• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cell phones again

Prayer in dark times

I will turn mine eyes up unto the IRS, whence cometh my str -- Wait a minute, goddammit!

You see? A poor mortal facing inscrutable, ustoppable powers can only turn to the supernatural. It's a human failing.

However: Knowing what I do about govt-funded research (been in the racket since 1969), I'm glad to see this sort of thing being done. It can't always lay the ghost; DHHS-funded work at the University of Colorado did a number on chiropractic back in the 70s, but you'd never know it. But research can establish facts, and it's just the sort of thing to throw money at. Illinois Institute of Technology will be doing this project, and they're serious people.
 
The real reason cell phones should be off the market is that they don't work. They just don't work. I mean, I have a few questions for my white corpuscles but they don't even have voice mail.
 
1. USDHHS is a branch of the military complex. It is actually the 5th. I do not expect non-biased opinions from them. Too much tax revenue to be made from cell phones to be non biased! BUt we can allways hope!
2. Electromagnetic radiation of certain frequency ranges and power density levels are know to cause health problems. cell phones are in this range.
3. I heard (heresay) that most High Level RF designers (i am low level) DO NOT/WILL NOT use hand held cell phones!
4. The actual power density of an 800mw cell phone next to your ear is about the equiv of 1KW/Meter and at 900Mhz it goes right into your brain tissue.
5. I have it on good authority (from a doctor who knew a neuro surgeon) that the older high power (5 Watt) original cell phones have caused brain cancer. They knew this because the tumors matched the radiation pattern on the side of the head that the phone/antenna was used on!
6. 800mw next to my ear at 900Mhz is not safe in My opinion!
7. TO REDUCE this problem ALLWAYS use your remote ear piece and try to better yet keep the phone in a mobile car holder with external antenna attached. I hope this helps!
 
Welcome to the forum, luvhumility

luvhumility said:
1. USDHHS is a branch of the military complex. It is actually the 5th. I do not expect non-biased opinions from them. Too much tax revenue to be made from cell phones to be non biased! BUt we can allways hope!
2. Electromagnetic radiation of certain frequency ranges and power density levels are know to cause health problems. cell phones are in this range.
3. I heard (heresay) that most High Level RF designers (i am low level) DO NOT/WILL NOT use hand held cell phones!
4. The actual power density of an 800mw cell phone next to your ear is about the equiv of 1KW/Meter and at 900Mhz it goes right into your brain tissue.
5. I have it on good authority (from a doctor who knew a neuro surgeon) that the older high power (5 Watt) original cell phones have caused brain cancer. They knew this because the tumors matched the radiation pattern on the side of the head that the phone/antenna was used on!
6. 800mw next to my ear at 900Mhz is not safe in My opinion!
7. TO REDUCE this problem ALLWAYS use your remote ear piece and try to better yet keep the phone in a mobile car holder with external antenna attached. I hope this helps!
Click to expand...

Will you communicate this very important material to the Illinois Institute of Technology?
 
RF radiation/Cell Phone exposure

I hope the ill people do know most of these issues. I would inform them but suspect I would be wasting my time. I posted this Info to inform the readers of my personal experience and knowledge. I feel this is much better use of our time here. The Mice's response in these tests will probably inform them of these issues anyway if the RF tests are done correctly. Although we do have a somewhat more complex brain/dna then mice, i suppose the data will be useful. The problem is to do the test correctly the mice will need to be exposed at low levels (800mW or 0.8W) and other levels for long periods of time, possibly over several years. Increasing the power levels to "simulate" accellerated time may not produce the same results. also, RF ressonance values of our tissues and mice will not be the same. There are so many variables to address in proper testing. You are better off just> Using the remote ear piece (assuming it is properly shielded) or better yet the phone holder with remote antenna. I have seen these studies go back and forth for years and I do not trust the results! Many studies are funded by cell phone companies/manufacturers if you care to dig deep enough.
USDHHS is just going to contract it to another cell phone Manufacturer lover i bet!
So error on the side of caution, it should only help you not hurt you. If you have any more questions i will answer what i can. p.s. Don't watch the food cook!
 
Re: RF radiation/Cell Phone exposure

luvhumility said:
So error on the side of caution, it should only help you not hurt you.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily true. Erring on the side of caution can just as easily result in a more tragic consequence than not.

For example, given the current knowlege concerning the hazards of cell phones, there is less justification for dedicating resources toward the purchase of ear-peices/remote antennas/etc than there is dedicating those same resources toward the purchase of...healthier food, for example. (added in edit: Sun Block would be a better example. Additional contributions into an IRA is a good one. It's all about comparative risk assessment)


One should apply the precautionary principle to the application of the precautionary principle.
 
