Italian court rules mobile phone use caused brain tumour

An Italian court has ruled that excessive, work-related use of a mobile phone caused an executive to develop a benign brain tumour.

In what could become a landmark ruling, the court in the northern town of Ivrea awarded the plaintiff a state-funded pension.

The judgment, which was handed own on 11 April but only made public on Thursday, is subject to a possible appeal.

Roberto Romeo, 57, had testified that his work duties obliged him to use his mobile for three to four hours of each working day for 15 years.

“For the first time in the world, a court has recognised a causal link between inappropriate use of a mobile phone and a brain tumour,” his lawyers, Stefano Bertone and Renato Ambrosio said in a statement.

Romeo said he did not want to demonise mobiles, “but I believe we have to be more aware about how to use them.

“I had no choice but to use my mobile to talk to colleagues and organise work – for 15 years I was calling all the time, from home, in the car.

“I started to have the feeling of my right ear being blocked all the time and the tumour was diagnosed in 2010. Happily, it was benign but I can no longer hear anything because they had to remove my acoustic nerve.”

A medical expert estimated the damage to Romeo at 23% of his bodily function, prompting the judge to make a compensation award of €500 per month to be paid by INAIL, a national insurance scheme covering workplace accidents.

Scientific studies of the potential health risks of mobile phones have mostly concluded that they pose no serious risk to human health at the level of most people’s use.

Heavier use may pose some risk, other studies have found, and many experts say it is too early to do a proper assessment of what is a relatively new technology.

Italian court rules mobile phone use caused brain tumour

Sea Hero Quest: the mobile phone game helping fight dementia

A mobile phone game that tests spatial navigation skills and has been played by 2.4 million people, has become the largest dementia study in history and raised hopes of a breakthrough in diagnosing the disease.

Sea Hero Quest, a collaboration between Alzheimer’s Research UK, Deutsche Telekom, game designers Glitchers and scientists, has generated the equivalent of 9,400 years of lab-based research since its launch in May.

Experts hope to use the data to create the world’s first global benchmark for spatial navigation, one of the first abilities affected by dementia, and to develop the game into an early diagnostic test for the disease, which is the leading cause of death in England and Wales.

Dr Hugo Spiers, of University College London, who presented the preliminary findings at the Neuroscience 2016 conference in San Diego, said: “This is the only study of its kind, on this scale, to date. Its accuracy greatly exceeds that of all previous research in this area. The findings the game is yielding have enormous potential to support vital developments in dementia research. The ability to diagnose dementia at early stages, well before patients exhibit any signs of general memory loss, would be a milestone.

“This study is thus now giving us the opportunity to make a real difference to the lives of millions of people living with dementia and those at risk of developing the disease in the future.”

Sea Hero Quest requires players to navigate a boat through waters in differently themed areas over 75 levels, collecting items along the way. It was designed to appeal to all gamers, rather than just people wanting to contribute to a good cause, and its popularity has seen the number of players soar past the original target of 100,000 by the end of the year.

Players provide their age and sex, allowing the scientists to chart their performance against other users.

Spiers said they could now create the equivalent of a height chart whereby if someone was particularly short – or in this case if their spatial navigation ability was particularly low – for their age and sex it would raise a red flag.

By testing a person’s spatial navigation abilities, the game could allow for diagnosis and treatment of patients far earlier.

Spiers said Sea Hero Quest, which will now be adapted for use in a clinical setting, could also be used to track decline and in drug trials to test the impact of the medication.

Alzheimer’s Research UK’s chief executive, Hilary Evans, praised the role of Deutsche Telekom, which has spent more than €1m (£860,000)on the project, including marketing.

“The early data that has very quickly been generated by Sea Hero Quest should inspire other corporations to consider what assets they might bring to research into dementia or any of our most seemingly intractable medical conditions,” she said.

The experts found differences in spatial navigation strategies employed by men and women, and also that spatial navigation abilities began to decline from early adulthood. For example, players aged 19 (the youngest in the study) had a 74% chance of accurately hitting a target during the game, compared with 46% among 75-year-olds (the oldest in the study). This decline over time contradicted previous studies – typically based on less than 100 people – which suggested cognitive abilities do not decline until later in life.

They also found that players in Nordic countries showed notable spatial navigation capabilities.

The scientists will carry out further analysis of the data over the next two years. In the meantime, the game continues to be available for free download and the data generated will contribute to the ongoing research.

Sea Hero Quest: the mobile phone game helping fight dementia

How to think about the risks of mobile phones and Wi-Fi

The US Green party presidential candidate Jill Stein has come under fire for supposedly ‘anti-science’ statements relating to the risks of vaccines, genetically modified crops and electromagnetic fields from Wi-Fi. She said that there were ‘real questions’ about the dangers of vaccines, that GM foods have ‘not been proven safe’ and that ‘more more research is needed’ on the risks of electromagnetic fields.

For many American liberals, who have often feel that science is on their side in an increasingly polarised political war, her statements seem like a betrayal. While she is hardly endorsing a conspiracy, Stein is a Harvard-trained doctor and she is expected to know that these things are pretty safe.

As with climate change, it is tempting to claim that the science is certain, the evidence is clear and the debate should move on. Things are rarely so black-and-white. In politics, the facts don’t speak for themselves, so it falls to experts to make sense of the shades of grey.

Experts have been having a tough time recently. Among the casualties of the Brexit campaign was the status of experts and their hard-won evidence. Michael Gove’s response to elite institutions’ predictions of economic calamity was that ‘we’ve had enough of experts’. Much to the frustration of the Remain camp, the Leavers showed little interest in who knows what. For them, it was about who was in control. In the US, Donald Trump’s ascendancy has led some to conclude that we are now in an era of ‘post-truth’ politics. (We shouldn’t ignore the irony that many fans of conspiracy theories label themselves ‘Truthers’).

So what should experts do? How can governments make good decisions when any scientific claim is likely to be torn to shreds?

Take electromagnetic fields (EMFs). We are surrounded by them. They are invisibly emitted across a range of frequencies by overhead power lines, microwave ovens and mobile phones as well as Wi-Fi routers. Scientists have known for decades that high-frequency EMFs like ultraviolet light can cause cancer. And they also know that powerful, low-frequency EMFs can cause health problems by heating up wet body tissue, which is how microwaves cook food. These well-known mechanisms provide the basis both for the regulation of new technologies and for advice that we should wear sun cream to prevent skin cancer and limit our exposure to X-rays. However, there are also some unknowns, some hints that long-term exposure to low-power EMFs may cause trouble. When these uncertainties are aired in public, scientists and campaigners have in the past been accused of scaremongering. Earlier this year, the Australian broadcaster ABC was seen by some as irresponsible for its broadcasting of a clumsy documentary on EMF risk called ‘Wi-Fried’.

In 2000, however, scientific uncertainty was seen as sufficiently troubling to justify a new approach to the regulation of mobile phones in the UK. In a new paper, I revisit the controversy over mobile phone risks and conclude that it provides a useful model for how experts should deal with complex issues.

Some readers may remember that, around the turn of millennium, the health scare over mobile phone EMFs was front-page news. More than a decade later, worries have largely abated. A YouGov survey in 2013 measured public concern about mobiles among the population at 9%, down from 27% in 2000. Over the same period, mobile phone ownership went up from 50% of the population to almost 100%.

Percentage mentioning handsets/masts as a concern

Base: All GB adults (2,164) P10Q1: What, if any, health-related dangers concern you most nowadays? Please type in the box below. P15Q1: And which other health-related dangers are you also seriously concerned about?

The science of mobile phone risks has not advanced substantially. New studies continue to raise questions. Advisory bodies continue to draw attention to troubling epidemiological data, criticising industry bodies for their ‘inertia’. In 2011, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified mobile phone EMFs as a ‘possible human carcinogen’ (placing them alongside bacon and almost every other enjoyable food). Officially, the jury is still out of the risks of EMFs, and most of us seem to be OK with that.

In 1999, an expert committee was established to deal with a rash of headlines about mobile phone dangers. A few people had blamed their brain tumours on their new mobile phones. Some who claimed to be ‘electrosensitive’ argued that mobile phones were making them dizzy or ill (an extreme version of this is the subject of this brilliant Guardian film). Local communities were becoming more vociferous in their opposition to mobile phone masts that were springing up around them. Licences for third generation mobile phone bandwidth had just been auctioned, giving the Government a £22 billion windfall.

