A reader writes:
Balko stated, "It does mean that brain cancer incidence has plummeted just as cell phone use has taken off." No way would such a new device have a measurable effect yet. In a logical and quotable interview with a neurosurgeon [seen above], he explains how it's like expecting lung cancer in teenage smokers when actually it's not until they become adults and elderly that they suffer and die from it. The surgeon also has sound advice on how to keep our phone away from your brain.
Jon Crowell fisks Balko a bit. Another writes:
I think you should have done a bit more digging on that post. I read the fuller piece of news, and this is how the WHO classifications work:
It’s worth noting that the WHO's cancer researchers could have given mobile phones one of five scientific labels: carcinogenic, probably carcinogenic, possibly carcinogenic, not classifiable, or not carcinogenic.
So, the WHO gave it the second lowest-grade, basically saying there isn't enough information for a definitive statement but there isn't good evidence to support a link between cell phones and cancer. Being possible is very different from being probable.
Also, if you're that worried, using bluetooth while the phone sits in your pocket would be worse (groin cancer?); at least your brain is protected by your skull!
Aaron Carroll goes through the evidence:
This is more akin to saying that there could be some risk, and that more research is needed. Putting cellphones in this category means that they now join picked vegetables and coffee as “possibly carcinogenic.” So I wouldn’t panic yet.
The Dish 