Cell phones again

[Pragmatist]

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.

Sam, some people are "electrosensitive", i.e. they react physiologically to radiation and fields that others don't notice. Although most of the claims made about the subject are misinformed, it does exist. Of course sensitivity is somewhat different to the terrible harm claimed by certain people....!

 

[Pragmatist]

http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/docs/2004/6355/abstract.html

Take a look at this guys.

We've been over all this - take a look at the bioelectromagnetics thread in GS&P. THAT will certainly rupture the DNA in your brain cells!

There are a great many studies indicating various effects/harm etc., but most of them are NOT replicated by independent researchers. That doesn't imply they are worthless, but the whole area is so complicated it's difficult to assess what's what. I think it would be fair to say that there are too many unknowns to draw any certain conclusions. Experimental procedures tend to vary enormously and in some cases, some of them are truly appalling!

 

[Anders]

We've been over all this - take a look at the bioelectromagnetics thread in GS&P. THAT will certainly rupture the DNA in your brain cells!

There are a great many studies indicating various effects/harm etc., but most of them are NOT replicated by independent researchers. That doesn't imply they are worthless, but the whole area is so complicated it's difficult to assess what's what. I think it would be fair to say that there are too many unknowns to draw any certain conclusions. Experimental procedures tend to vary enormously and in some cases, some of them are truly appalling!

Agree. My standing in all this is that as long as people don't get sick, that is, the number of cancer cases increase, there is probably nothing there.

 

[luvhumility]

Originally posted by luvhumility
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?
>>>Almost everything is taxed here in the USA! cell phones bring in BILLIONS in tax revenue. cmon now, Don't you know this??

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.

>>>> I probably was originally calculating point source (don't ask) as opposed to power density/area I don't really remember, I just remember it was a correct approximation.

The actual power densith calcs which you can find here http://n5xu.ae.utexas.edu/rfsafety/ which is W/cm^2.

here is the std 3W calc at 0.1 Ft, here are the results:

Average Power at the Antenna 3.000 watts (this is the send burst power right??) I know its only 0.8W during normal operation.
Antenna Gain in dBi 3.00 dBi (approx)
Distance to the Area of Interest 0.10 feet e.g. your head is/may be actually closer!
Frequency of Operation 900.000 MHz approx
Are Ground Reflections Calculated? Yes
Estimated RF Power Density 131.2568 mw/cm2
Controlled
Environment Uncontrolled
Environment
Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE)

3.00 mw/cm2

0.60 mw/cm2
Distance to Compliance From Center of Antenna

0.71 feet

1.53 feet
Does the Area of Interest Appear to be in Compliance?
no

Please DO NOT ask me to break down all the math, if you know math you can do/verify it yourself!


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.

>>No offence, but I don't have time for this. sure maybe 0.8W is much better than 5W but are you willing to bet your brain on it?


3. I heard (heresay) that most High Level RF designers (i am low/mid level) DO NOT/WILL NOT use hand held cell phones!>>> let me add/qualify Intelligent RF designers!

Nonsense! They usually brandish the latest model, and want to demonstrate ALL of its features, given the slightest provocation.>> THe RF designers you know of have been using cell phones tooooo long, thats all!

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.


I am sorry I may have been in error slightly but not an order of magnitude! AGAIN see answer no 2. If you really want to learn this spend some time, I have already done this study. 2M wavlengths, maybe you are right, but anthing above 400-500 Mhz pennetrates human skin and/or heats it... especially the eyes... and soft gushy tissue! This stuff is not in any BOOK!! sorry!

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 ?

>>>Think as you wish , I don't argue with neuro surgeons who found tumors....

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. >>>>OK cell phones powers are/were different at different times/stages but can we agree on about 3W during send burst? if you want to argue +/- 40% on a safety issue, go ahead! I usually won't do it. I move to the side of caution. you cant really argue that unless you can prove it helps you now can you????

6. 800mw next to my ear at 900Mhz is not safe in My opinion! >>>THis is JUST MY opinion
/experience..> which I value highly..!

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

WHO'S SURVEYS? give me numbers? links! MATH! paid by whom?

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 .

>> Its easy to correct and can't hurt you to be safe in this case. So just do it whenever you can!

Thats all! Drive/talk safely! pull over whenever you are in deep converstaion. Driving Distractions Kill!

 

[Soapy Sam]

Pragmatist said-"Sam, some people are "electrosensitive", i.e. they react physiologically to radiation and fields that others don't notice. Although most of the claims made about the subject are misinformed, it does exist. Of course sensitivity is somewhat different to the terrible harm claimed by certain people....! "

P- my own suspicion is that it's a psychosomatic thing. I find cellphones- especially the newer and smaller ones- awkward to use and handle. I'm told I screw my face up when I use one. Could be muscular. Oddly, I have no problems with walkie-talkies, which I sometimes use at work, either in attitude, comfort or post use headaches.

Selective Luddism.

 

[sackett]

My mistake

No, I should have said "post" instead of "email." I apologize for my poor command of forum terminology.

I think luvhumility's posts display the earmarks of derangement; we've all seen this sort of thing before.

And yet, he manages to raise a kind of point: The electronics industry bosses would resist and try to suppress any findings that EM radiation from cell phones is harmful. The tobacco barons provide an instructive parallel. That's why I'm glad to see DHHS and IIT involved; they grind data slowly, but you can trust their conclusions.

 

[Vitnir]

Yes that is true to a certain degree. Lennart Hardell who is the only scientist to my knowledge that has found any risks for brain tumors in connection to cell phones tried to make an interesting study. He wanted to get the records from the telephone operators so he could compare the total amount of time each person has used a cell phone and compare that to the occurence of brain tumors. The companies said no since it would invade peoples privacy, he didn't want to know who they called or when, just the total amount of time they used the phone. Such a study wouldnt adjust for the fact that some people use hands free devices but it would be a big improvement over questionaries. Does that mean that telephone operators have a conspiracy suppressing the truth? I don't think so.