Cell towers all over

[Samilcar]

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=can-you-hear-me-now

"Cell phones cannot cause cancer, because they do not emit enough energy to break the molecular bonds inside cells. Some forms of electromagnetic radiation, such as x-rays, gamma rays and ultraviolet (UV) radiation, are energetic enough to break the bonds in key molecules such as DNA and thereby generate mutations that lead to cancer. Electromagnetic radiation in the form of infrared light, microwaves, television and radio signals, and AC power is too weak to break those bonds..."


So, even if you bombarded yourself with a high enough level of microwaves to cook yourself (like the levels seen inside a microwave oven), it's a literal physical impossibility for those microwaves to cause cancer.

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: Vikas
I am betting that in my lifetime, I will see a day when scientific evidence would prove the disastrous effect of all of the microwave bombardment that we voluntarily put ourselves through.

Fifty years ago, smoking or asbestos was not considered health risk at all.

- Vikas


Possible, but not probable.

FM and TV broadcast has been around for decades and no one has complained that it caused cancer. Cell phone signal's frequence, as you have seen above, is about 1.1-2x of the FM / TV broadcast, so it is unlikely they are significantly different.

But then again, so many things have changed since back in the "good old days" that we don't know what is causing cancer and what is not anymore. Our food is plastered with pesticide, synthetic fertilizer, artificial preservatives, growth hormone, genetic modification, and radiation from nuclear fallout from previous nuke test. People are also more glued to their indoor activities like TV, Internet, video games rather than going out to play. How can we tell what is the cause of our cancer now?

 

[Nick R]

If wireless is dangerous, I'm screwed. I keep my cell phone on me at all time, it is on a shelf next to my bed, about 3 feet from my head. I have a 2.4Ghz/5Ghz range-extended wireless router in my bedroom, along with a 2.4Ghz Phone, a Wireless Headset, and wireless printer. I don't get headaches or sick feelings from them. Nor does anyone else I know.

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: JimPghPA
My Uncle once told me that when he was in the Korean war they use to aim radar at reporters and turn it on for a burst to triger all the flash bulbs in there camera bags.

An Electronic Engineer I once worked with told me of a widow who won a law suit because her husband died of RF exposure from the radars he worked on.

Now there is multi-frequency very low power radar for boats. While it does not have the long range that would be useful at sea, it is safe to humans close to the antenna, less likely to have interference from other radars, and has better close resolution.


Radar strong enough to trigger all the bulbs to flash in the camera bags are very different from the ones they use in civilian communication today (especially if you live in a large city where they have to reduce the power and coverage so they can reuse the same frequency in more location to save $). The difference is like exposing an ant under the sun vs putting them under a 100x magnifying glass; you can cook them in one but not the other.

Quote:
"For example, measurement data obtained from various sources have consistently indicated that "worst-case" ground-level power densities near typical cellular towers are on the order of 1 µW/cm2 or less (usually significantly less)." [1]

That is 0.01 Watt per square meter. There is no temptation to use more power. The entire idea of a "cell" phone system is to create small "cells" that don't interfere with each other.

The average energy received over the entire earth is about 250 Watts per square meter over a 24 hour day, ignoring clouds. So, on a day with no clouds, the average electromagnetic energy received from the Sun is 25,000 times that received near a cell phone tower.


Usually, the power from your cell phone next to your head is way more than the one from the tower. So it is unlikely it will exceed 2W next to your head.

 

[mechanicx]

I don't really know much about cell phones and radio waves. I don't think cell phone radio waves are powerful enough to damage living cells. I understand shorter wavelengths have more energy, and cell phones use fairly long waves, but some long waves can be made powerful enough to cause damage to cells. For example microwaves at high energy can cook tissue, but what about lower chronic levels? Would it just cause slight warmth or what?

But if there was a danger I'd think it would be in holding the cell phone next to your head moreso than from towers at some distance. My reasoning is it would not make much sense to make the cell tower's power appreciable more powerful than the cell phone. The cell phone has a limited range to the nearest tower so although the tower is mounted high, I wouldn't think it is that much more powerful than a cell phone. I could be wrong though.

 

[Win]

The FCC does promulgate limits on RF exposure to the public. I have limits that my amateur station has to comply with, so I would expect that the cell industry has limits as well.

Generally, the higher the frequency, the more damaging the radiation. Field strength follows the inverse square law so power limts and distance are your friends with respect to RF exposure.

Personally, I keep my cell phone on my body only when I have no other alternative. Any reasonable opportunity I have to get it away from me, even if only a few inches, I do so. I don't, and would not, use an in ear bluetooth device. In my car, I use the OnStar phone because the antenna is several feet away from my head. I wouldn't agree to a cell tower in my back yard, but a few hundred feet or so distance from a tower I would be OK with.

