aamir shehzad arain

8/14/2019 aamir shehzad arain

1/37

Mobile advertisements on T.V channels are

provoking the increase of mobile usage and due to the

excessive and unlimited usage of cell phones our

traditional culture which is based on socialnetworking is in threat.


2/37

PIMSAT

PIMSAT

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE & ACCOUNTING

UNLIMITTED USAGE OF CELL PHONES

SUBMITTED TO : SHEERAZ ALI SABRI

SUBMITTED BY : SAMIULLAH A1FM-307002

&

WASEEM ABBAS

A1FM-307001

DATE OF SUBMITION : 26/12/2009

PRESTON INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY KCH


3/37

PIMSAT

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

After so many thanks to ALLMIGHTY ALLAH, we are being grateful to our

mother, father, teacher and friends, who guided us at every step of its making.

We have no words to say thanks to the following persons also, without their co-

operation and prior support we will never reach up to the mark of success:

MR. SOHAIB ROOMI (FRIEND)

MS. UROOJ (LAB INCHARGE OF PIMSAT)

MR. ALTAF AHMAD (LAB INCHARGE OF PIMSAT)

MS. MALEHA BARRI (FRIEND)

MR. FAHAD JAVED (FRIEND)

MR. MOHAMMAD SAAD (TEACHER IN IU, FRIEND)

& ALL THE PIMSAT AND MORE PROBABLY THE STUDENTS OF IQRA

UNIVERSITY .


4/37

PIMSAT

ABSTRACT

We students of finance are on the project of communication model

regarding the subject of that the role of media in increasing the use of

mobile technology. For this research we have used the methodology ofquantitative paradigm, by the help of 50 surveys we have collected

desired data which helped us for the testing of hypothesis that is whether

the Cell phone advertisements on TV channels are provoking the increase

of cell phone usage and due to the excessive and unlimited use of cell

phones, our traditional culture which is based on social interaction, is in

threat or not?

Our target population is youth and the students of different educational

institutes like Iqra university and PIMSAT institute have been used as a

sample. Our research has provided such information that is very helpfulto manipulate that the great and unlimited use of mobile is taking us away

from our traditional culture that is social networking and interpersonal

communication which is based on face to face sharing of views, problems

and matters.


5/37

PIMSAT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Introduction 1

2. Rational of the study 1

Socially

Economically

3. Objectives 2

4. Background/History 25. Research question 3

6. Hypothesis 3

7. Sampling 4

8. Theoretical framework 4

Core Assumptions and Statements

Conceptual Model

9. Application and scope 4

10. Significance 5

11. Methodology 5

12. Literature review. 513. Bibliography 18

14. Annexure 19

15. Question aeries. 20

16. Data Analysis in a Pie Chart Form 120

17. Conclusion 128

18. Suggestions 128

19. Future scope. 129


6/37

INTRODUCTION

Mobile, a word which is known every where in the world. When this technology was

introduced it was not known that one day it will capture peoples minds.

Now when we glance at the world we find that human beings have become dependent

on this invention and there are certain repercussions in this regard. As this is the

phenomena of every invention that it provides easiness and relaxation in the

beginning but gradually we started to know about the grey areas of that particular

invention.

Our research is also based on the destruction that mobile phones are spreading in our

social culture. Pakistan is a developing country and foreign investor has an eye on us

for investment. Day by day mobile companies are increasing, due to this tough

competition; they are using different tactics likewise cheaper call rates, low rate

message packages and wide network system. Along with these business tactics media

channels are also playing vital roles in this cold war.

High production sets, celebrities and 3D effects are using in Ads making.

These combinations are helping mobile companies to increase their consumers.

But if we look on the other part of the story we have come to know that the great and

excessive use of mobile is taking our youth towards isolation.

On the basis of this hypothesis that the excessive and unlimited use of mobile taking

us away from our traditional culture that is social interaction which is based on face to

face interaction and sharing of views, problems and personal matters.

RATIONALE OF THE STUDY

Our Rationale of the study is to draw the attention of youth towards the negative

aspects of the cell phone likewise social, economical and educational destructions.

If we study each head thoroughly we will find that how this device causing our daily

lives

Socially: Peer to peer Interaction is decreasing day by day, individuals are isolating,

potency of love is decreasing and our traditional culture which is based on social

interaction is in threat.

Economically: Any one who has activated any sms package of any cell phone

connection company, he/she is paying minimum charges of fixed amount daily, forinstance, a customer of U-fone has activated sms package he/she is liable to pay

RS.2.79/day for 2000 msgs, In a mathematically we have find out that how much a

single customer of u-fone is paying for sms service monthly and yearly.

Rs.2.79 X 30 days a month=RS.83.7/month

Rs.83.7 X 12 month of a year=Rs.1004.4/year

But now if we multiply this amount of Rs.1004.4 with 1 million customers of u-fone

the result would be Rs.100440000, a huge amount which is contributing yearly in the

revenue of u-fone Company.


7/37

The grey areas of this device are not highlighted yet, only due to one solid reason, i.e.

availableness of connectivity at any time with our beloved ones.

OBJECTIVITES

Does the addiction of this device is affecting our youth's social, educational

and economical sector;

Does this harmful device is pushing our youth towards isolation;

Does with the excessive usage of cell phone our traditional culture which is

based on social interaction is in threat;

Does media is playing any effective role in the increase of cell phone usage;

Does with the passage of time this device will become even more integral part

of our daily lives;

BACKGROUND/ HISTORY

Marshall McLuhan, an authority in media theory, wrote, You just start telephoning.

Anybody can walk into any manager's office by telephone...the telephone is an

irresistible intruder in time and space. While cell phones didn't exist when McLuhan

made this observation in 1964, his words hold true today. This 'intruder' is now

distorting time and space to the worldwide audience by helping to create a worldwhere inhabitants demand immediate gratification from almost every aspect of daily

life.

