1-5 A A D D B
请选择年级七年级八年级九年级请输入相应的习题集名称(选填)：
科目：初中英语
来源：学年湖北武汉市武昌区北片八年级上学期期中考试英语试卷
题型：阅读理解
阅读理解We&can&not&live&a&modern&life&without&traveling.&The&fastest&way&of&traveling&is&by&air.&With&a&planeone&can&travel&in&one&day&to&places&which&it&took&a&month&or&more&to&get&to&a&hundred&years&ago.&Traveling&by&train&is&slower&than&by&plane,&but&one&can&see&the&country&he&is&traveling&through.&Modern&trains&have&comfortable&seats&and&dinning-cars.&They&make&even&the&longest&journey&enjoyable.Some&people&prefer&to&travel&by&sea&when&possible.&There&are&large&luxury&liners&or&river&boats.They&are&not&as&fast&as&trains&or&planes,&but&traveling&by&sea&is&a&very&pleasant&way&to&spend&a&holiday.Many&people&like&to&travel&by&car.&They&can&make&their&own&timetable.&They&can&travel&hundreds&of&miles&a&day,&just&as&their&wish.&They&can&stop&wherever&they&want&to&see&something&interesting&or&to&enjoy&a&good&meal&at&a&good&restaurant,&or&to&spend&the&night&at&a&hotel.&That&is&why&people&choose&traveling&by&car&for&pleasant&trips,&while&they&usually&take&trains&or&planes&for&business.【小题1】According&to&the&passage,&the&fastest&way&of&traveling&is&_______.&A．bycarB．bytrainC．byplaneD．bysea【小题2】&If&we&travel&by&car,&we&can&_________.A．enjoythelongestjourneyB．travelonlyfiftymilesadayC．makeourowntimetableD．traveltoaveryfarplaceinafewminutes.【小题3】&When&people&travel&on&business,&they&usually&take&_________.A．aboatoratrainB．acaroratrainC．aplaneoracarD．atrainoraplane【小题4】&&_______&have&comfortable&seats&and&dinning-cars.A．CarsB．ModerntrainsC．PlanesD．Buses【小题5】If&possible,&people&like&traveling&by&sea&because&&_______&.A．itisasfastastrainsandplanesB．itisapleasantwaytospendaholidayC．itisverycheapD．itcanstopwherevertheylike
科目：初中英语
来源：2012年外研版初中英语八年级下Module 9练习卷（解析版）
题型：阅读理解
We all know who Benjamin Franklin was. He
was a very famous American statesman. He was also the first man to discover
electricity. Franklin liked to study and to learn about new things. One day he
heard from a friend that something black in colour holds the heat better than
something white in colour. Franklin wanted to find out if this was true or not.
There was snow on the ground at the time.
So he put two large pieces of cloth over the snow. One piece of cloth was black
in colour, the other piece was white. Then he waited until the sun began to
shine. After several hours he looked under the pieces of cloth and saw that the
snow under the black cloth melted much faster than the snow under the white
cloth. This proved to him that the black cloth held the heat better than the
white cloth.
Soon after this, people began to wear white
hats and white clothes during the summer because they were cooler.
根据短文内容判断正（T）误（F）：
1.Benjamin Franklin was only a scientist.
2. One day a friend of his told him
something about the relation(关系) between colour and heat.
3. Something black in colour holds heat
better than something white in colour.
4.This story happened in summer.
5. People wear white clothes in summer
because they know it is cooler.
科目：初中英语
来源：2012年外研版初中英语八年级上Module 7 练习卷（解析版）
题型：阅读理解
We send our children to school to prepare
them for the time when they will be big and will have to work for
themselves.They learn their own language so that they will be able to tell
others clearly what they want and what they know,and understand what others
tell them.They learn foreign languages in order to be able to understand the
people from other countries and make themselves understood.They learn history
to know something about human beings they meet every day.What they learn at
school is,of course,quite useful,but is that the only reason（原因） why they go to school?
No.There is more in education than just
learning facts.We go to school,above all,to learn how to learn,so that when we
have left school,we can continue to learn.A man who really knows how to learn
will always be successful,because whenever he has to do something new,he will
quickly teach himself how to do it in the best way.The uneducated person,on the
other hand,is either unable to do something new,or does it badly.So the purpose（目的）of school is not just to
teach the students these useful subjects but teach the way to learn.
1.Children are sent to school because &&&&&&.
A．they can grow fast at school
B．they have to work for themselves at the moment
C．the parents have to prepare them for their future
D．they are able to learn facts
2.Why do they learn languages?Because they
will &&&&&&.
A．make friends with others
B．be able to speak to and hear others clearly
C．be able to understand others
D．make themselves understood
3.The sentence“There is more in education
than just learning facts”means&&&&&.
A．learning facts isn’t the only thing in education
B．there are more facts to learn in education
C．education is just learning facts
D．learning facts is more important in education
4.What does an educated person do when he
meets something new?He will&&&&&.
A．try his best to do it
B．quickly find the best way out
C．be unable to do it well
D．know how to learn
5.The main idea of the text is that &&&&&&.
A．children must go to school
B．the subjects at school are useful
C．parents should send their children to school
D．children should be taught not only to learn but how to learn
科目：初中英语
来源：2012年仁爱版初中英语八年级下册第八单元Topic2练习卷（解析版）
题型：阅读理解
We often see people in different offices wear
different clothes. In America, a businessman goes to work in a dark suit, with
black shoes, socks and a tie. A reporter goes to work in old blue jeans, a work
shirt and sneakers(运动鞋).
These two kinds of clothes are suitable for their work.
