This_shall_shiver_your_timbers

This is too important to keep to myself:


http://www.lifeenergies.com/pollution/hemef/emfip1-11.htm

A word to the wise is sufficient.

 

Thats the dumbest fucking thing Ive ever read in my life.
Theres more natually occuring electrical charge in the earth due to the effect of clouds. You may have seen it before. In my country we call it "lightning".
HTH

 

Until your post I didn't even check the link, figuring it was another
crackpot site. When I looked, I saw how much I had underrated the
"crackpottedness!" If any of it were true it would make headlines.

I've worked for an electrical utility for over 20 years and been in
communications for over 35 years (my original FCC radiotelephone license was
issued in 1969). A couple years ago I attended a mandatory all day RF safety
in-service. Funny how the professionals never mention anything like that
site does.

The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a hot
topic since 1979, since it was noticed electrical workers had nearly twice
the average rate of two brain cancers - gliomas and astrocytomas. The
epidemiological evidence spurred a flurry of studies, the largest and
lengthiest completed only a year or two ago. They came up with the same
conclusion; there is no causal relationship. Electrical effects have never
been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came up
with that weird idea.

As far as the power returning through the earth (as opposed to through
neutral conductors), it should be noted that the NEC includes a large body
of directives to prevent that. Ground current is a symptom of miswiring or
electrical fault.

OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have
mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us to
alternating current (see http://tinyurl.com/yxvd3o). They were more
believable when we knew little about electricity.

Mike

 

It's a question of "whose ox is gored".

Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are
you saying the researchers are corrupt?

Agreed, for 60 cycles, however I got the impression he mentioned
frequencies considerably higher than 60 Hz.

If I'd never heard of radar, microwaves, x-rays, cell phones etc. I might
think you knew what you're writing about.

 

Time for a reality check. If there were any remotely credible evidence,
don't you think the news services and tort lawyers would be all over it? Yet
none are interested. I don't know what the problem is with the citations in
the link - whether the research was flawed, completely bogus or if it is
completely fictitious or misrepresented or whatever. I do know that the FCC
(who has jurisdiction over exposure) recognizes only the heating effects of
non-ionizing radiation as a hazard and has ruled that there is no
relationship between non-ionizing radiation and cancer. The experts have
spoken and the professionals who care have listened.

Single point grounding affects all frequencies well into the HF range
equally. Yes, I have been recently retrained in grounding.

In the past year I've worked with 100W transmitters in the range of 37 KHz
to 196 KHz, 100W at 800 MHz, 5W at 6 GHz. In the past I've worked with 1 KW
transmitters in HF, 100W transmitters throughout VHF, 500W pulsed
transmitters above 1 GHz and 15 KW radar transmitters. I was licensed to
work on any transmitter in the US before I was old enough to vote. How are
your credentials?

Mike

 

Leprechauns told her...

 

Children (or adults) should never sleep next to a domestic power meter
through the wall or not. It causes brain cancer.

 

Janice said:

How do you know?

 

This subject has been more heavily studied than just about any other in the
last quarter century; partly because it is easy to study, partly because the
implications are so profound, and partly because so much money is involved.
The conclusion is perfectly clear now - no form of electricity or of EM
fields below the visible spectrum is associated with the development of any
form of cancer.

The brain cancer rumor is a holdover from the original concern in 1979 I
cited. The epidemiological evidence suggested a strong link between two
forms of brain cancer and something in the lifestyles of electrical workers
in one study. The concern (assumption among the unscientific) was that close
exposure to strong electric or EM fields was the key. In the end it turned
out to be a statistical cluster. How electric meters came to be a bugbear in
this is anybody's guess. The older ones are very tiny electric motors, much
lower power than the ones in bathroom ceiling fans. The modern ones aren't
even that, but are electronic recorders. They are way down on the list of EM
sources in the home.

One of the challenges of cancer research is that cancer is so prevalent. One
out of every four of us can expect to contract some form of cancer in his or
her life. It leads to the horror stories of "so-and-so had an oak tree in
his yard for just five years and he came down with colon cancer." Since the
average household has around four people, we can expect cancer to strike
most homes in any neighborhood without anything unusual going on.

Mike

 

I would worry about cell phones. They now admit that cell phone
radiation will cause a heating of a portion of the brain. A recent
news clip I saw, said that it may cause some involuntary muscle
spasms , like you suddenly getting twitch in your arm.

Google for "cell phone egg cooking".

If it's cooking your cells, there has got to be a risk. It will
be interesting to see in 30 years or so, the statistics for
brain abnormalities for heavy cell users.

There is so much money it, and people want the mobility so much,
that they will accept the risk.

It's far more likely a car accident will kill you, than any EM
radiation, yet people don't want to give cars up either.

So working with a computer daily from home, is probably
safer than commuting to work. Of course, if you commute to a cubicle,
and sit in front of a screen all day, next to the server rack, you
are SOL.