AFAIK there is no demonstrated connection between cell phones and adverse health, but I remain unconvinced and choose to keep some distance betweeen myself and these devices.

 

[Al]

I hope it kills off the soccer moms.

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: Al
I hope it kills off the soccer moms.


Are you married? got any kid?

 

[3311]

Originally Posted By: Al
I hope it kills off the soccer moms.
Simply the dumbest thing I have ever had the misfortune of reading on the internet.

 

[mailman74]

Some say cell towers are killing the honey bees.

 

[greenaccord02]

Originally Posted By: Al
I hope it kills off the soccer moms.


Right there with you, bro. Soccer moms fall somewhere between pinworms and tapeworms on my scale of life forms.

Haters gonna hate.

 

[PandaBear]

Son: Dad, can I join the soccer team this year?
Dad: No son, you gotta play some foot ball instead.
Son: But why?
Dad: Cause mom ain't driving you to practice.
Son: Why not?
Dad: Cause I hate soccer mom, and I ain't gonna marry one.

 

[JimPghPA]

More than once I have seen a referance to a medical scan of human heads on TV and someone saying that this scan shows an increase in activity on the side of the brain near where the cell phone was used. If those reports were true, that would mean that some type of energy is able to penetrate into the brain.

Radio waves travel by means of electro-static (voltage) converting into electro-magnetic waves, and then the electro-magnetic convert into electro-static. This process continues over and over again, once for ever wave-length of travel. While electro-static at low power and most frequencies may not be able to penetrate from air to inside of tissue, I would not think that the same could be said for electro-magnetic.

-----------------------------------------------------------------


I am much more concerned about the person standing near me in a checkout line using a cell phone than a tower a quarter of a mile away or more.

I use a wire ear plug that has a mike in it, and keep the cell phone away from me as much as I can when on a call, and also when no one is on it.

However, one of my hobbies use to be RC Airplanes. I use to stand with a One Watt RF transmitter in my hand for about a couple of hours a week. Great fun, and would not hesitate to do it again.

 

[PandaBear]

Increased brain activities. That is hard to say what it is, is it due to a bar pressing against the head, is it the heat generated, is it the talking, is it the placebo, is it the reorientation of some water molecule around your head due to the electric field? Unless they do a double blind test (random cell phones that may be on/off on both side of the brain), and follow the test person for years to see if their health get any problem. It is very hard to tell.

Originally Posted By: JimPghPA
Radio waves travel by means of electro-static (voltage) converting into electro-magnetic waves, and then the electro-magnetic convert into electro-static. This process continues over and over again, once for ever wave-length of travel. While electro-static at low power and most frequencies may not be able to penetrate from air to inside of tissue, I would not think that the same could be said for electro-magnetic.


All frequencies mentioned are electro magnetic wave (magnetic field), not electro static (DC, with an impulse release like lightning or static zapping when you take off a wool sweater on a dry day).

Infra-red and lower frequency do not usually penetrate much more than a piece of paper, and would be stopped at your skin paper deep. It will heat you up like if you warm your hand over a light blub depends on the power level. Cell tower is giving out 0.1uw / meter and your cell phone is typically about 0.5w, to 2w max.

Quote:
However, one of my hobbies use to be RC Airplanes. I use to stand with a One Watt RF transmitter in my hand for about a couple of hours a week. Great fun, and would not hesitate to do it again.


Might want to cut that out if you are worried about cell phone, that RF transmitter is a lot more harmful.

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Might want to cut that out if you are worried about cell phone, that RF transmitter is a lot more harmful.


It's not a good comparison. The R/C transmitter is a low frequency (between 27 and 72 MHz, depending on the transmitter), low power, low duty cycle, application, and holding it in your hand a couple of hours a week is different from wearing it on your person eight to ten hours a day. My amateur station can generate substantial close in peak field strength, but I don't transmit much, and when I do the average power is substantially less than the peak power, and the antenna is on a tower on my roof. My cumulative RF exposure is not significant.

OTOH, wearing a cell phone exposes you to its RF for much longer periods of time, at less benign frequencies. I don't know the duty cycle of a cell phone transmitter, but they are constantly linked to a transmitter, and exchanging information regardless of whether you are talking on it. This cumulative exposure over time may or may not be significant. So far it has not been demonstrated to have a harmful effect, but it is still early days as far as the widespread use of these devices. I err on the side of caution.

 

[Samilcar]

Originally Posted By: Win

OTOH, wearing a cell phone exposes you to its RF for much longer periods of time, at less benign frequencies.


How is 900-1800Mhz less benign than 72Mhz? Electromagnetic radiation doesn't start cracking apart DNA until you get up to the frequency of UV light (100,000,000,000Mhz).