If you are a college student who will leave
school soon, before starting a job, you have to buy some new clothes. And you’d
better have a look at“what
everyone else is wearing”in the office. On certain(某种) kinds of business occasions, the men wear only suits with white
shirts and dark ties. On others, men can wear jackets.
Dressing is very important. Without it, there
is no successful fashion. It would be helpful if everyone looks at himself in
the mirror before leaving home every morning.
根据短文内容，判断正(T)误(F)。
1.It’s very common to see people in different offices
wear the same clothes.
2. If you are a
student, you’d better know “what everyone else is wearing” in an office before working
there.
3. Suits with white shirts and dark ties are for men on
certain kinds of business occasions.
4. A reporter often goes to work in a dark suit.
5. Dressing is important for successful fashion.
科目：初中英语
来源：学年湖北武汉市武昌区北片八年级上学期期中考试英语试卷
题型：阅读理解
We&can&not&live&a&modern&life&without&traveling.&The&fastest&way&of&traveling&is&by&air.&With&a&plane
one&can&travel&in&one&day&to&places&which&it&took&a&month&or&more&to&get&to&a&hundred&years&ago.&
Traveling&by&train&is&slower&than&by&plane,&but&one&can&see&the&country&he&is&traveling&through.&
Modern&trains&have&comfortable&seats&and&dinning-cars.&They&make&even&the&longest&journey&enjo
Some&people&prefer&to&travel&by&sea&when&possible.&There&are&large&luxury&liners&or&river&boats
.They&are&not&as&fast&as&trains&or&planes,&but&traveling&by&sea&is&a&very&pleasant&way&to&spend&a&holi
Many&people&like&to&travel&by&car.&They&can&make&their&own&timetable.&They&can&travel&hundred
s&of&miles&a&day,&just&as&their&wish.&They&can&stop&wherever&they&want&to&see&something&interestin
g&or&to&enjoy&a&good&meal&at&a&good&restaurant,&or&to&spend&the&night&at&a&hotel.&That&is&why&peopl
e&choose&traveling&by&car&for&pleasant&trips,&while&they&usually&take&trains&or&planes&for&business.1.According&to&the&passage,&the&fastest&way&of&traveling&is&_______.&
B．bytrain
C．byplane
2.&If&we&travel&by&car,&we&can&_________.
A．enjoythelongestjourney
B．travelonlyfiftymilesaday
C．makeourowntimetable
D．traveltoaveryfarplaceinafewminutes.
3.&When&people&travel&on&business,&they&usually&take&_________.
A．aboatoratrain
B．acaroratrain
C．aplaneoracar
D．atrainoraplane
4.&&_______&have&comfortable&seats&and&dinning-cars.
B．Moderntrains
5.If&possible,&people&like&traveling&by&sea&because&&_______&.
A．itisasfastastrainsandplanes
B．itisapleasantwaytospendaholiday
C．itisverycheap
D．itcanstopwherevertheylikeCell Phones / Mobile Phones, Cancers and Brain tumors. Do cell phones cause cancer? What Is The Truth?
Environment, Health and Safety Online
The site for free, objective information you can use!&
Contact Info for:
Other Topics:
Cell Phones, Cancers and Brain Tumors.&
Do cell phones cause Cancer?What is the REAL story?Introduction
Cell phones and cancer are in the news all the time now it seems.&
But almost everyone uses cell phones. All over the world, tens of
millions of people are pressing them against their heads for hours every
day. Worldwide, the
and that number has continued to climb.&&So what's the fuss? Is cancer caused by cell phones a serious concern, or the media's panic-du-jour?A cell phone, and a household cordless phone, use a low level form of microwave radiation to send and receive their signals.& (see "" here.) Microwaves, as you know, are used to cook food.& As the radiation penetrates tissue it causes it to heat.Is this a problem for us with cell phones?& That is the current debate.& Let's examine the positions and the known evidence, without hype or prejudice.& As always, EHSO will provide citations and links to the sources of any evidence provided, so you can verify it for yourself.&&Positions, pro and con:Cell phones are dangerous:
They emit microwaves.
They produce heat.
You hold the source of the emission close to your brain.
There are claims that people have had brain tumors in the exact size, shape and position as the antenna on their cell phone.
Cell phones are safe:Cell phones use a very, very low level of radio frequency (rf) energy - too low to cause damage.The type of energy emitted is non-ionizing - meaning it doesn't cause damage to chemical bonds or dna.Hundreds of millions of people have been using cell phones and cordless phones for years. If there were a problem, we would have seen it by now. Latest News:
August 2014 - WebMD, Medscape Medical News:
, The potential
harm from microwave radiation (MWR) given off by wireless devices,
particularly for children and unborn babies, is the highlight of a new
review.Although the data are conflicting, links between MWR and cancer
have been observed.
June 2012 - Consumer Reports - Consumer Reports did not
conduct any research themselves, but their June 2012 Electronics Buying
Guide, page103, surveyed the research, as we do, and concluded, as we
do, that there still is no clear consensus, and that use of a headset or
speakerphone mode (held away from your head) is prudent.
October 21, 2011& -
biggest study to look for any connection has found no link between cell
phones and cancer. It followed more than 358,000 people for 13 years and
concluded heavy cell phone users have the same cancer rates as
people who don't use cell phones. The study, out of Denmark, confirms a
smaller one reported on last year. It also contradicts the WHO-IARC
study and confirms the assessments of
the Food and Drug Administration and the Federal Communications
Commission.
