Intensive mobile phone users at higher risk of brain cancers, says study

Aren't mobile phones a bit expensive to be using for more than 15 hrs a months? The best advice might be to limit their use as much as possible and try not to carry them on your person, especially when you really don't need to. Also switch them off when you can. I never had a mobile phone for years as I couldnt a handset due to bad credit. I guess thats benefited my health somewhat!

I don't think studies are going to be persuasive in my lifetime. Just as cigarettes were for decades portrayed as harmless and even beneficial -- despite many studies to the contrary -- mobile phones will surely be pronounced harmless for many years. There's just too much money in phones. It will always be easy to get headlines with studies showing whatever result you want. People like me have no way to know which studies are authentic, no way in Hades. So it seems the individual must decide: It's a problem. It isn't a problem. Pick one, make a note how you chose, and get on with your life.

Microwave/cell phone radiation causes a breaching of the blood brain barrier which under normal condition only allows passage of O2, CO2 and glucose to pass between brain and blood. With the breaching now chemicals, pollution, tobacco into the blood may pass into brain causing these cancerous growths. A. What we can do to minimize our health risk. 1. Use it less. 2. Children under 10 should not use a cell phone. 3. Don’t use when the signal is weak. 4. The lower the signal strength the stronger the radiation emitted from the antenna 5. When the antenna is recessed the entire phone functions as the antenna and exposes a much wider area, your head, jaw and hand to radiation. 6. Keep the antenna away from your body by using the ear piece. 7. Using an ear piece extension a. When using an ear piece don’t put it in your pocket, belt or hand especially during ringing. b. Keep the wire slack if taut it acts as an antenna. 8. The greatest radiation is emitted during dialing and ringing.

For instance, in contrast with previous work, it found that cancer occurred on the opposite side of the brain – rather than on the same side – of where the phone was customarily used. Can someone comment on this? If this is correct, what mechanism makes the part of the brain that is further away from the phone more vulnerable?

A simple school lab demonstration can show the ionisation effect of a mobile phone. A GM tube linked to counter shows ionisation rate well above any of the radioactive isotopes available in a school lab! I have demonstrated this for years, it makes pupils think.

Broadband: are we being taken for a superfast ride?

I pay Virgin for a 60 Mb service, am lucky to get 40

Same problem with BT. Speed started at 27mbps when we first got infinity but when I ran a test yesterday it was just 11mbps. When you ring them to complain you just stay in hold for 30 minutes before they tell you that they can't deal with the complaint today and hang up. They'll say anything to get your money, but once they have they don't want to hear from you again.

BT told me I'd get 55Mbps. I actually get 65Mbps+ over wifi. The cabinet is several streets away. I've managed 80Mbps over wifi but only by throwing the crappy Homehub in the attic and replacing it with an amplified Asus 5GHz router. I look forward to full FTTP fibre in future. It sounds to me like the author needs to get the OpenReach engineer back to fix the problem.

7mb/sec download in Edinburgh. I'm out in the garden on on linux laptop areasonable distance from the router. Like you say it depends on the time of the day. The speed has been creeping up w/o you noticing it. One time I checked I got a far higher speed (over 15 I think). It used to be 2 when we first signed up with BT. The speed is OK it allowed the wife and I to watch "New Tricks" in bed the other night, couldn't have done that previously. I was told we were supposed to be getting superfast here by a BT engineer who replaced our router after it got rendered unusable by lightening. The newer BT router is much better than the previous router so that maybe part of it.

BT in charge of the infrastructure would be funny if it wasn't so costly to the UK economy, and to the taxpayer. Given that BT/Openreach (their all part of the same company) are consistently refusing to provide fibre to cabinet on brand new housing developments in 2013, and installing copper into the same, then we should expect very little progress. BT /Openreach have a govt. gifted monopoly and taxpayers are literally paying for it in high charges and poor quality services over many parts of the UK. Go figure....

we live in the bedfordshire country side so this whole debate is irrelevant-except that BT still charge me the same as someone living closer to the exchange and with a far superior service. I can't tell you how useless our service is.

If you are on an ADSL modem router (ie all copper wire) turning off the router when not in use causes the line speed to be throttled back, as the exchange detects this as a dropped connection and adjusts speeds downwards to try to reestablish a stable connection. Whether it picks up speed again seems to be a moot point. So it's better to keep the router switched on permanently otherwise you will find yourself on a lower speed than you should get.

