The International Journal of Cancer has published a study of 3044 people which, says the March 12 issue of Forbes, finds "that mobile phone use doesn't significantly increase the incidence of brain cancer. [The study] was the latest of many dismissing the dangers of a radiation-emitting object held to the ears of a billion people."

In the US, the Federal Communications Commission mandates that when you're talking on your cellphone, your body absorbs no more than 1.6 watts of power per kilogram. By contrast, standing in direct sunlight your body absorbs around 3 watts per kilogram.

Like me, you probably aren't immediately aware of how many watts your body is absorbing from your mobile (I also try not to weigh myself) but the FCC has a link to various cellphone manufacturers websites here, most of which list specific absorption rate (SAR), though usually you have to dig to find it.

Checking the SAR section of Nokia's website (which includes models sold in New Zealand), I see that my official work phone, a low-end, meat-and-potatoes, txt-and-call Nokia 6235 is well under the 1.6 watts/kilo margin (it's officially rated at 0.63W/kg).

However, as we move up the food chain to mobiles with 3G and/or multimedia, there's also more wattage to be absorbed by your body. Nokia's all-singing, all-dancing N91, creeps up to 0.67W/kg - but that's still well under the FCC's limit.

And the FCC guideline seems to be working. Michael Thun of The American Cancer Society told Forbes: "Over time there have been 16 studies looking at this issue, and most have found no relationship between cellphone use and increased risk."

So all seems well?

Not according to one Dr George Carlo of a nonprofit US organisation called the Science and Public Policy institute. During the 1990s, says Forbes, the major cellphone companies paid Carlo $US28 million to research the potential dangers of electromagnetic radiation emissions. However, when he concluded that mobiles could affect pace makers and increase cancer risk, the cellphone companies disputed his results and let him go. He continues to campaign vigorously against them.

Currently Carlo is a pretty isolated figure in the scientific community, and Forbes notes that he collects some pretty hefty fees for his consultancy work, including $US10,000 in a recent instance to reassure scenary-conscious residents of a posh suburb that proposed cellular stations (so ugly!) would create harmful emissions (Carlo wants all wireless networks converted to fibre optic). So it's easy to be cynical. Still, as mobiles, and the networks they run on, continue to get more and more powerful, it's an issue to keep an eye on.