May 31, 2011 -
. The agency now
lists mobile phone use in the same &carcinogenic hazard& category as
lead, engine exhaust and chloroform. Note that this is a reversal of
WHO's previous position. According to CNN, the Apple iPhone 4 safety
manual warns users, &When using iPhone near your body for voice calls or
for wireless data transmission over a cellular network, keep iPhone at
least 15 mm (5/8 inch) away from the body.& and Blackberry Bold advises
users to, &keep the BlackBerry device at least 0.98 in. (25 mm) from
your body when the BlackBerry device is transmitting.&
February 22, 2011 -
; Fox News,
Reuters. Spending 50 minutes with a cellphone plastered to your ear is enough to change
brain cell activity in the part of the brain closest to the antenna. But whether that causes any harm is not clear,
scientists at the
said on Tuesday, adding that the study will
likely not settle recurring concerns of a link between cellphones and
May 17, 2010 -
& (funded in part by WHO, the World Health
Organization) using a cell phone for as little as 30 minutes
may increase your risk of getting a brain tumor
(glioma). The study is reported to have included 13,000 participants
over 10 years. But we have not seen
the details of this study. As soon as we find a source, we'll publish a
link to it.
March 03, 2010 - Yahoo News and CNN reports that
. Dr. Derva Davis Mt Sinai Medical center, and Dr. David
Carpenter Albany University spoke in favor of the proposed bill.
January 2010: Cell Phones may protect against Alzheimer's. Study
by Dr. Gary Arendash at the Florida Alzheimer's Disease Research Center.
For the complete story, see
Studies, Facts and EvidenceWhat is the radiation produced by a cell phone?Like televisions, alarm systems, computers, and all other electrical devices, Cell phones (also called mobile phones) are radio devices that use Radiofrequency (Rf) energy emit electromagnetic radiation. They operate at low power (less than 1 watt) by transmitting and receiving electromagnetic radiation in the radiofrequency (RF) end of the spectrum. Radiation which is called "ionizing" can be absorbed by tissue and break molecules apart, such as gamma rays and x-rays, are known to cause cancer.& The concern is that the cell phone and it's antenna (the source of the radiation) are held close against the head)The damage to the dna molecules is thought to be the cause. The radiation that a cell phone uses is also part of the same electromagnetic spectrum, but is not ionizing. For this reason, the US FDA can regulate these devices to ensure that the radiation doesn't pose a health hazard to users, but only once the existence of a public health hazard has been established. (See ) , RF energy was mistakenly thought to similarly cause cancer.&PowerNewer phones are digital.& The older analog phones are expected to be phased out by 2006.& The major difference is that analog phones use much more power than digital.& Analog use about 1.3 Watts, while a digital mobile phone is designed to operate at a maximum power level of 0.6 watts (see & By comparison, a household microwave oven uses between 600 and 1,100 watts.FrequencyIn the United States, mobile phones operate in a frequency ranging from about 850 to 1900 megahertz (MHz). In that range, the radiation produced is in the form of non-ionizing radiofrequency (RF) energy. This RF energy is different than the ionizing radiation like that from a medical x-ray, which can present a health risk at certain doses.Ionizing gamma rays and x-rays can cause cancer when their energy is absorbed by the tissue and chemical bonds are broken, damaging DNA. RF energy, on the other hand, produces heating of tissue. Although there is a small amount of experimental evidence that suggests RF energy can impact DNA in rats, this data has been contradicted by several other animal studies and is not well substantiated. Even if true, the doses administered in these animal studies were much larger than the exposure in humans and may have no relevance to cell phone use at all. So although the RF energy emitted by cell phones is in the electromagnetic spectrum, and other forms of electromagnetic radiation can cause cancer, RF energy is very different and has not been shown to cause cancer.At high enough levels, RF energy, too, can be harmful, because of its ability to heat living tissue to the point of causing biological damage. In a microwave oven, it's RF energy that cooks the food, but the heat generated by cell phones is small in comparison.A mobile phone's main source of RF energy is its antenna, so the closer the antenna is to a phone user's head, the greater the person's expected exposure to RF energy.Because RF energy from a cell phone falls off quickly as distance increases between a person and the radiation source (actually, by the distance squared), the safety of mobile phones with an antenna mounted away from the user, like on the outside of a car, has been presumed to be safe. The distance and the effect of the car acting as a Gaussian cage would virtually eliminate the radiation inside the car. Also not presently in doubt is the safety of those so-called cordless phones that have a base unit attached to a home's telephone wiring and operate at much lower power levels than cell phones.Many experts say that no matter how near the cell phone's antenna--even if it's right up against the skull--the six-tenths of a watt (typically) of power emitted couldn't possibly affect human health.&Scientific Studies to DateSome mobile phone users have been diagnosed with brain cancer, and many others who have not used mobile phones have gotten the disease, too. Each year in the United States, brain cancer occurs at a rate of about six new cases per 100,000 people. Among the 100 million Americans who own mobile phones, then, about 6,000 cases of brain cancer would be expected among them in a year, even if they had not used mobile phones.Scientific studies have focused on the question of whether the statistical risk of getting brain cancer is increased in those who use mobile phones compared to non-users, leaving to the courts the judgment of whether Chris Newman or other individuals would have gotten the disease had they not used a cell phone.Two types of studies are generally used to investigate suspected cancer causes: epidemiological studies, which look at the incidence of a disease in certain groups of people, and animal studies.
