Daaaaaaaammit. I can’t believe I misspelled that. /facepalm
1 Like
In Europe (especially England), the epicenter of the electrosensitivity movement, EHS is supposedly caused by the triumvirate of wifi, mobile phones, and powerlines. See Ben Goldacre’s blog, where he follows this in the way you’d expect from a responsible physician.
Oh, from the video:
Person from crowd: What about the wireless?
Jill Stein: We should not be subjecting kids’ brains especially to that. And we don’t follow that issue in this country, but in Europe where they do
2 Likes
Visible light burns and causes cancer; that’s why I spend as much time as possible inside a coffin filled with my native soil. It’s also lined with steel wool to collect orgone energy.
10 Likes
Well, that all is a bit “out there” for me. I’d worry more about being struck by cosmic rays than milliwatt-scale wi-fi emissions from an omnidirectional antenna. If I see Stein start talking earnestly about “electrosensitivity” to 802.11 networks, she’ll be off any electoral ‘short list’ I may keep. That said, I still wouldn’t choose to move into close proximity to a long-distance high-tension transmission line or into an apartment with a cell tower antenna on the roof directly above its bedroom…
In general, I’d rather see people overestimate danger than overestimate safety, but very-low-power 2.4 or 5 GHz RF just doesn’t make sense to worry about, and even if it did, there are any number of more concerning potential risks in our environments to deal with first, like, oh, I don’t know, coal smoke, rising levels of mercury in ocean-caught fish, radon in homes, glyphosate in the rain and surface waters, rising global atmospheric levels of greenhouse gasses, antibiotic-resistant bacteria in agriculture, heavy metals generally, or the dying off of honeybees and bats. I assume Jill Stein knows this and knows she’ll never lift a finger against 802.11…
Yeah well that is just the modern fancy talk for chiropractors, acupuncture, magic water, herbal who knows what really is in or the dose is remedies, etc.
They just made not so blatant.
5 Likes
I get the circular avatars confused with each other.
2 Likes
Fft, why pay attention to what she says, like this hubbub is about?
2 Likes
Integrative health : alternative medicine :: intelligent design: creationism
6 Likes
Sounds plausible (excuse the pun) although I hope such thresholds and tolerances have been controlled for.
I’m no audiologist but you raise an interesting point - particularly if the initial premise is true. Or maybe background noises in sub-tropical jungles/beaches equal or surpass background noise levels in urban/home environments?
It’s safe to assume prolonged changes in air pressure and sub-sonic/ultra-sonic frequencies beyond our hearing perception still effect our physiology in ways that can be measured.
I too would be curious about future studies that shed light on the effects of low dosage or long time exposures to different waveforms. (I’ve anecdotal evidence to suggest long-term exposure to certain waveforms can increase hearing thresholds - surfing sometimes helps de-wax my ears!)
2 Likes
I am well aware of this, having been raised working with all sorts of high-power radio equipment with my radio engineer grandfather, tinkering around in his garage…a hobby that has extended the last couple of decades. Not to mention the decade of exposure and hacking around with modern wireless equipment and transmitters. My point is that the idea that the RF warming ALONE from a modern cell phone, with normal use, would be enough to account for the heating mentioned, is hogwash unscientific.
The radiation emitted from the phones, which is usually much less than the FCC regulated maximum absorbtion rate of 1.6 W/kg, isn’t enough to raise the temperature of the skin (the only place that the heating would be taking place) more than a fraction of a single degree.
3 Likes
I mean, it’s not as if cell phones work off of batteries or anything.
1 Like
Wasn’t a dig, except at the lack of responsible external analysis or review by parties using responsible processes when such analysis shouldn’t be overly difficult for somebody with the time and some basic skills. At this point it’s just verification of the numbers and solid identification of (not just presumption of) other root causes that map consistently to the variance.
The variance is still real, the big question is what the root cause is. As I said, it could easily be something else.
What it is would still be interesting, but it’s annoying that instead we’re getting just people assuming it’s right without further analysis or people assuming it’s wrong without further analysis. There’s no conclusion that can be arrived at without such an effort, yet people are just picking their side and going their merry way.
I don’t think it’s plausible that the Clintons themselves were involved in any such things, but there are third party actors that had their biases that both had the motive and the means (presuming the non-auditable machines were as hackable as the last batch were)
I think nobody’s justified in doing either until there’s actual proper analysis of the data or peer review. Otherwise it’s just picking a side and twisting one’s assumptions to suit that side. I was pro-Sanders, but I think it’d be similarly reckless to dive on the presumption of guilt side without further information.
I’m not particularly worried, though it makes me avoid long talk times. I live somewhere relatively rural, so the phone is operating at higher output powers to reach back to the tower. The experience of it certainly doesn’t make much sense from a RF perspective (I’m a licensed codeless general class, myself), though to be honest, I noticed it more with prior phones such as an early Nokia, and that early phone probably did get hotter than my Android moto g…
So much this.
3 Likes
I’d probably get more of a temperature change than that just from the heat that my phone throws off when my screen has been on for awhile.
2 Likes
E for Ecstasy, M for my mind’s in my feet, F from us to you.
3 Likes
Only if the shiny side is OUT, you dull-side troglodyte. It’s your misguided, solar-corona-addled brain waves that will get Trump elected.
2 Likes
My circle is empty!
5 Likes
Awwwww!
6 Likes
It was falsely presented as a Standford Study. In actuality 2 students wrote a paper. With no proof. No peer review. In other words, nonsense. My friends and I had some theories too, especially after a couple of doobies.
5 Likes