McLuhan seemed frustrated that the phone makes it possible to talk to someone

without actually being in their physical presence. He would be shocked today to

discover that so many people own a wireless communication device that can easily

communicate with almost anyone. The phone has moved from a desk to the pockets

of its owner.

When using the phone we paint a picture of who we are talking to and the setting they

are in. McLuhan says the telephone is the extension of ear and voice that is a kind

of extra sensory perception. He theorizes that the telephone becomes a sixth sense

used to interpret communication. In face-to face interactions, we can use body

language to interpret the messages we receive; in a phone conversation, we cant use

these physical cues to understand the speaker. We begin to rely on extra-sensory

perception. Our minds must interpret information using auditory cues rather than the

visual and special cues that to which we have grown accustomed. Would you trust

someone more that youve met in person, or someone that youve only talked to on

the phone? Meeting someone in person allows you to pick up these visual cues and

body language. This interaction gives you more information to make an informed

decision. Will this behavior change in the future as we use cell phones more?


8/37

Some of McLuhans theory is no longer as relevant. He goes on to state "The

telephone demands complete participation, unlike the written and printed page." He

saw a ringing phone as something that required full and immediate attention. After all,

your books dont have ring tones. In a time before caller ID or answering machines, a

ringing phone would demand to be picked up. Today we have the luxury of

ignoring this ring or returning the call at our convenience. Additionally, people multi-task while on the phone much more than they used to now that the restrictions of a

corded phone have been lifted. In McLuhans time, a phone call was for news

exchange rather than the variety of motivations for cell phone use today, including

mobile games, texting and web browsing.

McLuhan may have been onto something else. He observed that many people doodle

while on a corded phone. He explained this behavior as a replacement for sight in a

face-to-face conversation. To be fully engaged, perhaps we must participate on

multiple levels. Has our world has become so fast-paced that we 'doodle' (or drive,

walk and shop) on the phone to effectively participate in a conversation? Will society

reach a point where face-to-face interaction is no longer needed?

In coming years cell phones will become an even more integral part of our daily lives.

As smart phones and PDA phones become more common, and cell phone software

improves, users will be empowered by the information and features offered by their

device. Telephone communication has certainly changed since Marshall Mcluhans

time. While we are no longer literally tied to our desks, we may now be tied to our

cell phones, our "mobile" desks.

RESURCH QUESTION;

Mobile advertisements on T.V channels are provoking the increase of mobile usage

and due to the excessive and unlimited usage of cell phones our traditional culture

which is based on social networking is in threat.

HYPOTHESIS

Our research work is based on the hypothesis i.e., whether the Cell phone

advertisements on TV channels are provoking the increase of cell phone usage anddue to the excessive and unlimited use of cell phones, our traditional culture which is

based on social interaction, is in threat or not?

Testing Of Hypothesis: On the basis of 15 pie charts hypothesis will be tested,

Target population:Our target population is youth and students


9/37

SAMPLING

The rationale of our research is to draw the attention of youth towards the negative

aspects of excessive usage of cell phone for this motive we will take random sample

of 100 students from different universities, likewise Iqra University (I.U), Karachi

and PIMSAT Karachi.

THEORATICAL FRAMEWORK

Cultivation Theory

(Television Shapes Concepts Of Social Reality)

Core Assumptions and Statements

Cultivation theory in its most basic form, suggests that television is responsible for

shaping, or cultivating viewers conceptions of social reality. The combined effect

of massive television exposure by viewers over time subtly shapes the perception ofsocial reality for individuals and, ultimately, for our culture as a whole. Gerbner

argues that the mass media cultivate attitudes and values which are already present in

a culture: the media maintain and propagate these values amongst members of a

culture, thus binding it together. He has argued that television tends to cultivate

middle-of-the- road political perspectives. Gerbner called this effect mainstreaming.

Cultivation theorists distinguish between first order effects (general beliefs about the

everyday world, such as about the prevalence of violence) and second order effects

(specific attitudes, such as to law and order or to personal safety). There is also a

distinction between two groups of television viewers: the heavy viewers and the light

viewers. The focus is on heavy viewers. People who watch a lot of television are

likely to be more influenced by the ways in which the world is framed by televisionprograms than are individuals who watch less, especially regarding topics of which

the viewer has little first-hand experience. Light viewers may have more sources of

information than heavy viewers. Resonance describes the intensified effect on the

audience when what people see on television is what they have experienced in life.

This double dose of the televised message tends to amplify the cultivation effect.

Conceptual Model

APPLICATION AND SCOPEIn our research we have observed that media is cultivating our culture according to the

agenda of the telecom companies. Recently an advertisement of the U-fone was onairing on T.V. In it two characters were acting as a husband and wife. The situation of


10/37

the scene was quarrel between them on any subject matter but the weird thing of this

advertisement is that they were fighting through text messages. A voice over was

coming from behind that "AB CHAHAY LADAI HO YA GUPSHUP LOG TU SMS

K ZARIYAE HE BAT KIYA KARTAY HAI". By seeing this we can conclude that

media is cultivating our culture. May be this act of weirdness is not be implemented

affectively in present scenario but we can predict that with the passage of time it willdefiantly affect the masses.

SIGNIFICANCE

The significance of the study is to draw the attention of youth towards the negative

aspects of the cell phone likewise social, economical and educational destructions.

If we study each head thoroughly we will find that how this device causing our daily

lives

METHODOLOGY

Our research is quantifiable in nature due to this reason we will follow paradigm of

Quantitative Methodology; our target population is youth and the method that we will

use in this enquiry is survey, which will conduct from the sample of 100 students of

different universities. We will follow all the rules and methods of quantitative

methodology which are require for our research.

