Radio waves that close to your brain or close to your waist!!! even wireless [hones and comp wifi seem to be the same deal. Profit hides all sins. The bad cell phone thing has been known for many years .
Scientists Believe Your Cell Phone Is a Death Trap
- Thread starter Lurch
- Start date
- Status
What are the dangers on microwave radiation exposure? Any engineers experienced in the subject on board?
I'm going to get a lead suit.
Oh wait, lead is hazardous.
Oh wait, lead is hazardous.
Originally Posted By: Lurch
I had a cell phone once - only for emergencies and almost never used it. If I ever get another it will be for same - emergencies only to take on the road. I don't even use a cordless phone at home because I also think they are a health hazard and one I can do w/o. I have a corded one and I hope to keep it that way.
No microwave oven for me either. Microwaves are IMHO a dangerous convenience item that I can do without. I have a nice little convection oven that will do the job just as well if not better and may take a few minutes longer.
According to you I should dead already...I use 2 Microwaves at the same time daily...I am always on my cell phone...I also use cordless phones a lot...I do not always sit far enough away from the TV most of the time...I have low ceilings and leave all the ceiling fans on 24/7...There is one in every single room...One is snack right over my bed...Besides the cental a/c I have another small unit in the bedroom near my bed that I keep on all night as I like it ice cold when I sleep.
But I also respect what you do...To each his own.
I had a cell phone once - only for emergencies and almost never used it. If I ever get another it will be for same - emergencies only to take on the road. I don't even use a cordless phone at home because I also think they are a health hazard and one I can do w/o. I have a corded one and I hope to keep it that way.
No microwave oven for me either. Microwaves are IMHO a dangerous convenience item that I can do without. I have a nice little convection oven that will do the job just as well if not better and may take a few minutes longer.
According to you I should dead already...I use 2 Microwaves at the same time daily...I am always on my cell phone...I also use cordless phones a lot...I do not always sit far enough away from the TV most of the time...I have low ceilings and leave all the ceiling fans on 24/7...There is one in every single room...One is snack right over my bed...Besides the cental a/c I have another small unit in the bedroom near my bed that I keep on all night as I like it ice cold when I sleep.
But I also respect what you do...To each his own.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: Steve S
The bad cell phone thing has been known for many years .
Old cell phones had much more powerful antennas. Don't confuse obsolete data with old news.
Yes ...and I am old enough to remember when my shoe store had a fluoroscopic machine so you could see a real time xray view of your foot bones.
What you're saying is something akin to "They're much better now. You only get 1/10th the radiation of the old xray manchine!"
Suppose the old units had a TWA lethal rate of 5000 accumulative hours? Suppose the current units put out 1/10 the emissions? I guess they'll only half kill you.
Just tearing apart the rationalization
Originally Posted By: Steve S
The bad cell phone thing has been known for many years .
Old cell phones had much more powerful antennas. Don't confuse obsolete data with old news.
Yes ...and I am old enough to remember when my shoe store had a fluoroscopic machine so you could see a real time xray view of your foot bones.
What you're saying is something akin to "They're much better now. You only get 1/10th the radiation of the old xray manchine!"
Suppose the old units had a TWA lethal rate of 5000 accumulative hours? Suppose the current units put out 1/10 the emissions? I guess they'll only half kill you.
Just tearing apart the rationalization
Well, that's not quite accurate. It is equally likely that cell replication is interfered with (allegedly) only by waves at or greater than a certain threshold of power, so it may be that we are now under that threshold. It is more likely that there is no such threshold and we have never been in any danger. People are always scared of new technology.
Is it just me or does this site need some kind of sub forum for health conspiracy theorists and organic foods eaters? This is one of those "don't eat it if I can't pronounce the ingredients" topics.
Is it just me or does this site need some kind of sub forum for health conspiracy theorists and organic foods eaters? This is one of those "don't eat it if I can't pronounce the ingredients" topics.
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
I would imagine that it falls under the exponential rate that most radiated power does. Half the distance, four times the strength. It assumes no intermediate reduces the strength. For many radiated sources it would be the density of intermediate objects ..which are effectively incidental shielding.
Yep, it's an inverse square relationship.