The response to public concerns had until this point been to reassure people that all technologies complied with guidelines that were based on the scientific fact of the heating effects of microwaves. As long as phones and phone masts were legal, they were therefore safe. As one regulatory spokesperson put it, “If it doesn’t heat you, then it doesn’t harm you”. End of conversation. Many concerned citizens were not satisfied by this response. They asked why the regulators appeared to be ignoring suggestions of so-called ‘non-thermal effects. They asked why long-term exposures hadn’t been investigated. They asked whether some groups may be less safe than others.

Experts were no longer answering the questions that were being asked of them. The Independent Expert Group on Mobile Phones was created to fill the credibility gap. It was chaired by Professor Sir William Stewart, who had been the government’s Chief Scientific Adviser at the tail end of the Mad Cow Disease (BSE) outbreak. This crisis had shaped Stewart’s response to the mobile phones controversy. He told a parliamentary committee that, after BSE, ‘Never again will any scientific committee say that there is no risk.’ His group took seriously the uncertainties surrounding mobile phone risks and saw people’s concerns as legitimate ones. He recommended that children should be advised not to use mobile phones, that phones should carry labels with their Specific Absorption Rates (a measure of how much energy is absorbed by body tissue over a certain time) and that mobile phone networks should be more careful with how they place their masts. He demanded that industry and government fund more research to fill gaps in knowledge on things like electrosensitivity. Following the Stewart report in 2000, the UK officially became more uncertain about the risks of EMFs.

Expert groups are often relied upon by politicians to tidy up the facts on contentious issues. It rarely works. People don’t like being patronised with easy answers where there are none to find. With mobile phones, a group of experts took a different approach. They instead admitted that there are uncertainties and trusted in citizens’ ability to navigate them. When it comes to climate change, Wi-Fi, GM crops, vaccines and mobile phones, there will always be scientific grey areas. If experts want to regain their credibility, they urgently need to find ways to talk about them.

This post is based on a new paper, ‘Scientific Advice on the Move’, published as part of a special issue of Palgrave Communications.

How to think about the risks of mobile phones and Wi-Fi

I hear his voice on the mobile phone and know my husband is consuming once more

‘I do what all British people do when a crisis is brewing and request R if he’d like a cup of tea.’

It all of a sudden feels all very three many years ago. I have accidently restored my cellphone settings so that all of my new contacts, photographs and suchlike have been deleted, and replaced with old stuff – photographs of our youngest when he was a child, text messages from individuals whose names I’ve now forgotten, extremely odd contacts with cryptic names, this kind of as Lawnmower Steve. 3 many years feels like a extremely extended time ago, or else my memory is shot.

On the very same evening that I mistakenly reconfigure my cellphone I get in touch with R, who is on his final night of a weekend away seeing old friends. I want to shoot the breeze, inform him how our daughter has run up a telephone bill that indicates I won’t be in a position to pay for groceries following month.

He listens silently as I tell him our son has a temperature. “Can you drive him to the GP?” he asks. It is 11pm on a Sunday night. This is the kind of nonsense he talks when he is drunk. And when he asks once more, I realise he is. He voice often lilts up towards the finish of sentences, a guise to preserve issues regular and cheery, an attempt to mask any malformed words.

This could be a scene from a couple of years back, an unremarkable journey exactly where I get to revisit my not-so-distance previous. R is pissed, slurring, talking baloney.

Nevertheless it is not like 3 years in the past, simply because my mind isn’t going to commence frantically analysing why he is consuming. (Was it the non-alcoholic beer he is been getting lately that has tempted him to drink the true thing? Is it because he is stopped going to AA meetings? Have his previous friends made him nostalgic for his outdated existence)?

I do not feel wounded in my chest, both, like almost everything has been ruined and R’s drunkenness will in the long run lead to chaos and a string of unhappy days. I feel a tiny unsettled and disappointed, yes, but I never continue with the conversation. I say goodbye and go to bed.

A friend whose husband is in recovery once explained: “There is totally no point in getting into into any type of conversation with R when he is drunk. You will only come to feel like crap.”

In the morning, R arrives home. I’m greeted by the potent whiff of a thousand drinks. It’s not pleasant, so I stand back. But weirdly the anger’s not there. Pity, maybe, simply because he seems to be fairly sad and says, “I will not think I can go on weekends away like that at the minute. Probably I never could.” I do what all British men and women do when a near-crisis is brewing and ask if R would like a cup of tea.

And sooner or later he says, “I drank,” which is one thing he never ever explicitly supplied up just before. I laugh and say, “The total of the bar?” and he begins to give me a serious solution but then he realises I am joking.

I want to update the familiar, new settings on my telephone but I fear they’re misplaced for ever. But at least I can scrub the pictures that remind me of 3 many years in the past. Not because it was all so horrible: we’re smiling as if we indicate it in some of the shots. We all search comparatively content and our elder son nevertheless has baby teeth that make him look impossibly wonderful, which for a moment fills me with a longing for all the children to stay for ever youthful.

But I was not at all Okay, not at all able to enjoy individuals real moments for any sustained time period of time back then. I was obsessed with R’s drinking. I counted his sober days like good behaviour factors on a children’s sticker chart.

I was fixated on his life as if it had been my personal. My easy belief was that if R could stop consuming then we would all be so considerably happier. I was full of rage, nevertheless unable to express it in a way that was valuable my anger like poison gas, omnipresent, ruining the great instances and producing the undesirable instances worse. So no, 3 years ago would not be someplace I would like to be. Apart from my hair. My hair was better then.

So we move on with out malice into the evening, when all of the young children have been place to bed by R, who has not when lain down and complained of a sore head. He tends to make me a dinner that is so delicious that I think of how wonderful a cook he is, rather than of his current binge. Simply because the moments of happiness that I considered I was missing out on three many years in the past, that I imagined could only exist if R remained sober for ever, can be experienced correct now.

I hear his voice on the mobile phone and know my husband is consuming once more

5 Mobile Habits That Will Change Your Existence

If only I had a device in my pocket that had the answer to practically any question…Oh, wait, I do: it is my telephone.

The mobile phone in your pocket utilized to only be ready to make calls. Now, this gadget connects with your social networks, offers you accessibility to emails, opens up the globe wide web and makes it possible for you the possibility to avoid speaking to a person and opt to send a text message alternatively.

This marvel of technological innovation delivers an remarkable capability for connectivity. Personally it is also reducing the good quality of my lifestyle, and last 12 months I made a decision to do one thing about it.

Up coming week will mark the 1-year anniversary of my digital vacation, a two-week sabbatical from the distractions of my mobile phone. Following Baratunde Thurston’s lead, I left the distractions behind and utilized my cellphone only to get directions, contact people, and uncover places to eat. (His wonderful journey is right here on Quickly Company)

Receiving your cellphone prepped for this type of journey is a chore: it demands changing the way you interact with your phone. The default settings on your cellphone are made to grab your interest. Little numbers appearing in the corner of your icons alert you to “important” messages waiting, push notifications alert you to exercise and tones signal upcoming appointments.

By altering my phone’s idle communication with me, I began a yr of new behaviors and an improved existence.

Hold your mobile phone in your pocket: It is time that we quit placing the mobile phone on the table at lunch and dinner. We must start enjoying the minute when strolling from area to spot rather of staring intently at our devices. (On a side note, about one,500 pedestrians are injured every year in mobile phone-related accidents—and that is on leading of the variety injured and killed in distracted driving-associated accidents.) Currently being in the second is an essential element of improving the high quality of your daily life.

Turn off notifications: This is really essential. Stop letting each and every notification distract you when you appear at your phone. These notifications create a heightened degree of anxiety, which has adverse results on your mental and physical health. The term for this nervousness even has a identify: FOMO, or fear of missing out. When you appear at your telephone and see 5 notifications waiting for your interest on social networks, fourteen emails needing your response and other concerns demanding your concentration, you truly feel an insanely robust impulse to search. These notifications are generating an environment in which you are both distracted by the act of hunting or you are feeling nervousness from FOMO.

Move social icons to a folder: Get your social icons off of your property screen. It’s important that you move distractions far, far away from your preview. This applies even if you do not verify your social profiles often. You need to decide on to see your social network(s) when you have the need and cost-free time, not for the duration of each second that you are in transit (or waiting in line, or in a conversation with somebody, and so on.).

Understand when to shut it off: Turning off your gadget can be key to your happiness. No matter whether you are at the beach or a concert or are playing cards with pals, inform individuals that need to have to know that you are turning off your gadget for a certain sum of time. Then, go offline and appreciate yourself. If you cannot dwell with out access to your cellphone for a number of hrs, your existence is in need of some adjustment.

