Bioelectromagnetics

[Darat]

I am not confident about the rules of this forum, but perhaps someone would tell me whether by naming the gentleman I would thereby be infringing your libel rules. I will ask the person if it's OK to do so before naming him.

...snip...

I cannot speak on behalf of the JREF but I cannot see how libel could have anything to do with this matter.

You stated that "...The Prof of physics at Bristol has just lost his MRC funding for being outspoken on the EMF issue..." who could you possibly be libeling (apart from perhaps the MRC)? (See http://www.swarb.co.uk/lawb/defTrueLibel.html for a concise guide to defamation and libel in the UK.)

You seem to have given the following information:

Physics Professor at Bristol University
Professor in the "dept for radiation effects in humans"

Using this information I could using the University's publicly accessible site find a name, email address and telephone number.

Out of courtesy to you I will refrain from any attempt at contacting Professor Henshaw until tomorrow (Weds).

If I hear nothing substantial from you I will contact him tomorrow.

 

[Darat]

If anyone is interested in why I want to contact the Professor that allegedly has had his funding withdrawn because of advocating a "non-mainstream" view it is because of “who” it has been alleged withdrew that funding.

"MRC" is the Medical Research Council. And from their website:

http://www.mrc.ac.uk/index/about.htm

...snip...

The UK Medical Research Council (MRC) is a national organisation funded by the UK taxpayer. We promote research into all areas of medical and related science with the aims of improving the health and quality of life of the UK public and contributing to the wealth of the nation.

The MRC is funded by the UK Government and receives an annual Grant in aid from Parliament via the Office of Science and Technology, which is now part of the Department of Trade and Industry.

Working through its Council, scientific boards, and committees, the MRC is independent in its choice of which research to support. It does however work in close partnership with Health Departments, other Research Councils, industry and others to identify and respond to current and future health needs.

...snip...

As you can see this is a government appointed, tax funded organisation and if this serious allegation is true then I want to pursue it further.

As one of the people who fund the MRC I would like to think it uses objective and rational thinking (and evidence) to come to its decisions and if it isn’t I would want to help to ensure it is changed so that it does so in future.

(Edited for evidence sake.)

 

[BillHoyt]

I am not confident about the rules of this forum, but perhaps someone would tell me whether by naming the gentleman I would thereby be infringing your libel rules.

If it is the truth, it can't be libel, can it? Stop the ruse.

 

[BillHoyt]

If I hear nothing substantial from you I will contact him tomorrow.

I'm not a doctor and don't play one on TV, so this isn't really medical advice. Nonetheless, don't hold your breath.

 

[Lucianarchy]

I don't think any real sceptic doubts that chronic EM exposure cause harm.

The problem lies with the scientific establishment and their links to commercial enterprises.

Homeopathy would have been accepted a lot earlier if the establishment hadn't been so dependant on the real drugs cartel.

 

[BillHoyt]

I don't think any real sceptic doubts that chronic EM exposure cause harm.

The problem lies with the scientific establishment and their links to commercial enterprises.

Homeopathy would have been accepted a lot earlier if the establishment hadn't been so dependant on the real drugs cartel.

Please provide evidence for the existence of these commercial enterprises in Hahnemann's time.

Please provide evidence for the existence of a scientific establishment in Hahnemann's time.

Please provide evidence for the existence of (presumably medical) "drug cartels" in Hahnemann's time.

Please provide evidence for the scientific acceptance of homeopathy in our time.

But please also take this discussion elsewhere, as the topics here center around this advocator of infanticide, his claims and, of course, his product lines.

 

[BillHoyt]

If you want to contact MRC I suggest you confront David Coggon there at Southampton with my allegations. I will be interested in his response, and will have more to say about him anon. Actually i am minded to bring his action to Court, but that's another issue.

It is about time this whole disgraceful saga got into the open and to show how the establishment has been covering up the EMF issue for decades.

Right, then. No evidence to support the allegation. Next?

 

[Darat]

If you want to contact MRC I suggest you confront David Coggon there at Southampton with my allegations. I will be interested in his response, and will have more to say about him anon. Actually i am minded to bring his action to Court, but that's another issue.

It is about time this whole disgraceful saga got into the open and to show how the establishment has been covering up the EMF issue for decades.

From this I take it you have resolved any issue you had about understanding the JREF rules about naming people and possible libel issues.

Therefore please give me the name of the Professor at Bristol University name so I can contact him.