I would imagine that it falls under the exponential rate that most radiated power does. Half the distance, four times the strength. It assumes no intermediate reduces the strength. For many radiated sources it would be the density of intermediate objects ..which are effectively incidental shielding.
Yep, it's an inverse square relationship.
Originally Posted By: greenaccord02
Well, that's not quite accurate. It is equally likely that cell replication is interfered with (allegedly) only by waves at or greater than a certain threshold of power, so it may be that we are now under that threshold.
Pretty much.
As I understand it, the "threshold" is defined by three things:
1. The likelihood of damage
2. The ability of our cells' internal repair mechanisms to compensate
3. The expected severity of un-repaired damage
These can obviously be different for different people, but the point is that an incremental decrease in radiation intensity can decrease the danger exponentially.
Well, that's not quite accurate. It is equally likely that cell replication is interfered with (allegedly) only by waves at or greater than a certain threshold of power, so it may be that we are now under that threshold.
Pretty much.
As I understand it, the "threshold" is defined by three things:
1. The likelihood of damage
2. The ability of our cells' internal repair mechanisms to compensate
3. The expected severity of un-repaired damage
These can obviously be different for different people, but the point is that an incremental decrease in radiation intensity can decrease the danger exponentially.
Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: Steve S
The bad cell phone thing has been known for many years .
Old cell phones had much more powerful antennas. Don't confuse obsolete data with old news.
If the internal printed circuit antenna of modern cell phones is less efficient ( and I don't know that it is ), that could be, and likely has been, overcome by advances in semiconductor technology to reduce the noise floor of the receiver, and advances in battery technology to allow for a higher transmitter output from the device.
A higher transmitter output device could be more dangerous, the old ones might have been safer, no one really knows.
Originally Posted By: Steve S
The bad cell phone thing has been known for many years .
Old cell phones had much more powerful antennas. Don't confuse obsolete data with old news.
If the internal printed circuit antenna of modern cell phones is less efficient ( and I don't know that it is ), that could be, and likely has been, overcome by advances in semiconductor technology to reduce the noise floor of the receiver, and advances in battery technology to allow for a higher transmitter output from the device.
A higher transmitter output device could be more dangerous, the old ones might have been safer, no one really knows.
Break out the tin aluminum foil hats!! Run for the hills!
No, but really in todays world it's almost impossible to avoid radiation. Does it mess with us on a cellular level? (living cells, not cell phones, no pun intended) Of course it does, but how much no one knows.
Would I live next to a cell tower? Heck no! There's even a few (smallish 3 story) apartment buildings around here with cell towers on the roof. Yowsa. Talk about getting cooked!
No, but really in todays world it's almost impossible to avoid radiation. Does it mess with us on a cellular level? (living cells, not cell phones, no pun intended) Of course it does, but how much no one knows.
Would I live next to a cell tower? Heck no! There's even a few (smallish 3 story) apartment buildings around here with cell towers on the roof. Yowsa. Talk about getting cooked!
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
Quote:
Well, that's not quite accurate.
Not offered for accuracy
Quote:
It is equally likely that cell replication is interfered with (allegedly) only by waves at or greater than a certain threshold of power,
..and this threshold is? ..and are we into odds here? How many sides are on your die? Watch out for the Umberhulk ..."20!"
Quote:
It is more likely that there is no such threshold and we have never been in any danger.
How do you know this to be true? Are you a man of faith in that you "believe" it?
Quote:
People are always scared of new technology.
Not at all. I'll remind you of the wondrous machine that a shoe store could buy to let you see your bones as a sales aid. Never thought anything of it. Lawn darts ....chainsaws for those who shouldn't have used them... You name it .. Heck ..what was that woman's product that coined a new term ..toxic shock syndrome??.
I'd hardly say that the public fears new technology for the most part. I'd say that due to past practices some of the geezers are more cautious ..but there's usually some assumption that our nannies will assure our safety. Do you subscribe to that theory?
I do fear drive by wire. I'll really have a panic attack when steer by wire comes around.
But for myself I pretty much throw caution to the wind. I delivered radio isotopes for 5 years ...don't worry about artificial sweeteners ...this ..that ..I often don't wear a seat belt. I eat lots of butter ..and drink whole milk ..24 cups of coffee a day (usually 2 12cup pots) ..and thoroughly enjoy a meat lovers pizza ..with extra toppings.