references to more studies. Epidemiological studies are sometimes difficult to carry out in a way that can determine whether a cause-and-effect relationship exists between a single variable in a person's life (in this case, cell phone use) and the person's disease (brain cancer). Some factors that complicate research into the asserted link between cell phones and brain cancer: Brain cancer can take years or even decades to develop, making possible long-term effects of mobile phone us mobile phone technology is ever- and so many lifestyle factors--even down to the precise position in which a person holds the phone, as well as his or her own anatomy--can affect the extent of radiation exposure.Studies in animals are easier to control, but entail complications of their own. For example, how should results obtained in rats and mice be interpreted in terms of human health risks? And how can scientists account for the fact that these studies sometimes expose animals to RF almost continuously--up to 22 hours a day--and to whole-body radiation, unlike people's head-only exposure?While studies generally have shown no link between cell phones and brain cancer, there is some conflicting scientific evidence that may be worth additional study, according to FDA. (See ).& The FDA says on their website that they are closely following ongoing research into whether there might be any association between cell phones and cancer.A
is already under way to examine possible risk factors for brain cancer. It compares past usage of mobile phones (as well as other environmental, lifestyle, and genetic factors) by 800 people with brain tumors compared with 800 others who don't have tumors.The study, the first part of which is expected to be published early next year, will provide a "snapshot" of what the risks from cell phones could be, says Peter Inskip, Sc.D., one of the study's principal investigators. But this research, he cautions, has its own limitations. For one thing, the study was started in 1994 and it considers radiation exposures from cell phones that occurred between the mid-1980s and 1998. That time frame in large part predates the explosion in the popularity of cell phones, as well as the introduction of digital phones that work on a fraction of the energy compared with older analog varieties.Recently, FDA announced that it will collaborate with the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA) on additional laboratory and human studies of mobile phone safety. A "Cooperative Research and Development Agreement" signed in June provides for research to be conducted by third parties, with industry funding and FDA oversight to help ensure the studies' quality.Specifically, FDA will identify the scientific questions that merit attention, propose research to address those questions, review study proposals from those interested in doing the research, make recommendations on the selection of researchers, and oversee the development of study design. Once research is begun, FDA will review the progress of ongoing studies, review the results of completed studies, and issue a report to the CTIA.Beyond this planned research, according to the industry association, there are hundreds of scientific studies completed or in progress around the world to investigate RF's possible health effects, with half of them specifically addressing the frequencies used by wireless phones. FDA is a leading participant in the World Health Organization's International EMF (electric and magnetic fields) project to coordinate research and the harmonization of international radiation standards. have reported their hypothesis that normal mobile phone use can lead to cancer. The research group, lead by radiation expert Dr Peter French, principal scientific officer at the Centre for Immunology Research at St Vincent's Hospital in Sydney, said that mobile phone frequencies well below current safety levels could stress cells in a way that has been shown to increased susceptibility to cancer. The paper, published in the June 2001 issue of the science journal, &Differentiation&, says that repeated exposure to mobile phone radiation acts as a repetitive stress, leading to continuous manufacture of heat shock proteins within cells. Their theory is that these proteins, which are sensitive to heat, are always present in cells at a low level, but are manufactured in larger amounts when the cell is stressed by heat or other environmental factors. These proteins repair other proteins that are adversely affected by the conditions, and are part of the cell's normal reaction to stress. However, if they are produced too often or for too long, they are known to initiate cancer and increase resistance to anti-cancer drugs. However, this group has reported absolutely evidence nor studies to substantiate this - it is only a theory. More recently, a
of some of the world's most popular mobile phones found the amount of radiation they emit is well below agreed limits and largely in line with data published by manufacturers. The survey conducted by Finland's Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) covered 16 new models made by top handset makers including Finland's own Nokia, Motorola of the United States and South Korea's Samsung Electronics. At this level, the study found that head tissue does not warm significantly and no other harmful effects have been proved scientifically. STUK said the SAR levels in all the 28 models tested so far ranged from 0.45 to 1.12 watts per kilogram. &It is important that also in the future the limits set for radiation from mobile phones and base stations are based on current and confirmed scientific proof of the effects of radiation on health,& Kari Jokela, a researcher at STUK, said in a statement.& STUK also said that some of its studies have indicated that microwave radiation from mobile phones may cause small changes in how cells operate, but the findings were insufficient for concluding what effects of this radiation had on health.& STUK will start testing third-generation UMTS-standard mobile phones during 2005, focusing on the most popular models. Other phones in the current study were made by Sony Ericsson and Siemens. Finally, as the non-ionizing radiation does have a small heating effect, it is postulated that the effect would be greatest on the eyes and testes, due to the lower amount of blood vessels to help cool these areas.Perceptions and ConcernsThe latest studies may support the generally held position that cell phone radiation is not a substantial hazard, but they will never be able to prove cell phones to be absolutely safe. It is logically impossible to prove a negative, that cell phones can not cause cancer.&ConclusionsEHSO has seen no credible evidence to date that cell phones cause cancer or brain tumors.& It is illogical to believe that evidence of unusual brain tumors is covered up when there are hundred's of millions of people using cell phones worldwide. There is a TREMENDOUS amount of junk science and thoroughly ignorant (as in untrained, uneducated) people running around naming themselves as experts and publishing their opinions on the internet. This hype and fear-mongering has only one goal: to puff up the egos and wallets of those propagating nonsense.And
the supposed link between mobile-phone use and cancer is even listed
among the American Cancer Society's
However, cell phones are still relatively new, and while science does not support that the radiation may not be likely to cause cancer, time may prove differently!& And in any case, it may cause some other type of damage (certainly accidents in cars from being distracted while fumbling with the phone!)