Actually use your phone as a telephone: This is radical, I know. Pick up your cellphone and begin calling individuals. Just before you send that following electronic mail or text, inquire yourself, “Would I be more productive if I named this man or woman?” Calling, rather than texting and emailing, generally builds stronger relationships. Even although text, electronic mail and social media messages are frequently far more convenient, they may not make the prolonged-phrase connections that you are looking for.

Placing these guidelines into practice will have far more than 1 good influence on your existence. You will be much more content, involved and recharged. You will also be just as linked, only in a far more meaningful way. It’s tempting to want to make every second of every single day the most digitally linked second of your daily life, but—for your happiness, wellness and sanity—sometimes you need to just put down the mobile phone.

If you are hunting for a resource to understand how to unplug a buddy of mine, Alexandra Samuel, wrote a fantastic piece more than on HBR that will assist – The Proper Way to Unplug Whilst You’re on Holiday  

5 Mobile Habits That Will Change Your Existence

Five Mobile Habits That Will Adjust Your Daily life

If only I had a device in my pocket that had the solution to virtually any question…Oh, wait, I do: it’s my telephone.

The cellphone in your pocket used to only be in a position to make calls. Now, this gadget connects with your social networks, provides you entry to emails, opens up the world broad net and makes it possible for you the chance to avoid speaking to a person and opt to send a text message as an alternative.

This marvel of technology provides an amazing capability for connectivity. Personally it is also decreasing the high quality of my lifestyle, and last yr I made the decision to do anything about it.

Turn off notifications: This is very essential. End letting every notification distract you when you seem at your phone. These notifications create a heightened level of anxiety, which has adverse results on your mental and bodily overall health. The term for this anxiousness even has a title: FOMO, or concern of missing out. When you seem at your phone and see 5 notifications waiting for your focus on social networks, fourteen emails needing your response and other issues demanding your concentration, you really feel an insanely powerful impulse to seem. These notifications are creating an surroundings in which you are either distracted by the act of seeking or you are feeling anxiety from FOMO.

Really use your cellphone as a cellphone: This is radical, I know. Select up your phone and commence calling men and women. Prior to you send that up coming e mail or text, request your self, “Would I be more productive if I referred to as this person?” Calling, rather than texting and emailing, normally builds stronger relationships. Even though text, email and social media messages are usually a lot more handy, they may possibly not create the prolonged-phrase connections that you are in search of.

Putting these guidelines into practice will have a lot more than a single constructive affect on your daily life. You will be far more pleased, involved and recharged. You will also be just as linked, only in a a lot more meaningful way. It’s tempting to want to make each and every moment of each and every day the most digitally connected second of your existence, but—for your happiness, well being and sanity—sometimes you require to just put down the telephone.

If you are looking for a resource to learn how to unplug a buddy of mine, Alexandra Samuel, wrote a excellent piece above on HBR that will support – The Appropriate Way to Unplug While You’re on Vacation  

Five Mobile Habits That Will Adjust Your Daily life

Why Mobile Well being Technologies Have not Taken Off (Nevertheless)

Tech entrepreneurs see the mobile overall health (mHealth) marketplace as the following wonderful enterprise revolution, but it has nevertheless to obtain critical mass.  mHealth is regarded the sum of technologies-based applications that enable a patient and a physician to clinically interact from distinct locations.  Examples incorporate the exchange of health care details via e-mail, texting, smartphone apps, storing and forwarding photos, and Net-primarily based video.

The mHealth marketplace is becoming re-energized by the development of the smartphone industry, with a lot more than 140 million smartphone consumers in the U.S.  This quantity is expected to rise to more than 200 million in excess of the subsequent five many years.  This growth is getting fueled by 1000′s of apps that are empowering customers in their every day lives.  Customers are enjoying the handheld convenience of depositing checks, steering clear of visitors, playing video games, and staying linked to pals.

But is the U.S. healthcare infrastructure ready to embrace the developing need for non-traditional doctor-patient encounters?  Regrettably, the adoption curve has been slow, with only about ten% of the U.S. population (36 million) possessing ever utilized mHealth technologies, such as telemedicine.  Irrespective of the medium by means of which the experience will take location, there are even now main hurdles for mHealth to implement remedies that are presently prevalent in other service-based mostly industries, this kind of as banking, insurance coverage, and travel.  Despite much more than 20,000 healthcare-connected smartphone apps that are available in the marketplace right now, a 2012 Pew Analysis Center review located that only ten% of smartphone customers have downloaded a healthcare app.  A comparable variety of customers have ever obtained an electronic mail or alert directly associated to their health.

Telemedicine Seek advice from (Photo credit: IntelFreePress)

To obtain some insight into the state of mHealth adoption, we contacted Dr. Darren Sommer, Chief Health-related Officer of the Optimized Care Network, a network of healthcare companies who nearly connect with and treat individuals.  In accordance to Sommer, mHealth apps can be divided into 3 types of encounters: (1) initiated and concluded by the patient, (2) initiated and concluded by the healthcare supplier, and (3) initiated by either, but concluded by the other.

The 1st two represent the potential for either the physician or the patient to utilize technological innovation as a personal resource for their medical needs.  A patient might track his or her diabetes, or a doctor may seem up the dose of a medication.  In the two examples, the patient and the doctor are not dependent upon each other.  The third category, which is defined by the patient or doctor initiating the app use and the other concluding the interaction, is a considerably tougher model.  Some pre-coordination must consider place ahead of the data being collected can be acted on.

A lack of standardization is not surprising, considering the amount of mobile platforms and medical apps providing equivalent functions.  For illustration, says Sommer, “If a patient self-selects the use of a diabetes app without coordinating with their doctor, the doctor may only be in a position to alter a patient’s diabetes routine by reviewing a paper printout brought by the patient to the following in-man or woman pay a visit to.  The worth of collecting that data in true time is now marginalized.”  It would be greater for the two the patient and the doctor to be able to share that information in real time, overview it, and act on it ahead of issues can come up.

The logistical hurdles to mHealth adoption also have monetary ramifications.  If a major care medical professional manages a population of two,500 patients, do they have the employees and/or time to integrate and act on what could be hundreds of day-to-day notifications?  Today’s fragmented, brick-and-mortar healthcare practices had been not developed to modify their workflow like utility grids that foresee and deal with the peaks and troughs of energy consumption.  A utility firm is financially incentivized to deliver power effectively, which saves them income and improves their margins.  In healthcare, nevertheless, there is not a compelling financial case for incentivizing the patient and the doctor to invest their own resources into several, discrete mHealth options.

There are thousands of organizations offering telemedicine technology, but there is no widespread adoption by practitioners.  Sommer asks, “Why would a family members practitioner that sees 25 individuals in the office per day quit seeing 5 of those individuals, in purchase to see 5 remotely?  Even if they could get paid for the e-pay a visit to, which they likely can’t (at least beneath existing reimbursement designs), they would nevertheless drop funds on their investment in the telemedicine engineering.

Numerous independent physician practices do not have the resources to invest in new infrastructure.  Imagine your regional independent barbershop investing 1000′s of dollars into an app that allows its buyers to book appointments online, figure out the schedule of their favorite barber, and get reminders when a defined time period of time expires in between haircuts.  The barbershop could by no means afford to do it unless the investment could be recouped.  This would come in the form of far more patrons receiving haircuts.  However, if the store is operating at greatest capacity, there is minor cause to invest added assets just for the sake of buyer ease.  The case is the very same for healthcare.  If a household physician has a practice that is operating at capacity, there is no economic incentive to invest in new providers to attract extra patients or chance diminishing its already tight margins.

Regardless of all these headwinds, it’s most likely that healthcare buyers will soon commence to act a lot more like consumers of solutions from other industries.  They will demand far more for their healthcare dollar, since more of that healthcare dollar will come from their wallet and not from their health insurance coverage company.  Innovative providers of healthcare will devise new ways to supply large-good quality healthcare at reduced expenses.  These innovations will get rid of the middleman (government agencies and wellness insurance coverage organizations) and restore the primacy of the patient-doctor partnership.  These new clinical companies will be more responsive to the wants of individuals, more marketplace-driven, and much more in line with other services-primarily based industries.  As Dr. Sommer puts it, “Medical practices will compete in the very same way that other organizations do or they will not survive.  This, in time, will drive down healthcare expenses and boost quality for all.”

