As you may have recently read, there has been a “study” or rather meta-analysis (and apparently a very bad one) making the news recently about a review of studies on cell phones and cancer risk. It has now been published in the Los Angles Times and on Fox News – both of which should be ashamed of themselves. The ” Stud,” acknowledges that when 23 studies on cell phone usage and cancer risk are examined, there appears to be none. It then goes on to state that when the eight “highest quality” studies are looked at, there turns out to be a risk of cancer.
This methodology seems very suspect on the face of things, since no explicit problem is found with the rest of the studies, but it becomes even more suspect when it becomes clear that the ones seamed “highest quality” were almost exclusively done by one researcher – and a very fringe one at that, whose results have generally been rejected by most scientists and who has made a living scaremongering in the media over cell phone usage.
Clearly such a stacked deck of studies negates the very point of looking at multiple study data. Apparently this meta-analysis either decided not to bother with some of the other thousands of studies out there or simply did not care about them. In either case, the quality of this is deplorable.
I’m therefore asking for a little help here:
I’d like to write a letter to the Journal of Clinical Oncology about this and I’d like to write to the editorial section of other journals about this. I’d also like to see if I can get some professionals to write in about this. BUT, I’d rather not pay for the data and support this crap, but to really critique this I need the study in full.
So, if you happen to be at a university that subscribes to a scholarly journal database or otherwise have access to this, let me know.
This crap has really been getting out of hand recently. The rather untrustworthy “Environmental Working Group” has been cashing in on this crap recently with a lot of scary news stories and their stupid list of phones. The quality of the reporting on this has been deplorable and totally biased. There really needs to be more critical review of this BS.
This entry was posted on Thursday, October 29th, 2009 at 11:58 pm and is filed under Bad Science, Not Even Wrong, Obfuscation, inverse square, media. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
View blog reactions