Cell phone RF exposure

Muse,

You have got me thinking! Ohm no! Please Excuse the looong length/grammatical errors of this message in advance.
>> One should apply the precautionary principle to the application of the precautionary principle.

On your above statement I agree! Taken in proper context though, concerning cell phones/RF (radio frequency) only next to our bodies, one could argue during reception of a signal the phone might be better off near your head. e.g.> If the receiver antenna input (low level signal) were to in theory "pull" the RF signal coming from the cell phone transceiver towers into the phone and thus away from your head. Although, in actuality the phone both transmits and receives simultaneously so the transmitted RF is right next to your head/brain. So unless you could say "It happens that the RF transmission was near exact polarization and opposite phase etc. of another "bad" RF signal" (it’s plausible, there’s plenty of RF around us at all times) of similar frequency then your argument might hold true. In reality, this is very rarely the case. consider all the RF spectrum of all power and communications> this is huge amounts! Between AC power lines, and natural/man made emissions we are getting bombarded at various levels. Man made RF radiation is probably the worst now because it is so close to us and all around us etc etc. in city settings. Some natural radiation, it could be argued is actually good but in this specific man made case, I would say no.
You could think of it like those noise canceling headphones, except in the RF spectrum instead. hmm Gud idea!

Considering the power levels (RF, AC, high voltage etc. etc.) I have personally worked around and the way that they have all affected me, (itchy skin, warmth, sick feelings) in my humble opinion, I feel we all need to reduce our man made electromagnetic field exposures.
I also believe it will have many more great medical uses in the future, but only under controlled conditions.

Power line radiation is another area of great concern. But that is a whole other subject. Occam’s razor is in order for long term man made RF/EMF exposure here. Keep away from the hot stove, it burns! Chemical/ Pollutant elimination in Air, foods and water and RF/EMF reduction may be the cure to most cancer? We will not fully know until we research and try! RF/EMF can also, I am fairly sure, help us. But only when we better understand it and properly control it.

Some military People used to (in ignorance) stand in front of RADAR Microwave antennas to stay warm in the old days on real cold days until it got them sick/leukemia. Although the RADAR sets were outputting in the 100's-1000’s of watt ranges, so it would only take minutes to “cook” you. RF over exposure is known to cause health problems. (heating of the eye’s fluids, the cells, the skin etc.) The question is, like in nuclear radiation exposures, even at low levels for long periods of time how much “accumulated exposure” can our bodies handle? Whats good, whats bad?
We should not assume... we need to KNOW! In this specific case I think RF reduction is in order. Especially, just when we hit the phone’s "send" button. Because most phones put out a 3 Watt burst at that time.
Does that clairify the issue? Fire away! i need it!
 
luvhumility said:
1. USDHHS is a branch of the military complex. It is actually the 5th. I do not expect non-biased opinions from them. Too much tax revenue to be made from cell phones to be non biased! BUt we can allways hope!
2. Electromagnetic radiation of certain frequency ranges and power density levels are know to cause health problems. cell phones are in this range.
Click to expand...
EM radiation in certaion ranges has little or no effect on anything but perhaps the blood brain barrier, BBB.

3. I heard (heresay) that most High Level RF designers (i am low level) DO NOT/WILL NOT use hand held cell phones!
Click to expand...
Well, most people today use some kind of off-free device.

4. The actual power density of an 800mw cell phone next to your ear is about the equiv of 1KW/Meter and at 900Mhz it goes right into your brain tissue.
Click to expand...
Doesn't prove that anything happens to the brain tissue.

5. I have it on good authority (from a doctor who knew a neuro surgeon) that the older high power (5 Watt) original cell phones have caused brain cancer. They knew this because the tumors matched the radiation pattern on the side of the head that the phone/antenna was used on!
Click to expand...
No, no sigificant increase of cancer in the brain has been shown to relate to cell-phone use. See http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/...ve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15255560



6. 800mw next to my ear at 900Mhz is not safe in My opinion!
Click to expand...
There are no signs that use on GSM900MHz cell phones would increasing the number of cancer vicims, se above artivel from Pubmed.

But you make your on choice of course!

7. TO REDUCE this problem ALLWAYS use your remote ear piece and try to better yet keep the phone in a mobile car holder with external antenna attached. I hope this helps!
Click to expand...
Probably a good advice when you're drivning!

The article from pubmed ends with: "At present, there is little, if any, evidence that the use of mobile phones is associated with cancer in adults, including brain tumors, acoustic neuroma, cancer of the salivary glands, leukemia, or malignant melanoma of the eye."
 
Anders said:
Probably a good advice when you're drivning!
Click to expand...

