 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Honda Cars / November 2006This_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. > 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 f.cking 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 >> This is too important to keep to myself: >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > "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 > 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. It's a question of "whose ox is gored". > 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 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > been a legitimate suspect in leukemia - it's hard to tell where he came up > with that weird idea. Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are you saying the researchers are corrupt? > 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. Agreed, for 60 cycles, however I got the impression he mentioned frequencies considerably higher than 60 Hz. > 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. If I'd never heard of radar, microwaves, x-rays, cell phones etc. I might think you knew what you're writing about. >> The connection between power frequency EM fields and cancer has been a >> hot [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are > you saying the researchers are corrupt? 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. >> 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 [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Agreed, for 60 cycles, however I got the impression he mentioned > frequencies considerably higher than 60 Hz. Single point grounding affects all frequencies well into the HF range equally. Yes, I have been recently retrained in grounding. >> OTOH, there have been odd assertions that alternating currents could have >> mysterious bodily effects since the days when Tesla first introduced us [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > If I'd never heard of radar, microwaves, x-rays, cell phones etc. I might > think you knew what you're writing about. 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 >> I've worked for an electrical utility for over 20 years and been in >> communications for over 35 years (my original FCC radiotelephone license [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Probably the studies done on children in California and maybe Alberta. Are > you saying the researchers are corrupt? Children (or adults) should never sleep next to a domestic power meter through the wall or not. It causes brain cancer. Janice said: <snip> > Children (or adults) should never sleep next to a domestic power meter > through the wall or not. It causes brain cancer. How do you know?  SignatureRichard Heathfield "Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999 http://www.cpax.org.uk email: rjh at the above domain, - www. > Janice said: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > How do you know? Leprechauns told her... > Children (or adults) should never sleep next to a domestic power meter > through the wall or not. It causes brain cancer. 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 >> Children (or adults) should never sleep next to a domestic power meter >> through the wall or not. It causes brain cancer. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >fields below the visible spectrum is associated with the development of any >form of cancer. 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. :-) SignatureI'm not really a human, but I play one on earth. http://zentara.net/japh.html > 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. 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 > 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. 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. >> 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; [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > 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, Signature*Art >> 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; [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Cell phones have been shown to cause brain damage, and it ain't from > heating. 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". SignatureTegger The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ www.tegger.com/hondafaq/ >> 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 [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Cell phones have been shown to cause brain damage, and it ain't from > heating. 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 >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 [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >have DNA that is more than an inch long - cells as big as basketballs, >perhaps - you have nothing to fear from cell phone radiation. 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 SignatureI'm not really a human, but I play one on earth. http://zentara.net/japh.html From the Collected Witterings of kwatq, volume 23: > Cell phones have been shown to cause brain damage, and it ain't from > heating. There's a connection between excessive use of mobile phones and brain damage, all right, but it's not causal. > From the Collected Witterings of kwatq, volume 23: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > 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 > [...] My father was a radar tech in WWII (he had a > Marine with a .45 assigned to him to "protect the country's secrets"). That sounds interesting. Depending on where his work being undertaken, at any particular point during the war, this marine could not only have been assigned to preserve your father's life against those who might wish to kill him, but could also display undertones that there was no way that your parent would be taken alive by the enemy, either. In a "I'll save one round for you" sort of way. (Don't know which group in the eclectically cross-posted distribution is your nominal 'home port', but AFP is mine, so I've set Followup-To to there accordingly (and added AFP-local subject tagging) in case you want to reply.) zentara skrev: > >> Children (or adults) should never sleep next to a domestic power meter > >> through the wall or not. It causes brain cancer. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > be interesting to see in 30 years or so, the statistics for > brain abnormalities for heavy cell users. I'm a heavy cell user, about 20 stone, but I can't see the relevance to developing brain abnormalities. -Frank- >I'm a heavy cell user, about 20 stone, but I can't see the relevance to >developing brain abnormalities. >-Frank- 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. SignatureI'm not really a human, but I play one on earth. http://zentara.net/japh.html |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.