Rob Szczerba is the CEO of X Tech Ventures.  Comply with him on Forbes, Twitter (@RJSzczerba), Facebook, and LinkedIn.

Why Mobile Well being Technologies Have not Taken Off (Nevertheless)

Mobile Cardiovascular Screening Packages Come Underneath Fire

It seems like a no brainer. Cardiovascular screening is the #1 killer in the world so broad screening of the general population must be a good idea, right? Wrong, says the consumer group Public Citizen, at least when such screening is performed indiscriminately. Somewhat surprisingly, Public Citizen, which is often held at arm’s length by mainstream medicine, gained some support for its position from a major cardiology organization.

In its statement Public Citizen urged 20 hospitals to sever their involvement in a mobile cardiovascular screening program. The HealthFair Cardiovascular Screening Packages are unethical, mislead consumers, and do more harm than good, said Public Citizen.

In a blog post, the president of the American College of Cardiology. Patrick O’Gara, said that “the questions raised about screening have some merit…. we do not recommend broad and untargeted screening.”

The program, says Public Citizen, “peddles inexpensive cardiovascular disease screening packages to people living near the hospitals and institutions without identifying who has relevant risk factors that would make each of the screening tests medically appropriate. HealthFair’s basic cardiovascular screening packages include six tests that, among other things, take pictures of the heart, measure its electrical activity and look for blockages in arteries.”

“The promotions rely on fearmongering and erroneously suggest that for most adults in the general population, these screening tests are useful in the prevention of several potentially life-threatening cardiovascular illnesses – including heart attacks, strokes and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms – and make them sound like an appealing bargain,” according to Public Citizen. Among the harms cited by Public Citizen are false-positive results or the discovery of inconsequential abnormalities. ”Both circumstances can lead to additional unnecessary and risky tests and treatments that will harm some people, cause unfounded anxiety, and cost patients and insurance companies.”

Here is O’Gara’s statement about the issues raised by Public Citizen:

“The questions raised about screening have some merit. The American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association have joint guidelines that offer recommendations to guide physicians in making decisions with individual patients about their risk for heart attack and stroke. Other than assessing blood pressure and serum cholesterol, being attentive to diabetes and promoting a healthy weight with regular exercise, we do not recommend broad and untargeted screening. Decisions about the need for additional testing should be based on each patient’s circumstances.

“The American College of Cardiology participates in the Choosing Wisely campaign, which encourages physicians and patients to discuss the costs and benefits of often overused tests and procedures.”

Ethan Weiss, a cardiologist at the University of California at San Francisco, sent the following explanation for the counter-intuitive perspective on the dangers of screening:

Conceptually, people (including many doctors) believe that we should do everything we can to discover occult disease like heart disease. The assumption is that if we look hard enough, we can find disease and intervene to change the outcome in a positive way. People may ask, “What’s the harm?” However, for cardiology at least, there is no evidence to support this assumption outside of screening for hypertension, lipid abnormalities and diabetes. This situation is worsened when options such as executive physicals are offered, which harden the perception that there must be some health benefit, but you just need money to access it. Again, sadly, this is not supported by evidence.

There can be serious consequences to false positive results. Usually the harm is limited to unnecessary anxiety caused by false-positive tests, but there are also costs (many of these tests are not reimbursed) and the rare cases where false positives result in more tests that lead to complications and very serious medical consequences.

Here is another anecdote: I once had a symptomatic patient with well-managed risk factors who insisted on having a nuclear stress test annually. It had been something started by a colleague of mine who had seen him before me — a very senior and respected doctor — and it was hard for me as a young doctor to overcome the perception that I did not know what I was talking about.

I kept doing the stress tests for a few years, but all the while I tried to convince him it was a mistake. I finally resorted to telling him that I was concerned about all the radiation he was getting. He continued to insist on the tests because he believed (firmly) that this was helping him and could not harm him.

One summer, I got an urgent call from him from the U.S./Canada border where he was being detained —he had set off the Geiger counter crossing the border a few days after his stress test. He was shaken. I reassured him and convinced the border patrol that he was not a terrorist. The next time he came to see me, he agreed to stop having stress tests and has not had one since.

I do believe that we can and will eventually improve our prediction tools. Right now blood pressure, lipids, and diabetes are the only validated — and thus, recommended — things to screen. This does not mean that we don¹t talk about other factors such as
weight, body composition, nutrition, and exercise with our patients. The truth is that the evidence basis for these factors are pretty flimsy too, but we make the assumption that it can’t hurt, and I try to remind patients where we have strong evidence and where we do not.

The bottom line for me is to be honest with patients about what prediction and prevention tools we have and what the evidence basis is for each of them. Going forward, we need to work on more robust and careful studies from which we can learn how to better identify at-risk individuals and also validate whether the new tools do what they should. Finally, we should work to show that the information we learn from these tools can help improve clinical outcomes.

Mobile Cardiovascular Screening Packages Come Underneath Fire

Mobile Cardiovascular Screening Plans Come Underneath Fire

It seems like a no brainer. Cardiovascular screening is the #1 killer in the world so broad screening of the general population must be a good idea, right? Wrong, says the consumer group Public Citizen, at least when such screening is performed indiscriminately. Somewhat surprisingly, Public Citizen, which is often held at arm’s length by mainstream medicine, gained some support for its position from a major cardiology organization.

In its statement Public Citizen urged 20 hospitals to sever their involvement in a mobile cardiovascular screening program. The HealthFair Cardiovascular Screening Packages are unethical, mislead consumers, and do more harm than good, said Public Citizen.

In a blog post, the president of the American College of Cardiology. Patrick O’Gara, said that “the questions raised about screening have some merit…. we do not recommend broad and untargeted screening.”

The program, says Public Citizen, “peddles inexpensive cardiovascular disease screening packages to people living near the hospitals and institutions without identifying who has relevant risk factors that would make each of the screening tests medically appropriate. HealthFair’s basic cardiovascular screening packages include six tests that, among other things, take pictures of the heart, measure its electrical activity and look for blockages in arteries.”

“The promotions rely on fearmongering and erroneously suggest that for most adults in the general population, these screening tests are useful in the prevention of several potentially life-threatening cardiovascular illnesses – including heart attacks, strokes and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms – and make them sound like an appealing bargain,” according to Public Citizen. Among the harms cited by Public Citizen are false-positive results or the discovery of inconsequential abnormalities. ”Both circumstances can lead to additional unnecessary and risky tests and treatments that will harm some people, cause unfounded anxiety, and cost patients and insurance companies.”

Here is O’Gara’s statement about the issues raised by Public Citizen:

“The questions raised about screening have some merit. The American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association have joint guidelines that offer recommendations to guide physicians in making decisions with individual patients about their risk for heart attack and stroke. Other than assessing blood pressure and serum cholesterol, being attentive to diabetes and promoting a healthy weight with regular exercise, we do not recommend broad and untargeted screening. Decisions about the need for additional testing should be based on each patient’s circumstances.

“The American College of Cardiology participates in the Choosing Wisely campaign, which encourages physicians and patients to discuss the costs and benefits of often overused tests and procedures.”

Ethan Weiss, a cardiologist at the University of California at San Francisco, sent the following explanation for the counter-intuitive perspective on the dangers of screening:

Conceptually, people (including many doctors) believe that we should do everything we can to discover occult disease like heart disease. The assumption is that if we look hard enough, we can find disease and intervene to change the outcome in a positive way. People may ask, “What’s the harm?” However, for cardiology at least, there is no evidence to support this assumption outside of screening for hypertension, lipid abnormalities and diabetes. This situation is worsened when options such as executive physicals are offered, which harden the perception that there must be some health benefit, but you just need money to access it. Again, sadly, this is not supported by evidence.

There can be serious consequences to false positive results. Usually the harm is limited to unnecessary anxiety caused by false-positive tests, but there are also costs (many of these tests are not reimbursed) and the rare cases where false positives result in more tests that lead to complications and very serious medical consequences.

Here is another anecdote: I once had a symptomatic patient with well-managed risk factors who insisted on having a nuclear stress test annually. It had been something started by a colleague of mine who had seen him before me — a very senior and respected doctor — and it was hard for me as a young doctor to overcome the perception that I did not know what I was talking about.

I kept doing the stress tests for a few years, but all the while I tried to convince him it was a mistake. I finally resorted to telling him that I was concerned about all the radiation he was getting. He continued to insist on the tests because he believed (firmly) that this was helping him and could not harm him.