LITERATURE REVIEW

We have fully tried to find out relevant data regarding literature review but we have

just find one article on the internet which was written by Marshall McLuhan, In 1964

he wrote against the forefather(Telephone) of the cell phone and predicted the future

circumstances of this invention . Now with the passage of time his words hold true

today. Cell phones have drastically changed the way we communicate. Like the leap

from agricultural to industrial, the jump from wired to wireless phones is equally

significant. For many of us, the cell phone is an element of our wardrobe. Wireless

phones have created social and structural standards that have changed our

communication expectations; we now live and work in a global society that operates

on a 24-hour schedule. The wireless phone has created an expectation of immediacy;

unlike its land line predecessor, this communication takes place anytime, anywhere.

Where did these behaviors tied to cell phones originate???

ARTICLE FROM AN INTERNET SOURCE;

Initially, the shift to instant communication was not well received. The wired

telephone was patented in 1876. Quickly, it became apparent that the phone was here

to stay. This new technology did not excite everyone. The New York Daily Graphi

ran this headline for March 15, 1877: The Terrors of the Telephone The Orator of

the Future. The idea of a different method for communication was frightening andunfamiliar to a society so grounded in the written word. It is difficult to imagine what


11/37

the people of the nineteenth century would think of the over 2 billion cell phones that

are in use today.

Marshall McLuhan, an authority in media theory, wrote, You just start telephoning.

Anybody can walk into any manager's office by telephone...the telephone is an

irresistible intruder in time and space. While cell phones didn't exist when McLuhanmade this observation in 1964, his words hold true today. This 'intruder' is now

distorting time and space to the worldwide audience by helping to create a world

where inhabitants demand immediate gratification from almost every aspect of daily

life.

McLuhan seemed frustrated that the phone makes it possible to talk to someone

without actually being in their physical presence. He would be shocked today to

discover that so many people own a wireless communication device that can easily

communicate with almost anyone. The phone has moved from a desk to the pockets

of its owner.

When using the phone we paint a picture of who we are talking to and the setting they

are in. McLuhan says the telephone is the extension of ear and voice that is a kind

of extra sensory perception. He theorizes that the telephone becomes a sixth sense

used to interpret communication. In face-to face interactions, we can use body

language to interpret the messages we receive; in a phone conversation, we cant use

these physical cues to understand the speaker. We begin to rely on extra-sensory

perception. Our minds must interpret information using auditory cues rather than the

visual and special cues that to which we have grown accustomed. Would you trust

someone more that youve met in person, or someone that youve only talked to on

the phone? Meeting someone in person allows you to pick up these visual cues and

body language. This interaction gives you more information to make an informed

decision. Will this behavior change in the future as we use cell phones more?

Some of McLuhans theory is no longer as relevant. He goes on to state "The

telephone demands complete participation, unlike the written and printed page." He

saw a ringing phone as something that required full and immediate attention. After all,

your books dont have ringtones. In a time before caller ID or answering machines, a

ringing phone would demand to be picked up. Today we have the luxury of

ignoring this ring or returning the call at our convenience. Additionally, people multi-

task while on the phone much more than they used to now that the restrictions of a

corded phone have been lifted. In McLuhans time, a phone call was for newsexchange rather than the variety of motivations for cell phone use today, including

mobile games, texting and web browsing.

McLuhan may have been onto something else. He observed that many people doodle

while on a corded phone. He explained this behavior as a replacement for sight in a

face-to-face conversation. To be fully engaged, perhaps we must participate on

multiple levels. Has our world has become so fast-paced that we 'doodle' (or drive,

walk and shop) on the phone to effectively participate in a conversation? Will society

reach a point where face-to-face interaction is no longer needed?

In coming years cell phones will become an even more integral part of our daily lives.As smartphones and PDA phones become more common, and cell phone software


12/37


13/37

variety of parameters indicative of sperm health. But is the implied conclusion,

namely that cell phone radiation harms male fertility, justified?

Probably not from this study.

Briefly, the study examined 361 men attending an infertility clinic from September2004 to October 2005. The mean age of the study population was 31.816.12 years.

The men were divided into four groups based on their self-reported cell phone usage:

none; less than 2 hours a day; 2-4 hours a day; and greater than 4 hours a day. Semen

samples were collected, and several standard parameters measured. It was found that

there was no correlation between cell phone use and semen volume, liquefaction time,

pH, and viscosity. However, a negative correlation adjusted for age was observed

between increasing cell phone use and sperm count, motility, sperm viability, and

percent normal morphology. The authors concluded that cell phone usage was

associated with sperm and semen parameters associated with decreased male fertility.

This study has a number of shortcomings that make me take its conclusion with ahuge grain of salt. Right off the bat, I note that it's an observational study, and such

studies are fraught with problems. Another huge problem with this study is that the

men being studied are not a representative group by definition. After all, they are

coming to an infertility clinic. As the article itself points out, infertility affects

approximately 15% of reproductive age couples, with nearly half of these cases being

due to male factor infertility. That means, right off the bat, without knowing anything

more about the study we can predict that close to 50% of the men being examined will

have problems with sperm count, motility, or other parameters indicative of low

fertility. That's much higher than the 7% or so that would be expected among the

general population of men of reproductive age at large.

A second problem is that the four parameters that showed a decrease are not

independent. They are related, and in this study showed significant positive

correlation with each other. If one goes up, all tend to go up, and if one goes down, all

tend to go down. However, together, they do correlate with the health (or lack thereof)

of spermatozoa.

However, these problems pale in significance with the single biggest problem of the

study: the utter failure even to try to control for confounding factors other than age.

