http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091220/ap_o...e_warnings

Quote:A Maine legislator wants to make the state the first to require cell phones to carry warnings that they can cause brain cancer, although there is no consensus among scientists that they do and industry leaders dispute the claim.

The now-ubiquitous devices carry such warnings in some countries, though no U.S. states require them, according to the National Conference of State Legislators. A similar effort is afoot in San Francisco, where Mayor Gavin Newsom wants his city to be the nation's first to require the warnings.

Maine Rep. Andrea Boland, D-Sanford,

In general, I'm pretty fine w/ warnings. Caveat emptor, and all that. It is curious though that warnings on music is taboo, but this is fine.

However, this is also a first step toward more regulation. And eventually, you'll find "industry support" for it. As industry discovers it can have legislators craft a law that requires some minor, 5-cent tweak, but they can charge $20/month extra for their anti-cancer technology.

yeah, i read this yesterday. it sets an interesting precedent if you ask me

What about the cordless phones in our homes?

We need warnings for the following:

Standing in the Sun - skin cancer
Red meat - colon cancer
Automobiles - crashes cause deaths
Stairs - people fall down them and die
Bath tubs - people slip and fall
Dogs - they bite
My wife's cooking

(12-21-2009 04:32 PM)smn1256 Wrote:  What about the cordless phones in our homes?

We need warnings for the following:

Standing in the Sun - skin cancer
Red meat - colon cancer
Automobiles - crashes cause deaths
Stairs - people fall down them and die
Bath tubs - people slip and fall
Dogs - they bite
My wife's cooking

Damn

(12-21-2009 10:00 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091220/ap_o...e_warnings

Quote:A Maine legislator wants to make the state the first to require cell phones to carry warnings that they can cause brain cancer, although there is no consensus among scientists that they do and industry leaders dispute the claim.

The now-ubiquitous devices carry such warnings in some countries, though no U.S. states require them, according to the National Conference of State Legislators. A similar effort is afoot in San Francisco, where Mayor Gavin Newsom wants his city to be the nation's first to require the warnings.

Maine Rep. Andrea Boland, D-Sanford,

In general, I'm pretty fine w/ warnings. Caveat emptor, and all that. It is curious though that warnings on music is taboo, but this is fine.

However, this is also a first step toward more regulation. And eventually, you'll find "industry support" for it. As industry discovers it can have legislators craft a law that requires some minor, 5-cent tweak, but they can charge $20/month extra for their anti-cancer technology.

I despise idiocy from public officials, but my perception is that this is being a bit selective in attributing this to democrats. This is akin to anti-vaccine hysteria and my perception is that it comes from Republicans as well as Democrats when it comes to public venting of this kind of crap.

(12-21-2009 07:57 PM)I45owl Wrote:  

(12-21-2009 10:00 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091220/ap_o...e_warnings

Quote:A Maine legislator wants to make the state the first to require cell phones to carry warnings that they can cause brain cancer, although there is no consensus among scientists that they do and industry leaders dispute the claim.

The now-ubiquitous devices carry such warnings in some countries, though no U.S. states require them, according to the National Conference of State Legislators. A similar effort is afoot in San Francisco, where Mayor Gavin Newsom wants his city to be the nation's first to require the warnings.

Maine Rep. Andrea Boland, D-Sanford,

In general, I'm pretty fine w/ warnings. Caveat emptor, and all that. It is curious though that warnings on music is taboo, but this is fine.

However, this is also a first step toward more regulation. And eventually, you'll find "industry support" for it. As industry discovers it can have legislators craft a law that requires some minor, 5-cent tweak, but they can charge $20/month extra for their anti-cancer technology.

I despise idiocy from public officials, but my perception is that this is being a bit selective in attributing this to democrats. This is akin to anti-vaccine hysteria and my perception is that it comes from Republicans as well as Democrats when it comes to public venting of this kind of crap.

Your overstatement of the anti-vaccine concerns aside, I'm sure you're right. Except remember how Bush was "anti-science" and us religious right fundies hate science, while Dems love science? The popular media advances stereotypes that don't fit with facts.