I recently 'upgraded' to BT infinity and it is terrible. Very inconsistent and regularly times out. Virgin Media broadband was even worse. Both 'helplines' just lie to you. In between we had old fashioned BT asdl - 2 MBs or something. For anything other than iplayer, it was more than fine, consistent and reliable. Iplayer was about the same as now. I am tempted to revert.

I'm on Virgin's 60Mbps (cable) deal and right now I'm getting 62Mbps from a wired connection and 42Mbps from wireless (same computer for both) according to, meanwhile, is telling me I'm getting only 28Mbps for both wired and wireless. It's worth noting that trying to measure your speed from speed checking sites is fraught with problems not the least being the speed of the site itself. A much more reliable way of measuring your speed is to do several simultaneous downloads of large files (videos for example) from different sites and add all the speeds together.

Student jobs: why tax could be taxing for summer workers

Students working during the summer may be paid less than the tax threshold, but can still see money deducted. Cracking the tax code is key

Regarding point 4, I thought HMRC just automatically refunded the tax at the end of the year if you are still in employment. Well that's my experience from about 10 years ago...

If you continue working for the same employer one day a week during term-time you will be earning below the tax threshold and, if your code is cumulative which is the norm, you will gradually be refunded a lot of the tax you have paid over the summer. If you have a "week1/month1" tax code you will, as it says above, have to wait until after the end of the tax year.

It is shocking to me that there isn't a simple 1-page tax form to file at the end of the tax year for those that have minimal income, tax credits, and deductions. But then again, why strive for low-cost efficiency when you can employ people to read letters from students and investigate the need to give them money back.

Firstly, only send your P60 or P45 to HMRC if they ask for it. Usually they won't because they already have the information from your employer. Send a copy if you think it might speed things up, but keep the original. Secondly, if you start work in July, and tick Box A on your starter checklist, only tick it if it is correct though, then you will get the tax free allowance for April to June in your July salary.

Payday loans: cute and cuddly tricks can't disguise outrageous APRs

I always thought the Wonga ads were strange, although I see little television so am rarely exposed to them. All of these characters to me are about as cuddly as a rag doll Nazi or Lego Khmer Rouge, i.e. they aren't. What these companies definitely are is a mirror on our society that shows how it really is, despite all the bollocks politicians and banks spout about responsible lending and debt. 'Almost nine out of 10 borrowers were not asked to provide proof that they could afford to repay the loan' is 100% UK Plc if you ask me.

I had to check out their Twitter feed: "" We're looking into possible reasons this occurred. Would you mind direct messaging your phone number so we could reach out to you? "" Possibly one of the most insidious and repugnant phrases employed by these shysters. Let us Reach out to you so we can screw you a bit more.

They give you a sense of harmlessness associated with elderly eccentric old age pensioners who would not hurt a fly. Also they portray Wonga in a light as if you are just borrowing money off your elderly grandparents or relatives. Wonga is the same as your dear elderly grandparents or wealthy aunt or uncle for instance. They fail to show whether your grandparents would send the bailifs round as soon as you don;t pay off the loan plus 4,214% interest. It's all very very clever marketing.

Although a lot of companies offering Payday loans are behaving badly (to say the least) it is worth noting that: 1. APRs are misleading. Borrowing £100 and paying back £130 1 week later will give you an Annual Percentage Rate in the thousands. 2. Many of those who borrow from Payday lenders do so because they have a bad credit rating (some lenders will only lend if you have a good credit rating but not all) which means that at a previous point in their life they have abused credit that they have been given. The companies offering these services need to be reined in but let us not forget that customers have the option not to take the loans and if you sign for something you should honour that contract.

If I had a reasonably significant amount of money I was prepared to lend at very reasonable rates (by which I mean not for profit) to individuals or families who were in danger of going the payday route, does anyone know if there's an organisation that could help me go about doing this?

Christ, when even the United States bans this sort of sub-prime nonsense, that's usually an indicator of how bad it is. Ban it now. Promote local credit unions instead.

The financial crisis was caused by irresponsible lending to people who's risk profile wasn't reflected in the rate charged i.e. jobless americans being offered 120% LTV no questions asked. Now people are charging an interest rate that accurately reflects credit risk, and everyone wets their pants. .

People do need cash short term and at least these services can be regulated. Or would you prefer people who are caught short rely on Dave from down the pub (who knows some large blokes to help with bad loans). It occurs to me that most of the people who have a problem with payday lenders are those who will never have the misfortune to need one. I'm not saying it's a perfect solution, but it's better than the alternative.
Search form
Display RSS link.
Friend request form

Want to be friends with this user.

QR code