Technology has created remarkable transformations in the world today. Moreover, technology has revolutionized how people communicate, conduct business, and acquire knowledge and information. Automation of several industrial and construction processes has created immense urban growth on a global scale. Besides, technology has facilitated discoveries in healthcare that have transformed aspects such as disease diagnosis, treatment, and management. In cancer care, technology is attributed to less harmful treatment procedures that increase patients’ survival rates and enhance their quality of life. However, technology is also associated with cancer onset and is said to be a significant precursor to cancer development. Several technological advancements that rely on the use of electromagnetic and ultraviolet (UV) radiology have precipitated cancer prevalence increase globally. This paper seeks to explore and argue on how technology is a cancer-contributing factor in the world today. Although modern technologies have made life easier in several ways, their increased use is associated with negative human health safety issues and cancer onset.
Technology has played a pivotal role in the advancement of cancer treatments and the development of better methodologies for cancer care. Technological discoveries of therapies such as immunotherapies, improved radiology technologies, and better diagnostic procedures have continued to improve survival and cure rates (Siegel & Welsh, 2016). However, studies have established that cancer claims one in every six deaths worldwide (Hugosson, et al., 2010) . The World Health Organization (WHO) indicates that cancer diagnoses are expected to increase by 70% by the year 2022 (Brown et al., 2014) . The increased use of devices and gadgets such as mobile phones and microwaves in both developed and developing nations seems to reverse the advanced treatment gains due to high cancer prevalence rates (Misra, Acharya, & Sahoo, 2010) . Besides, the utilization of advanced diagnostic procedures in healthcare that emits electromagnetic frequencies and ionizing radiation creates a counter effect in cancer treatment since they are associated with causing cancer.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
People are more exposed to gadgets that transmit low-intensity radio frequency radiation. According to Yakymenko et al. (2016) the type of radiation emitted from gadgets, commonly found in wireless technologies such as laptops, phones, and Wi-Fi increase oxidative stress that results in an elevation in free radicals in the body. Increased free radicals, in the absence of antioxidants result in body cells destruction, which is a risk factor for cancer onset. Although free radicals are a critical part of the aging process, increased exposure to technological devices that emit Radio Free Roscoe (RFR) can elevate free radicals in a way that overwhelms the body resulting in cancer. Additionally, several studies have been conducted to evaluate the effect of the non-ionizing rays emitted by wireless devices. A substantial amount of evidence form these studies seems to suggest that low-intensity radio frequency found in wireless devices is harmless in regard to cancer (Hugosson, et al., 2010) . However, the meta-analyses by Yakymenko et al. (2016) indicated that persistent and long-term exposure to low-intensity radiofrequency radiation is adequate to suggest the increased cancer prevalence in the world.
Technology has offered immense benefits in the health sector, business, education, communication, construction, and transport. In the building industry, utilization of ICT and uncrewed aerial vehicles has transformed the construction industry due to enhanced building technologies and construction management methodologies. In education, virtual and distance learning have enabled a significant number of individuals to acquire an education with the exemption of traveling several miles to attend physical classrooms. In healthcare, real-time technological diagnostic and treatment procedures have necessitated accurate patient treatment, which increases positive patient outcomes. This aspect is especially true in cancer care because of technology-based advanced cancer care procedures. Given, exposure to these technological advancements may also be contributing to cancer today. The main reason is that specialists are required to utilize wireless devices and for individuals to effectively achieve their goals in areas such as virtual education, construction, and business. Communication bandwidth has today advanced form 2G to 5G bandwidth technology, which offers more reliability and speed. Such increased speeds require the utilization of more transmitters in residential neighborhoods. The technology means that people are more exposed to radiation causing cancer. The exposure is against the backdrop of arguments presented by wireless technological experts that despite the increased exposure to radiation from these transmitters poses, as a risk for cancer remains low. The argument seems to counter the evidence presented in Yakymenko et al. (2016) study that increased and long-term exposure to low-intensity non- ionizing radiation is a significant factor in cancer onset. Therefore, exposure to communication technology and the risk of cancer has not been conclusively reached.
Research suggests that wireless technological devices are not a risk factor for brain tumors. This is because the use of mobile phone and Bluetooth devices has increased exponentially in the entire globe without a corresponding increase in brain cancer prevalence. For instance, studies have revealed that although mobile phone use has increased by over 500%, between 1990 and 2017, brain cancer incidence rate increased by only 34% (Siegel & Welsh, 2016). The increase in the number of diagnosed brain cancer cases has been made possible by technological advancements in brain cancer diagnosis such as advanced imaging that allow for enhanced tumor detection. Hence, an increase in mobile phone and other wireless devices use fails to match the rise in brain cancer prevalence and incidence. However, according to research conducted by the International Agency for Research (IAR), mobile phones are classified as a potential cancer cause (Saracci & Samet, 2010) . Results of the study led the agency to conclude that sufficient evidence is non-existent to adequately conclude that mobile phone devices result in cancer.
Furthermore, plausible explanations of how mobile devices could cause cancer is lacking since the radio frequency electromagnetic radiation emitted by these devices are not strong enough to trigger cell mutation or DNA damage (Siegel & Welsh, 2016). Researchers further suggest that the majority of the studies, which provide evidence of the correlation between mobile phone, and other wireless devices use and cancer are generally small studies. Often these studies have been cited as unreliable and lacking in validity due to factors such as small sample sizes. Therefore, to provide research-based evidence that links wireless devices and cancer requires large studies with large sample sizes. Conversely, Siegel and Welsh, (2016) state that this may not be possible due to the ethical concerns involved with this type of research. Per se, wireless technology does not contribute to cancer and cancer-related diseases.
Overall, technology plays a critical role in today’s society. It has created numerous benefits in several sectors that have transformed how human beings live and conduct business. However, technology use is attributed to contributing to cancer due to oxidative stress, free radicals, and cell and DNA damage. Although modern technologies have made life easier in several ways, their increased use is associated with human health safety issues and cancer onset. While several studies seem to suggest that technology plays a significant role in cancer development, other studies indicate that technology use is an insignificant cancer-contributing factor. Therefore, researchers suggest increased research to investigate the mechanisms through which technologies such as wireless devices causes cancer and provide conclusive research-based evidence. The research should be conducted as soon as possible to conclusively determine whether advanced technology in the communication sector actually increase cancer risks.
References
Brown, M. L., Klabunde, C. N., Cronin, K. A., White, M. C., Richardson, L. C., & McNeel, T. S. (2014). Challenges in meeting Healthy People 2020 objectives for cancer-related preventive services, National Health Interview Survey, 2008 and 2010. Preventing Chronic Disease , 11 , E29-E29.
Hugosson, J., Carlsson, S., Aus, G., Bergdahl, S., Khatami, A., Lodding, P., ... & Lilja, H. (2010). Mortality results from the Göteborg randomised population-based prostate-cancer screening trial. The Lancet Oncology , 11 (8), 725-732.
Misra, R., Acharya, S., & Sahoo, S. K. (2010). Cancer nanotechnology: application of nanotechnology in cancer therapy. Drug Discovery Today , 15 (19-20), 842-850.
Saracci, R., & Samet, J. (2010). Commentary: Call me on my mobile phone… or better not?—a look at the INTERPHONE study results. International Journal of Epidemiology , 39 (3), 695-698.
Siegel, J. A., & Welsh, J. S. (2016). Does imaging technology cause cancer? Debunking the linear no-threshold model of radiation carcinogenesis. Technology in Cancer Research & Treatment , 15 (2), 249-256.
Yakymenko, I., Tsybulin, O., Sidorik, E., Henshel, D., Kyrylenko, O., & Kyrylenko, S. (2016). Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagnetic Biology and Medicine , 35 (2), 186-202. Doi: doi.org/10.3109/15368378.2015.1043557
