Is There A Good Reason Not To Get A Kid A Phone When They'Re 6-7 Or So?

[WinnieTheKhwai]

I think a phone makes sense as soon as the kid spends signficant time away from a parent, such as when going to school. Picking kids up from school is always a hassle to locate them, involving several teachers with megaphones, and it's kind of hit & miss if they'll even hear it.

So a phone makes a lot more sense; that's what phones are for.

Or is/are there any reason(s) not to get a kid a phone when they're in pathom (grade school) ?

And then, what kind of phone? I'm leaning towards a pretty basic one, though my kids will of course want something entertaining. But that also carries more considerations with it, such as limiting (data) costs, purchase price (and replacement cost when it inevitably breaks or gets lost), and internet safety concerns. But with a Nokia 0001, (or whatever their 600 baht base model is) those aren't really concerns.

[TommoPhysicist]

They will lose, break or have the phone stolen ..... so get the basic one for 400bht.

The little rat-bags rifle each others bags all the time.

Mine just had a 5k one stolen, the week before another class-mate had one stolen.

If they want an expensive one for a toy make them leave it at home.

Edited July 12, 2012 by TommoPhysicist

[WinnieTheKhwai]

They will lose, break or have the phone stolen ..... so get the basic one for 400bht.

The little rat-bags rifle each others bags all the time.

Mine just had a 5k one stolen, the week before another class-mate had one stolen.

If they want an expensive one for a toy make them leave it at home.

Thanks; yes, and we have an iPad for entertainment at home anyway.

[billd766]

I gave my 7 year old son a Nokia 3110 when he went back to school but it was my old one from 2007 and was a spare anyway.

I put 100 baht on it and there is still 60 odd left.

It is worth it as our son is usually picked up by the school minibus but sometimes I am up in town and I will pick him and his friend up so I will call him and my wife calls the bus driver.

Edit I need to go back to scool for bad speling.

Edited July 13, 2012 by billd766

[Brabo]

I bought a phone for my GF 7 year old doughter. It was a good idea.

The doughter stays with my GF parents in Isaan. Now she can call us whenever she wants, we can call her directly. We don't allow her to take the phone to school.

She has the phone now for about 6 months and it's still in mint condition..

[PattayaParent]

Picking kids up from school is always a hassle to locate them, involving several teachers with megaphones, and it's kind of hit & miss if they'll even hear it.

Maybe send your kid to a school that is better organised?

[Chittychangchang]

There are health implications to consider also..

Mobile phones have potential risks in the long-term

“Mobile phones could be a 'health time bomb', say experts who are urging ministers to warn the public,” the Daily Mail reported. The newspaper said that a leading group of scientists have published a report looking at research into the health risks of using mobiles, in which they state that “the government is underplaying the potentially 'enormous' health risks – especially for children, whose smaller, thinner skulls are more susceptible to radiation”.

This news report is based on a report by MobileWise, a UK charity aimed at raising awareness of mobile phone health issues. The report includes a narrative review of evidence into the risks of mobile phones to date. However, this review was not systematic and therefore may not show the complete picture. Furthermore, the researchers themselves acknowledge that the studies cited have limitations, the risks are still uncertain and no conclusions have been drawn.

Mobile phones are a relatively new exposure, and there has been and continues to be a lot of research into whether they present a risk. The balance of evidence that exists so far points to them not being a risk, but potential risks over the long-term have not yet been disproved.

As reported in July this year, current UK government advice for children and young people under 16 is to use mobile phones only for essential purposes and to keep calls short. The World Health Organization (WHO) has also taken a precautionary approach, and recently classified mobile phones as a “possible carcinogen”, putting them into the same risk bracket as traffic fumes and coffee. The classification means that the link is far from certain, and WHO states there is only “limited evidence” of a link, and that the results supporting a link may be due to other factors that have distorted study data.

Where did the report come from?

The news story is based on a report by MobileWise, a UK charity aimed at “raising awareness of mobile phone health issues, and promoting action to protect public health”.

