I had a cell phone back in 2000 and I used to get headaches while using and and shortly after using it. I also remember later reading some reports that cell phones actually can cause headaches. I'm thinking about breaking down this year or next and getting a cell phone again. Have they changed the technology to make it more human friendly? The main reason I'd get one is to call my long distance friends. My health is important to me (at least when it comes to my mind), so I don't want to get a cell phone again if I'm still going to be getting headaches. (By the way, I had an erikson (sp) wireless web phone with ATT service) If anyone currently is getting headaches from their cell phone let me know, or if you used to get headaches, but you got a new phone and you aren't bothered by them anymore. Thanks! B
IT'S NOT A TOOMAH I've never had any problems like that, then again I really don't use my cell phone that much.
I've noticed that other peoples cell phones really give me headaches. I'm actually the last human to not own one.
You could always sue. Some guy in Maryland is trying that, for a cool 800 million. Of course, there isn't too much science to back him up. Although.... http://news.findlaw.com/ap_stories/high_tech/1700/9-10-2002/20020910151503_19.html Cancer Study May Help Motorola Suit By GRETCHEN PARKER Associated Press Writer BALTIMORE (AP) - In what could bolster an $800 million lawsuit against Motorola and major cell phone carriers, a new study found a possible link between older cell phones and brain tumors. Although many studies have found no cancer risk from cell phone use, the research published in the latest European Journal of Cancer Prevention said long-term users of analog phones are at least 30 percent more likely than nonusers to develop brain tumors. Newer digital phones emit less radiation than older analog models of the sort studied. The lawsuit against cell phone manufacturer Motorola was brought by Christopher Newman, a Maryland doctor stricken with brain cancer. A federal judge is expected to decide by month's end whether case should go to trial and if so, whether the study can be used as evidence. "From our perspective, and from a public health perspective, the court should just be aware of what's out there," said Newman's lawyer, John Angelos, whose firm has made millions suing asbestos and tobacco companies. If the case is allowed to go forward, it could open the door to other major lawsuits against the wireless communication industry. So far, no similar claims have been successful. Motorola attorneys criticized the methodology of the new report, which was written by Swedish oncologist Dr. Lennart Hardell. Hardell studied 1,617 patients with brain tumors and compared them with a similar-sized group of people without tumors. He found that patients who used Sweden's Nordic Mobile telephones were 30 percent more likely to have brain tumors, especially on the side of the head that touched the phone most often. Those who used the phones longer than 10 years were 80 percent more likely to develop tumors. Newman's lawsuit names Motorola, Verizon and other wireless carriers. He claims the analog cell phones he used from 1992 to 1998 caused him to develop a cancerous brain tumor behind his right ear. The tumor was removed, but Newman is blind in one eye, suffers memory loss and slowed speech and can no longer work, his lawyers say. Cell phones are used by 97 million Americans. Digital phones emit radiation in pulses; older analog varieties emit continuous waves. By the time cell phones exploded in popularity in the late 1990s, most of those sold used digital technology. Three major studies published since December 2000, including one by the U.S. National Cancer Institute, found no harmful health effects from cell phones. Motorola spokesman Norman Sandler questioned the author's theory that tumors are more apt to develop near the ear that touches the receiver most often. "His testimony raises significant questions about recall bias," he said. "Do people who used the phones 10 years ago really remember what side of the head they used?" And that's the old Analog models anyway. The Motorola spokesman's comment is kinda lame though. Maybe the same side of the head they use now, genius?
From what I've heard, they have dropped the broadcast power considerably from early models. The new ones also automatically adjust output based on how strong the signal is, and with towers everywhere, they usually don't broadcast at full strength. I've also heard theories about the heat from old phones being a part of the headache problem, as well as the fact that these phones are build for size/style, and are rarely very ergonomic. However, if you are concerned, there's a real easy solution -- get a headset. Most models now come with an earbud type, and you can get a good headset for $20-30.
Yeah, the old cell phone I had got really hot around my ear, and I'd get the pain in that area, and it wasn't ergonomic at all. I'll take a look at headsets also. I'm spoiled by the quality of my main line phone I have a hard time putting up with the inferior sound quality of most cell phones. B
Digital is so much better than analog. Most phones now are dual or tri-mode. The dual mode phones (which I have) use digital signals where available -- which includes all the big cities and along interstates, and are very clear. Outside of those areas it switches to analog (the old system) which isn't as good, but is better than nothing. In the digital areas, you should have very few problems. I don't know much about the tri-mode phones, but they are supposed to be better. I have very few signal problems, unless I'm blocked by something or am out in the country (visiting Mom & Dad). I have a Nokia 8200 series phone, which is a step up from the baseline, and cost around $100. It has no visible antenna, keeps a good signal, and you can adjust the volume much louder than a normal phone.
