 |  | 
james
join:2001-02-26
antarctica | Re: The Sun I had no idea that radiation could be measured in tonnes.
Don't worry though, most of us nerdy dsl freaks avoid the sun like it's the black death anyways.  | |
| jlsand
join:2001-04-19
Portland, OR
1 edit | here's a thought... Hmmm. Maybe get them off their phones and do some physical activity. Perhaps too much technology is contributing to childhood obesity? What in the world are they always talking about anyway? Us older people survived without needing to call or text our friends about every thing we do. | |
| | quatrix
Premium
join:2005-02-11
Davie, FL | Re: here's a thought... When I see 8-year-olds chatting on cell phones, I wonder what the hell is wrong with their parents. | |
| | Jonbo298
join:2004-01-12
Council Bluffs, IA
| Time's have changed. Technology has enhanced the younger generation's way of life because its made things better (in most cases, not all).
Feel free to go back to using carrier pigeons. It's not going to bother the "young'ins". We'll be going the path of the future, not the past.
Yes, we as Americans are quite overweight. I too am correcting my mistake (don't care if you want to poke fun at me personally, not the first time, and not the last). But technology has also made it easier for me to work towards that. People I can talk to online and watch their progress and mine and whatnot. Easier then trying to meet up in person sometimes with how fast things move nowadays. | |
| | | kcir
join:2005-07-30
Butner, NC | Re: here's a thought... When I was growing up there were figity tigity cellphones .. you walked 5 miles in 3' foot deep snow and yelled your message when we got in shouting distance.  | |
| | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Re: When all else fails, try "It's for the children" And not for the taxpayers, who foot the bill for this ridiculous study. Price tag? Im sure the skies the limit. Who will do it? A friend of some politician probably will get awarded this lucrative crap. End result? Wireless doesn't harm you (as we know), but it will cost us 10s of millions to find that out again. | |
| | | grandpinaple
join:2006-01-03
New York, NY
1 edit | Re: When all else fails, try "It's for the children" Not quite, the result will be inconclusive leading to the award of another contract...
In all seriousness though, it's worried soccer moms that keep putting the pressure of lawsuits, that's probably driving things like this. | |
| | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Re: When all else fails, try "It's for the children" We should give those mom tin foil hats =) and that'll solve it right up. As for the end result, inconclusive would be great for getting more studies. Or, it could backfire and lead to lots of lawsuits. Hence, it's better to find it doesn't hurt anyone and milk that study for all its worth. | |
| | | | | | | 
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| Re: When all else fails, try "It's for the children" It's the research equivalent of doctor shopping. If you do enough studies, you'll eventually find one that gives you the results you're looking for. Then you point to that one to show the horrible dangers of Wi-Fi and disregard the tons of other studies that say it's not dangerous at all. | |
| | | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Re: When all else fails, try "It's for the children" Yep. Will always find someone will to go along with your results, even in the most professional fields. Enough money and time could probably find you a doctor who claims HIV doesn't exist, cancer is in psychosomatic, etc. Problem is, as you said, it's these sort of studies that people then hold in high esteem to sell their results or invoke panic. Sigh, but hey, that's why you read who does the study and who was behind it to draw your own conclusions! | |
| 
Dogfather
Premium
join:2007-12-26
Laguna Hills, CA | RUFKM Are you fing kidding me?
Gov't runs huge deficits and continues spending on crap like this? Someone needs to take away these hacks spending privs. | |
| | | 
karlmarx
join:2006-09-18
iraq
 ·Fairpoint Communic..
| Re: Time to get them out--- No No No.. The tinfoil hats are a government plot.
"Using a $250,000 network analyser, we find that although on average all helmets attenuate invasive radio frequencies in either directions (either emanating from an outside source, or emanating from the cranium of the subject), certain frequencies are in fact greatly amplified. These amplified frequencies coincide with radio bands reserved for government use according to the Federal Communication Commission (FCC). Statistical evidence suggests the use of helmets may in fact enhance the government's invasive abilities."
What you need to do is build a faraday cage around your house. Granted copper is quite expensive, but that's what it takes to secure your persons from the gestapho tactics of the current bush regime.
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_Cage
--
Relgion and Politics don't mix! I have firsthand knowledge of what happens when ANY religion mixes with ANY politics. | |
| 
Mactron
el camino Real
Premium
join:2001-12-16
CM94sv
| Study after study says... "Study after study says that those risks are minimal or non-existent."
Tin Foil sales have dropped?
Must be... breakout the pattern for the hats.