Several scientific advisers, specialising in disciplines ranging from neurosurgery to environmental science, helped to produce this report. The report reviews scientific papers that have indicated health risks associated with mobile phones and assesses their methodological quality. However, this review was not systematic (in other words, it did not carry out a careful search for all studies that have investigated mobile phone risk, and so may not have included all relevant research; either those that have associated mobile phones with health risks and those that have not).

A systematic review would allow an overall assessment to be carried out of the evidence for any health risks. Narrative reviews such as this one can highlight interesting examples from one side of an argument, but cannot provide overall conclusions. A potential downside of a narrative review is that the authors can select (unwittingly or not) studies that support their own opinions. Additionally, the references included in this review are not restricted to human studies, and animal and laboratory studies have only limited relevance to humans unless they have been followed up with human studies.

What did the report find?

The report looked at studies showing a risk from mobile phones in the following health areas:

• cancer and other tumours
  
• damage to fertility and reproduction
  
• DNA damage
  
• damage to other biological processes
  
• health of children and young people
  

The report assessed observational studies in humans and also used data from laboratory studies. The reviewers highlight some problems with how some of the observational studies were carried out. These include:

• Some of the studies asked people to recall their mobile phone usage, which may be difficult to remember.
  
• In older studies, people’s phone use in the past may not reflect their current use.
  
• Studies that have assessed long-term exposures have done so for generally no more than 10 years, which may not be long enough to record health problems that occur later on in life.
  

The newspaper reports have particularly focussed on the health risks of mobile phones for children. The review said: “Laboratory studies have shown consistently that children’s heads absorb up to double the energy that a large adult does when making a mobile phone call and the energy can be concentrated in certain areas of the child’s brain, resulting in up to three times the absorption in these areas.” It added: “One study has found that the risk of brain cancer after prolonged mobile phone use is significantly greater in younger users.” However, the review did not give any explicit details of these studies.

In their conclusions on the health risks of mobile phones for children, the reviewers said that “large-scale epidemiological studies have not studied children, leading to major gaps in our understanding of the differences in the profile of risks for children and particularly for the developing brain,” and that a greater focus of research in this area is required.

What did the report conclude?

The reviewers said: “The substantial body of evidence highlighted in this report suggests that mobile phone use may be linked with a range of important health problems. These include, but are not limited to, brain tumours and the evidence has serious implications for public health. Although further research is needed, it makes sense to err on the side of caution in the meantime.”

It should be noted that there were limitations to this report; it was not a systematic review and appraisal of and links to the evidence were not always clearly stated in the document. Although some assessment was made of the methodological quality of the studies, the reviewers did not restrict their analysis to higher quality studies only. The reviewers are correct that further research is needed and that this is an important area of research, but a useful first step would be to conduct a systematic review to describe the full extent and quality of the evidence to date in order to prioritise areas for future research.

What is the official guidance on mobile phone safety?

More health information on mobile phones can be found on the HPA website

The NHS Choices Health AZ page on mobile phone safety

WHO: Electromagnetic fields and public health: mobile phones

[mike123ca]

As a high school teacher, I really love it when Somchai comes to class and is telephoning his friends or listening to the latest tunes. Why he even shows up to class is beyond me.

Edited July 18, 2012 by mike123ca

[billd766]

To reply to the long post about possible health issues (without posting it all again).

I retired 3 years ago after 21 years in the mobile phone system building networks in about 30 countries and I don't think I have any side effects.

I have colleagues who have benn in the businees since the early 1980s and are still in the business and who are also embarrasingly normal.

I went to the website, saw the video pushed by these people with no input from any other organisation, I have read their report and all I could see was a lot of could be's, perhaps'es, maybe's.

After over 10 years studies in many countries there is so far NO conclusive proof either for or against the use of mobile phones.

[sonicdragon]

As an epidemiologist I have studied the evidence presented by the many investigations into the link between mobile phone use and adverse health conditions. There is no compelling evidence of a link. On the contrary, the evidence points to there being no link.

On the other hand, the main reason for not getting a 6-7yr old child a mobile phone is to not encourage the consumerism and mine-is-better-than-yours cult.

[4evermaat]

To reply to the long post about possible health issues (without posting it all again).

