研究生科技英语阅读课文翻译对照(37)

以INTERPHONE研究五月份发表的结论为例子。这是目前规模最大持续时间最长的研究，针对手机会不会增大使用者患脑癌的几率，且会在多大程度上影响。由国际癌症研究署（IARC）主持，耗资2500万美元，历时十年。共有世界各国的约24位科学家和研究团队参与，涉及来自13个国家的一万多名患者和手机用户。研究对象范围虽然很广，但结论还是太缺乏说服力。
“Overall, no increase in risk of glioma [a cancer of the cells that protects the brain’s neurons] or meningioma [tumors that develop in the tissue that surrounds the brain] was observed with use of mobile phones,” the study concluded. “The possible effects of long-term heavy use of mobile phones require further investigation.”
研究结论是：“总体来看，手机用户患神经胶质瘤（神经胶质是保护大脑神经的一种细胞）和脑膜瘤（脑膜是大脑周围的组织）的风险不会增加。长时间大量使用手机可能造成的影响，需要进一步研究。”
And yet even these modest claims proved contentious. The study scientists themselves recognized problems in the methodology: While they had good data on the participants’ tumor and cancer histories, they had very suspect ‘After 10 years of research, we do not have an answer whether mobile phone radiation causes brain cancer,’ says one expert.data on their cell phone usage. Participants’ recall of how often and how much they talked on their cell phones, when checked against their actual cell phone records, in some cases proved very unreliable. The matching of patients with control subjects also turned out to be problematic. Should controls include only those who never used a cell phone and exclude those who’d used one only infrequently? While the distinction may seem insignificant, such selection biases can wreak statistical havoc. The analysis using the first group, for instance, resulted in the somewhat astonishing finding that regular users of cell phones had a reduced risk of developing glioma.