Yawn, 
--
If only the Verizon CSRs worked this well.  | |
| | | 
CCNnorthcali
join:2004-03-07
Tempe, AZ
clubs: | I don't see anything wrong with this Sure, we probably do have to worry about health risks from a number of other sources, but I wouldn't mind knowing if there was something possibly risky about wireless. Nothing wrong with being sure. | |
| 
tbsteph
join:2002-01-31
Maylene, AL
·AT&T Southeast
| Here We Go Again Cellular phones have been around for more than 15 years now. How long of a study does the FDA propose? I particularly liked the use of the term studies "suggest" we are not at risk. Suggest? From my reading the studies have found NO health risks related to ones use of a cell phone. I suggest the FDA has found a way to waste more tax payer money. | |
| 
PolarBear
The bear formerly known as aaron8301
Premium
join:2005-01-03
 ·CableOne
| If wifi were dangerous... I don't know about cellular or other frequencies, but I do know one thing: if wifi were indeed dangerous, we'd all be dead from microwave ovens. Period. These idiots (the English woman who claimed to be allergic, anyone?) that claim wifi is dangerous fail to realize that microwave ovens use about 50,000 times the amount of energy that a router does.
Sure, it's contained inside a faraday cage, but that cage is not 100% impervious. When I'm using my bluetooth headset in the kitchen with the microwave running, it distorts my call almost to the point that it's useless. Microwave stops, bluetooth works fine.
If any studies need to be done, they should be done on microwave ovens. Until I can cook food on my router or put my coffee on top of my cell phone to keep it warm, I'm not concerned about wireless.
--
There comes a point in your life when you get tired of fixing everything and wiping everyone's ass. But it’s not giving up. It’s realizing that you don’t need certain people and the bullshit and drama they bring to your life. | |
| | | whiteyonenh
join:2004-08-09
Keene, NH
clubs:
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: This is why I primarially use a landline said by sullim4  :The power emitted by wifi is nothing compared to the power emitted by cell phones. In most cases you're lucky if wifi works from two different corners of your house. Cell phones on the other hand can penetrate concrete buildings and work over ranges of several miles. As far as the microwave comparison, I don't know of anyone who puts the side of their head next to a microwave for hours each day. Flame me all you want, but personally I don't feel comfortable talking on one for longer than I need to. Current handheld cell phones use less than a watt of power while some cordless phones use significantly more. The reason for the long range of cell phones is mainly because they have exclusive use of the frequencies, not because of the power they emit. CB radios and other radios of that type are more dangerous by your logic of power consumption.
I'm much more likely to say that FM Radio broadcasts are much more worrisome, as is standing under high-voltage powerlines. | |
| | | 
KA3SGM
- -... ...- -
Premium
join:2006-01-17
West Chester, PA
clubs:
 ·Cricket Broadband
 ·Verizon FIOS
| But RF is GOOD For You !! said by whiteyonenh :said by sullim4 :The power emitted by wifi is nothing compared to the power emitted by cell phones. In most cases you're lucky if wifi works from two different corners of your house. Cell phones on the other hand can penetrate concrete buildings and work over ranges of several miles. As far as the microwave comparison, I don't know of anyone who puts the side of their head next to a microwave for hours each day. Flame me all you want, but personally I don't feel comfortable talking on one for longer than I need to. Current handheld cell phones use less than a watt of power while some cordless phones use significantly more. The reason for the long range of cell phones is mainly because they have exclusive use of the frequencies, not because of the power they emit. CB radios and other radios of that type are more dangerous by your logic of power consumption. I'm much more likely to say that FM Radio broadcasts are much more worrisome, as is standing under high-voltage powerlines. Look back at the last 100 Years of Ham Radio Operators for the study, if you want to talk about people being exposed to too much RF.
I don't see the body count that there would obviously be if RF is so bad for you, so whats the fear??
How many people will stand there with their nose practically pressed against the glass, and watch their food spin around while it's cooking in the Microwave??
If not you, how many of us let our kids do the same?? Kids really like watching the Popcorn POP in the microwave, don't they?? 
Compare your 50 milliwatt WiFi access point to that 1200 watt Microwave oven.
If I was the Government official proposing a health study, I would be more worried about someones health with that "More Than 2Lbs of Food" TV Dinner,
with it's 6700 Calories, 1200mg of Cholesterol, 3000mg of Sodium, and 800g of Fat, than the Microwave that it's cooking in.
It tows the same mentality as the NIMBY protester pissed off that they want to put a cell tower in their town, but then constantly bitch about their POS cell phone provider that always drops their calls.
Those public cell tower meetings are absolutely hilarious, when they take a short recess from the very heated debate at the meeting,
the loudest protesters at the meetings are the first ones to go outside and light up a cigarette and start fumbling with their cell phones to make as many calls as possible in the 15 minutes they get for a break.
They probably go over to the local pub, or go home, and consume half-of-a-case of Beer after the meeting too.