One summer, I got an urgent call from him from the U.S./Canada border where he was being detained —he had set off the Geiger counter crossing the border a few days after his stress test. He was shaken. I reassured him and convinced the border patrol that he was not a terrorist. The next time he came to see me, he agreed to stop having stress tests and has not had one since.

I do believe that we can and will eventually improve our prediction tools. Right now blood pressure, lipids, and diabetes are the only validated — and thus, recommended — things to screen. This does not mean that we don¹t talk about other factors such as
weight, body composition, nutrition, and exercise with our patients. The truth is that the evidence basis for these factors are pretty flimsy too, but we make the assumption that it can’t hurt, and I try to remind patients where we have strong evidence and where we do not.

The bottom line for me is to be honest with patients about what prediction and prevention tools we have and what the evidence basis is for each of them. Going forward, we need to work on more robust and careful studies from which we can learn how to better identify at-risk individuals and also validate whether the new tools do what they should. Finally, we should work to show that the information we learn from these tools can help improve clinical outcomes.

Mobile Cardiovascular Screening Plans Come Underneath Fire

How mobile grew to become mighty in healthcare

With no a doubt, 2014 will be declared the yr mobile became mighty in healthcare. No matter exactly where in the globe you reside, regardless of whether you are speaking about patients, customers, or healthcare providers, mobile is revolutionising the long term of healthcare – so significantly so, that it’s worth taking a closer appear at 10 effective trends emerging throughout the mobile overall health space. We’ll also be showcasing our findings on mobile wellness consumer knowledge at the Mighty Mobile seminar at the inaugural Cannes Lions Health festival.

one Elevated mobile utilization

Each day there are a lot more mobile phones offered than babies born. In reality, mobile (vs Television, desktop computers, print, and radio) is the only medium that is at present increasing. Google receives more search queries from mobile gadgets than ever before. A current Milward Brown research reports that across thirty countries, individuals devote an average of 147 minutes a day employing a smartphone. And 91% of adults have their mobile gadget inside of arm’s reach 24/seven. It need to come as tiny shock, then, that the collecting and sharing of well being details by means of mobile phones is projected to expand exponentially.

Mobile overall health has become an indispensable component of this hyper-linked world, where physicians and individuals alike are prolific mobile adopters. The stats for getting health info through mobile are impressive, to say the least, but the important takeaway right here is the massive chance to benefit a global population with an limitless selection of healthcare demands.

two Apps

A single of the most significant elements within mobile health is apps. In accordance to Research2Guidance, there are much more than a hundred,000 mobile well being apps in app retailers close to the world, with much more than 4m free of charge downloads every single day. By 2017, these app companies are projected to attain $ 26bn (£15bn).

Mobile health apps can be broken into two classes: wellness and health care 85% of apps are for wellness, designed to be employed mostly by the customer and patient, and the remaining 15% are healthcare, utilized by doctors.

Client wellness apps fall into a few sub-categories: bodily fitness or training, self-measurement (eg pregnancy trackers), health details (predominantly nutrition based mostly), and self-testing (like calorie monitoring or sensor triggering to keep track of factors such as heart price). These days, a lot more people than ever ahead of are feeling empowered to take a proactive part in monitoring their wellness.

Doctors are utilizing apps as an gear supplement, and advances in mobile sensors are helping them recognize possible overall health problems. The findings can then be geo-found, synced to patient records and shared with companion doctors. Physicians are also tapping into healthcare apps to record and access patient information on the spot. They are also employing apps as condition management and drug administration equipment. Healthcare app laws continue to be a scorching subject inside of this area: what qualifies as a healthcare device? How do you weigh safety and reliability considerations, along with the want for a timely approval method?

three Place

Leveraging area-primarily based user info via geo-focusing on, Close to Area Communication and iBeacon technological innovation were well-liked subjects at this year’s Mobile Planet Congress and South by South West Interactive Conference. Area-based mostly content material delivered through methods this kind of as push notifications allow individuals and physicians to acquire related info at the appropriate minute, based mostly on their geo-area. For illustration, when a patient walks into a waiting space, an iBeacon can supply pertinent patient resources to a patient’s mobile gadget to examine with his or her medical professional.

four Personalisation

This is about you getting you – your habits, your likes, and your dislikes. Mobile enables shoppers, patients, and doctors to have a more personal, ongoing encounter. Technologies has the ability to tailor wellness material according to a patient or healthcare provider’s mobile history and present behaviour. Personalised mobile experiences can initiate direct one-to-one conversations and interactions, and supply very relevant details at the right time, based mostly on user preferences. Nevertheless, for overall health content suppliers, it’s essential to discover the right stability among personalisation and privacy.

five Wearable technology

Admittedly, wearable technology (wrist bands, glasses and even jewellery) is an offspring of mobile engineering but often snycs with units. This category’s explosive prospective for growth in the healthcare room cannot be ignored. Thanks to enhancements in sensors, wearables are commencing to go beyond just monitoring and tracking individual wellness to assisting diagnose disease. Augmented sensory perception, information streaming, and even bio-imbedded sensors (under the skin) are emerging locations of target.

6 Video as a consistent companion

More and a lot more individuals and doctors are viewing video articles on the go and employing it as an data source for diagnostic, drug buy, and prescribing choices. Google’s Screen to Script research mentioned doctors on regular devote 3 hrs per week watching on the internet movies for skilled purposes. They view sites such as Medscape and YouTube, followed closely by pharmaceutical company sites. We are also seeing more individuals sharing video clips, commenting, and following content creators through mobile. The enhanced electrical power of new mobile products and their hardware are helping to drive this development.

seven Enhanced data and analytics

Large information is affecting mobile overall health in a big way. Greater information high quality implies greater health decisions and greater patient outcomes. The potential to acquire physiological information, contextual data (circumstance, preferences, and emotions), and usage information can be harnessed to inform purchases, behavioural modification, and prescribing suggestions. Think about this from Forrester Research: 2bn smartphones generate raw information from developed-in functions: accelerometers, cameras, and GPS chipsets – generating phenomenal insights about client, patient, and physician preferences.

eight Electronic well being information

Electronic overall health records have the capability to generate a sea modify in healthcare. And now, with mobile entry individuals and providers have the capacity to accessibility overall health data with higher comfort. For illustration, care summaries can now be shared in between care settings with other companies, via mobile, with ease. Drug and medication interactions can be checked by means of mobile platforms to make sure patient security. Healthcare experts can send individuals electronic copies of their well being details by way of smartphones. Individuals can also see, download, and transmit their overall health data by way of a secure electronic mobile messaging services to their healthcare provider. All thanks to electronic well being information with mobile accessibility.

9 High quality content material

Pharmaceutical brands and overall health and wellness products are moving far more and much more to the “pill plus” model. This means they are establishing and offering much more related content and solutions for buyers, individuals, and healthcare suppliers to compliment the advantages of their treatment by means of mobile experiences.

10 Greater tiny-display design and style

The reality that far more time is being invested on mobile for wellness information means there is a need for better mobile web site design and a a lot more intuitive consumer expertise. There are numerous screens in numerous distinct sizes, which necessitate mobile optimisation, this kind of as responsive design and style for apps, internet sites, and display adverts. In addition, a style encounter that utilises the device capabilities, such as touch, gyroscope, and accelerometer, is turning out to be more and more important in creating the interaction with overall health content that considerably a lot more immersive.

Mobile health has undoubtedly turn out to be ubiquitous across our lives and is poised to change the horizon line of the healthcare landscape in a mighty way.

Katie Erbs is Google’s head of rich media for Northern and Central Europe, and Chris Duffey is senior vice president and group innovative director at healthcare communications network Sudley &amp Hennessey

Are you a member of our on the web local community? Join the Guardian healthcare network to receive standard emails and unique gives.

How mobile grew to become mighty in healthcare

Do mobile phones result in brain tumours?

After surgery, he was left deaf in one ear and suffered some facial paralysis, but has been given the all-clear. His employers, however, did not see eye to eye with his decision not to use a mobile. “I basically got ‘managed out’,” he says. “When I went back to work and explained that the tumour had been near my ear, they said, ‘Well, can’t you just put the phone to your other ear?’ It was ludicrous.

“I now run my own training agency without a mobile – it can be done, but we have all become so reliant on mobiles that we think we can’t survive without them.”

His sons, aged 13 and nine, do not own mobiles and are not too bothered about their father’s ban. “If people ask, they just explain what happened to me,” says Mr Whitfield. “So many people don’t know about the risks. If mobile phones were a food, they would have been taken off the shelves by now.