So common sense suggests that we each take some see
below.Precautionary Steps To TakeThere are some simple steps that cell phone users can take to reduce any remaining risk:First, use a headset or speakerphone mode.& That moves the phone (and it's antenna) away from your head.Second, consider reserving the use of mobile phones for shorter conversations or when a conventional phone is not available.&Third, the effects of cellular damage are greatest on growing, developing organisms (i.e., the young), so limit children's use of cell phones!Finally, in a car, use an external antenna mounted outside the vehicle to move the source of the radiation farther from you!And don't believe the claims of conmen preying on people's fear of radiation, selling fraudulent devices that they say protect against radiation. These useless items are mostly sold as &shields& on the Internet.& Experts says none of these devices work.To reduce the risk of an accident while driving, here's a simple tip:& enter the several numbers you call the most often in a way that brings them to the top of the list, so you can use fewer keystrokes to dial them.& For example, the Motorola V60 starts with an alphabetized list when you press the multi- so start your most commonly called number with "AAA",& Like "aaaParents" and the next number with "AAB", like "aabHusband", then they will always appear at the top of the list, which should take fewer keystrokes and less time to dial!
Below are a variety of headsets that will allow you to use your
cellphone without the potential risks of having the transmitter close to
your ear. The blooth versions work with any mobile phone that is
bluetooth enabled, which includes Apple iPhones and most Android and
smartphones. If your phone does not have blooth, one of the wrired
versions will work justthe same.& If you play music from your
phone, there are steroe headset versions that work both as a headset for
talking on the phone and for playing music. These below have the highest
customer satistfaction for both safety, reliability and voice / sound
Epidemiological and animal studies undertaken by the U.S. cell phone industry and others have yielded mixed results.
- Interphone, an international collaboration, and the largest study of
its kind to date, reported that overall, cell phone users have no
increased risk of two of the most common forms of brain cancer -- glioma
and meningioma. Furthermore, there was no evidence of risk with
progressively increasing number of calls, longer call time, or time
since the start of the use of cell phones. However, for the small
proportion of study participants who used cell phones the most ?EUR“
measured as cumulative call time over their lifetime ?EUR“ there was a
suggestion of increased risk of glioma, though the authors call this
finding inconclusive. The study was published online May 17, 2010, in
the International Journal of Epidemiology.
A new study has found no link between use of cell phones and the risk of developing a brain tumor. The study is published in the April 12 issue of Neurology, the scientific journal of the American Academy of Neurology.. The Danish study questioned 427 people with brain tumors and 822 people without brain tumors about their cell phone use. The study found no increased risk for brain tumors related to cell phone use, frequency of use, or number of years of use. : February 2005: The amount of radiation most popular cell phones emit is well below agreed limits and largely in line with data published by manufacturers. The survey conducted by Finland's Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority (STUK) covered 16 new models made by top handset makers including Finland's own Nokia, Motorola of the United States and South Korea's Samsung Electronics. At this level, the study found that head tissue does not warm significantly and no other harmful effects have been proved scientifically.
, and other researchers.Orebro, Sweden, 1999: No connection: In a study published in 1999, investigators at the Orebro Medical Centre in Sweden compared the past mobile phone use of 209 Swedish brain tumor patients and 425 healthy people. Conclusion: The study found no mobile phone/brain cancer link "in virtually all respects," cancer researcher John E. Moulder, Ph.D., says in the August 2000 issue of IEEE Spectrum, the official magazine of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Investigators did find that mobile phone users who got certain types of brain tumors tended to report using the phone on the side of the head where they developed the tumor. The study's limitations, according to Moulder, include a weak association between cell phone use and tumor development, as well as a possibility that the cancer patients' recollections were biased by already knowing on which side of their head the brain cancer developed. Joshua Muscat, 1999: Glioma: &In a yet-unpublished study presented at a 1999 scientific meeting, researcher Joshua Muscat looked for an association between mobile phone use and a type of brain cancer called glioma. Muscat did not find evidence that cell phone use increased people's risk of this type of brain cancer generally. He did, however, observe an increase in one rare kind of glioma, which FDA scientists say might have occurred by chance. Interestingly, with increased hours of mobile phone use, the risk tended to decrease rather than increase as might be expected. A few animal studies have suggested that low levels of RF exposure could speed up development of cancer in laboratory animals. In one recent Australian study, for example, mice genetically altered to be predisposed to developing lymphoma got more than twice as many of these cancers when exposed to RF energy compared to mice not exposed to the radiation. A large number of laboratory tests have been conducted to assess RF's effects on genetic material, looking for mutations, chromosomal changes, DNA strand breaks, and structural changes in blood cells' genetic material. One kind of test, called a micronucleus assay, showed structural changes in genetic material after exposure to simulated cell phone radiation. The changes occurred only after 24 hours of continuous exposure, which experts say raises questions about this test's sensitivity to heating effects and whether that sensitivity could be solely responsible for the results.More InformationFollow-up with:The American Council on Science and Health - The SAR is a value that corresponds to the relative amount of RF energy absorbed in the head of a user of a wireless handset. The FCC limit for public exposure from cellular telephones is an SAR level of 1.6 watts per kilogram (1.6 W/kg).& Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) for Wireless Phones and Devices Available at FCC Web Site.& * * AgenciesNational Cancer Institute - , 01/04/2002
More cell phone usage tumor and cancer news, studies and articles
October 13, 2009 -
- by Seung-Kwon
Myung, Woong Ju, Diana D. McDonnell, Yeon Ji Lee, Gene Kazinets, Chih-Tao
Cheng,and Joel M. Moskowitz
March 30, 2008 - '' - A
self-published and non-peer reviewed meta-study by Dr. Vini
Khurana, an Australian neurosurgeon, presented an &increasing body of
evidence ... for a link between mobile phone usage and certain brain
tumours& and that it &is anticipated that this danger has far broader
public health ramifications than asbestos and smoking&. On
, Dr. Khurana said: &the concern is not just brain
tumors, but other health effects associated or reported to be associated
with cell phones, including behavioral disturbances, salivary gland
tumors, male infertility and microwave sickness syndrome&.&
However, according to Wikipedia, this was criticized as ?EUR~?EUR?an unbalanced
analysis of the literature, which is also selective in support of the
author's claims.'
