In the UK alone twenty seven to forty million people own mobile ‘phones and the number is growing each day. Eight million of these are school-aged children. It is expected that four hundred and eighty three million mobile ‘phones will be sold worldwide in 2003. The first cellular phone was tested in 1978 and since then mobile ‘phones have become hugely popular and a controversial issue.
How can any one argue against this marvelous invention of science? Those against mobile phones argue that it slows the reaction of the driver by one third, when drivers are talking on mobile phones than when under the influence of al chola. For this and other reasons in some cities such as Santiago city in the Philippines mobile ‘phones are banned in public to reduce accidents and disturbances. Those for mobile ‘phones argue that it is not the mobile ‘phone itself it is the conversation which affects the driver and the same result can be found if some is talking to a driver. They also say the fact that mobile ‘phones affect drivers is nothing but public hysteria. Significantly enough one of the main arguments that people who oppose mobile ‘phones give is the link with mobile ‘phone and cancer. In recent vitro studies cells where exposed to infra-red radiation at the same frequency used by mobile ‘phones, In the study it was found that there was damage to the DNA of the cells exposed to infra-red radiation.
This is significant because small damages to the DNA of cells can cause cancer. Those who favour mobile ‘phones point out that in the study it was also found that the DNA damaged was small enough for the DNA repair function in the cells to repair the DNA. Further more it would take at least a hundred or so changes in the DNA to cause cancer. In particular those who feel strongly against mobile ” phones point out that in recent years mobile ” phones have become a privacy issue.
In Britain the number of children bullied through text messaging is rapidly growing. In recent studies done it has been shown that it is quite easy to intercept mobile ‘ phone signals and to listen into a conversation between two people. However those who strongly feel for mobile ‘phones point out that it is just an old problem which has gained new footing in the mobile ‘phone industry. Way before mobile ‘phones were invented there were illegal phone taps and crank calls to land line phones. The problem has just moved on with the technology. Alternatively those in support of mobile ‘phones give the argument that mobile ‘phones are indispensable when it comes to business and commerce.
Mobile ‘phone are used in business for fast communication with stockbrokers, employes etc. In business a simple matter of communication can mean the difference between a million dollars lost or gained. This is clearly true in the UK because twenty seven to forty million people use mobile phones in the UK and the number is predicted to double or triple over the next few years and it is predicted that nearly half of the user will be stockbrokers. As the UK moves in to new age of technology and commerce it is clear that mobile ‘phones will become an integral part of business and commerce. Most importantly those who think mobile ‘phones are a benefit to mankind point out that mobile ‘phones are important when it comes to an emergency.
For example if a mobile phone user finds a person who is having a heart attack, the user would not have to leave the patient to find help he or she can just call an ambulance and try to help the patient which could increase the possibility of he or she surviving. This is clearly the fact since 33% of people say their mobile ‘phones are only for emergencies. Further more the technology employed in mobile ‘phones simple combined with medical sensors can be used to monitor patients outside hospitals to make sure they are safe. Already studies of such devices are being carried out. Finally those who argue in support of mobile ‘phones say that since the launch of mobile ‘phones and the huge boom in mobile ‘phones five years ago, they have hugely boosted the economy through mobile ‘phone sales and services. A good example of the positive impact of mobile ‘phones on the economy is Finland whose entire economy depends on mobile ‘phone sales and services.
This is true since twenty seven to forty million mobile ‘phones are expected to be sold world wide by 2003. The average person in the UK spends twenty pounds a month on mobile ‘phones service multiply that with twelve for twelve months of the year and then by forty million or so people who have mobile ‘phones in the UK and it works out be ninety six million pounds a year and we have not yet still add the money from the sales and salaries given to the employees of the mobile phone companies each year. In the UK the mobile phone industry is a multi-billion pound industry. All in all my opinion is that the fact against mobile phones have no logic or evidence behind them and so should be dismissed as public hysteria.
Examples of which litter our history. Like when trains became hugely popular people started to fear that the smoke from the train would kill all the birds and horse would go extinct and that the speed at which the train traveled was to much for the human body to bear. Today these notions are seen as nothing more then paranoia and the fear of technology. It is best to say that the hysteria behind mobile phones is another example that man fears what he does not understand.
The common public do not understand the technology behind mobile ‘phones and are easily frightened by rumours etc.