Thanks

 

[BillHoyt]

To BillHoyt: You have thre opportunity of verifying my allegation via the MRC direct. That is the strongest support one could ever ask for. Go and check it out.

You made the claim, you provide the evidence. You've thus far made the claim and then used the libel rules as a ruse. That was called. Then you provided us ways to check it out ourselves, though we asked you to name the professor. Ruse. Ruse. Ruse.

 

[Upchurch]

Please provide evidence for the existence of these commercial enterprises in Hahnemann's time.

Please provide evidence for the existence of a scientific establishment in Hahnemann's time.

Please provide evidence for the existence of (presumably medical) "drug cartels" in Hahnemann's time.

Please provide evidence for the scientific acceptance of homeopathy in our time.

But please also take this discussion elsewhere, as the topics here center around this advocator of infanticide, his claims and, of course, his product lines.

[modu]This post has been reported for containing personal attacks. This is not against the forum rules except in the Critical Thinking board. It isn't the responsibility of the moderators to punish people for writing things you don't like to see or do not agree with. Please do not abuse the Report function in this manner.[/modu]

 

[CFLarsen]

If it is the truth, it can't be libel, can it?

Correct. In this context, it is very interesting that it was Roger who brought up the subject of libel....

 

[MRC_Hans]

Excuse me, but on the side of a cell-phone (practically all cellphones) facing the user is the display and the keyboard. How do you read the display and operate the keyboard through a fine metal mesh inside a stylish leather casing . Edited to add: And why does a one-shilling piece of metal mesh sell at nearly 40 quid? Must be some fine leather casing.

*snip*
Hans

Perhaps you have been busy, but I would like to see an answer to the question above. Perhaps I should clairify it:

I agree that a metal mesh might yield some attenuation of the EMF field from a cell-phone, although the effect of a floating grid is somewhat dodgy. However, to have any useful effect, it must be placed between the user and the transmitter, which means that it must be placed so that it covers the display, speaker, and keyboard area of the typical cellphone. How do you then operate the equipment?

Second question: The production price of a small piece of metal grid and a leather casing is at most a couple of pounds. Don't you think your profit margin is a tad steep?

Hans

 

[BillHoyt]

[modu]This post has been reported for containing personal attacks. This is not against the forum rules except in the Critical Thinking board. It isn't the responsibility of the moderators to punish people for writing things you don't like to see or do not agree with. Please do not abuse the Report function in this manner.[/modu]

Wow, incisive skeptical questions reported as "personal attacks." Gotta love it.

 

[BillHoyt]

Correct. In this context, it is very interesting that it was Roger who brought up the subject of libel....

Uh-huh, but bluff is being called. Remember UCE and Blackmore? Redux.

 

[Lucianarchy]

Correct. In this context, it is very interesting that it was Roger who brought up the subject of libel....

No. Cogreslab brought up the subject of EM risks and the bias within the scientific establishment.

You, and Lil'Bill, otoh, are a pair of obsessive pedants who brought their own psychological and personality disorders into the forum. Don't you get it yet? You are both nuts. You'd both rather split the hairs of a shrew's scrotum than advance science with honesty and integrity.

 

[Upchurch]

Re-read the final paragraph of the relevant post, where someone was being accused of advocating criminal behavior.

I'm obliged to protect the identity of the poster who made the report, but yes, the "advocator of infanticide" comment was specifically pointed out.

 

[Upchurch]

But please also take this discussion elsewhere, as the topics here center around this advocator of infanticide, his claims and, of course, his product lines.

[modu]This post has been reported as potentially libelous. As our Forum rules state, the JREF is not responsible for content posted on this Forum. Users are urged to act responsibly when posting, as they alone are liable for what they post here.

As per JREF policy, a copy of the thread will be made in the offline area of the forum.[/modu]

 

[Cleopatra]

Can we post in this damn thread or not?

Who is playing with the report post button damn it?


I suggest to the dear mods to learn how to play with the bl**dy buttons!!!

 

[Ed]

You'd both rather split the hairs of a shrew's scrotum than advance science with honesty and integrity.

Irony meter really busted.

 

[Ed]

I'm obliged to protect the identity of the poster who made the report, .

Why? Are we to be enablers of ballslessness? If we are supposededly into the notion of a free interchange of ideas, the idea of some child tattleing in secrecy should be anathema. Where does it say that the identity of whiners must be kept secret?