February 2008:
compared phone use in 322 brain
cancer patients with 683 healthy people and found that regularly using a
mobile did not significantly affect the likelihood of getting brain
cancer. &Using our newly developed and more accurate techniques, we
found no association between mobile phone use and cancer, providing more
evidence to suggest they don't cause brain cancer,& Naohito Yamaguchi,
who led the research, said. His team's findings were published in the
British Journal of Cancer.
December 5, 2006 - Scientists in Denmark tracked over 420,000 cell phone users over the course of 21 years in an attempt to determine if if cell phone use causes cancer. As , they found the RF energy produced by the phones did not correlate to an increased incidence of the disease. From the article: 'This so-called Danish cohort &is probably the strongest study out there because of the outstanding registries they keep,' said Joshua Muscat of Pennsylvania State University, who also has studied cell phones and cancer. 'As the body of evidence accumulates, people can become more reassured that these devices are safe, but the final word is not there yet,' Muscat added.&April 2006 - the Swedish National Institute for Working Life issued a this week, published in the International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, disputing two earlier studies that claimed cell phone use has no correlation to increased brain tumor risk. The researchers examined the cell phone usage of 905 adults who developed malignant brain tumors. They& found that people with more than 2,000 hours of total talk time had 3.7 times the risk of developing brain cancer when compared with nonusers. 2,000 hours is about an hour of talk time every Monday through Friday for 10 years. The study, also found a 2 times increase for tumors specifically on the side of the head where the cell phone was generally used. But it should be noted that the study relied on the memory of the subjects for how long they used their phones, for& as much as a decade ago, according to a , an epidemiologist at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health. &You're interviewing subjects in an era when everyone has a suspicion that cell phones may be harmful,& Zablotska said of the study's shortcomings.January 2006 - A four-year long British study performed by the London-based Institute of Cancer Research and three British universities found that talking on a cell phone had . The researchers included 966 people with glioma brain tumors and 1,716 healthy respondents. Individuals were questioned on first use, lifetime years of use, cumulative hours of use, and number of calls they made.
May 17, 2005 -
- A Swedish study
finds that users of digital phones in rural areas may be at greater risk
of brain cancer. Its authors say the link is troubling, although they
acknowledge that the amount of data is small and wider research is
needed to amplify the findings. The chance of developing a malignant
brain tumor was roughly eight times higher for cell phone users in the
Swedish countryside than in urban areas. The risk of developing any
brain tumor was four times higher for country dwellers using mobile
phones for five years or more, compared with those who did not use the
devices.& The BBC present a program (Panarama) which countered Dr
Lennart Hardell's& claims (), & The National Radiological
Protection Board (NRPB), which advises the government on safety levels,
said the study &the study did not involve enough people to offer
compelling evidence, and any difference in risk it did find was not
statistically significant. . &March 21, 2005 -
both report that on March 16, 2005, a federal appeals court in Maryland reinstated five class-action lawsuits that allege that the cell phone industry has failed to protect consumers from unsafe levels of radiation. Fox quotes a Dr. Henry Lai, a bioengineering professor at the University of Washington, as saying that electromagnetic radiation emitted from cell phones may damage DNA and cause benign brain tumors.& Dr. Lai also agrees with EHSO's recommendation to use a headset to minimize potential exposure.
- MSNBC - The Associated Press - Jan.14, 2004 - LONDON - There is no evidence linking mobile phones to cancer or other health problems, but more research needs to be done to be sure, a panel of experts said Wednesday. The scientists, who are advising the British government, said existing research into the health effects of cell phones ?EURoedoes not give cause for concern?EUR that the devices cause cancer ?EURoenor any other adverse health effect.?EUR - Friday, October 04, 2002 - Fox News& -Washington University School of Medicine,& St. Louis, June 25, 2002 ?EUR” Radiation from cell phones doesn't appear to cause cancer in rats, according to a study by researchers at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. The research team exposed rats to the two most common types of cell phone radiation for four hours a day, five days a week for two years. ?EURoeWe tried to mimic a high level of exposure that humans might experience,?EUR says study leader Joseph L. Roti Roti, Ph.D., professor of radiation oncology, of biochemistry and molecular biophysics and of cell biology and physiology. ?EURoeWe found no statistically significant increases in any tumor type, including brain, liver, lung or kidney, compared to the control group.?EUR"."- National Cancer Institute - 12-21-2000 - Researchers at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) found that people who used cellular phones did not have an increased risk of brain tumors compared to non-users.& The study, due to be published in the Jan. 11, 2001, issue of the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM)*, was released on Dec. 19, 2000. - National Cancer Institute - 12-21-2000 - The results pertain primarily to patterns of cell phone use in the United States during the early to middle 1990s.& During the period of this study, there was no evidence that use of hand-held cellular phones caused tumors of the brain and nervous system.& The findings suggest that, if there was any increase in risk, it was small, particularly for malignant tumors (glioma). - Spring 2001 - Berkley Medical Journal- ABC News - May 29, 2001 - A Neurosurgeon's Thoughts - a recent report from the General Accounting Office found that federal agencies do not always provide the latest information and research on cell phone radiation to consumers, and often the information they do provide is too technical for the average consumer to fully understand. Dr. Ted Schwartz, a neurosurgeon from New York Presbyterian Hospital, speaks to the popular concern about the possible connection between cell phones and brain tumors.