Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: aruanan

Like two heads fro ... well, three for us males ... from sitting in front of the video monitor that is a greater source of EFM?


19 posted on 10/14/2004 11:02:42 AM PDT by dhuffman@awod.com (The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: dhuffman@awod.com
Like two heads fro ... well, three for us males ... from sitting in front of the video monitor that is a greater source of EFM?

The RF radiation from cell phones is probably greater since the source is held right against your head. A video monitor is usually about 12-14 times farther away from one's head than a cell phone held to the ear. Remember the inverse square law. The effect is probably temperature related.
21 posted on 10/14/2004 11:17:19 AM PDT by aruanan (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

To: dhuffman@awod.com
Like two heads fro ... well, three for us males ... from sitting in front of the video monitor that is a greater source of EFM?

Huh?

Didja mean EMF? Electrical, magnetic and electromagnetic fields are ubiquitous in our modern world. There is a huge body of epidemilogical evidence that indicates that the only known hazard from non-ionizing radiaton is direct heating. Sort of like cooking yourself in a microwave oven.

You don't need to feel warm to suffer injury, one famous case involved some technicians working on the antenna of the FPS-49 in Clear, Alaska about thirty years ago. Unbeknownst to them, the transmitter was on and they suffered irreparable and ultimately fatal liver damage, without experiencing any pronounced feelings of warmth.

The U.S. standard for exposure to radio frequency energy changes with wavelength, but it's on the order of about 5 milliwatts per square centimeter. This translates to an effecive total dose of about 50 Watts over your entire body. Cell phone transmitters are about 10 Watts... The spot levels in certain places may be higher. Just because a "standard" is being exceeded doesn't mean that there's any real hazard, they are at best guidelines allowing trade-offs between the convenience of modern appliances and potential risks.

Any one study in isolation is of very little value in making an informed judgment, especially about rare diseases. Instances of rare diseases, by very virtue of being rare, will occur in a very "noisy" distribution in a small population. With enough diseases and enough studies, you're inevitably going to get an occassion noise spike.

22 posted on 10/14/2004 11:30:44 AM PDT by Lonesome in Massachussets (NYT Headline: "The Protocols of the Learned Elders of CBS", Fake But Accurate, Experts Say)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson