Dean wrote:
>> A while back some on this list engaged in a lively debate about cell
>> phone radiation risks. This article may have some information of
>> interest to those of you who think this issue isn't dead yet.
>> The cell phone industry: Big Tobacco 2.0?
>> By Molly Wood, senior editor, CNET.com
>> Tuesday, March 8, 2005
> Oh, C|Net. Now we KNOW it's quality journalism.
> Consider that Ms. Wood readily admits she has an agenda (she has an
> axe to grind with cell phone manufacturers over what she perceives as
> "iron-clad control over phone releases and pricing, its
> ever-lengthening contracts, and the annoying habit it has of crippling
> Bluetooth phones so that [she] can't use them the way [she wants]
> to"). I would thus take this with a heavy handful of salt.
> E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
> Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.
OK OK, I'm not saying there's anything absolutely definitive in that article. But it seems certainly prudent to use a headset and try to keep the antenna at a certain distance -- just as she suggests toward the end of the article. (although I think I read somewhere that the cord of the headset can have some adverse effect too - one can only take so many precautions and still be reasonable:-)
Regards,
Dean
PS As for Ms Wood's honesty, I am certainly not qualified to offer an opinion (haven't read her enough). But the evidence you mention is hardly enough to dismiss her as biased. If I had to guess, I would say that her grievances are shared by the vast majority of people interested in telecom, and I don't think too many of us want to see phone manufacturers brought to their knees by unwarranted lawsuits.