Cellphone signal concerns raised again

Bradbowlllama said:
Not sure that the WHO has the last say on what is and isn't safe - especially when they haven't conducted any sustained clinical trials on the subject...
Click to expand...

They do have statistics that show what is harmful and what is not, 20 - 30m from the tower show NO harmful radiation, if you go closer than you might be in danger but its not instant. The best way to test harmful radiation when you close to a tower is to hold a low watt flourescent bulb, if it flickers or worst goes on, you might be in danger.
 
marine1 said:
So genius enlighten us to your degrees that you have from studying all of this.
Click to expand...
Oh, like the N.Dip Elec Eng (light current) ..as in telecoms radio qualification I studied for ..yes, I know it's not a degree (so no, I'm not a genius, just somewhat smart).. that happened to cover radio transmission theory quite thoroughly - would that count?
Posting such a long winded post and insulting others just proves you dont have a freaking clue what you are talking about.
Click to expand...
Oh look, someone found hisself a shoe - that fits ..bully for you! Heh, you might want to consider learning to interpret the use of the smilies we have on this forum :cool:
Posting links to WIKI and reports from people who have been paid by cellphone companies doesnt fly either.
Click to expand...
Scientific fact simply is, regardless of the politics of who tries to use it to bolster their argument. See, I actually read those articles and saw the parts where it mentioned the good prof is going against consensus in his community. Now, being as I'm no expert on his field I can't comment on what he does or doesn't know but cynical curmudgeon that I am :p I know that Big Media(tm) aren't about enlightening us so much as getting circulation and the juicier and more contentious something is, the better it serves that purpose for them ..but maybe that's just me.

I suppose it was people like you who said smoking was not bad for you back in the day.
Click to expand...
You don't know me personally so you have no way of knowing how militantly anti-smoking I've always been but, as always, ignorance is bliss.
Instead of moaning and insulting others maybe post something constructive or dont post at all.
Click to expand...
Funny, seeing as this is something I believe I know a thing or two about, I thought I had brought some clarity to the situation; again, maybe that's just me.
Glory hound? Maybe look in the mirror. Oh and you can SIGH all you like, we will continue to debate this until we get concrete proof either way.
Click to expand...
Let's see, debate:
a contention by words or arguments: as a: the formal discussion of a motion before a deliberative body according to the rules of parliamentary procedure b: a regulated discussion of a proposition between two matched sides
Click to expand...
..upon consideration, I'm inclined to say: sorry sport, but no - not with you at any rate.
 
marine1 said:
Oh by the way I think I will listen to the people who are qualified to give advice and not people like you are the ones who are being paid by the cell compaines
Click to expand...
Ah, you might want to consider the use of punctuation so, you know, the rest of us can make head-or-tail of your [-]rant[/-] input ..please? But, just so you know, the views I espouse are my own and are not financially or otherwise swayed by any "compaines"(sic).
 
bdt said:
Oh, like the N.Dip Elec Eng (light current) ..as in telecoms radio qualification I studied for ..yes, I know it's not a degree (so no, I'm not a genius, just somewhat smart).. that happened to cover radio transmission theory quite thoroughly - would that count?
Click to expand...
No it would not, you are not a medical doctor so stop trying to tell me what you think you might understand. YOU are NOT a doctor.
bdt said:
Oh look, someone found hisself a shoe - that fits ..bully for you! Heh, you might want to consider learning to interpret the use of the smilies we have on this forum :cool:
Click to expand...
For a so called learned person you act like a child. When you are proven wrong you insult others - well done. Those days of study paid off. :D By the way you might want to learn English, is it not HIMSELF?
bdt said:
but maybe that's just me.
Click to expand...
First correct thing you have said.:rolleyes:
bdt said:
You don't know me personally so you have no way of knowing how militantly anti-smoking I've always been but, as always, ignorance is bliss.
Funny, seeing as this is something I believe I know a thing or two about, I thought I had brought some clarity to the situation; again, maybe that's just me.
Let's see, debate:..upon consideration, I'm inclined to say: sorry sport, but no - not with you at any rate.
Click to expand...
practice what you preach, you came in here sighing and name calling so why not go study some more and report back when you have something useful to add. :cool:

But yes keep attacking the man:rolleyes::cool::eek::D
 
Last edited:
Brilliant, some guy who probably just finished studying electrical engineering arguing with a medical doctor about the effects of radiation on a human. ROFLMAO
 
Last edited:
Apparently one of the countries with the longest standing use of cell phones is Israel, from what I remember 'cos of the land line infrustructure of the country being quite low, so cells were widely and quickly adopted.

I can't remember where, but a while ago I googled on the health risks of cell phones, and there is a study done in Israel (longest standing users of cells), which points to increased rates of cancer of the mucus glands or something.

It mentioned also that cell handsets give off more radiation when the signal is lower.

Another issue that has been mentioned is that cell phones haven't really been in use long enough to determine the exact risks, according to "experts".

I might try to find the article later....
 
Hey Threep, thanks for that information, it would make sense to me as the less signal, the more the unit tries to search, is that correct?
But then again our esteemed electrical engineer will probably be able to guide us there.
 
marine1 said:
Hey Threep, thanks for that information, it would make sense to me as the less signal, the more the unit tries to search, is that correct?
But then again our esteemed electrical engineer will probably be able to guide us there.
Click to expand...

I have no idea as to the technical aspect behind this, but yours sounds like a good guess to me.

Found an article that is very similar to the one I first read:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7250372.stm

Heavy mobile phone use may be linked to an increased risk of cancer of the salivary gland, a study suggests...Researchers looked at 500 Israelis who had developed the condition and compared their mobile phone usage with 1,300 healthy controls...
Click to expand...
 
this is WHY microwave ovens resonate at 2.4, that's where they're most effective, considering what you're heating.
Click to expand...

Yes but how much power does a microwave oven output?
Almost a kW

At the kilo-watt level, even a regular CB rig will give you a suntan.

A GSM handset puts out at most +32,5dBm... which is pretty weak. Wi-fi is like a couple of hundred milli-watts.

Radio transmitting equipment has been around for a long time... now when things go mobile suddenly the doomsday prophets come out to play.

I myself have been exposed to many kW's of RF power and I can tell you now nothing happened to me. I got sick easily from other crap like spraypaint, dust, and fag smoke and lead solder.

The thing with smoking is obvious... there's poisonous chemicals in the fags, so it stands to reason then that over a long period of time you'll get some sort of damage.
Actually, I think a bolt of lightning is far more dangerous than a cellphone FFS
 
Last edited:
Yeah but prolonged exposure is what they are talking about. Small doses over long periods of time. By the way smoking does not make you get cancer after a drag but rather after long periods of use.
 
marine1 said:
Yeah but prolonged exposure is what they are talking about. Small doses over long periods of time.
Click to expand...

How many radio hams do I know that lived to be 80 years old? Old Ron Caldecott is still alive and well I phoned him the other day... that man has been exposed to RF much more than all of us put together. He spends 3-4 hours on the air every day at 25 watts... and this has been since 1996 when I met him.
 
marine1 said:
Yeah but prolonged exposure is what they are talking about. Small doses over long periods of time. By the way smoking does not make you get cancer after a drag but rather after long periods of use.
Click to expand...

I don't think we can equate smoking with exposure to signal radiation. With smoking there is actually stuff like tar accumalating in your lungs.

What we know so far is when you're exposed to rf, there is a slight heating effect which is dissapated continuously as you're exposed (e.g. you will never heat your food with a 1W microwave oven. There is no accumalation and then one day the scale tips and you die.
 
Which companies manufacture tinfoil in SA, and are they listed on the JSE? - I would like to buy some shares while the price is still reasonable...:rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X