I retired 3 years ago after 21 years in the mobile phone system building networks in about 30 countries and I don't think I have any side effects.

I have colleagues who have benn in the businees since the early 1980s and are still in the business and who are also embarrasingly normal.

I went to the website, saw the video pushed by these people with no input from any other organisation, I have read their report and all I could see was a lot of could be's, perhaps'es, maybe's.

After over 10 years studies in many countries there is so far NO conclusive proof either for or against the use of mobile phones.

As an epidemiologist I have studied the evidence presented by the many investigations into the link between mobile phone use and adverse health conditions. There is no compelling evidence of a link. On the contrary, the evidence points to there being no link.

On the other hand, the main reason for not getting a 6-7yr old child a mobile phone is to not encourage the consumerism and mine-is-better-than-yours cult.

While I agree that the post about the potential health effects of mobile phone usage is a bit blown out of proportion, I can say from experience that the bluetooth earpieces can leave a stinging feeling in or around your ear. But you usually can feel this either immediately or after a few days of use, so it's pretty traceable. I don't see many people using wireless earpieces here anyway.

[dominique355]

I gave my son (9) my old Samsung Galaxy 2 with a new, pre-paid SIM. After a week the credit was 0 and 15 new games were installed on the phone.

Result: I took away the phone and he must "grow up" a bit more.

[TwoDogz]

Over last 2 years when my kids had been asking for phones, I told them no until they hit 13yo.

The pressure out there is immense and just a few months ago I got the 10yo a bottom end nokia for 2k baht. Spent a little more than the under 1k ones for a decent camera so he can use it on school excursions etc and is handy for him.

All the friends have them and they feel left out. Many have iphones and ipads at school etc, but I draw the line there as I do not want my kids living with their heads in electronics.

So really apart from the convenience for whatever reason and perhaps a safety issue, the pressure around them is the reason we got it 2 years early. He is not allowed internet on it and only a set amount per month and will stay this way until older and more responsible with things.

[Satcommlee]

Ignore previous posters, mobile phones are definately hazardous..

Mobiles phones can cause black eye's, reddening of the cheeks and on rare occasions involuntary Penectomys and even death.

Please make sure to lock your phone before you visit your mia noi, as it is sometimes possible to make accidental calls when the phone is in your pocket!

[whistleblower]

There are health implications to consider also..

Mobile phones have potential risks in the long-term

“Mobile phones could be a 'health time bomb', say experts who are urging ministers to warn the public,” the Daily Mail reported. The newspaper said that a leading group of scientists have published a report looking at research into the health risks of using mobiles, in which they state that “the government is underplaying the potentially 'enormous' health risks – especially for children, whose smaller, thinner skulls are more susceptible to radiation”.

This news report is based on a report by MobileWise, a UK charity aimed at raising awareness of mobile phone health issues. The report includes a narrative review of evidence into the risks of mobile phones to date. However, this review was not systematic and therefore may not show the complete picture. Furthermore, the researchers themselves acknowledge that the studies cited have limitations, the risks are still uncertain and no conclusions have been drawn.

Mobile phones are a relatively new exposure, and there has been and continues to be a lot of research into whether they present a risk. The balance of evidence that exists so far points to them not being a risk, but potential risks over the long-term have not yet been disproved.

As reported in July this year, current UK government advice for children and young people under 16 is to use mobile phones only for essential purposes and to keep calls short. The World Health Organization (WHO) has also taken a precautionary approach, and recently classified mobile phones as a “possible carcinogen”, putting them into the same risk bracket as traffic fumes and coffee. The classification means that the link is far from certain, and WHO states there is only “limited evidence” of a link, and that the results supporting a link may be due to other factors that have distorted study data.

Where did the report come from?

The news story is based on a report by MobileWise, a UK charity aimed at “raising awareness of mobile phone health issues, and promoting action to protect public health”.

Several scientific advisers, specialising in disciplines ranging from neurosurgery to environmental science, helped to produce this report. The report reviews scientific papers that have indicated health risks associated with mobile phones and assesses their methodological quality. However, this review was not systematic (in other words, it did not carry out a careful search for all studies that have investigated mobile phone risk, and so may not have included all relevant research; either those that have associated mobile phones with health risks and those that have not).