&& - The Associated Press - Wednesday, February 7, 2001 - Scientists who tracked the health of 420,000 Danish cell phone users found no sign the devices increase cancer risk -- the biggest study yet to provide reassurance about the phones' safety, but one that won't end the controversy. The study, published in today's Journal of the National Cancer Institute, found cell phone users are no more likely than anyone else to suffer brain or nervous system cancers, leukemia, or salivary gland tumors.-& IEEE Spectrum Online - August 2000 - By Kenneth R. Foster, University of Pennsylvania & John E. Moulder, Medical College of Wisconsin - A MOTORIST USING A WIRELESS TELEPHONE might be worried about having an accident, even while being reassured that if one were to happen, he or she could call for help. Recently some scientists and lay people have expressed alarm at another possible danger--that the use of mobile phones itself may harm the user's health, perhaps even causing cancer. - USA Today - 08/09/99- Before rushing to judgment, consider the nature of the media and the nature of science. The media essentially created the cell phone scare when CNN's Larry King Live hosted widower David Reynard in 1993. Reynard was suing several phone companies because his wife, who used a cell phone, died of a brain tumor. Reynard and his lawyer didn't have much of what you might call evidence, which is why they didn't get very far in the courts. But the issue has hung around as a media fascination. Television shows and news reports can, in a matter of moments, leave a lasting impression. Science is different. It takes years to collect and analyze data, and that's just for one study Positions by Authorities......that conducted their own research or are credible to offer a meaningful opinionCell Phones Are DangerousNote: It has been very difficult to find credible sources that have taken the position that cell phones are dangerous.& This may be because this position is unsupportable (like taking the position that the earth is flat) or that there is new evidence that contradicts current thinking (like Copernicus' calculations that the earth revolves around the sun) . Credible sources means persons of institutions whose education, practice, past performance, and affiliations would lead a logical person to conclude that they are knowledgeable about the subject and have conducted thorough, accurate and unbiased research.& If you would like to recommend a source, please
He has an extensive website, but he is an an osteopathic physician, not a medical doctor. He also has not conducted
he just reviewed a study conducted by a television program (20/20) and we have all seen from Dan Rather's performance lately that the news media are not to be trusted as credible sources - they are meant to report the news objectively, not create research.Cell Phones Do Not Cause Cancer
compared phone use in 322 brain cancer patients with
683 healthy people and found that regularly using a mobile did not
significantly affect the likelihood of getting brain cancer. &Using our
newly developed and more accurate techniques, we found no association
between mobile phone use and cancer, providing more evidence to suggest
they don't cause brain cancer,& Naohito Yamaguchi, who led the research,
said. His team's findings were published in the British Journal of
- &Considerable research has also found no clear association between any other electronic consumer products and cancer. Cell phones, microwave ovens and related appliances emit low-frequency radiation?EUR”the part of the electromagnetic spectrum that includes radio waves and radar. Ionizing radiation such as gamma rays and X-rays can increase cancer risk by causing changes to DNA in cells of the body. Low frequency, non-ionizing radiation does not cause these DNA changes&&
- A very detailed page, with a considerable amount of information, including both FAQs and cit it can be technically overwhelming for non scientists.National Institute of Health / National Cancer Institute - April 2000.
published its report on the health implications of mobile phones in 2000. Two later reports by the independent Advisory Group on Non-ionising Radiation (AGNIR) and the most recent ?EURoeMobile Phones and Health 2004?EUR by the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB), have endorsed Stewart's findings. All three reports can be found at: .Undecided
&Additional resources&For more information, the ACS book,
provides an educated perspective on what cancer health hazards people may face in everyday life, and what's not worth worrying about.American Cancer Society - Bioelectromagnetics Society:
(non government0U.S. Dept. of Defense:
European Bioelectromagnetics Association:
Electromagnetic Energy Association:
Federal Communications Commission:
U.S. Food and Drug Administraton:
- , April 1, 2001ICNIRP (Europe):
IEEE Committee on Man & Radiation:
International Electromagnetic Field Conference:Microwave News:
J.Moulder, Med.Coll.of Wisc.:
National Council on Radiation Protection & Measurements:
National Institute of Environmental Health Science:National Radiation Protection Board (United Kingdom):
NJ Dept Radiation Protection:
RF Safety Program, Office of Engineering and Technology, Federal Communications Commission:Richard Tell Associates:
United Kingdom, National Radiological Protection Board: US OSHA:
Wireless Industry (CTIA):
Wireless Information Resource Centre (Canada):
World Health Organization (WHO):
World Health Organization International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (select Qs & As):From the Mobile Manufacturer's Forum (obviously, a pro-cell phone group):
(PDF) &&FCC and FDA Background InformationFCC Policy on Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic FieldsThe FCC is required by the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 to evaluate the effect of emissions from FCC-regulated transmitters on the quality of the human environment. At the present time there is no federally-mandated radio frequency (RF) exposure standard. However, several non-government organizations, such as the American National Standards Institute (), the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (), and the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) have issued recommendations for human exposure to RF electromagnetic fields. The potential hazards associated with RF electromagnetic fields are discussed in , "Questions and Answers About the Biological Effects and Potential Hazards of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields."....The US FCC's Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) ()This section contains answers to the most frequently asked questions received by the Federal Communications Commission concerning RF fields and its application. Also, see FCC .
