how-to block ads
|
|
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
bluex
join:2005-02-04
Gatineau, QC
4 edits | reply to Tzale
Re: Another EM source right into the home said by Tzale 
There is no proof that cell phone frequencies at their current average energy density are any health risk to humans.
And there is no proof, out of any doubt, of the opposite either, which is why the precautionary principle should be considered.
You know, exposure thresholds are set by people, at a given time, and sometimes later on (because of studies, research, public concerns, etc. ) they are proven wrong. For example, in '90 the maximum limit for Radon in a house was 800 Bq., and even that was considered perfectly safe. People testing their house for Radon in the '90 could say "hey, my house has 500 Bq, I am way below the threshold, I'm perfectly safe". In 2008, the limit is now 150 Bq, because a higher level has been linked to lung cancer. The same principle can be applied to anything. So before adding additional EM sources to a home, which maybe already has multiple EM sources such as Wifi transmitters, I would think about it. | |
| I believe that Radon is dangerous because you can breath the radiation in. It is alpha radiation whereas wireless radiation is electromagnetic radiation of the non-ionizing variety.
Following the principles of point sources, the radiation exposure rate will decrease exponentially as you move away from the source, so it is unlikely that the femtocell itself will create any significant increase in risk.
However, the increased cell phone usage may. Personally, I am not convinced that the long term studies of people using the phones for 1 hour a week are representative of real world use, so I limit my usage of the phone to more in line with the study - and I wear a headset. | |
|
