Meeting in Lyon, France, Member’s of the World Health Organization formed a panel in late May to discuss the potential carcinogenic hazards from exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic fields, like those emitted by cellular phones and other wireless communications devices. The panel, which represents the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), consisted of 31 scientists from 14 different countries. While the group did not conduct any new research, the panel reviewed numerous existing studies that focused on the health effects of the radiofrequency magnetic fields emitted from cellphones, and concluded that there is a possibility that exposure to these low levels of radiation might induce long-term health risks, including an increased risk of cancer.

The IARC panel classified cellphones under the category Group 2B, the same category as certain dry cleaning chemicals, pesticides such as DDT, engine exhaust, lead, and various other industrial chemicals. However, the cellphone industry was quick to point out that pickled vegetables and coffee also made the 2B designation, which is defined by the IARC below:

“This category is used for agents for which there is limited evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and less than sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. It may also be used when there is inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans but there is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals. In some instances, an agent for which there is inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in humans and less than sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in experimental animals together with supporting evidence from mechanistic and other relevant data may be placed in this group. An agent may be classified in this category solely on the basis of strong evidence from mechanistic and other relevant data.”

Major medical groups such as the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute have reassured the public that there is little concern in regards to adverse health effects because cellphones emit nonionizing radiation – which are supposedly non-cancerous. In February, however, researchers from the National Institutes of Health published a study which found that less than an hour of cellphone usage can speed up brain activity at the area nearest to the phone antenna. This study was one of the most significant of its kind to document the measurable effects of the radio frequency signals to the brain.

The New York Times reported:

“In the past, any concerns about the health effects of cellphones have been largely dismissed because the radiofrequency waves emitted from the devices are believed to be benign. Cellphones emit nonionizing radiation, waves of energy that are too weak to break chemical bonds or to set off the DNA damage known to cause cancers. Scientists have said repeatedly that there is no known biological mechanism to explain how nonionizing radiation might lead to cancer or other health problems.

But the new study opens up an entirely new potential area of research. Although an increase in brain glucose metabolism happens during normal brain function, the question is whether repeated artificial stimulation as a result of exposure to electromagnetic radiation might have a detrimental effect.

Although speculative, one theory about how an artificial increase in brain glucose metabolism could be harmful is that it could potentially lead to the creation of molecules called free radicals, which in excess can damage healthy cells. Or it may be that repeated stimulation by electromagnetic radiation could set off an inflammatory response, which studies suggest is associated with a number of health problems, including cancer.”

While there are no official recommendations for the public following the study, the use of hands-free devices and text messaging may lower exposure to radiofrequency electromagnetic waves emitted by cellphones. Even though all of this may seem alarming, the Group 2B designation simply means that there may (or may not) be a possible link between cellphone usage and certain forms of cancer. In other words, this is fearmongering at its finest, and Stephen Colbert has already solved the problem.

Photo by Sam Biddle via Gizmodo

At some point while driving you may have become distracted when a passenger was talking, a favorite song was playing or while trying to make sure you did not end up wearing your lunch. Driving distracted is not a new issue. In recent times it has come into greater focus because of the increasing use of hand-held technology and other electronic devices. Because of the number of injuries and fatal crashes in recent times, driving while distracted has become a health hazard.

Lives were changed on December 1, 2010 when a California mother and her two-year daughter were hit by a distracted driver as they crossed the street just a few blocks from home. Ling Murray has no memory of what happened. Both of her legs were shattered with other serious injuries and her daughter Calli was killed. Walking for the first time in three months, Ling remains in a rehabilitation medical facility. The teen that caused the accident admits to using her cell phone at the time the accident occurred.

In 2009 out of 1,517,000 injury crashes reported, about 20 percent involved distracted driving, according to the Official U.S. Government Website for Distracted Driving. This included each type of driving distraction: audible, visual, physical and cognitive. One or a combination of distractions can contribute to a crash depending on the driving behavior.

Audible distractions can occur when focusing on music or talking from a passenger or cell phone. Visual distractions occur when the focus is on something or someone outside the car or when reading. Physical distractions happen when removing a hand from the wheel for eating, tending to children, applying cosmetics, making a call or texting. Cognitive distractions are when your mind is not focused such as when you are emotional or daydreaming

So if these types of driving behaviors have existed for so long, why so much hype now? For nearly 10 years there has been a significant increase in cell phone use. It has become common to see an individual with a cell phone attached to his or her ear while in traffic. While there has been considerable focus on teenagers and texting, adults are not exempt from this behavior. A cell phone or PDA is a lifeline for business communications among many professionals, and the increasing use of Smartphones and small PC tablets does not improve the situation.

Distracted driving has also become a legislative issue. In 2010, nearly 30 states established primary and secondary laws on texting and use hand-held devices. With the objective to end distracted driving, goals also include increasing public awareness, expand law enforcement initiatives to reduce injuries and save lives.

Will banning cell phones while driving solve the problem? Should other distracted driving behaviors receive the same legislative treatment as cell phones and other hand-held devices? Why should teenagers be held just as accountable as adults?or should they?  Share your views.