{"id":16695,"date":"2015-04-17T00:08:03","date_gmt":"2015-04-17T04:08:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.saratoga.com\/living-well\/2015\/04\/technology-pollution.html"},"modified":"2017-11-28T13:38:09","modified_gmt":"2017-11-28T18:38:09","slug":"technology-pollution","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.saratoga.com\/living-well\/2015\/04\/technology-pollution\/","title":{"rendered":"Technology Pollution"},"content":{"rendered":"
Are you styling with your new Apple IPhone 6, wearable fitness
\ntrackers, and Apple Watch? <\/p>\n
Most people don’t stop to wonder, “Could this technology be harming my health?”<\/p>\n
Below is a review of some of the latest articles that explore this connection
\nand urge caution in our over-dependence in convenient technology.<\/p>\n
Health We Yet While The <\/b><\/p>\n Mobile What was that risk? Here’s the summary on the risk of We TV Data from 3234 overweight US Less “Our <\/b><\/p>\n Plant What about the effect of technology Key My Technology has its place and I I always turn off my Wi-Fi at
\nConcerns of Wearable Technology<\/b><\/p>\n\n
\nhave long suspected that cellphones, which give off low levels of radiation,
\ncould lead to brain tumors, cancer, disturbed blood rhythms and other health
\nproblems if held too close to the body for extended periods.<\/i><\/p>\n
\nhere we are in 2015, with companies like Apple and Samsung encouraging us to
\nbuy gadgets that we should attach to our bodies all day long.<\/i><\/p>\n
\nthere is no definitive research on the health effects of wearable computers
\n(the Apple Watch isn’t even on store shelves yet), we can hypothesize a bit
\nfrom existing research on cellphone radiation.<\/i><\/p>\n
\nmost definitive and arguably unbiased results in this area come from the
\nInternational Agency for Research on Cancer, a panel within the World Health
\nOrganization that consisted of 31 scientists from 14 countries.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
\nPhone Use and Cancer Risk<\/b><\/p>\n
\nmobile phone use and brain tumors (gliomas). I’ve bolded the main results:<\/p>\n\n
\nmade a pooled analysis of two case-control studies on malignant brain tumours
\nwith patients diagnosed during 1997-2003 and 2007-2009. They were aged 20-80
\nyears and 18-75 years, respectively, at the time of diagnosis. Only cases with
\nhistopathological verification of the tumour were included. Population-based
\ncontrols, matched on age and gender, were used. Exposures were assessed by
\nquestionnaire. The whole reference group was used in the unconditional
\nregression analysis adjusted for gender, age, year of diagnosis, and socio-economic
\nindex. In total, 1498 (89%) cases and 3530 (87%) controls participated. Mobile phone use increased the risk of
\nglioma,<\/b> OR<\/i>\u2005<\/i>=<\/i>\u2005<\/i>1.3, 95% CI<\/i>\u2005<\/i>=<\/i>\u2005<\/i>1.1<\/i>–<\/i>1.6
\noverall, increasing to OR<\/i>\u2005<\/i>=<\/i>\u2005<\/i>3.0, 95% CI<\/i>\u2005<\/i>=<\/i>\u2005<\/i>1.7<\/i>–<\/i>5.2
\nin the >25 year latency group. Use of cordless phones increased the risk to
\nOR<\/i>\u2005<\/i>=<\/i>\u2005<\/i>1.4, 95% CI<\/i>\u2005<\/i>=<\/i>\u2005<\/i>1.1<\/i>–<\/i>1.7,
\nwith highest risk in the >15<\/i>–<\/i>20
\nyears latency group yielding OR<\/i>\u2005<\/i>=<\/i>\u2005<\/i>1.7, 95% CI<\/i>\u2005<\/i>=<\/i>\u2005<\/i>1.1<\/i>–<\/i>2.5.
\nThe OR increased statistically significant both per 100<\/i>\u2005<\/i>h
\nof cumulative use, and per year of latency for mobile and cordless phone use.
\nHighest ORs overall were found for ipsilateral mobile or cordless phone use, OR<\/i>\u2005<\/i>=<\/i>\u2005<\/i>1.8,
\n95% CI<\/i>\u2005<\/i>=<\/i>\u2005<\/i>1.4<\/i>–<\/i>2.2
\nand OR<\/i>\u2005<\/i>=<\/i>\u2005<\/i>1.7, 95% CI<\/i>\u2005<\/i>=<\/i>\u2005<\/i>1.3<\/i>–<\/i>2.1,
\nrespectively. The highest risk was found for glioma in the temporal lobe. First use of mobile or cordless phone
\nbefore the age of 20 gave higher OR for glioma than in later age groups. (2)<\/b><\/i><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
\n& Diabetes<\/b><\/p>\n
\nadults revealed a positive connection between length of TV time and diabetes. The study’s aim was
\nto determine the effect of metformin or lifestyle modifications (exercise and
\nweight loss) on the prevention or delay of type 2 diabetes onset. During the 3.2 year trial, the researchers also
\ncollected time spent viewing TV. They reported: <\/p>\n\n
\ntime spent sitting lowers the chance of developing type 2 diabetes in
\nindividuals at high risk of the disease, according to a new study based on data
\nfrom the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP). The authors emphasize that sitting
\nbehavior may be an additional modifiable risk factor for diabetes that could
\nhave public health implications.<\/i><\/p>\n
\nresults showed that for every hour spent watching television there was a 3.4%
\nincreased risk of developing diabetes during the 3-year follow-up in
\nindividuals who were at high risk of developing the disease. This was true even
\nafter controlling for the effects of physical activity on diabetes
\nincidence,” said lead researcher Bonny Rockette-Wagner, PhD, director of
\nphysical activity assessment at the University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. (3) <\/i><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
\na Tree, Ditch the Depression Drugs?<\/b><\/p>\n
\n“unplugging” by stepping outside? A cross-sectional analysis compared the use
\nof antidepressants rates (aD-Rx) with density of urban street trees (UST) in
\nEngland. The study authors utilized a National Health Service from 2009-2010.(4-5)<\/p>\n\n
\nFindings: <\/i><\/b>After
\ncontrolling for confounding variables, rates of aD-Rx were inversely associated
\nwith UST density using standard linear regression modeling. Specifically, the
\naddition of 1 UST was associated with 1.18 fewer aD-Rx per 1,000 people per
\nborough (<\/i>\u2012<\/i>1.18, 95% confidence interval [CI]: <\/i>\u2012<\/i>2.45-0.00).
\nThis is a slight change from the unadjusted model (<\/i>\u2012<\/i>1.38,
\n95% CI: 2.72-0.03), demonstrating that while confounders such as income and
\nemployment status influenced aD-Rx rates, these SES factors do not completely
\naccount for all of the between-borough differences. (5)<\/i><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n
\nSummary:<\/b><\/p>\n
\npersonally love mine. However, too much radiation has risks.<\/p>\n
\nnight, put my IPhone in “airplane mode” when it’s near my body, use
\nspeakerphone as much as possible (no glioma for me!), and get outdoors with no
\ntechnology as much as possible, to make sure I stay “connected” to the “real world.”<\/p>\n