“I don’t know any parent who would hand their child drugs and say, off you go, yet virtually every kid has a mobile. I find it terrifying.”

But just what the risks are for children is still open to fierce debate. Last week, the Department of Health announced that it had commissioned the world’s largest study of the effects of mobile-phone use. The two-year Study of Cognition, Adolescents and Mobile Phones (Scamp) will look at 2,500 children aged 11 and 12. They will be asked about phone use and tested on functions such as memory and attention to see whether the use of mobiles has any impact. It has been suggested that children and teenagers could be more vulnerable to radio-frequency exposure because their nervous systems are still developing.

Around 70 per cent of 11- and 12-year-olds in the UK now own a phone, rising to 90 per cent of children over 14. One recent phone app even encourages parents to download nursery rhymes and place the device on a child’s pillow so they can be soothed to sleep with lullabies. And although the 2005 Stewart report on phone technology recommended that children under 16 should only use mobiles for essential calls, the reality is that most teenagers spend hours on them a week.

So what are the risks? Experts may not agree on whether phones cause cancer, but there is a consensus that excessive use is leading to a rise in other related issues, such as repetitive strain injury (known as “texting thumb” by some doctors) and attention problems in some children.

And although most studies have not found any firm link between mobile-phone use and cancers or other health problems in children and adults, pressure groups and some scientists dispute those findings. Denis Henshaw, Emeritus Professor at Bristol University and honorary scientific director of the Children with Cancer UK charity, is one of them.

“The dangers are being seriously underplayed,” he says. “We are seeing a rise in brain tumours in adults and children. And because brain tumours are relatively rare, we are talking small numbers, but the increase is there.

“Why should it come as any surprise that holding the equivalent of a small microwave oven to your ear should be a health risk?”

Prof Henshaw and others believe that mobile phone packaging should carry cigarette-style public health warnings rather than the advice being buried in manufacturers’ manuals. And Mr Whitfield agrees. “After I was diagnosed, I looked at my phone manual and very, very far down it says you should keep your phone at least 10mm away from your body at all times,” he says. “Hardly anyone reads those manuals, but even the manufacturers are admitting there is a safety issue here.”

Prof Henshaw also believes the growth in mobile-phone use over the past decade means that most scientific studies have yet to record the real effects on health.

But Prof Anthony Swerdlow, of the Institute of Cancer Research, disputes the claim that there has been an increase in brain tumours in children, saying Office for National Statistics figures show only a small increase in much older people. “We can’t be sure, but there is no evidence to show there is a link with brain cancers.”

The biggest study to date also failed to resolve the issue. The Interphone study, published in 2010, studied 13,000 adult users in 13 countries over 10 years. Researchers found that heavy users had a slightly higher risk of gliomas (a type of brain tumour), but concluded that they had neither proved a link with brain cancers, nor demonstrated that there wasn’t a risk.

Other scientists are not so sure. A Swedish researcher, Prof Lennart Hardell, has published a controversial paper that found children who use mobiles are five times more likely to develop brain tumours, although his results have been questioned by many scientists.

A French study, published last week, also found that heavy users of mobile phones may be at higher risk of gliomas and meningiomas. Researchers from the University of Bordeaux compared 447 adults with the tumours with a control group of almost 1,000 healthy people. They found that people who used their phones for more than 15 hours a month over five years were up to three times more likely to develop the tumours compared with those who rarely used a mobile.

But even the researchers admitted that the findings did not take into account other factors, such as smoking.

Phones and how we use them have also changed in the past 10 years. Most teenagers are now more likely to be texting and messaging than holding a device to their ear, and new smartphones emit fewer radio waves.

In 2011, the World Health Organisation’s International Agency for Research on Cancer classified mobiles as a “possible carcinogen”. But the decision was highly controversial – some members of the scientific committee walked out of the proceedings in protest.

But certain countries are taking action. France has banned mobiles and Wi-Fi in primary schools, while phone shops in Canada are required to hand out safety leaflets.

Last year, the Italian supreme court ruled that a businessman’s brain tumour had been caused by mobile-phone use, in a case that could pave the way for European-wide class actions. The case has yet to be resolved.

But the mobile phone industry remains buoyant. “A large number of studies have been performed over the last two decades to assess whether mobile phones are a potential health risk,” says John Cooke, executive director of the Mobile Operators Association. “To date, no adverse health effects have been established.”

For parents, the health risks are important – but a straw poll of mothers on Facebook last week found that many are more concerned about another impact of phones on their children.

“My son and his friends are messaging on their phones all the time,” said Hayley Brown, mother of a 17-year-old son and eight-year-old daughter. “I do worry about the health risks but I’m also concerned that they are losing the art of normal social interaction. It seems to be the only way they can communicate now.”

Do mobile phones result in brain tumours?

Why we shouldn"t worry about teens making use of mobile phones | Joanna Moorhead

‘I wonder regardless of whether there may be a few shocks in store for men and women who consider mobile phone technological innovation spells doom for today’s youngsters. It seems to me that the opposite might be the case.’ Photograph: Getty Images

Like most twelve-yr-olds, my daughter received her 1st mobile phone a number of months ago – just as she started out secondary school. Yr seven is the time when existence really opens up for younger men and women: suddenly they are travelling solo to college and going out on their own, meeting up with pals to go buying or to the park or to the cinema. It manufactured sense to me as a mother or father, as it does to most mothers and fathers with youngsters of this age group, to get her a telephone.

Do I be concerned about her connection with her cellphone, not just now but on into the adolescent many years that are nearly upon her? Yes, I do – and so do many other parents. So I welcome today’s information that Imperial University is launching a examine into the use of mobiles, focusing on two,500 year seven college students who will be assessed now and again in two years’ time. The research is not seeking at well being risks around the use of mobile phones – of brain tumours and so on – although these will continue to be monitored in the years and decades ahead. Rather, it really is hunting at cognitive issues connected with the use of mobiles: such as how the use of phones may affect children’s memory or interest span.

I seem forward enormously to what the study reveals, but I wonder whether or not there may be a few shocks in shop for individuals who feel mobile phone technologies spells doom for today’s youngsters, eating up their brain cells with mindless chit-chat and pointless online video games. It appears to me that the opposite may be the case: my older daughter, who is 15 and uber-linked (even for a 15-year-previous), looks to me to have honed her rapid-wittedness hand in glove with her mobile mobile phone. Multitasking? Fast contemplating? Dilemma solving? Information gathering? My daughter utilizes her smartphone for all this and much more and I consider you’d agree that all the above are helpful, existence-enhancing attributes for a teenager.

Another massive advantage mobile phones offer youthful men and women is independence, some thing that they crave and that parents want for them. My 12-12 months-previous can do all kinds of duties by herself that I, aged twelve, would have relied on my mother and father to do: she can find out cinema occasions, supply garments she would like in retailers, check what time the vet opens so we can get the rabbit’s claws clipped. Her globe has opened up thanks to her mobile mobile phone, in an fully positive way, and it will undoubtedly have knock-on effects for her development.

So what are my worries about mobiles? Effectively, considerably much more than both brain tumours or arrested cognitive growth, I’m concerned about addiction. I truthfully cannot don’t forget the final time I noticed my 15-yr-outdated without having her smartphone, other than possibly when she was in the swimming pool on holiday final summer time (and even then, it was positioned close by on a sunbed). Teenagers can appear obsessed with their mobile: checking them every single couple of minutes, texting individuals all the time, checking to see how a lot of “likes” they’ve got following they’ve posted on social media, refusing to place their phones to 1 side when they are sitting round the table for Sunday lunch …

Then once more, that reminds me of some other individuals I know – me and my husband. We’re fairly wedded to our phones as well. Challenge us about it (our youngsters certainly do) and we’ll cheerfully reassure you that it’s all to do with function, that we’re just monitoring some information story, or that we’re waiting for an essential call. Sadly, however, I have to admit that the cause I check my telephone also frequently is almost certainly for the same motives my daughters do the same with theirs: boredom and insecurity. Youngsters, of course, have these issues by the bucketload, and I sometimes think mobiles have made adolescents of us all.

So in many techniques I suspect that, no matter what the Imperial University survey discovers, the individuals we should be seeking most closely at is not our youngsters, it really is ourselves. After all, we’re grappling with the newness and the unknowns of mobile cellphone technologies just as our children are, and the items they’re receiving incorrect may possibly be the factors we’re not function-modelling very well for them. Time, and this review, will hopefully tell us far more.