It's funny when you compare the relative risks between getting cancer and driving down the jam-packed freeway at seventy miles per hour while talking to your wife on your cell phone about picking up bread from the grocery store.

It reminds me of Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid.

Butch Cassidy: Then you jump first.
Sundance Kid: No, I said.
Butch Cassidy: What's the matter with you?
Sundance Kid: I can't swim.
Butch Cassidy: Why you crazy...the fall will probably kill you.
 
simple logic here,

are we being diverted by a form of argument that is obvious?

YES, it is also very dangerous to be distracted by anything inside the automobile/vehicle while controlling the automobile/vehicle. This is not an excuse to avoid doing the best in all situations. I will not argue these obvious concepts. you should know common sence. If you wish to ignore my personal experience then do as you wish.

I have REAL experience and know of REAL people and Neuro surgeons who were affected. (this is hard to refute)! I do not want to spend time to go get counter arguments that i know exist.

WHY ARE YOU ARGUING THIS? WHat is your intent?

Again, consider the source of your data. It is jaded, these orginazations make huge tax revenue on these devices.
One article is not going to lead you/Us to ALL the facts.

Everything i have suggested is easy to do to protect yourself from RF over exposure and only YOU can avoid being distracted while driving.

If you want to believe a government (tax/revenue biased) study over my persoanl experience and that of RF engineers that is your choice.

I also see you have made ASSUMPTIONS about RF effects based on incomplete information. I will encourage you to do MORE research on RF and its affects on the body before you come to conclusions. I also suspect you work in the cell phone or RF related industry and are trying to justify your argument. AM i correct?

A simple yes or no will suffice. Keep searching. You may be suprised at what you find if you keep looking.

enough said.
 
luvhumility said:
1. USDHHS is a branch of the military complex. It is actually the 5th. I do not expect non-biased opinions from them. Too much tax revenue to be made from cell phones to be non biased! BUt we can allways hope!
2. Electromagnetic radiation of certain frequency ranges and power density levels are know to cause health problems. cell phones are in this range.
3. I heard (heresay) that most High Level RF designers (i am low level) DO NOT/WILL NOT use hand held cell phones!
4. The actual power density of an 800mw cell phone next to your ear is about the equiv of 1KW/Meter and at 900Mhz it goes right into your brain tissue.
5. I have it on good authority (from a doctor who knew a neuro surgeon) that the older high power (5 Watt) original cell phones have caused brain cancer. They knew this because the tumors matched the radiation pattern on the side of the head that the phone/antenna was used on!
6. 800mw next to my ear at 900Mhz is not safe in My opinion!
7. TO REDUCE this problem ALLWAYS use your remote ear piece and try to better yet keep the phone in a mobile car holder with external antenna attached. I hope this helps!
Click to expand...

1. Please show evidence to back up your claim of alleged bias.

2. EM radiation of certain frequency ranges and power densities are well known to "cause health problems". But you will need to qualify the statement that "cell phones are in this range". What range and what evidence of what health problems at what power densities?

3. I know a number of high level RF designers, they all use cell phones.

4. KW/Meter is not a valid metric for any known physical quantity, the normal measurement of RF intensity is KV/m, and the normal measurement of absolute power is the Watt. You cannot directly compare a metric of KW/m with mW. Your assertion doesn't make any sense. And you will need to qualify what you mean by "directly goes into brain tissue".

5. There are believed to be in general slightly higher possible statistical correlations between certain brain cancers and exposure to old high power analog phones, but not strong enough to state that there is any definite association. The radiation pattern inside a head is complex and unpredictable for individual cases unless complex multi point measurements are made. Therefore it is extremely unlikely that any doctor would be in a position to definitively state that a tumour matched a radiation pattern.

6. You are entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

7. IIRC studies on mobile earpiece sets only 3 or 4 years back established that earpieces can cause MORE radiation exposure to the head than normal use of a handset. I cannot recall specific references, but you will need to provide evidence that an earpiece will reduce radiation exposure.

This is the critical thinking forum, I'm afraid you will need to provide something more substantial than just opinion, hearsay and hearsay of hearsay in support of your argument.
 
luvhumility said:


I have REAL experience and know of REAL people and Neuro surgeons who were affected. (this is hard to refute)! I do not want to spend time to go get counter arguments that i know exist.
Click to expand...
I thought that what you said was that you know someone that knew a neuro surgeon.

WHY ARE YOU ARGUING THIS? WHat is your intent?
Click to expand...
I want people to worry about the real dangers in our world. Like: smoking, narcotic drugs, excessive drinking, over-weight, driving while talking on the phone, etc. Cell phones are not dangerous, they don't cause cancer anywere. But, and this is important, if legitimate scientifically stringent surveys show that there is, for instance, a 100% higer risk of getting cancer in the brain, or in the head area, by average use of a cell phone, then there might be a cause for alarm. In comparison: Smoking increase the risk of lungcancer by about 6000%.