Not only did the authors not validate cell phone exposure independently, but they did

not examine the occupational history of the subjects or other potential exposures ofradiofrequency radiation. The reason this is significant is that there could be a factor

common to these men with decreased fertility that is the real cause of their problems

that is also correlated with cell phone use. Examples that come to mind might include

number of airplane flights per year, given that airline travel exposes travelers to

natural background radiation. I'm not saying that this is the case; I'm merely sayingthat there's a strong possibility that there couldbe a confounding factor like that that

only makes it appear that increasing cell phone use is correlated with decreased

fertility and that it is a serious shortcoming of the study that such a factor was not

more actively sought. Had I been a peer reviewer for this paper, I would have come

down hard on the authors for this. Indeed, a similar critique was leveled at the same

investigators for the same study when they presented it at the American Society forReproductive Medicine meeting a year and a half ago:


14/37

However, Dr Allan Pacey, senior lecturer in andrology at the University of Sheffield,

said "This is a good quality study but I don't think it tackles the issue.

"If you're using your phone for four hours a day, presumably it is out of your pocket

for longer. That raises a big question: how is it that testicular damage is supposed to

occur?"

He said mobile phone use may be a marker for other lifestyle factors known to affect

sperm quality.

"Maybe people who use a phone for four hours a day spend more time sitting in cars,

which could mean there's a heat issue. It could be they are more stressed, or more

sedentary and sit about eating junk food getting fat. Those seem to be better

explanations than a phone causing the damage at such a great distance" he added.

The comment about "great distance" brings up an aspect of this study that bothers me

as well: Most people do not use their cell phones close to their genitals. True, with theincreasing use of Bluetooth headsets this may be changing, as men leave the phone in

its belt holster and use those funny-looking headsets with the blue blinking lights, but

for the most part people still hold the headset to their ear when using a cell phone.

Radiation intensity drops off rapidly with distance, and there's a huge difference

between holding the phone to one's ear and and using it in the holster.

The bottom line is that, although there is some evidence in mouse and rat studies

suggesting that cell phone radiation might induce sperm abnormalities, the evidence

that cell phone use is associated with decreased fertility in human men is far from

convincing thus far. The animal studies render the possibility of a negative effect on

fertility somewhat plausible from a biological standpoint, but most human studies,

this one included, that I've seen concluding such a problem exists tend to be plagued

by methodological difficulties and inadequate controls for confounding factors. Still,

further research into this question is warranted. In any case, if, as Steve Novella

suggests in his cautious examination of whether cell phone usage is a risk factor for

brain or head and neck cancers, one way to mitigate any risk that might exist for such

tumors is to use a headset in order to keep the cell phone antenna away from the head,

the consequence might be more male infertility. Given that possibility, I'd guess that

most men would tend to opt for an uncertain possibility of perhaps a slightly increased

risk of brain cancer over a similar uncertain possibility of a slightly increased risk of

infertility.

That's assuming, of course, that there even is a problem. In the meantime, I'm not

planning on getting rid of my cell phone.

REFERENCES:

1. Karinen, A., Heinavaara, S., Nylund, R., Leszczynski, D. (2008). Mobile phone

radiation might alter protein expression in human skin. BMC Genomics, 9(1), 77.DOI: 10.1186/1471-2164-9-77


15/37


16/37

5. Having studied communications electronics, and thus the electromagnetic

spectrum, quite extensively, I have trouble taking any of these studies seriously.

Knowledge is a bad thing for a doomsayer to come across.

I can think of a lot of men for whom infertility is not a "problem."

That would certainly be fine with me me. I would be quite content being infertile. Infact, that would make me happy. Just yesterday, inspired by a post on a different blog,

I blogged on the very subject of being childfree by choice, and I wish it were as easy

as simply not being able to have kids at all.

Posted by: Godless Geek | February 27, 2008 12:41 PM

6. Covering the phone in a ManBag still leaves sensitive male body bits exposed to

other potentially harmful (or at least scary sounding) environmental radiation sources.

The careful disemminator of genetic information would store the family jewels within

that protective covering.

Posted by: Jim | February 27, 2008 1:26 PM

7. "However, even though radiofrequency radiation of the sort used in cell phones

does not break chemical bonds or induce mutations, it's not entirely implausible that

prolonged exposure to cell phone radiation over a long period of time..."

I think it is.

Cell phone radiation ~1 GHz. That means each photon carries

(h*nu)=(1*10^9)*(6.6*10^-34)=6.6*10^-25 J = 4 micro-eV

kT at room temperature = 30 meV (that's milli-eV)

So, we survive pretty well in an environment where every molecule is banging around

amongst other molecules with on average 30 meV of energy. We should be worried

about adding photons with 10^-4 times that energy?

Posted by: delurking | February 27, 2008 3:22 PM

8. "Do Cell Phones make men sterile?"

Well less reproductive anyway, you will never get anywhere with a potential mate ifyou keep yabbering on the cell.

Posted by: sailor | February 27, 2008 7:32 PM

9. I must agree with Orac. The possibility of biological effects of cell phone radiation

is plausible. Non-ionizing radiation still causes heating. It's not that the energy of eachphoton is so low, but that the total energy absorbed by the tissues can raise the

temperature. (The usual concern is for the head, but the unmentionables could also be

affected.)

I think we could all imagine the possibility that local heating from cell phones couldaffect fertility.


17/37

There was also a recent study that showed electric fields could disrupt cellular

function. Keeping in mind the study in this link does NOT deal with microwave

frequencies (so I am not sure how relevant it is), there might yet be other possibilities

for biological effects of cellular radiation.

However, the studies that get trumpeted as actually showing any kind of link havesevere methodological problems -- as Orac shows in this example.

So while there's definitely no evidence of cell phones causing harm, the (remote?)

possibility of harm may still be plausible.

Posted by: Mister Troll | February 28, 2008 10:29 PM

10. "I must agree with Orac. The possibility of biological effects of cell phone

radiation is plausible. Non-ionizing radiation still causes heating. It's not that the

energy of each photon is so low, but that the total energy absorbed by the tissues can

raise the temperature. (The usual concern is for the head, but the unmentionablescould also be affected.)"