Why we shouldn"t worry about teens making use of mobile phones | Joanna Moorhead

Uk launches greatest research of mobile phone effects on children"s brains

The Department of Health has commissioned the world’s largest review into the results of mobile phones’ radio waves on childrens’ brains, 9 years after a government examine mentioned youngsters need to only use mobile phones when “definitely needed”.

The Study of Cognition, Adolescents and Mobile Phones (Scamp) will examine about 2,500 schoolchildren at the ages of eleven and twelve, gather information about how they use the phones and how a lot time they spend on them, and assess them two years later on on mental functions this kind of as memory and interest, which carry on to develop into the teenage many years.

Whilst no research has ever proven harmful effects from the lower-energy radio waves, recognized as “non-ionizing radiation”, created by mobile phones, nearly all have targeted on grownups.

The last tips on childrens’ use of mobile phones came in the Stewart report in January 2005, in which Sir William Stewart advised that as a precaution youngsters under eight should not use mobile phones at all, and that older kids ought to use it for texting rather than voice calls.

Considering that then ownership of mobile phones has continued to rise: an estimated 70% of 11- to 12-12 months-olds in the United kingdom now personal a mobile telephone, increasing to 90% by age 14.

The Scamp study will be led by Dr Mireille Toledano, of the faculty of medicine at Imperial College, who has written papers on investigations into claims of cancer hyperlinks between reduced-energy emissions from mobile phones and from power lines.

The Scamp research was commissioned by the Department of Health by means of the Investigation Initiative on Well being and Mobile Telecommunications, which is funded jointly by the government and mobile telephone operators.

Toledano stated: “This suggestions to mother and father is based on the precautionary principle, offered in the absence of offered evidence, and not simply because we have proof of any hazardous effects.

“As mobile phones are a new and widespread technological innovation central to our lives, carrying out the Scamp study is important in buy to offer the proof base with which to inform policy and via which parents and their kids can make informed life selections.

“By assessing the young children in yr seven and once again in year nine we will be able to see how their cognitive capabilities produce in relation to altering use of mobile phones and other wireless technologies.”

The study will by its nature contain some examination of the impact of Wi-Fi capability, given that a lot of children now use smartphones – which have a tendency to have higher SAR (distinct absorption charge) values, a measure of how considerably electromagnetic radiation is absorbed by the entire body for the duration of use, than older mobile phones.

But even that image is complex simply because older phones tend only to use GSM technological innovation, which emits far more radiation than the 3G technological innovation of newer phones.

Current Uk overall health guidelines, based mostly on the 2005 Stewart report, say young children underneath 16 should be encouraged only to use mobile phones for crucial calls, and in which possible to use a hands-cost-free kit or to send text messages. When they do have to make calls, they are advised to maintain them brief.

Regardless of there currently being no convincing evidence that mobile phones impact adult wellness, authorities have hypothesized that youngsters could be much more vulnerable to any results due to their developing nervous methods and thinner skulls, which absorb greater levels of radio energy.

Professor Patrick Haggard, deputy director of the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience at University College London and chairman of the Scamp steering committee, said it was crucial to have a properly-funded, huge-scale review. “It has taken a long time to get to this. A longitudinal examine, which seems to be at a lot folks, is much better but a lot more expensive and tough to set up.”

A whole lot of earlier scientific studies had been too tiny to rule out chance effects, he stated. “It truly is good that the Uk is major in this. I hope that the public, dad and mom and little ones are prepared to give generously of their time.”

The World Well being Organisation (WHO) has ranked forward-hunting scientific studies of the results of mobile phones on children and adolescents as a “highest priority research want”, but to date there are only two scientific studies, both in Europe, focusing on childhood cancers and mobile phone use. One particular has reported no association and the other is ongoing.

Co-investigator Professor Paul Elliott, director of the MRC-PHE Centre for Setting and Wellness at Imperial University, stated: “Scientific proof accessible to date is reassuring and displays no association in between exposure to radio frequency waves from mobile mobile phone use and brain cancer in grownups in the brief phrase (much less than 10 many years of use). But the proof obtainable regarding lengthy term heavy use and children’s use is restricted and significantly less clear.”

Another study, named Cosmos, which has a United kingdom arm funded by the Department of Health, is currently investigating the attainable lengthy-term wellness results of mobile phones on 290,000 adult users over a time period of twenty to 30 many years. The most recent examine on this topic was carried out in Australia from 2006-7 with 250 participants, and published in 2010. It found no statistical impact.

Toledano said: “Scamp will complement this other research by focusing on the ongoing advancement of cognitive functions in the brain for the duration of adolescence.

“Cognition is primarily how we feel how we make selections and how we approach and recall information. It is linked to intelligence and educational achievement and kinds the building blocks of the modern and creative potential of each personal and consequently society as a complete.”

Youngsters volunteering for the review will undertake classroom-based mostly computerised tasks developed to measure cognitive abilities that underpin functions this kind of as memory and attention. Collectively with their dad and mom, they will also response concerns about their use of mobile phones and other gadgets, wellbeing and life style.

Toledano additional: “Taking element in Scamp is a wonderful chance for colleges to bring ‘live’ science into their classrooms, display young children how we conduct wellness investigation and, above all, for colleges, pupils and dad and mom to make a real contribution to the well being of present and long term generations.”

Uk launches greatest research of mobile phone effects on children"s brains

Uk launches biggest research of mobile mobile phone effects on children"s brains

The Department of Well being has commissioned the world’s biggest study into the effects of mobile phones’ radio waves on childrens’ brains, nine many years following a government study said children must only use mobile phones when “totally essential”.

The Review of Cognition, Adolescents and Mobile Phones (Scamp) will examine about 2,500 schoolchildren at the ages of 11 and 12, acquire data about how they use the phones and how a lot time they invest on them, and assess them two many years later on on psychological functions such as memory and consideration, which carry on to produce into the teenage years.

Even though no review has ever shown damaging effects from the minimal-power radio waves, known as “non-ionizing radiation”, produced by mobile phones, almost all have targeted on grownups.

The final suggestions on childrens’ use of mobile phones came in the Stewart report in January 2005, in which Sir William Stewart suggested that as a precaution kids under eight ought to not use mobile phones at all, and that older youngsters must use it for texting rather than voice calls.

Since then ownership of mobile phones has continued to rise: an estimated 70% of eleven- to 12-12 months-olds in the Uk now own a mobile phone, increasing to 90% by age 14.

The Scamp examine will be led by Dr Mireille Toledano, of the faculty of medication at Imperial College, who has written papers on investigations into claims of cancer back links among minimal-energy emissions from mobile phones and from power lines.

The Scamp review was commissioned by the Department of Overall health through the Analysis Initiative on Well being and Mobile Telecommunications, which is funded jointly by the government and mobile mobile phone operators.

Toledano stated: “This guidance to mother and father is based mostly on the precautionary principle, provided in the absence of obtainable evidence, and not simply because we have proof of any damaging results.

“As mobile phones are a new and widespread technological innovation central to our lives, carrying out the Scamp examine is important in order to offer the evidence base with which to inform policy and by way of which parents and their kids can make informed lifestyle options.

“By assessing the youngsters in yr 7 and yet again in 12 months 9 we will be in a position to see how their cognitive abilities create in relation to changing use of mobile phones and other wireless technologies.”

The study will by its nature include some examination of the impact of Wi-Fi capability, offered that several young children now use smartphones – which have a tendency to have larger SAR (specific absorption charge) values, a measure of how a lot electromagnetic radiation is absorbed by the body during use, than older mobile phones.

But even that picture is challenging since older phones have a tendency only to use GSM technologies, which emits a lot more radiation than the 3G engineering of newer phones.

Recent Uk health tips, based on the 2005 Stewart report, say kids beneath 16 ought to be encouraged only to use mobile phones for vital calls, and the place attainable to use a hands-free of charge kit or to send text messages. When they do have to make calls, they are suggested to maintain them brief.

Regardless of there becoming no convincing proof that mobile phones impact grownup well being, authorities have hypothesized that young children could be far more vulnerable to any results due to their developing nervous techniques and thinner skulls, which soak up larger ranges of radio power.

Professor Patrick Haggard, deputy director of the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience at University University London and chairman of the Scamp steering committee, explained it was crucial to have a properly-funded, large-scale review. “It has taken a extended time to get to this. A longitudinal research, which seems to be at a whole lot men and women, is far better but a lot more high-priced and difficult to set up.”