 

Don't worry about it. Cell phone power levels are more than an order of
magnitude too low to cause significant heating of the brain; walking in the
sunshine is much more significant. Imagine - we expose ourselves to the
radiation of a thermonuclear reaction so intense it heats our skin and will
severely burn it after only a few hours of exposure, yet we live.

You are right about the heating effects of RF, though. The two big concerns
are the eyes and testicles. Both are the "right" size to absorb RF in the
microwave range and both are sensitive to heat. Heating of the testicles can
cause temporary or permanent sterility while heating of the eye can cause
cataracts. The eye is especially susceptible because there is no circulation
to cool the interior of the eye. Heating cooks proteins in the lens to
produce cataracts, and that is the primary focus of the FCC rules for
exposure.

Sterility is more theoretical. My father was a radar tech in WWII (he had a
Marine with a .45 assigned to him to "protect the country's secrets"). He
told me about the many times he warmed himself in front of the radar dishes
and that he was told he would be sterile. That was before my four brothers
and I were born.

I realize this is an international forum and other countries have different
regulations, but here in the US the FCC is very aggressive about exposure
limits. The FCC gets major funding through fines and will jump on any
possibility of excessive exposure. The relevant document for exposure limits
is available on the web at http://www.rfsafety.com/oet65.pdf For cell
phones, look at pages 45 - 48.

Mike

 

zentara skrev:

I'm a heavy cell user, about 20 stone, but I can't see the relevance to
developing brain abnormalities.

-Frank-

 

Heating effect is a gov't whitewash. Far more inmportant is the molecular
damage.

Cell phones have been shown to cause brain damage, and it ain't from
heating.

 

Because I like to play devil's advocate, why not check out the /reverse/
causality -- whether it's those with the most brain damage who spends the
most time on the phone? That seems plausible to me.

Regards,

 

Cell phones cause brain damge in this precise manner:
1) Place phone on cranium (on or off, doesn't matter)
2) Strike phone with hammer repeatedly until phone fragments enter brain
3) Voila, instant brain damage!

Now if you're basing your conclusions on your overhearing of teenagers
talking on *their* cell phones, rest easy. Teenagers are already brain-
damaged, so what you observe is quite normal.

However, their brains will repair themselves by the time they're 27, at
which point they will come to you and say, "Hey dad, you're actually
pretty cool".

 

No, it is definitively established that non-ionizing radiation does not and
can not cause cancer. There is one very good reason why that is so: cancer
is a DNA disorder and radiation cannot affect DNA until the wavelength
approaches 4 times the DNA strand length or less. It's a matter of energy
transfer - I canna change the laws of physics. No energy transfer means no
effect. Cell phones operate mostly in the 2 GHz (15 cm) band, so unless you
have DNA that is more than an inch long - cells as big as basketballs,
perhaps - you have nothing to fear from cell phone radiation.

The people charged with protecting the public have examined the evidence and
testimony in open session, with opportunity for public input before the
rules were made. Each person may decide on their own whether to trust them
or to trust random paranoids. Having dealt with a few US federal agencies in
my time I have to laugh at the concept of a government "whitewash" - it is a
ludicrous concept that any agency could get every single one of the
thousands of people involved to go along with any such deception. How they
would cause the governments of dozens of other industrialized countries to
agree to the "whitewash" boggles the mind.

Mike

 

I think your responses have been right on the money, but I would like
to point out a tidbit of evidence that a EM researcher mentioned when
there was the power line uproar.

One of the scientists said that there was no evidence the fields
caused cancer, but he finished with the cyrptic comment that
<paraphrasing from memory>
the fields do interfere with the ability of the cell wall barrier
to distinquish between good and bad molecules.
</paraphrasing>

He said the cell walls have a mechanism which allows good
molecules in and rejects bad ones, and high external fields
may interfere with this.
So "maybe" it is a factor in helping something else cause cancer.

Like almost everything else in modern techno-civilization, things
are proven safe in lab conditions, but seldom take into account
real world conditions. So we end end getting "nickled and dimed"
to death.

zentara

 

If I was to take an educated guess, as to what symptoms to watch for,
I would look for
1. hearing nerve (or balance ) problems, the inner ear is very sensitive
2. arthritic necks
3. constipation
4. muscle twitching or loss of tone, like a drooping eyelid

Of course, that is just wild guessing, and I'm also opened
minded.
It may turn out that cell-phone warming is good for you, and
microwave generating neck rings will be prescribed for everyone.


Of course, all these symptoms can be caused by other factors, so
it can never be proven. Just like cigarette smoking, personal genetic
factors are probably important, and it will be argued forever.
In the mean time, we are guinea pigs.

 

From the Collected Witterings of kwatq, volume 23:

There's a connection between excessive use of mobile phones and brain
damage, all right, but it's not causal.

 

....with results being suffered by nearby non-users..

JT