radiation with all the wireless links

[bobby23]

Any links to a study suggesting a causal link? I agree that caution is a good idea, and I agree that there is no conclusive evidence either way. Fortunately we are covered by safety standards that limits the power output of tranmitters.

How about the Interphone study? The researchers reported in 2008 that after a decade of cellphone use your chances of getting a brain tumor on the side where you use the phone goes up by 40%.

GQ reported on a case of an investment banker that developed a brain tumor. When he asked the doctor about his chances for developing such a tumor the doctor told him that he was seeing more and more cases in young driven businessmen with obsessive cellphone usage.

As for Chernobyl, that is not a good comparisson. Nuclear radiation is ionizing, which is much different from non-ionizing radiation. Ionizing radiation has been shown to be dangerous beyond any doubt. The only known way that EM waves interact with the human body, is by induced currents in your body - i.e. your body acts as the secondary winding in a very strange transformer. The induced currents, however, is smaller than those naturally present in your body.

I disagree. It's a very good comparison. Nuclear radiation IS dangerous beyond any doubt yet it fails the socalled test of these bogus skeptics. Other forms of radiation won't let you grow an extra appendage either but that doesn't make the potential dangers less real.

As for extra arms and legs: I don't have stats on it, but it does seem as though the number of people getting cancer is increasing. There are numerous possible causes for it, though, and I don't think anyone really know why. Is it because of microwave radiation, or because of the plastics our food is often in? Is it caused by foamalite cups used for coffee at childrens' parties, or does the baby milk powder contain something sinister? Will free-range chickens save us? We live in a society where there are numerous possible culprits that have not been researched adequately, and we cannot really blame one of them for harm without proper research and proofs.

I agree. Proper research is needed. Bogus skepticism however prevents research from being carried out by reducing valid concerns down to a tin foil hat donning brigade. All I can say to those people is welcome to your rock!

 

[icyrus]

How about the Interphone study? The researchers reported in 2008 that after a decade of cellphone use your chances of getting a brain tumor on the side where you use the phone goes up by 40%.

Perhaps you should do some research on the matter?

The 13 nation INTERPHONE project - the largest study of its kind ever undertaken - has now been published and did not find a solid link between mobile phones and brain tumours

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phone_radiation_and_health#Cancer

GQ reported on a case of an investment banker that developed a brain tumor. When he asked the doctor about his chances for developing such a tumor the doctor told him that he was seeing more and more cases in young driven businessmen with obsessive cellphone usage.

GQ reported then it must be true.

I disagree. It's a very good comparison. Nuclear radiation IS dangerous beyond any doubt yet it fails the socalled test of these bogus skeptics. Other forms of radiation won't let you grow an extra appendage either but that doesn't make the potential dangers less real.

It is immensely amusing how you construct a fallacious argument for people who you disagree with so that you can then dismiss it out-of-hand as outrageous.

I agree. Proper research is needed. Bogus skepticism however prevents research from being carried out by reducing valid concerns down to a tin foil hat donning brigade. All I can say to those people is welcome to your rock!

Perhaps it is dishonest people like you who insist in spreading FUD that we should be cautious of.

Let me summarize it for you as you seem incapable of reaching the right conclusions:
- the is no scientific evidence of a link between non-ionizing radiation and cancer.
- no one who is skeptical of the effects of non-ionizing radiation, based on current science, claims that people will grow extra arms/legs/etc.

It would serve you well to try and think a little before you accuse others of bogus skepticism and tinfoil hattery.

 

[bobby23]

**** OFF

The only one dishonest here is you, so YOU do some research instead of attacking people. TROLL

 

[Roadrunner]

The argument of whether the radiation is harmful or not will only be settled in about 30-40 years' time when long-term exposure effects should have become clear.

 

[Tacet]

@OP - seems like this thread has degenerated into personal insults and name calling. If you have any questions, feel free to ask and I'll do my best to answer where I can. I'm not going to participate in any debate in which conspiracy is used as an argument, however.

 

[UnUnOctium]

Its more dangerous walking to your car at night because of the radiation coming from the universe than staying for a year next to a tower.

Not exactly Cosmic radiation is one of the reasons we have an almost uniform noise floor everywhere (disregarding man-made transmissions) of about -120 dBm. It's much lower than even low power transmissions (with the exception of some very special DSSS ones where they can go below the noise floor), it's UV radiation from the sun that's the real danger.

Also, Tacet's maths is correct. Just to add that the radio transmitters can go up to Megawatts in transmission power. Now THAT's dangerous.