A great deal of earlier scientific studies were also modest to rule out likelihood effects, he mentioned. “It truly is great that the Uk is leading in this. I hope that the public, parents and kids are ready to give generously of their time.”

The Globe Well being Organisation (WHO) has ranked forward-hunting studies of the effects of mobile phones on children and adolescents as a “highest priority analysis want”, but to date there are only two research, each in Europe, focusing on childhood cancers and mobile mobile phone use. 1 has reported no association and the other is ongoing.

Co-investigator Professor Paul Elliott, director of the MRC-PHE Centre for Atmosphere and Health at Imperial School, explained: “Scientific proof offered to date is reassuring and shows no association amongst publicity to radio frequency waves from mobile phone use and brain cancer in grownups in the quick term (significantly less than 10 years of use). But the evidence obtainable concerning lengthy term heavy use and children’s use is constrained and less clear.”

Another examine, called Cosmos, which has a United kingdom arm funded by the Department of Health, is at present investigating the attainable extended-phrase health results of mobile phones on 290,000 adult users in excess of a period of twenty to 30 years. The most current research on this topic was carried out in Australia from 2006-7 with 250 participants, and published in 2010. It found no statistical result.

Toledano said: “Scamp will complement this other investigation by focusing on the ongoing growth of cognitive functions in the brain for the duration of adolescence.

“Cognition is essentially how we believe how we make selections and how we method and recall data. It is linked to intelligence and educational achievement and kinds the constructing blocks of the progressive and imaginative likely of each and every personal and for that reason society as a whole.”

Youngsters volunteering for the review will undertake classroom-primarily based computerised tasks made to measure cognitive skills that underpin functions this kind of as memory and consideration. Collectively with their parents, they will also reply concerns about their use of mobile phones and other devices, wellbeing and way of life.

Toledano additional: “Taking part in Scamp is a amazing possibility for schools to deliver ‘live’ science into their classrooms, demonstrate youngsters how we perform overall health research and, over all, for colleges, pupils and mothers and fathers to make a real contribution to the wellness of recent and future generations.”

Uk launches biggest research of mobile mobile phone effects on children"s brains

Intensive mobile cellphone customers at greater risk of brain cancers, says study

A mobile mobile phone consumer. The new study located that cancer occurred on the opposite side of the brain – rather than on the exact same side – of in which the phone was customarily utilised. Photograph: Lewis Whyld/PA

Individuals who use mobile phones intensively seem to have a larger chance of creating specific sorts of brain cancer, French scientists have said, reviving concerns about mobile phone safety.

Men and women who utilized their mobiles for much more than 15 hours every month over 5 years on common had among two and three times higher chance of establishing glioma and meningioma tumours compared with people who seldom used their phones, they located.

The review, appearing in the latest situation of British journal Occupational and Environmental Medication, is the most current in a lengthy-working exploration of mobile-phone security.

More than the previous 15 many years most investigations have failed to flip up conclusive final results either way, although a number of have suggested a hyperlink in between gliomas and intensive, prolonged-term use.

“Our examine is portion of that trend, but the benefits have to be confirmed,” said Isabelle Baldi, of the University of Bordeaux in south-western France, who took part in the examine.

In 2011 the International Company for Research on Cancer (IARC) mentioned radiofrequency fields utilized by mobile phones had been perhaps carcinogenic.

Even so, researchers have faced several difficulties, which includes acquiring an correct picture of phone use in genuine existence, filtering out life style variables this kind of as smoking which amplify cancer chance and taking into account shifting mobile phone technologies.

The new examine looked at 253 circumstances of glioma and 194 situations of meningioma reported in four French departments in between 2004 and 2006.

These patients have been matched towards 892 “controls” or wholesome individuals drawn from the standard population, in a bid to spot any variations amongst the two groups.

The comparison found a increased risk amid individuals who utilised their telephone intensively, particularly among people who used it for their operate, this kind of as in product sales. The duration of use in this group ranged from amongst two and ten many years, averaging at 5 years.

But the study also discovered a number of inconsistencies with other investigations that have recommended a website link in between hefty telephone use and brain cancer.

For instance, in contrast with prior perform, it found that cancer occurred on the opposite side of the brain – rather than on the very same side – of in which the cellphone was customarily utilised.

“It is hard to define a degree of danger, if any, specially as mobile cellphone technology is continually evolving,” the study acknowledged.

“The quick evolution of technology has led to a considerable enhance in the use of mobile phones and a parallel lessen of [radiowave intensity] emitted by the phones.

“Scientific studies taking account of these latest developments and allowing the observation of prospective prolonged-term results will be required.”

Intensive mobile cellphone customers at greater risk of brain cancers, says study

Mobile technologies will nurse the NHS back to health

A sensible nurse call technique that can send patient alerts or lab final results immediately to the telephone or tablet of the closest, most appropriately certified member of personnel. Photograph: Alamy

Overhauls, strategic modifications, new goals: the NHS is no stranger to grand claims and strategies about the potential of healthcare. Even so, all too frequently these plans are political footballs, undertaking little to boost day-to-day patient care or the operating lives of frontline healthcare pros.

We all know that in the face of price range cuts and rising admissions, NHS experts at every degree are under pressure to do much more with much less. Whilst alter in the NHS is no straightforward task, investment targeted in the proper places supplies enormous possibilities to enhance efficiency, minimize fees and improve patient care. 1 latest initiative, the NHS Nursing Engineering Fund, has provided some hope for individuals at the frontline of wellness providers.

A latest freedom of info request submitted to NHS trusts across England highlighted that, despite the pledge to create a “paperless NHS” by 2018, two-thirds of nurses and medical employees continue to depend on handwritten notes and corridor conversations to communicate essential patient data. An additional survey of NHS staff recently located that, despite the fact that 37% of those surveyed did not have entry to a Wi-Fi network installed at work, 66% felt that this would increase their ability to provide good top quality care.

This program of pagers, fixed terminals and handwritten notes draws nurses away from patients. But sophisticated mobile communication technologies could flip the circumstance close to, permitting nurses to efficiently be at their patients’ bedsides every time needed. Technological innovation can determine new approaches to lessen administration and pace up decision-producing, information transfer, delegation and products obtaining. The correct tech indicates nurses can invest much more time with individuals, imporving the quality of care they can offer.

The essential is to consider benefit of possibilities such as the Nursing Technological innovation Fund to adopt engineering that can make it simpler to talk and share information on the move. Nursing is clearly not a sedentary function. If nurses are equipped with products and tools that permit them to speedily input information, speak to colleagues or react to sufferers, they will be cost-free to target their attention in which and when it is essential most.

Take into account 3 straightforward abilities that could run on a mobile device and improve the lives of clinical workers and individuals alike:

• A wise nurse phone method that can send patient alerts or lab benefits immediately to the cellphone of the closest, most appropriately qualified member of staff. This means that nurses can respond to patients’ requirements right away without automatically having to stroll back to their space. The consequence? Peace of mind and a comprehensive view of activity on the ward.

• Barcode scanning would help make certain the proper medication is being provided to the proper patient or that the proper man or woman has turned up for surgical treatment accompanied by the proper paperwork. By employing a device equipped with a scanner nurses can be rapidly assured that no errors have been manufactured.

• Geo-area of essential tools could conserve hours of wasted time browsing the hospital and make certain vital pieces of kit are well distributed across wards. Wheelchairs, health-related units, even beds can be very easily fitted with RFID tags and then identified with a mobile device, allowing nurses to find what they require quickly and simply.

• Static engineering, no matter where it is located, will produce delays. Quick intervals of time spent walking to an information source add up if repeated above the program of a prolonged shift.

Even so, when we talk mobile products we do not imply customer-grade smartphones and tablets. A day in a ward or in A&ampE will swiftly show that these flashy bits of tools aren’t lower out for serious function. In a demanding hospital setting, smartphones will be susceptible to breakages, water injury from chemical cleansers, drained batteries and network blackspots – major to inconvenience, expensive repairs and an incredibly large expense of ownership. More seriously, we noticed lately that smartphones pose a hygiene threat, potentially spreading viruses like MRSA.

The NHS requirements to invest in objective-created, intelligent mobile communication gadgets if it is to increase patient experiences, nurse satisfaction and hospital efficiency. And with £70m of the Nursing Engineering Fund nonetheless to be distributed, the implies are ultimately accessible to make a difference.

Simon Watson is director at Spectralink

Are you a member of our on the web community? Join the Healthcare Professionals Network to acquire standard emails and exclusive delivers.

Mobile technologies will nurse the NHS back to health