A history of bad news For example, in 1994, University of Washington bioengineering professors Henry Lai and Narendra Singh found that DNA in rats' brains was damaged after two hours of exposure to levels of microwave radiation considered safe by government. When Lai and Singh published research, a leaked memo from Motorola's head of global strategy, Norm Sandler talked about ways to minimize damage by undermining their research, with Sandler writing, "I think that we have sufficiently war-gamed Lai/Singh issue." Ouch. Worse, research biologist Jerry Phillips, who was paid by Motorola to conduct similar testing, says he was able to duplicate Lai and Singh's findings, but was then asked not to publish research and was subsequently shunned by company. Motorola says it told Phillips that his findings needed clarification, and industry still maintains that Lai and Singh's results have never been duplicated and can't be considered legitimate.

The biggest Russell Crowe-style insider in this case, though, is Dr. George Carlo, who was hired by Cellular Telecommunications & Internet Association to head up a $28 million research program into possible health effects from cellular phones. Unfortunately, he now says his findings show an increased rate of brain cancer deaths, development of tumors, and genetic damage among heavy cell phone users. He wrote this letter of concern to president of AT&T Corporation and later went public with his findings after what he considered to be neglect by industry. He's since broken with industry, become a vocal critic, and coauthored a book called Cell Phones: Invisible Hazards in Wireless Age--so you can tell he's on "cell phones could cause cancer" side of things.

Meanwhile, more studies keep coming, and they seem to be getting worse. A study funded by European Union reported last December that radio waves from mobile phones do, definitively, damage DNA and other cells in body--and that damage extended to next generation of cells. Even though mutated cells are considered a possible cause of cancer, UK National Radiological Protection Board said that since study didn't show that damage definitely led to disease, consumers shouldn't worry too much about findings.

Uh, right. In meantime, report recommended that children use mobile phones only in emergency situations. You know, just in case. How reassuring.

The cell phone industry hasn't commissioned another large-scale study – at least not publicly –since its fateful encounter with Dr. Carlo – and why would they? They're in a catch-22. It's a multibillion dollar industry, and they simply can't afford to find out, definitively, that cell phones are dangerous. Worse, just like tobacco companies, if they start issuing warnings and precautionary tales now, it'll look like they knew all along that radio waves were dangerous, opening them up to major liability claims. They've already dodged one big, big bullet--an $800 million lawsuit against Motorola and cell phone carriers was thrown out in 2002, with judge ruling that there wasn't sufficient evidence for trial. Since then, neurologist Dr. Christopher Newman, who filed lawsuit, has died of brain cancer.

Listen, I use a cell phone, and I'm not trying to scare bejesus out of everyone. But I do use a headset when I'm talking for any long period of time, and I carry that sucker in my purse, not my pocket. (I know you guys don't have that luxury, but reconsider briefcase, OK?) And if you're shopping for a new phone, you might want to check our cell phone radiation chart to see which ones carry a low dose.

In a few more years, we'll either know for sure that cell phones can cause cancer, or we'll know they can't. I just hope we don't find out hard way – through subpoenaed documents from cell phone makers and carriers who've been trying to minimize their damages and maximize their profits for more than a decade.

Here’s a few simple guidelines to follow:

Less is usually better. Some people should never drink. If you do drink never, never, never mix alcohol and medications of any kind. Red wine is not necessarily best. Moderate or low-risk drinking is: * For men: no more than two drinks a day, but not every day * For women: one to two drinks a day, but not every day

These are some of possible adverse effects of drinking alcohol over a long period of time:

* Diminished coordination, cognitive impairment; * Injury or death from falls, motor crashes, fire, water mishaps; * Drownings, suicide; * Assault, violence, firearm use; * Choking deaths (asphyxiation); * Elevated blood pressure; * Stroke; * Cardiac myopathy and heartbeat irregularities (arrhythmias) with possible heart failure; * Possible "rebound coagulability" with increased blood clotting; * Pancreatitis (pancreas inflammation); * Alcoholic gastritis (stomach irritability, bleeds); * Liver cirrhosis; * Dependency (addiction); * Abusive behaviour, emotional problems; * Alcohol-related psychosis, breakdown of family, work and social relationships.

Advice on low-risk drinking

* Drink no more than two standard drinks in any day. * Abstainers should not begin drinking to protect heart. * Do not step up consumption to lower health risks. * Anyone who drinks more than two drinks in any one day should reduce consumption. * To minimize risks of dependence, have at least one alcohol-free day per week. * All persons who consume alcohol should avoid drinking to intoxication. * The following should drink no alcohol: -- people with certain psychological and physical illnesses; -- those taking certain medications such as antihistamines, psychoactive drugs and sleep-aids -- people driving vehicles or operating machinery; -- those responsible for public order or safety; -- people unable to control their drinking; -- those legally prohibited from drinking, such as under-age persons.

And so we come to my conclusions: Yes, moderate drinking can be very beneficial to a person. However, side of this coin to be carefully watched is: what is moderate for one person is not enough for another person and excessive for yet another. What is “just right” for 200-220 lb man is excessive for 145 lb man and not quite enough for 300 lb man.