I didn't mention this because I thought it was so obviously not an issue. The natural

variation in your body temperature throughout the day is larger than any heating that

can be caused by a cell phone. Or, make a rough estimate for the heat transfer to the

testes (or to the brain) in a hot shower or in sunlight and the cell phone concern

vanishes.

Dr. Ronald B. Herberman;

(July 24, 2008, 07:13 am)

The head of a prominent cancer research institute issued an unprecedented warning to

his faculty and staff Wednesday: Limit cell phone use because of the possible risk of

cancer.

The warning from Dr. Ronald B. Herberman, director of the University of Pittsburgh

Cancer Institute, is contrary to numerous studies that don't find a link between cancer

and cell phone use, and a public lack of worry by the U.S. Food and Drug

Administration.

Herberman is basing his alarm on early unpublished data. He says it takes too long toget answers from science and he believes people should take action now -- especially

when it comes to children.

"Really at the heart of my concern is that we shouldn't wait for a definitive study to

come out, but err on the side of being safe rather than sorry later," Herberman said.

Dr. Herberman is a highly respected cancer center director, which is why I can't help

but wonder just what on earth he was smoking when he decided to do this. It strikes

me as being rash in the extreme; the announcement even admits that the published

data do not support a link between cell phone use and brain tumors. This is alarmism

that, I suspect, even Revere would have a hard time supporting, because it goes farbeyond the published evidence and is based on "early unpublished data." Scaring the


18/37

nation based on "early unpublished data" is irresponsible in the extreme. Why did Dr.

Herberman do it?

The question of whether cell phones cause or contribute to the development of brain

tumors is not as easy a question to answer as one might think. First, there is the issue

of biological plausibility. Radiowave energy at the power level used by most cellphones, is not ionizing, and our understanding of cancer is that, in general, ionizing

radiation is what is required for radiation to cause or contribute to cancer. That does

not mean that there isn't a potential mechanism by which non-ionizing radiation can

cause cancer that we don't know about yet, but it makes hypothesis that cell phone

radiation causes brain cancer less plausible. Too, we can actually test radiofrequency

radiation in the same power range used in cell phones on cells in cell culture in order

to determine whether exposure to such radiation can cause changes associated with

malignant transformation. There is one confounding effect that has to be controlled

for in such experiments (but is not always), namely that radiofrequency radiation

interacts with water in order to heat it. Still, there are no compelling studies showing

any specific effect of radiofrequency radiation on cells to induce changes associatedwith malignant transformation, at least none that I'm aware of. Animal studies are

prone to the same sorts of problems as cell culture studies, but even so there is no

good quality animal data that I'm aware of implicating cell phone radiation in the

formation of cancer. On a basic science basis, there doesn't appear to be strong

evidence of a plausible mechanism or effect.

That brings us to epidemiological studies. For us to consider any epidemiological to

be support for the hypothesis that cell phones cause brain cancer, there must be a few

key results. First, there must be an increased incidence of brain cancer in cell phone

users. It's even more convincing if there is some sort of dose-response phenomenon.

In other words, there should be an increasing risk of cancer with increasing cell phone

use. Other results that also support the hypothesis would be tumors correlated with

proximity. In other words, do people who primarily use their left hand to hold their

phones to their ears tend to get tumors primarily on the left and people who primarily

hold their phones with their right hand tend to get tumors primarily on the right?

Finally, there should be a plausible lag time between exposure and tumor

development consistent with known lag times for cancer, say 10-20 years, and some

specificity. In other words, does exposure to cell phone radiation correlate with

certain types of tumors and not others? There are other aspects of the results of a

study that can more strongly support the hypothesis that cell phones cause brain

cancer, but these are the main ones.

In general, however, getting "clean" data from an epidemiologic study of cell phone

use that can support a strong enough correlation to suggest causation is very difficult.

In order to correlate cell phone use with an increased incidence of brain tumors, it's

necessary somehow to be able to reliably quantify cell phone usage. This presents a

big problem. It's generally not possible to continuously observe people with their cell

phones for years on end and obtain objective measurements. Another way is to ask

people how much they use their cell phones, but memories are unreliable, and such

methods are very prone to recall bias in the form of people with brain tumors being

more likely to remember their cell phone use as having been heavy. That's not even

counting trying to control of the number of potentially confounding factors, such asheavy cell phone use being associated with certain jobs or, especially for 10-20 years


19/37

ago when cell phones were far less common, with higher socioeconomic status. Then

there's the shift in technology from analog to digital in the early 2000s, which

changed the power and frequencies used.

Of course, there are ways to overcome the limitations of retrospective studies. For

example, an investigator can try to look at cell phone bills and see the number ofminutes used per month, but who keeps their bills for 10 or 20 years, which is the

time of exposure most relevant to the development of cancer? Alternatively, one can

abandon the retrospective study altogether and follow people prospectively and have

them report their cell phone usage from their bills every month. However, because

brain tumors are a fairly uncommon form of cancer, thousands upon thousands of

subjects would have to be followed this way, and it would take at least a decade or

two to start to see any results. Also, it would be very hard to enforce a control group,

given the ubiquity of cell phones.

Despite the difficulties, several epidemiological studies have been done, with largely

negative results. Surprisingly, the NPR report actually summarizes them pretty well:

The issue that concerns some scientists -- though nowhere near a consensus -- is

electromagnetic radiation, especially its possible effects on children. It is not a major

topic in conferences of brain specialists.

A 2008 University of Utah analysis looked at nine studies -- including some

Herberman cites -- with thousands of brain tumor patients and concludes "we found

no overall increased risk of brain tumors among cellular phone users. The potential

elevated risk of brain tumors after long-term cellular phone use awaits confirmation

by future studies."

Studies last year in France and Norway concluded the same thing.

