I. Cell phone usage
a. Pew Internet Project - as of May 2013, 91% of adults own a cell phone.
b. 2010-2011 study - an average of 12.3 voice calls were made or received per day.
c. The number and length of voice calls continues
to increase.
<Table from Pew Research Center>
Cell Phones Emit
Radiofrequency Energy
II. Radiofrequency Energy
a. Emitted by holding a cell phone close to the ear.
b. Radiofrequency energy is non-ionizing
electromagnetic radiation at a low or power frequency,
similar to a microwave oven.
Cell Phones
Radiofrequency Energy Causes Brain Cancer
III. Causes cancer
a. The Interphone study - those who used
a cell phone for more than 10 years with voice calls averaging 30 minutes a
day or more had an increased risk of brain cancer.
b. There is a link between
prolonged cell phone use and ipsilateral brain tumors.
<answer
to interview question #2>
Cell Phones
Radiofrequency Energy Does Not Cause Brain Cancer
IV. Does not cause cancer
a. Although holding a cell phone close to the head
affects the brain, it is not enough to cause tumors.
b. DNA is damaged for cancer to develop, but radiofrequency energy does not cause this.
b. DNA is damaged for cancer to develop, but radiofrequency energy does not cause this.
<answer
to interview question #3>
V. Conclusion
a. Evidence is not yet conclusive to say there is a link between cell phone use and brain cancer.
b. Those who are concerned should limit their exposure by using a headset.
b. Those who are concerned should limit their exposure by using a headset.
c. There are several studies underway for more evidence (Cosmos Study)
Michelle’s idea is very interesting and doable. It is an important topic in today’s society. Her post is about the ongoing investigation of whether or not the radiofrequency from cell phones causes cancer. Her outline does a great job at framing her post by breaking it down into specific sections.
ReplyDeleteShe also did a great job in using embedded links so I can exactly what she is talking about. The outline is also well balanced with an introduction to the topic, then a section saying the radio frequency causes cancer, and then one how it doesn’t, and finally she ends with a conclusion. She knows the research isn’t finalized but still thinks people need to know that there is a chance this radiofrequency can cause cancer.
The audio description of her outline was very good as you could clearly hear her and she briefly described her topic angle. This subject is especially good because there is a lot of research and studies going on about it. One thing is that she doesn’t mention, however, is who her expert source is or what questions she is going to ask them. This topic is going to be especially hard to find a UMD expert on because there isn’t any real conclusive evidence on the matter. However, I found Ian White who is in the department of bioengineering and knows a lot on disease detection. He is a possible interviewee and you can ask him “how exactly does this radiofrequency energy affect the body (long term and short term) and more specifically the brain?”
The way Michelle structured her post is very detailed and easy to follow. From the looks of it, her final post will be organized in a cohesive manner. The content of her post is very relevant, as cell phones are commonly used for communication in today's age. This will appeal to various audiences, as many people use cell phones. It seem like Michelle has gathered a lot of research on the content, so I am excited to read her final post.
ReplyDeletePro: The organization of the post is extremely good. She has broken it into parts, that specifically detail what she will discuss in each section. She even went as specific as detailing where she will include the expert interview. This has given me a very good idea of what her final post will look like, and it also shows that Michelle has organized her thoughts. The outline proves that Michelle has a clear objective she wants her post to achieve. I like that the parts give a preview to what the section will discuss, without giving aways too much information; it tells you just enough so you can get an idea of what will be discussed. This is intriguing to me, and makes me want to read her final post.
Cons: Although her outline is almost perfect, Michelle should rewrite her headline. The headline is not very declarative or strong, so it does not do the content justice. It should express her view clearly, without sharing all of the details of the article; it should be a preview of what is to come. I also think she should include an introduction about cell phone usage and why it has been thought to cause brain cancer. This would give the reader background information, that could help them understand the rest of the content.
Pro: This topic is always in the debate over how much technology is too much. Anytime brings up our over use of our cell phones they bring in the argument that they are causing us cancer. I really enjoy how you are looking at both sides of the debate and really presenting a fair and balanced argument in your findings.
ReplyDeleteCons: I'm interested what studies might be out there in regards to cell phone use compared to land lines, or wireless land line phones. Also, I know that there is nothing conclusive done research wise. However, I was left at the end of your article wanting some conclusion. Do headsets really work in reducing cancer or does bluetooth technology contribute? Also, do smart phones increase the chance of cancer compared to other phones?