprecedented for the Plaintiff (me) in such a case to receive unredacted documents like this.

In his Order, the judge also forbade me from distributing the documents. So I cannot quote directly from them.

I will say that the documents confirm what I have said all along during this saga — the ACC redacts largely because it can. Almost all the redactions I saw are completely bogus and, in my opinion, illegal. Many are downright ridiculous, as in Why did they bother? Oh that’s right, because they can.

I did find a few juicy bits, but they are mostly of an embarrassing nature and not anything that would have someone led away in handcuffs. That said, I do think the redactions are illegal, and that the perpetrators belong in jail. I gave the ACC three chances to get my public records request right and all they did was stonewall.

Concealing Public Records with intent to deceive is a class 6 felony (1 year jail). Secreting “the whole or any part thereof” of a Public Record is a class 4 felony (2 & 1/2 years jail).

Woodward v. Brnovich at the Arizona Supreme Court

A couple weeks ago I received notice from the Arizona Supreme Court that my case against Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich was “continued.” I did not know exactly what that meant but it certainly sounded better than “discontinued.” It turns out it means that they are still considering the case.

This is the case I brought against AZ AG Brnovich seeking to compel him to do his job, follow the law, and begin proceedings against ACC commissioner Robert Burns for usurping office. Burns was a registered lobbyist for an outfit that supported telecom legislation beneficial to companies that the ACC regulates. He held that position both during his campaign and after his election to the ACC. Conflict of interest law specific to the ACC forbids that.

In addition to my complaint against commissioner Burns, the AG office has ignored various other complaints I have lodged with them over the years. For example they were not at all interested that I had proof of felony Public Records Law violations at the ACC. No search warrants or subpoenas were ever issued in the ACC whistleblower case, a story that broke well over a year ago. Heck, the AG office doesn’t even care that ACC commissioner Bob Stump destroyed state property by throwing away his phone in what many think was a lame attempt to also destroy the Public Records stored in it. For these and similar reasons I have long suspected corruption at the AZ AG office.

Recently, I read an affidavit by a former investigator at the AG office that fueled my suspicion. It is very long and very detailed, but if you like reading real-life crime dramas you might want to take the time, or at least scroll down to the Conclusion which covers all the bases, and thoroughly so.

Dan Woods is a former FBI special agent, former technical operations officer at the CIA, and former AZ AG Assistant Chief. He has an excellent record. While at the AG office he spent something like 4 years investigating a convoluted white collar criminal conspiracy that involved numerous people, both in Arizona and California. Woods’ investigation resulted in multiple indictments and plea agreements. But when his investigation led him to a powerful AZ law firm, the investigation was abruptly halted by his superiors, and his employment at the AZ AG office was terminated. Read it and judge for yourself if the AZ AG office is corrupt.  https://arizonadailyindependent.com/2016/05/19/former-special-agent-tells-arizona-supreme-court-of-brnovich-corruption/

“Smart” meter related Lawsuit at Court of Appeals

No news in my case against the ACC for, among other things, violating various laws in their “smart” meter decision of over a year ago. Just waiting for a decision. This is the case that got stalled because of a bogus jurisdictional issue.