rileyjam514
There You Go Again...
join:2005-06-26
Kearny, NJ
| Hmmm...
And will they be taking some cookies with their Kool-Aid?
Seriously, if they're worried about radio signals causing sickness, wouldn't it be smarter to go after cell phones first?
Additionally, with the size and abilities of most routers, it becomes practically impossible to enforce a ban like this. It's going to turn into Prohibition at that school.
It's more likely that this person is posturing and preparing to step down as president, to hop into something else - lobbying, for example.
--
Abortion is murder, Reagan was a hero, Clinton was a sleazeball, Iraq is much better off without Saddam, and the telcos are not trustworthy with American tax dollars. There! I've managed to offend a significant portion of BBR! |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
|  said by rileyjam514  :And will they be taking some cookies with their Kool-Aid? Seriously, if they're worried about radio signals causing sickness, wouldn't it be smarter to go after cell phones first? I don't buy into them, but at least studies have been done on cell phone use that claims that having a phone up next to your ear can cause tumors. But I haven't read anything on studies that claims WiFi use is dangerous. If the college is going to ban WiFi based on what might happen, there are so many other things that are proved dangerous that they should be banning - like driving and overeating.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com
Conrail Photo Album |
|
knightmb
Everybody Lies
join:2003-12-01
Franklin, TN
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| said by TKJunkMail :said by rileyjam514 :And will they be taking some cookies with their Kool-Aid? Seriously, if they're worried about radio signals causing sickness, wouldn't it be smarter to go after cell phones first? I don't buy into them, but at least studies have been done on cell phone use that claims that having a phone up next to your ear can cause tumors. But I haven't read anything on studies that claims WiFi use is dangerous. If the college is going to ban WiFi based on what might happen, there are so many other things that are proved dangerous that they should be banning - like driving and overeating. No, more junk science. There is nothing to show cell phones are linked to cancer, none at all.
All you are doing with that statement is helping these people stay in business selling crap such as this below. Anyone can publish a study saying anything. Without hard evidence, it's bonk.
Junk Science in Action for your $$$ Link
»www.cellphoneshop.net/yerash.html |
|
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
1 edit | said by knightmb :No, more junk science. There is nothing to show cell phones are linked to cancer, none at all. I wouldn't say that the cell phone EM thing is totally junk science, holding a relatively high powered transmitter right up against your brain for the amount of time some people are doing probably isn't good. But the issue is going to be mitigated simply by moving the transmitter a foot or so away; so the solution is to buy a $10 headset if you talk a lot on your cell phone (something I think most people would do anyway).
The WIFI thing is ridiculous unless dorm rooms have gotten so small that you can't be in the room without being within a couple inches of the transmitter.
--
Asking those who disagree with you to find support of your arguements is like asking an assailant if you can borrow his gun. |
|
Dipsomaniac
Oh My, Yes.
join:2001-12-12
Toronto, ON
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| »www.cancer.org/docroot/PED/conte···area=PED
There is NO evidence of a causal link between cell phone use and brain cancer. No properly-done study has ever found evidence of such a link.
--
Therapy is expensive. Bubble wrap is free. |
|
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| You'll notice in that article that they basically say that cellphones haven't been around long enough to be able to make a conclusive study. It's probably only been in the last five years that the number of people talking for extended periods of time has become more than a few.
Look, I'm not saying that you shouldn't hold your cell phone up to your ear at all. I'm just saying that if you use your cell phone a lot you should probably buy a headset and use it when it's convenient. It's not going to hurt to get the antenna a couple feet away from your ear and it just might save you from some health problems down the line; especially since holding the damn phone up to your ear is fairly inconvenient in most cases anyway.
--
Asking those who disagree with you to find support of your arguements is like asking an assailant if you can borrow his gun. |
|
toddinpal
join:2002-09-18
Palatine, IL
| Jumping into this argument is probably pointless, but I have to ask, what difference does it make where the cellphone is? If radio energy *were* to cause cancer, do you think it's going to be specific to your brain and not other parts of your body? At best some have suggested that your eyes act like a very poor waveguide at frequencies near cell phone frequencies, but what that has to do with cancer is beyond me. It's mostly a concern for higher powered devices where your eyes may absorb RF energy in the form of heat and the insides of your eyes don't have pain/heat sensors. Some radar operators found this out the hard way.
Again, as has been said before, there is NO credible science that indicates a link between RF energy (cell phone or otherwise) and cancer. The closest any study has come is to show some correlation between calcium channels in cells and exposure to RF energy. The only other well documented effect is heating that occurs at higher frequencies and powers, i.e., why a microwave oven cooks! |
|
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| said by toddinpal :Jumping into this argument is probably pointless, but I have to ask, what difference does it make where the cellphone is? Sigh...
because you will absorb a heck of a lot less RF energy with the transmitter 1 foot away from you than you will if the transmitter is 1 inch away from you.
If you want to expose one small section of your body to relatively high levels a EM radiation for extended periods of time from the time you're 10 years old go right ahead. But wisdom would dictate minimizing your exposure when it's convenient.
Just because there currently isn't any conclusive evidence doesn't mean that a potential danger doesn't exist. The fact of the matter is only recently have people began sticking active, relatively high powered radio transmitters right up against the same part of their body for hours at a time day after day. The evidence is inconclusive at best, and will remain so for the near future.
--
Asking those who disagree with you to find support of your arguements is like asking an assailant if you can borrow his gun. |
|