Again, consider the source of your data. It is jaded, these orginazations make huge tax revenue on these devices.
One article is not going to lead you/Us to ALL the facts.
Click to expand...
The organisation that made that survey was The Department of Psychosocial Cancer Research, Institute of Cancer Epidemiology, The Danish Cancer Society, Copenhagen. They are probably funded from donations soley.

And you are completley right, one survey does not count.

Please, make a search on pubmed, find at least 5 survey that show on at least 50% increses risk on getting cancer in the head area from using a cell-phone. If you do find any, please publish the links here in the forum!


Everything i have suggested is easy to do to protect yourself from RF over exposure and only YOU can avoid being distracted while driving.

If you want to believe a government (tax/revenue biased) study over my persoanl experience and that of RF engineers that is your choice.
Click to expand...
No, I don't ignore your personal experience. I'm writing replies, aren't I.

I also see you have made ASSUMPTIONS about RF effects based on incomplete information. I will encourage you to do MORE research on RF and its affects on the body before you come to conclusions. I also suspect you work in the cell phone or RF related industry and are trying to justify your argument. AM i correct?
Click to expand...
You are right that I work for a company that procuces GSM and 3G systems, including the phones. It's a very large company, and I work in the IT consulting part on the company. We have little or no contact with the RF and mobile systems departments.

And I thought we were discussing if cell-phones cause cancer. I didn't know we were discussing me, which, BTW, is my favorit subject. And Oh, I have a M.Sc degree in electrical engineering, so feel free to ask me anything about radiation.


A simple yes or no will suffice. Keep searching. You may be suprised at what you find if you keep looking.

enough said.
Click to expand...
Yes! And no, that't not enough said..
 
luvhumility said:
1. USDHHS is a branch of the military complex. It is actually the 5th. I do not expect non-biased opinions from them. Too much tax revenue to be made from cell phones to be non biased! BUt we can allways hope!

What tax revenue? are cellphones selectively taxed in your country?

2. Electromagnetic radiation of certain frequency ranges and power density levels are know to cause health problems. cell phones are in this range.

To my knowledge, they are not. Please provide evidence of this.


3. I heard (heresay) that most High Level RF designers (i am low level) DO NOT/WILL NOT use hand held cell phones!

Nonsense! They usually brandish the latest model, and want to demonstrate ALL of its features, given the slightest provocation.

4. The actual power density of an 800mw cell phone next to your ear is about the equiv of 1KW/Meter and at 900Mhz it goes right into your brain tissue.

Incorrect. Power/distance is not used as a measuring unit, and the penetration depth of 900MHz in not very great.

5. I have it on good authority (from a doctor who knew a neuro surgeon) that the older high power (5 Watt) original cell phones have caused brain cancer.

Good authority: Somebody who knew somebody. Is that good authority in your book :rolleyes: ?

They knew this because the tumors matched the radiation pattern on the side of the head that the phone/antenna was used on!

Never heard of such a thing. The old 5W cell-phones did not transmit from the handset, they used an antenna on the lugable box that was the real RX equipment. Better get your references right. There has never been a 5W integrated handset.

6. 800mw next to my ear at 900Mhz is not safe in My opinion!

Nevertheless, quite extensive surveys have not been able to show any significant effects of the use of cellphones.

7. TO REDUCE this problem ALLWAYS use your remote ear piece and try to better yet keep the phone in a mobile car holder with external antenna attached. I hope this helps!

It certainly won't hurt you ;).
Click to expand...

Hans
 
Hans- clear as always. And yet... I admit I detest the things, as an anti social nuisance. Frankly, if there is a selective cause of brain cancer , I can think of few groups I would rather see smitten than those who bawl loudly into cellphones on trains and buses, exposing us to the boring details of their sad and shallow lives. But then , I once dreamed of an induction device able to make the earphones of Sony Walkmans explode at up to ten metres...


The one piece of info I do have on this is wholly anecdotal, but repeatable. Almost every time I am required to use a cellphone, I develop a headache within a few minutes.

(Sharp, apparently above and behind the right eye. It fades within a minute or two.) I'm right handed, but can't swear that I always hold a phone that way. Could be psychosomatic. But it happens.) Other than this, I experience headaches once or twice a year, usually connected to colds , sinus pressure etc., ie rarely.
There is a box of eight Codeine & Paracetamol in my kitchen drawer. Sell by date is 1999. I'm hardly a headache sufferer.

I would be curious to know if others share this experience.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom