The N.Y. Times 'health guide' description of an acoustic neuroma is precise and complete, just like the descriptions on this website.
The cell-phones-cause-cancer article was the usual rehash of well-known arguments pro and con and if you read it carefully, the 'experts' who make the claim that cell phone use can cause cancer basically say that just because it isn't proven, doesn't mean it isn't a fact. Please. Not this again.
They fault scientific studies that find absolutely no link and claim the studies aren't long-term, even though cell phone usage has been popular for over a decade. The reality is that in the long run, we'll all be dead - of something. I'm a skeptic on this issue because the folks who tout the cell phone-cancer linkage can't come up with any real evidence and when they can't, they then seem to be saying that doesn't prove their hypothesis isn't true, which is a self-serving circular argument and one that I reject. I'm quick to state that I'm not a scientist or doctor and of course, I could be wrong on this. However, I feel it is up to the people, be they physicians, scientists or window washers, to prove their premise and, to date, I don't see that has happened. The cell phone-cancer 'debate' is mostly supposition and conjecture on the part of those who believe that link actually exists. Until it has been scientifically proven, I side with the American Cancer Society and simply do not accept the thesis. However, I'm in favor of further scientific research into the issue, because, as I always add, I could be wrong. This is just my opinion based on a lack of hard evidence and the fact that people a lot smarter than I am (neurologists, scientists, electrical engineers, etc) dismiss the claims for seemingly valid reasons.
Jim