I merely saying that just because you don't think there's a hazard ..that there isn't one. There's plenty of cases that could be cited where the risk and the effects were protracted and insidious to researchers of the time.
Well, that's not quite accurate.
Not offered for accuracy
Quote:
It is equally likely that cell replication is interfered with (allegedly) only by waves at or greater than a certain threshold of power,
..and this threshold is? ..and are we into odds here? How many sides are on your die? Watch out for the Umberhulk ..."20!"
Quote:
It is more likely that there is no such threshold and we have never been in any danger.
How do you know this to be true? Are you a man of faith in that you "believe" it?
Quote:
People are always scared of new technology.
Not at all. I'll remind you of the wondrous machine that a shoe store could buy to let you see your bones as a sales aid. Never thought anything of it. Lawn darts ....chainsaws for those who shouldn't have used them... You name it .. Heck ..what was that woman's product that coined a new term ..toxic shock syndrome??.
I'd hardly say that the public fears new technology for the most part. I'd say that due to past practices some of the geezers are more cautious ..but there's usually some assumption that our nannies will assure our safety. Do you subscribe to that theory?
I do fear drive by wire. I'll really have a panic attack when steer by wire comes around.
But for myself I pretty much throw caution to the wind. I delivered radio isotopes for 5 years ...don't worry about artificial sweeteners ...this ..that ..I often don't wear a seat belt. I eat lots of butter ..and drink whole milk ..24 cups of coffee a day (usually 2 12cup pots) ..and thoroughly enjoy a meat lovers pizza ..with extra toppings.
I merely saying that just because you don't think there's a hazard ..that there isn't one. There's plenty of cases that could be cited where the risk and the effects were protracted and insidious to researchers of the time.
There's a difference between ionizing and non-ionizing radiation.
X-rays are ionizing radiation. Microwaves are not.
X-rays are ionizing radiation. Microwaves are not.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
microwaves ...thermalized neutrons ...hexavalent chromium .what have you..does it really matter? The point was awareness of consequences between onset of exposure and realization of the side effects. There may be no merit to the precautionary hype ..but how would the first (would be) fear monger be received when they presented precautionary comments about the foot x-ray machine?
DON'T WORRY! It's perfectly safe!
DON'T WORRY! It's perfectly safe!
Why do they bother shielding your microwve oven ?
Why did ex GF's Dad and his mates stand in the radar antenas before going on shore leave ?
It's funny at work, we were all issued mobile phones...the manual told us not to put the phone in our pocket's but to keep a 1cm separation...why would they do that if they don't believe there's a "potential" for an issue.
I'll look up the number on the mobile and use a land line if it's there to make the call, check message bank on speaker, and wear the phone clipped to the outside of my pocket. But I also have no qualms at all answering when it rings, or using it to talk while I'm walking.
There's an unknown level of risk, and I'll minimise it while still remaining practical.
Have workmates tell me that if it wasn't safe, they wouldn't be on the market, while they almost glue them
Then as they go off to their annual lung X-ray, tell of making asbestos snow balls and throwing them at each other "because who could have possibly known it could give you cancer" ?
(well maybe the asbestos industry who tried to selctively employ non smokers and non asthma sufferers well into the 60s)
Why did ex GF's Dad and his mates stand in the radar antenas before going on shore leave ?
It's funny at work, we were all issued mobile phones...the manual told us not to put the phone in our pocket's but to keep a 1cm separation...why would they do that if they don't believe there's a "potential" for an issue.
I'll look up the number on the mobile and use a land line if it's there to make the call, check message bank on speaker, and wear the phone clipped to the outside of my pocket. But I also have no qualms at all answering when it rings, or using it to talk while I'm walking.
There's an unknown level of risk, and I'll minimise it while still remaining practical.
Have workmates tell me that if it wasn't safe, they wouldn't be on the market, while they almost glue them
Then as they go off to their annual lung X-ray, tell of making asbestos snow balls and throwing them at each other "because who could have possibly known it could give you cancer" ?