Beer, Cigarettes, Their Own Cell Phone, and their Microwave Oven are all perfectly safe, but that cell tower is gonna kill all of the Children in a 100 mile radius of it, guaranteed !!
Tin Foil Hat or not !! 
Zillions of studies later, no one has been able to prove that last point, so they will continue to insist upon doing taxpayer financed health studies on RF exposure,
until they get just 1 that is 'inconclusive' or slightly biased their way,
then all of the towers will have to come down, WiFi will be banned, cordless phones will be banned, radio and TV will be banned, electricity will be banned, ect....
...but by then, Doctors will have also discovered that Alcohol and Tobacco are actually good for you as well.
--
"Lithium is no longer available on credit" | |
| | | | | | | | |
KA3SGM
- -... ...- -
Premium
join:2006-01-17
West Chester, PA
clubs:
·Cricket Broadband
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: But RF is GOOD For You !! said by sullim4 :You're entitled to your opinion, but so am I. Here's a study that was just released today that was funded by the cell phone companies themselves: » news.independent.co.uk/sci_tech/···3768.ece quote:
Radiation from mobile phones delays and reduces sleep, and causes headaches and confusion, according to a new study.
The research, sponsored by the mobile phone companies themselves, shows that using the handsets before bed causes people to take longer to reach the deeper stages of sleep and to spend less time in them, interfering with the body's ability to repair damage suffered during the day.
WOW, my favorite line from that article: "A massive study, following 1,656 Belgian teenagers for a year, found most of them used their phones after going to bed. It concluded that those who did this once a week were more than three times, and those who used them more often more than five times, as likely to be "very tired"."
No Crap?? 1,656 Teenagers that used their phones "AFTER GOING TO BED"
S#it, if the kiddies are up all night talking on their Cell phone, OF COURSE THEY ARE LIKELY TO BE "VERY TIRED".
This could easily be rectified by taking their phones away at bedtime and actually letting them go to sleep for a change !!
I can fully understand the Cell Phone Companies research making that determination.
They are trying to get parents to keep their kids from using the phone at Night (aka: during off-peak hours when airtime is FREE), and force them to instead use the phones during the day when they are burning peak minutes AND making money off of it.
Thats not a research report, its an ingenious business marketing plan !!
Let the kids run up the minutes during the day when the Cell Company is profiting from it.
Let me sign you up for the Tin Foil Hat of the Week Club, do you realize that in the time it took you to write that reply, that the Electromagnetic Radiation, and X-Rays emanating from your Computer Monitor have done as much damage to your brain as a typical 30 minute Cell Phone Call ??
But wait, the monitor is also targeting that radiation DIRECTLY AT YOUR EYES. 
You need Tin Foil Glasses to go with your hat !!!
Let us know when you end up with Cataracts and Glaucoma from staring at your Computer Monitor all day.
While you are at it, don't go out in the sunlight, don't drink the water, don't breath the air, and best to hire someone to taste your food before you eat it, because it might be poisoned.
--
"Lithium is no longer available on credit" | |
| | | | | | jc100
join:2002-04-10 | Re: But RF is GOOD For You !! All in the wording =). Problem is, you think too much and are educated enough to pull apart the crap. Most people would take that study at face value, and not see below the crap on top. | |
| | | | |
Jason Levine
Premium
join:2001-07-13
USA
| quote:
using the handsets before bed causes people to take longer to reach the deeper stages of sleep and to spend less time in them, interfering with the body's ability to repair damage suffered during the day.
The same could be said about watching too much TV before bed or eating weird foods before bed. Both can make it hard for you to fall asleep and stay asleep.
--
-Jason Levine
Support a children's charity. Buy a calendar. Shooting For A Cause
Jason's Toolbox | PCQandA.com | |
| 
sjohnson
join:2001-02-28
Sioux Falls, SD
·Golden West
2 edits | Natural radiation? The sun was mentioned. How about the Uranium present in your body?
From »chppm-www.apgea.army.mil/documen···g238.pdf
quote:
A typical person will contain about 100 -125 Fg of uranium. The daily uranium intake (largely
from food ingestion) and excretion (in feces) in people is about 1.9 Fg. Bone contains a few
thousand picograms (pg) of uranium per gram of bone ash; however, soft tissue concentrations
are relatively low, in the order of a few hundred pg per gram of wet tissue.
I'm not too worried about the extremely low energy ionizing radiation from a cell phone or wifi when my own personal collection of Uranium is decaying in intimate proximity to my tissues.
--
Don't confuse me with the facts... | |
| 
Doc Casualty
join:2005-02-06
Harbor Springs, MI | Here we go again . . . OMG, why don't we revisit fluoride in the water while we're at it? | |
| | | |
|
|
FDA Requests Another Study on Wireless Health Risks
The Sun
When all else fails, try "It's for the children"
·