"If there is a risk from these products -- and at this point we do not know that there is

-- it is probably very small," the Food and Drug Administration says on an agency

Web site.

A French study based on Interphone research and published in 2007 concluded that

regular cell phone users had "no significant increased risk" for three major types of

nervous system tumors. It did note, however, that there was "the possibility of an

increased risk among the heaviest users" for one type of brain tumor, but that needs tobe verified in future research.

Earlier research also has found no connection.

Steve Novella also summarized the state of the evidence regarding cell phone use and

the risk of cancer and concluded that we can probably rule out a strong correlation

between cell phone radiation and cancer, but we do not yet have enough data to rule

out a small increased risk of brain tumors due to cell phones, particularly in children. I

mostly agree with this characterization of the state of the evidence at present, which is

why I find statements like this to be overblown fear-mongering:


20/37

A driving force behind the memo was Devra Lee Davis, the director of the

university's center for environmental oncology.

"The question is do you want to play Russian roulette with your brain," she said in an

interview from her cell phone while using the hands-free speaker phone as

recommended. "I don't know that cell phones are dangerous. But I don't know thatthey are safe."

I think PalMD got it right when he sarcastically retorted:

Hey, I don't know for an absolute certainty that my popcorn won't spontaneously

combust, but I'm not yelling fire either.

To which I'd add: Hey, I don't know with absolute certainty that vaccines don't cause

autism, but I'm not joining the anti-vaccinationists.

The actual warning is even worse, delving into some truly dubious comparisons:

In the early 1980's, the owners of asbestos mines were reduced to bankruptcy as a

result of lawsuits brought by the families of deceased exposed workers. A few years

later, a key executive of Johns Manville, the most prominent company, drew lessons

from the years of struggle of his industry against medical data and the scientists who

were drawing attention to the risks of asbestos. He concluded with regret that greater

warnings for the public, the establishment of more effective precautions, and more

extensive medical research "could have saved lives, and probably also shareholders,

the industry, and the benefits of its product."

We call on the cell phone companies to provide independent access to records of use

so that appropriate studies can be carried out.

Earlier in the report there was even a comparison with tobacco! Here's the difference

that makes these comparisons specious. Tobacco smoke is a known carcinogen. We

have many in vitro and animal studies showing the mechanisms by which it induces

cancer. Similarly, although the mechanism of how asbestos induces cancer remains

unclear, we similarly have animal studies that show that it can. We have no such

studies showing biological plausibility for cell phone radiation.

Particularly strange is Davis's statement:

She said 20 different groups have endorsed the advice the Pittsburgh cancer institute

gave, and authorities in England, France and India have cautioned children's use of

cell phones.

As PalMD astutely pointed out, these 20 groups did not actually endorse UPCC's

report; rather they endorsed recommendations similar to the recommendations in the

report.

Having looked over this report and the news coverage it engendered, I still can't figure

out what on earth possessed Dr. Herberman to allow it to be issued. Even if theunpublished data are as alarming as implied (unlikely, given the number of previous


21/37

studies that found either no risk or a questionable very slight risk) and the National

Research Council in the U.S. is wrong about its being highly skewed due to selection

bias, as a responsible leader in public health and cancer, you don't pull something like

this. You just don't. It's irresponsible as hell. A few months to get the data published

in a peer-reviewed journal or presented at a major meeting are not going to make a

difference, given the long lag time of cancer, and waiting until it is published will atleast allow scientists and physicians to vet the data and decide if, on balance taking

into account its limitations, it warrants such a strong warning. Or, if you really believe

you can't wait a few months because the risk is so horrible, then release the data with

the warning, so that scientists can judge whether the warning is warranted.

Fortunately, many Americans seem to have more common sense than our cancer

leaders:

"I think if they gave me specific numbers and specific information and it was scary

enough, I would be concerned," Loughran said, planning to call her mother again in a

matter of minutes. "Without specific numbers, it's too vague to get me worked up."

Comments.

1. Cell phones have been around since the 1980s. The lag time for cancer

development is about 20 years. If cell phones were a risk factor for brain cancers, one

might expect to see a spike in brain cancer incidence about now. There is no such

spike. The incidence of brain cancer has actually decreased slightly since a high in the

1980s. This doesn't rule out a subtle effect counteracted by a decrease due to other,

unknown factors, but it does not support the idea that cell phones are a risk factor in

the development of brain cancers.

2. I'm from Israel, and yesterday our Department of Health issued an official warning

about cell phones, recommending to avoid keeping them near the body, and to keep

them away from children.

Why? Three reasons.

The first was, well, the nonsense discussed above in this post. They just totally

jumped on the recommendation of Herberman (even though all the news reports I saw

managed to misspell his name as Heberman)

The other was a research done by local researchers that allegedly found relationbetween cellular phone usage and "Malignant Parotid Gland Tumors". Mind you, the

doctor in charge of this research was also quoted in the paper as saying that (roughly

translated by me) "A two-three years old kid who says hello to an aunt or

grandmother on the cell phone is a situation close to child abuse".

This quote was, according to the article, not based on her own research, but on the

recent research by Herberman...

3. You may want to review who pays for the studies that conclude there's little cause

for concern. I've found that industry-sponsored studies invariably demonstrate no

harm from cell phones, cordless phones and WIFI. In contrast, truly independent

studies are much more likely to show connections between brain and salivary gland


22/37

tumors, hearing and memory loss, breaching the blood brain barrier, skin rashes,

sperm quality and sleep disturbance.

Look at the work of Henry Lai, a radiation expert at the University of Washington.

Here's a link: http://www.mapcruzin.com/radiofrequency/henry_lai2.htm

As you research the data you'll find that cell phones were first developed by the

Pentagon. The devices then entered the commercial market before pre-market safety

testing, thanks to a loop hole in FDA regulations.