(well maybe the asbestos industry who tried to selctively employ non smokers and non asthma sufferers well into the 60s)
FWIW : I eat lots of high quality butter, coconut oil full of saturated fat.
I love to bathe in the Sun on warm days (10-15 minutes on each side - at noon) (I'd NEVER use sunblock).
I eat raw eggs any time I want to, and as many eggs a day as I want to. I prefer my blood cholesterol to be at least 200, preferably 250.
Grass fed beef daily.
No nuked food for me though.
I love to bathe in the Sun on warm days (10-15 minutes on each side - at noon) (I'd NEVER use sunblock).
I eat raw eggs any time I want to, and as many eggs a day as I want to. I prefer my blood cholesterol to be at least 200, preferably 250.
Grass fed beef daily.
No nuked food for me though.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Why do they bother shielding your microwve oven ?
You just brought back a memory of a teacher I had back in the 1970's. She was convinced that using those new-fangled microwave ovens would cause you to break out in cancerous tumors. She implored any of us that had them at home to run into the next room as soon as they were turned on.
Why do they bother shielding your microwve oven ?
You just brought back a memory of a teacher I had back in the 1970's. She was convinced that using those new-fangled microwave ovens would cause you to break out in cancerous tumors. She implored any of us that had them at home to run into the next room as soon as they were turned on.
Originally Posted By: AcuraTech
Would I live next to a cell tower? Heck no! There's even a few (smallish 3 story) apartment buildings around here with cell towers on the roof. Yowsa. Talk about getting cooked!
I do. Well, if you call 2/10 of a mile or so, to be next to a cell tower. It's a monster site, five vertical bays of directional cell antennae, clusters of VHF/UHF four poles, point to point microwave wave links, the whole RF enchilada on a 200 foot monopole. I admire it every morning when I walk out in my driveway. I was the only person in the neighborhood not to object to it.
Other than increasing my noise floor, I don't care about it. It's there for the same reason I am - it's in the middle of town on a hill, and its a terrific radio location. I can see the horizon in three directions just standing on my roof.
In addition to the distance, the height above ground severely limits the RF field strength in the immediate vicinity of the source. Ironically, the height and visual quality of these things seem to be what the public most objects to, but higher is always better not just for RF performance, but for minimizing exposure in the immediate vicinity of the source.
Keep a few feet of distance between yourself and these little SHF, GHz level devices, (or really any RF device) and you'll likely be fine. Plant one on your hip, or hang a cell phone or bluetooth device off of your ear a good part of the day, all bets are off, maybe you will have problems in the immediate vicinity of the device at some point in the future, or maybe not.
Time will tell.
Would I live next to a cell tower? Heck no! There's even a few (smallish 3 story) apartment buildings around here with cell towers on the roof. Yowsa. Talk about getting cooked!
I do. Well, if you call 2/10 of a mile or so, to be next to a cell tower. It's a monster site, five vertical bays of directional cell antennae, clusters of VHF/UHF four poles, point to point microwave wave links, the whole RF enchilada on a 200 foot monopole. I admire it every morning when I walk out in my driveway. I was the only person in the neighborhood not to object to it.
Other than increasing my noise floor, I don't care about it. It's there for the same reason I am - it's in the middle of town on a hill, and its a terrific radio location. I can see the horizon in three directions just standing on my roof.
In addition to the distance, the height above ground severely limits the RF field strength in the immediate vicinity of the source. Ironically, the height and visual quality of these things seem to be what the public most objects to, but higher is always better not just for RF performance, but for minimizing exposure in the immediate vicinity of the source.
Keep a few feet of distance between yourself and these little SHF, GHz level devices, (or really any RF device) and you'll likely be fine. Plant one on your hip, or hang a cell phone or bluetooth device off of your ear a good part of the day, all bets are off, maybe you will have problems in the immediate vicinity of the device at some point in the future, or maybe not.
Time will tell.
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Why do they bother shielding your microwve oven ?
Why do they bother putting insulation in your conventional oven? Why do they bother shielding the RF modulator in a cable box?
Why do they bother shielding your microwve oven ?
Why do they bother putting insulation in your conventional oven? Why do they bother shielding the RF modulator in a cable box?
- Status
Similar threads