&OET RF Safety Bulletins, Fact Sheets, Guides and ReportsQuestions and Answers About Biological Effects Potential Hazards of Radiofrequency Electromagnetic Fields (Fourth Edition, August 1999)This is an informative bulletin written as a result of increasing interest and concern of the public with respect to this issue. The expanding use of radio frequency technology has resulted in speculation concerning the alleged "electromagnetic pollution" of the environment and the potential dangers of exposure to non-ionizing radiation. This publication is designed to provide factual information to the public by answering some of the most commonly asked questions. Evaluating Compliance With FCC Guidelines for Human Exposure to Radiofrequency Electromagnetic FieldsThis technical bulletin was issued to provide guidance in the implementation of the Commission's new exposure limits and policies. The bulletin provides acceptable methods of determining compliance Commission limits through the use of mathematical and empirical models. Supplement A: Additional Information for Radio and Television Broadcast Stations Supplement B: Additional Information for Amateur Radio Stations Supplement C: Additional Information for Evaluating Compliance of Mobile and Portable Devices with FCC Limits for Human Exposure to Radiofrequency EmissionsThis page explains technical information on cellular and PCS base stations, mobile, and portable telephones. ( | )A Local Government Official's Guide to Transmitting Antenna RF Emission Safety: Rules, Procedures, and Practical Guidance. The LSGAC and the FCC have developed this guide to aid local governmental officials and citizens in understanding safety issues related to radiofrequency emissions from telecommunications towers. [ |
| ]That have responsibilities related to Certain agencies in the Federal Government have been involved in monitoring, researching or regulating issues related to human exposure to RF radiation. These agencies include the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) and the Department of Defense (DOD).By authority of the Radiation Control for Health and Safety Act of 1968, the Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) of the FDA develops performance standards for the emission of radiation from electronic products including X-ray equipment, other medical devices, television sets, microwave ovens, laser products and sunlamps. The CDRH established a product performance standard for microwave ovens in 1971 limiting the amount of RF leakage from ovens. However, the CDRH has not adopted performance standards for other RF-emitting products. The FDA is, however, the lead federal health agency in monitoring the latest research developments and advising other agencies with respect to the safety of RF-emitting products used by the public, such as cellular and PCS phones.The FDA's microwave oven standard is an emission standard (as opposed to an exposure standard) that allows specific levels of microwave leakage (measured at five centimeters from the oven surface). The standard also requires ovens to have two independent interlock systems that prevent the oven from generating microwaves the moment that the latch is released or the door of the oven is opened. The FDA has stated that ovens that meet its standards and are used according to the manufacturer's recommendations are safe for consumer and industrial use. More information is available from: .The EPA has, in the past, considered developing federal guidelines for public exposure to RF radiation. However, EPA activities related to RF safety and health are presently limited to advisory functions. For example, the EPA now chairs an Inter-agency Radiofrequency Working Group, which coordinates RF health-related activities among the various federal agencies with health or regulatory responsibilities in this area.& OSHA is responsible for protecting workers from exposure to hazardous chemical and physical agents. In 1971, OSHA issued a protection guide for exposure of workers to RF radiation [29 CFR 1910.97]. However, this guide was later ruled to be only advisory and not mandatory. Moreover, it was based on an earlier RF exposure standard that has now been revised. At the present time, OSHA uses the IEEE and/or FCC exposure guidelines for enforcement purposes under OSHA's "general duty clause" (for more information see: www.osha- slc.gov/SLTC/radiofrequencyradiation/index.html ).NIOSH is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. It conducts research and investigations into issues related to occupational exposure to chemical and physical agents. NIOSH has, in the past, undertaken to develop RF exposure guidelines for workers, but final guidelines were never adopted by the agency. NIOSH conducts safety-related RF studies through its Physical Agents Effects Branch in Cincinnati,Ohio.The NTIA is an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce and is responsible for authorizing Federal Government use of the RF electromagnetic spectrum. Like the FCC, the NTIA also has NEPA responsibilities and has considered adopting guidelines for evaluating RF exposure from U.S. Government transmitters such as radar and military facilities.The Department of Defense (DOD) has conducted research on the biological effects of RF energy for a number of years. This research is now conducted primarily at the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory located at Brooks Air Force Base, Texas. For more information on this topic please note: Questions and Answers About the Biological Effects and Potential Hazards of Radiofrequency Radiation.& Any questions regarding this subject matter should be addressed to: This page explains technical information on cellular and PCS base stations, mobile, and portable telephones. ( | )A Local Government Official's Guide to Transmitting Antenna RF Emission Safety: Rules, Procedures, and Practical Guidance. The LSGAC and the FCC have developed this guide to aid local governmental officials and citizens in understanding safety issues related to radiofrequency emissions from telecommunications towers. [ |
Other Issues
Dustmites in your pillow or mattress causing allergies?&
Have you heard about the explosion of bed bugs, especially in
hotels, and invading homes?&
may also be interested in these pages about recycling ./ disposing of
&Copyright ?(C) 2011 Benivia, LLC (dba EHSO) All rights reserved. Revised:
2015-Apr-18
Contact information
Environmental Health & Safety Online
12850 Hwy 9, Suite 600-196, Atlanta, GA&300004 -
Table of Contents to free guidance and resources:
Environmental and safety services for business - training, consulting, assessments, ISO14000, report and permit preparations and expert testimony:
If you provide environmental, safety, transportation, or related
such as training, consulting, management, etc., EHSO would like to hear from you.& We are looking for quality professionals to offer their services as affiliates. Please contact us via
Copyright (C) 2013 Benivia, LLC (dba EHSO) All rights reserved.}