 

[JimPghPA]

Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Increased brain activities. That is hard to say what it is, is it due to a bar pressing against the head, is it the heat generated, is it the talking, is it the placebo, is it the reorientation of some water molecule around your head due to the electric field? Unless they do a double blind test (random cell phones that may be on/off on both side of the brain), and follow the test person for years to see if their health get any problem. It is very hard to tell.

Originally Posted By: JimPghPA
Radio waves travel by means of electro-static (voltage) converting into electro-magnetic waves, and then the electro-magnetic convert into electro-static. This process continues over and over again, once for ever wave-length of travel. While electro-static at low power and most frequencies may not be able to penetrate from air to inside of tissue, I would not think that the same could be said for electro-magnetic.


All frequencies mentioned are electro magnetic wave (magnetic field), not electro static (DC, with an impulse release like lightning or static zapping when you take off a wool sweater on a dry day).

Infra-red and lower frequency do not usually penetrate much more than a piece of paper, and would be stopped at your skin paper deep. It will heat you up like if you warm your hand over a light blub depends on the power level. Cell tower is giving out 0.1uw / meter and your cell phone is typically about 0.5w, to 2w max.

Quote:
However, one of my hobbies use to be RC Airplanes. I use to stand with a One Watt RF transmitter in my hand for about a couple of hours a week. Great fun, and would not hesitate to do it again.


Might want to cut that out if you are worried about cell phone, that RF transmitter is a lot more harmful.


Recent understanding of how radio waves propagate is that they change from magnetic to voltage, and then from voltage to magnetic, at right angles to each other, over and over again. This is for ALL frequencies.

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: JimPghPA
Recent understanding of how radio waves propagate is that they change from magnetic to voltage, and then from voltage to magnetic, at right angles to each other, over and over again. This is for ALL frequencies.


That recent understanding has been around for a couple hundred years. Anyone who has taken high school physics should have it in the back of their mind.

Voltage: electrons on one side and electron holes on the other side

Magnetic: electrons flow in one direction causing other material near by to have electrons flow in the same direction.

They are the twin brother of each other in RF. This has nothing to do with how much power it has or how damaging it can be.

I'll stick to my magnifying glass on ants example, if you want to know where I stand.

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: Win
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Might want to cut that out if you are worried about cell phone, that RF transmitter is a lot more harmful.


It's not a good comparison. The R/C transmitter is a low frequency (between 27 and 72 MHz, depending on the transmitter), low power, low duty cycle, application, and holding it in your hand a couple of hours a week is different from wearing it on your person eight to ten hours a day. My amateur station can generate substantial close in peak field strength, but I don't transmit much, and when I do the average power is substantially less than the peak power, and the antenna is on a tower on my roof. My cumulative RF exposure is not significant.

OTOH, wearing a cell phone exposes you to its RF for much longer periods of time, at less benign frequencies. I don't know the duty cycle of a cell phone transmitter, but they are constantly linked to a transmitter, and exchanging information regardless of whether you are talking on it. This cumulative exposure over time may or may not be significant. So far it has not been demonstrated to have a harmful effect, but it is still early days as far as the widespread use of these devices. I err on the side of caution.



Cell phone does not transmit all the time. Otherwise the battery life would be the same regardless of talk time or standby.

During non transmission (i.e. not in call or not uploading / downloading), it only transmit a periodic signal to the tower to tell it is there and is turned on. Most of the time it is in receiving and does nothing. Remember, usable frequencies is VERY EXPENSIVE and phone companies have no incentive to waste it on making cancer patient (if you believe in that).

Now the debate on frequency of harmfulness. Your phone is generating 2W the most, and usually 0.5W if you are near the tower with good reception. The frequency as you see on the chart is lower than visible light. Your light bulb at home generate infra red higher than cell phone frequency and it is at a much higher output, much closer to UV, EUV, X ray, or Gamma ray, and at a freaking 40W-120W per bulb.

I've never seen someone who claims light bulbs causes cancer and should be banned. You argue that RC toys with 1W (which is much closer to the cell signals) is not harmful but the cell tower is. So you have to accept that visible light and infra red is more harmful than cell signal, otherwise there is no way that a cherry picked frequency at low power, low usage level can cause more harm.

 

[Win]

Originally Posted By: Samilcar
How is 900-1800Mhz less benign than 72Mhz? Electromagnetic radiation doesn't start cracking apart DNA until you get up to the frequency of UV light (100,000,000,000Mhz).


RF is non ionizing, so dielectic heating is its biological effect, so far as I know.

Microwaves are more efficient at transmiting heat to water than longer wavelengths. It is a microwave transmitter, albeit a small one, one has against one's body or in one's ear when using these devices.

Most people are resonant probably around 60 - 100MHz, so on a whole body basis will absorb the most RF energy at those frequencies up to around 300 MHz or so.