Robert Kane was an industry insider who wrote the book "Cellular Telephone Russian

Roulette". Kane, an electrical engineer, believes that cell phones are indeed a

technology that has damaging effects, particularly to children. Despite years of

military research showing harm from electro-magnetic radiation, this data has largely

been ignored. The technology obviously has friends in high places. Federal legislation

prevents citizens from objecting to cell phones towers based on health concerns.

Kane's book is surprisingly out of print and is not available via Amazon.com, even asa used copy. This prompts suspicions that the telecoms bought all available copies and

pulped them. I finally found a copy via interlibrary loan.

4. Radiowave energy at the power level used by most cell phones, is not ionizing, and

our understanding of cancer is that, in general, ionizing radiation is what is required

for radiation to cause or contribute to cancer."

I wish you would include some numbers in your posts about this stuff. Photons at 1

GHz have an energy of 4 x 10^-6 eV. kT at room temperature is .028 eV. So, just

saying it is "not ionizing" is like saying "scores of people died in WWII". Literally it

is true, but it conveys an impression that is orders of magnitude off. Basically, cell

phone photons have an energy of 10^-6 times the threshold of ionizing radiation. Each

photon has about 10^-4 kT at room temperature. Saying "most cell phones" also

implies that some cell phones might be dangerous. No cell phone transmits or receives

ionizing radiation.

5. Dr. H had only argued that using cell phones while driving causes brain cancer.

That's something I could get behind. And maybe he could toss in that the larger the

vehicle the more aggressive the cancer, that'd be great.


23/37

BIBLIOGRAPHY

WWW.Cellphoneforums.net/Cellphoneforums /blogs/rambling of aforum admin/

WWW. Marshall McLuhan.com

WWW.fiercewireless.com/story/spri


24/37

Annexure

The instrument which we have chose for data collection is the set of

15 questions in the form of questioner.

Methodology: Quantitative Methodology.

Method: Survey.

Target population: Our target population is youth.

Survey Findings And Data Analysis in a Pie Chart Form


25/37

PIMSAT

PIMSAT

Department Of Finance & Accounting

Introduction;

Our research is based on the study regarding the role of media in the

increase of mobile usage. Your contribution will provide us important information

which is very helpful to draw youths attention towards this harmful device.

Q.1: Where do you get to know about the mobile service packages?

a) Media advertisement

b) Call center

c) Friends

Q.2: Have you activated any SMS package?

a) Yes

b) No

Q.3: Do you ever achieve the SMS limit?

a) Yesb) No

Q.4: How many messages you deliver approximately per day?

a) 1-300

b) 300-600

c) 600-unlimited

Q.5: Do you think that due to the use of short English in SMS your spelling mistakes

are increasing?

a) Yes

b) No

Q.6: Do you think mis-use of Ahmed Faraz or any other poets poetry is unethical?

a) Yes

b) No

Q.7: When do you meet your friends & family members?

a) Daily

b) Weekly

c) Monthly

Q.8: According to you which way is more effective to get to know about your friends

& family members circumstances/matters?a) Face to Face


26/37

b) SMS

c) Call

Q.9: Do you think that due to excessive use of mobile we are going towards isolation?

a) Yes

b) Noc) Dont know

Q.10: Do you think that our grand parents were more honest and involved in their

relations than us?

a) Yes

b) No

c) Dont know

Q.11: Do you think that excessive use of mobile is creating an anxiety factor among

youth?a) No

b) Yes

Q.12: Do you think that in near future cell phone will become even more integral part

of our daily lives?

a) Yes

b) No

Q.13: Are you in favor that there should be any mobile restriction for a child until

unless he/she reaches to the age of adultery?

a) Yes

b) No

Q.14: How much amount do you spend to fulfill your cell phone expenses in a month?

b) Rs.500-Rs.1000

c) Rs.1000-Rs.2000

d) Rs.2000-Rs.3000

Q.15: Do you think due to cell phone crime ratio is increasing day by day?

a) Yes

b) No

We are very thankful to you for sharing your precious views with us


27/37

Survey Findings And Data Analysis in a Pie Chart Form

Q.1: Where do you get to know about the mobile service packages?

a) Media advertisement

b) Call center

c) Friends

62%12%

26%Media

Advertisments

Call center

Friends

In The above pie chart three colors are shown pale blue color represent media

advertisement, violet color represent call center and light yellow represent

friends, According to pie chart 62% select pale blue, 12% select violet and 26%

select light yellow.

Q.2: Have you activated any SMS package?

a) Yes

b) No

91, 91%

9, 9%

Yes

No

In The above pie chart two colors are shown pale blue color represent that91,91% select Yes and 9,9% select violet color its mean No.


28/37

Q.3: Do you ever achieve the SMS limit?

a) Yes

b) No

73, 73%

27, 27%

Yes

No

In The above pie chart two colors are shown pale blue color represent that

73,73% select Yes and 27,27% select violet color its mean No.

Q.4: How many messages you deliver approximately per day?

a) 1-50

b) 50-200

c) 200-unlimited

73, 38%

27, 14%

90, 48%001-50

50-200

200-unlimited

In The above pie chart three colors are shown pale blue color show 73,38% select

001-50 messages, violet color show 27,14% select 50-200 messages and lightyellow show 90,48% select 200-unlimited messages.


29/37

Q.5: Do you think that due to the use of short English in SMS your spelling

mistakes are increasing?

a) Yes

b) No

73, 73%

27, 27%

Yes

No

In The above pie chart two colors are shown pale blue color represent that

70,70% select Yes use of short English in SMS your spelling mistakes are

increasing and 30,30% select violet color its mean No.

Q.6: Do you think mis-use of Ahmed Faraz or any other poets poetry is

unethical?

a) Yes

b) No

84, 84%

16, 16%

YesNo

In The above pie chart two colors are shown pale blue color show that 84,84%

select Yes mis-use of Ahmed Faraz or any other poets poetry is unethical and16.16% select violet color its mean No.


