Mobile phone cancer link rejected

20 October 2011 Last updated at 21:11 ET By Nick Triggle Health correspondent, BBC News

Further research has been published suggesting there is no link between mobile phones and an brain cancer.

The risk mobiles present has been much debated over the past 20 years as use of the phones has soared.

The latest study led by the Institute of Cancer Epidemiology in Denmark looked at more than 350,000 people with mobile phones over an 18-year period.

Researchers concluded users were at no greater risk than anyone else of developing brain cancer.

The findings, published on the British Medical Journal website, come after a series of studies have come to similar conclusions.

'Reassuring'

But there has also been some research casting doubt on mobile phone safety, prompting the World Health Organization to warn that they could still be carcinogenic.

In doing so, the WHO put mobile phones in the same category as coffee, meaning a link could not be ruled out but could not be proved either.

The Department of Health continue to advise that anyone under the age of 16 should use mobile phones only for essential purposes and keep all calls short.

Continue reading the main story

"Start Quote

These results are the strongest evidence yet that using a mobile phone does not seem to increase the risk of cancers of the brain or central nervous system in adults"

End Quote Hazel Nunn Cancer Research UK

The Danish study, which built on previous research that has already been published by carrying out a longer follow-up, found there was no significant difference in rates of brain or central nervous system cancers among those who had mobiles and those that did not.

Of the 358,403 mobile phone owners looked at, 356 gliomas (a type of brain cancer) and 846 cancers of the central nervous system were seen - both in line with incidence rates among those who did not own a mobile.

Even among those who had had mobiles the longest - 13 years or more - the risk was no higher, the researchers concluded.

But they still said mobile phone use warranted continued follow up to ensure cancers were not developing over the longer term, and to see what the effect was in children.

Hazel Nunn, head of evidence and health information at Cancer Research UK, said: "These results are the strongest evidence yet that using a mobile phone does not seem to increase the risk of cancers of the brain or central nervous system in adults."

Prof Anders Ahlbom, from Sweden's Karolinska Institute, praised the way the study was conducted, adding the findings were "reassuring".

Prof David Spiegelhalter, an expert specialising in the understanding of risk who is based at the University of Cambridge, said: "The mobile phone records only go up to 1995 and so the comparison is mainly between early and late adopters, but the lack of any effect on brain tumours is still very important evidence."

And Prof Malcolm Sperrin, director of medical physics at Royal Berkshire Hospital, said: "The findings clearly reveal that there is no additional overall risk of developing a cancer in the brain although there does seem to be some minor, and not statistically significant, variations in the type of cancer."

But the researchers themselves do accept there were some limitations to the study, including the exclusion of "corporate subscriptions", thereby excluding people who used their phones for business purposes, who could be among the heaviest users.

Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin | Settlement Statement

Libel 'threat' to web anonymity

20 October 2011 Last updated at 03:22 ET By Emma Griffiths Political reporter, BBC News

Websites should have protection from defamation cases if they act quickly to remove anonymous postings which prompt a complaint, a report says.

A joint parliamentary committee says it wants a "cultural shift" so that posts under pseudonyms are not considered "true, reliable or trustworthy".

It says websites which identify authors and publish complaints alongside comments should get legal protection.

But Mumsnet said the proposal could have a "chilling effect" on websites.

The report by the joint committee of MPs and peers who examined the draft defamation bill covers a wide range of defamation issues.

Its recommendations - including more protection for scientists and academics writing in peer-reviewed journals and more work on reducing "unacceptably" high costs of libel cases by encouraging more to be resolved through mediation - have been welcomed by the Libel Reform Campaign.

'Entirely legitimate'

The committee also proposes a new "notice and take-down procedure" for defamatory online comments - aimed at providing a quick remedy for those who are defamed and to give websites which use the procedure more legal protection.

Under the current law, websites are liable for defamatory statements made by their users. If they fail to take down a post when they receive a complaint, they risk being treated as the "primary publisher" of the statement.

Continue reading the main story

"Start Quote

Anonymity may encourage free speech but it also discourages responsibility"

End Quote Draft Defamation Bill Committee

The report says many "entirely legitimate" comments may be removed by websites who are keen to avoid legal liability.

It recommends that where complaints are made about comments from identified authors - the website should promptly publish a notice of the complaint alongside it.

The complainant can then apply to a court for a "take-down" order - which if granted, should result in the comment being removed, if the website is to avoid the risk of a defamation claim.

But where potentially defamatory comments are anonymous, the website should immediately remove them on receipt of a complaint, unless the author agrees to identify themselves, the report says.

'Mischievous and malicious'

The author of the comment can then be sued for defamation but if a website refuses to take down an anonymous remark it "should be treated as its publisher and face the risk of libel proceedings".