A systematic review would allow an overall assessment to be carried out of the evidence for any health risks. Narrative reviews such as this one can highlight interesting examples from one side of an argument, but cannot provide overall conclusions. A potential downside of a narrative review is that the authors can select (unwittingly or not) studies that support their own opinions. Additionally, the references included in this review are not restricted to human studies, and animal and laboratory studies have only limited relevance to humans unless they have been followed up with human studies.

What did the report find?

The report looked at studies showing a risk from mobile phones in the following health areas:

• cancer and other tumours
  
• damage to fertility and reproduction
  
• DNA damage
  
• damage to other biological processes
  
• health of children and young people
  

The report assessed observational studies in humans and also used data from laboratory studies. The reviewers highlight some problems with how some of the observational studies were carried out. These include:

• Some of the studies asked people to recall their mobile phone usage, which may be difficult to remember.
  
• In older studies, people’s phone use in the past may not reflect their current use.
  
• Studies that have assessed long-term exposures have done so for generally no more than 10 years, which may not be long enough to record health problems that occur later on in life.
  

The newspaper reports have particularly focussed on the health risks of mobile phones for children. The review said: “Laboratory studies have shown consistently that children’s heads absorb up to double the energy that a large adult does when making a mobile phone call and the energy can be concentrated in certain areas of the child’s brain, resulting in up to three times the absorption in these areas.” It added: “One study has found that the risk of brain cancer after prolonged mobile phone use is significantly greater in younger users.” However, the review did not give any explicit details of these studies.

In their conclusions on the health risks of mobile phones for children, the reviewers said that “large-scale epidemiological studies have not studied children, leading to major gaps in our understanding of the differences in the profile of risks for children and particularly for the developing brain,” and that a greater focus of research in this area is required.

What did the report conclude?

The reviewers said: “The substantial body of evidence highlighted in this report suggests that mobile phone use may be linked with a range of important health problems. These include, but are not limited to, brain tumours and the evidence has serious implications for public health. Although further research is needed, it makes sense to err on the side of caution in the meantime.”

It should be noted that there were limitations to this report; it was not a systematic review and appraisal of and links to the evidence were not always clearly stated in the document. Although some assessment was made of the methodological quality of the studies, the reviewers did not restrict their analysis to higher quality studies only. The reviewers are correct that further research is needed and that this is an important area of research, but a useful first step would be to conduct a systematic review to describe the full extent and quality of the evidence to date in order to prioritise areas for future research.

What is the official guidance on mobile phone safety?

More health information on mobile phones can be found on the HPA website

The NHS Choices Health AZ page on mobile phone safety

WHO: Electromagnetic fields and public health: mobile phones

Wow you'll never be asked to santa claus at the school fete

[whistleblower]

I think the OP is old enough to know that in 'our' day the concept of a mobile phone never existed. To now be talking/discussing/debating about whether to give our prepubecent kids a phone says a lot for society today.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

Picking kids up from school is always a hassle to locate them, involving several teachers with megaphones, and it's kind of hit & miss if they'll even hear it.

Maybe send your kid to a school that is better organised?

You mean one without extensive playgrounds, or rules that prohibit kids from playing on those grounds after school and staying lined up or in their classrooms?

I think the OP is old enough to know that in 'our' day the concept of a mobile phone never existed. To now be talking/discussing/debating about whether to give our prepubecent kids a phone says a lot for society today.

I'm not getting this. In 'our' day some vaccinations didn't exist. In my day my parents didn't have a car. Or even if they had one, child safety seats didn't exist yet.

But maybe I'm misunderstanding your post, so just in case: what does it say about society today? You stopped short of actually telling us what.

Edited August 6, 2012 by WinnieTheKhwai

[WinnieTheKhwai]

also, this is mostly for my own convenience; it's not like an 800 baht phone is a desirable toy. I actually buy desirable toys that cost a lot more.

[krisb]

best reason is they are to young to have unless you feel the need to be able to contact them.

Edited August 6, 2012 by krisb