30/37

Q.7: When do you meet your friends & family members?

a) Daily

b) Weekly

c) Monthly

70, 70%

17, 17%

13, 13%

Daily

Weekly

Monthly


Daily, violet color show 17,17% select Weekly and light yellow show 13,13%

select Monthly.

Q.8: According to you which way is more effective to get to know about your

friends & family members circumstances/matters?

a) Face to Faceb) SMS

c) Call

84, 44%

16, 8%

90, 48%Face to Face

SMS

Call


Face to Face, violet color show 16,8% select SMS and light yellow show 90,48%select call.


31/37

Q.9: Do you think that due to excessive use of mobile we are going towards

isolation?

a) Yes

b) No

c) Dont know

61, 61%22, 22%

17, 17%yes

No

Don't Know


Yes excessive use of mobile we are going towards isolation, violet color show

22,22% select No and light yellow show 17,17% select Dont Know.

Q.10: Do you think that our grand parents were more honest and involved in

their relations than us?

a) Yesb) No

c) Dont know

81, 81%

13, 13%

6, 6%

yes

No

Don't Know


Yes our grand parents were more honest and involved in their relations than us,

violet color show 13,13% select No and light yellow show 6,6% select DontKnow.


32/37

Q.11: Do you think that excessive use of mobile is creating an anxiety factor

among youth?

a) No

b) Yes

77, 77%

23, 23%

yes

No


select Yes excessive use of mobile is creating an anxiety factor among youth and

23,23% select violet color its mean No.

Q.12: Do you think that in near future cell phone will become even more integral

part of our daily lives?a) Yes

b) No

96, 96%

4, 4%

yesNo


select Yes that in near future cell phone will become even more integral part ofour daily lives and 4,4% select violet color its mean No.


33/37

Q.13: Are you in favor that there should be any mobile restriction for a child

until unless he/she reaches to the age of adultery?

a) Yes

b) No

77, 77%

23, 23%

yes

No

In The above pie chart two colors are shown pale blue color show 77,77% select

Yes and 23,23% select violet color its mean No.

Q.14: How much amount do you spend to fulfill your cell phone expenses in a

month?

a) Rs.500-Rs.1000

b) Rs.1000-Rs.2000c) Rs.2000-Rs.3000

75, 75%

17, 17%

8, 8%

Rs.500-Rs.1000

Rs.1000-Rs.2000

Rs.2000-Rs.3000


Rs.500-1000, violet color show 17,17% select Rs.1000-2000 and light yellow show

8,8% select 2000-3000.


34/37

Q.15: Do you think due to cell phone crime ratio is increasing day by day?

a) Yes

b) No

87, 87%

13, 13%

yes

No

In The above pie chart two colors are shown pale blue color show 87,87% select

Yes due to cell phone crime ratio is increasing day by day and 13,13% select

violet color its mean No.


35/37

PIMSAT

CONCLUSION

The basis of our research is the hypothesis that is whether the Cell phone

advertisements on TV channels are provoking the increase of cell phone usage

and due to the excessive and unlimited use of cell phones, our traditional culture

which is based on social interaction, is in threat or not?. For testing this

hypothesis we have conducted 50 surveys from different students on the basis of

survey's results we concluded that our hypothesis is correct. Out of 100%

students 62% students answered that through media advertisements they get to

know about the mobile service packages and out of 100% students 70,70%students select Yes use of short English in SMS our spelling mistakes are

increasing, out of 100% students 70,70% students select meet friends & family

members Daily, 17,17% students select meet friends & family members Weekly

and 13,13% students select meet friends & family members Monthly. Out of

100% students 96,96% students select Yes that in near future cell phone will

become even more integral part of our daily lives and 4,4% students select No

cell phone will not become even more integral part of our daily lives. out of

100% students 81,81% students select Yes our grand parents were more honest

and involved in their relations than us, out of 100% students 87,87% students

select Yes due to cell phone crime ratio is increasing day by day out of 100%

students 77,77% students select Yes excessive use of mobile is creating an anxietyfactor among youth out of 100% students 61% students gave the opinion that

our youth is going towards isolation due to excessive usage of cell phone.

SUGGESTIONS

We suggest that Government should take positive steps to control and stop this

sedition which is expanding day by day. According to ourresearch out of 100%

students 84% students are in favor that there should be some age restriction in

use of mobile for the children until or unless they reach the age of adultery. Dueto limited time and sources our research is conducted on the limited scale but if it

would be conducted on large scale with the sincere participation of several

Government Departments then it may provide better and more powerful

suggestions for the solution of this sedition and after taking a deep breath, we

come to a this point research was a great experience to us, it seems to like us a

marathon race first, but when we put our mind in it we analyze and explore so

many important things about research. This type of research is necessary for the

students of business in the academic life to give them a challenging task, to polish

them, to give them self awareness, to get closest to the real world experience and

more commonly to face the difficulties and problems that a research person

faced. Your contribution has provided us important information which is very

helpful to draw youths attention towards this harmful device.


36/37

PIMSAT

FUTURE SCOPE

In our research we have observed that media is cultivating our culture according

to the agenda of the telecom companies. Recently an advertisement of the U-fone

was on airing on T.V. In it two characters were acting as a husband and wife.

The situation of the scene was quarrel between them on any subject matter but

the weird thing of this advertisement is that they were fighting through text

messages. May be this act of weirdness is not be implemented affectively inpresent scenario but we can predict that with the passage of time it will defiantly

affect the masses.

Our research is conducted on a small scale due to the limitations of time and

sources and due to these bound resources we have just covered one aspect of cell

phone and that is SMS services. For further research we recommend other

researcher to work on other grounds of cell phones.


37/37

Documents

aamir shehzad arain