Your last comment is correct.<quoted text>
Go to page 6.
The studies are based upon causing cancer. Plus the studies are limited in scope and short term. Economic considerations may be the reason.
The simple fact is as referenced in that is you have that magnetic field passing through your head. It is a closed field and full strength. You are in the flow, and not catching the waves like you do from radio and other sources. An analogy would be your being the object being struck by light rays, catching the full force of its energies, versus catching the reduced reflections and heat. Reflected light is dispersed over a greater area, thus weaker.
This EMF, which gain is full force for the device, works on a frequency, which means the magnetic field builds and falls, which induces electrical currents in the salts and other conductive portions of your body, and a static charge in the non-conductive portions. These will have an effect on the electrical balance of all matter within the body coming into contact. You are setting up potentials that can rearrange molecules. This is basic physics. It happens. You are putting stress on the original design. You are greatly increasing the chance of random mutations.
What I am trying to point out is the increased stress on the mental processes brought about by the increased variation of frequencies and strength of magnetic fields that did not exist until recent times.
The paper suggests that risk of damage damage is low to undetectable, and that better, long term studies are needed.
If I were designing this - I mean, other than using Asia as your example, since everyone uses cell phones here - I'd want to compare individual's kinds of cancer too. Did they develop cancer in other parts of their body, or just their head?
The study mentions comparing ipsilateral versus contralateral cancers/phone use, which is also necessary. But...I'd guess that a fair number of people switch back and forth - I do.
Interesting, though, thanks :)