The report also says a website could apply to a court for a "leave up" order - if it considers the anonymous comment to be on a matter of "significant" public interest.

Continue reading the main story

"Start Quote

If you think all anonymity is bad you could end up with unintended consequences of removing peer-to-peer support, in particular around sensitive issues"

End Quote Mumsnet spokeswoman

The committee criticises comments made anonymously, which it says "may encourage free speech but it also discourages responsibility" and sets out moves it hopes will lead to a "cultural shift towards a general recognition that unidentified postings are not to be treated as true, reliable or trustworthy".

It says the aim of its proposal is to reduce damage "inflicted by the mischievous and the malicious".

But Mumsnet, a parenting website, says many of its members rely on the ability to ask questions or post comments anonymously.

Many of the women posting messages do so under a "user name", rather than their real name - and the site is worried the proposal will mean more people demanding messages be taken down.

Its co-founder, Justine Roberts said while it was right to stop people from "assassinating the character of others from behind the cloak of anonymity" the report did not recognise how useful anonymous postings were "in allowing people to speak honestly about difficult real-life situations".

"The recommendations could have a chilling effect on sites like Mumsnet where many thousands of people use anonymity to confidentially seek and give advice about sensitive real-life situations."

In 2007, the website settled a libel case with Gina Ford, author of the Contented Little Babies book, over comments posted about her by its users.

A spokeswoman said they received about 10 complaints a month about comments on the site - and "two or three big ones a year" - often from small companies who have been reviewed by its members. It often agrees to take comments down.

But she said anonymous posts were important to the site - for example in its campaign for better care for women who have miscarried, where they have had a midwife and doctor making anonymous contributions.

"What we're really keen to do is to say there is some value in it [anonymous posts] and that is very different to being an anonymous troll and waging war on someone.

"If you think all anonymity is bad you could end up with unintended consequences of removing peer-to-peer support, in particular around sensitive issues."

Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin | Settlement Statement

ARM chip promises cheaper phones

19 October 2011 Last updated at 16:32 ET

UK chip designer ARM has unveiled a new processor, which should allow manufacturers to make cheaper smartphones.

The company hopes the Cortex A7 will enable a mobile computing revolution in developing countries where current technologies are often unaffordable.

Consumers in developed countries should also see a benefit.

The ultra-efficient chip can be paired with more powerful processors in a "hybrid" model to reduce power use.

ARM's designs are used in approximately 95% of the world's smartphones.

A range of big name manufacturers have already signed-up to use the A7 processor along with the company's "big.LITTLE" architecture.

Samsung, LG, NVidia and Texas Instruments were among those to throw their weight behind the technology.

Apple is also known to make use of ARM-designed chips in its mobile devices, although it has historically been reluctant to say so publicly.

Smaller and cheaper

Used as the sole processor in a smartphone, the A7 is said to offer comparable power to current chips at a fraction of the price, while consuming much less battery power.

Its silicon core is only one-fifth of the size of existing technologies, allowing a reduced production price, according to ARM chief executive Warren East.

"You typically make chips on a silicon wafer and it costs roughly the same amount of money for each wafer. If you can get 2,000 devices on a wafer or 1,000 devices on a wafer it makes a huge difference to the cost per device," he told BBC News.

"We can see the developed world moving on and mobile being the nexus for all sort of consumer electronics. In the Bric countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) we are seeing catch-up.

"As we look forward these smartphones are going to be totally ubiquitous and in the much less developed areas, such as Africa, you will see smartphones becoming tools that people use to make their lives easier."

Mr East said that the trend would happen regardless of intervention, but cheaper devices would greatly accelerate that, enabling smartphones to be produced for under $100 (�60) by 2013 or 2014.

Little and large

In countries where price is less of an issue, the Cortex A7 may be combined with high end mobile processors to offer a powerful, yet energy-efficient package, ARM said.

For less demanding tasks such as checking in the background for email and social networking updates, the A7 processor would handle the work.

Using a technology known as big.LITTLE, the phone would instantly switch over to chips such as the Cortex-A15 when more horsepower was needed.

"It's not just trying to solve the issue of doing yet another CPU with higher performance," said Avner Goren, general manager of Omap strategy at Texas Instruments, one of ARM's clients.

"I don't need massive processing all the time, I need it only some of the time, and for the rest I can use A7. This allows me now to continue the path to more and more powerful devices but without sacrificing battery life."

Although ARM currently enjoys a dominant position in the smartphone and tablet markets, the Cambridge-based firm is facing the prospect of stiff competition from Intel, which has recently entered the mobile processor business.

Its Sandy Bridge and forthcoming Ivy Bridge processors are also aimed at the smartphone and tablet markets.

Powered By WizardRSS.com | Full Text RSS Feed | Amazon Plugin | Settlement Statement