ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags 5G-technology , cancer , fertility , radiation

Reply
Old 2nd June 2019, 11:14 PM   #41
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,795
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
While I acknowledge I may be reading too much into it, the highlighted seems like code for "no Jews."


As for the topic at hand, my first question to cell phone radiation panickers is always this: Why haven't you been protesting radio and TV? Our cells have been saturated with Jerry Mathers and Lucille Ball for a very long time.
Hmmm... Given the current world perhaps there is something in this after all.....
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you

Last edited by Darat; 2nd June 2019 at 11:15 PM. Reason: Tags
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2019, 11:20 PM   #42
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,795
Originally Posted by casebro View Post
Flipping channels this after noon I caught a blurb like "only applies to products sold to the Gov.". Hence the 'security' concerns.

But where do you draw the line? Any cell tower transmission equipment just might carry pentagon comms...
Pretty much all the infrastructure can be remotely patched so even" clean" technology may not remain clean, and given that the alternative technology supplier seems to be Cisco I have little confidence in 1G being secure! (Actually analog may be secure these days!)
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2019, 05:45 PM   #43
Elagabalus
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,629
Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets View Post
Well actually... TV may indeed fry you brains - but not with microwaves.

TV Is Bad for Your Brain

But what does this have to do with 5G?

How 5G will change home internet and TV
A TV in every room means - more brain rot! And to maximize the damage:-

Huawei is developing a 5G 8K TV because that's apparently a thing now
Brain fried.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
Elagabalus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th June 2019, 07:52 PM   #44
Trebuchet
Penultimate Amazing
 
Trebuchet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: The Great Northwet
Posts: 22,234
That reminds me (off topic warning!) of a few years ago when I came out of a supermarket, walked up to our car, pulled out my key and pushed the button, and was rewarded with an answering beep. Except it was the wrong key and our car was still locked.
I've since regretted not pushing the lock button to lock it back up. Whoever's it was.
__________________
Cum catapultae proscribeantur tum soli proscripti catapultas habeant.
Trebuchet is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2019, 04:24 AM   #45
The Don
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Don's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Sir Fynwy
Posts: 26,551
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
That reminds me (off topic warning!) of a few years ago when I came out of a supermarket, walked up to our car, pulled out my key and pushed the button, and was rewarded with an answering beep. Except it was the wrong key and our car was still locked.
I've since regretted not pushing the lock button to lock it back up. Whoever's it was.
Nothing new in that. Back in the "analogue" key world of the 1970's and 1980's the same physical key could open several different cars. One friend's Morris 1800's key also opened another friend's MG1300.
The Don is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2019, 06:32 AM   #46
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 24,316
I used to have a couple of keys that would run other things. Back when I was a kid, I had for backyard disassembly and old 1941 Chevy, and its key would start nearly any Chevy whose indulgent owner would let me try it. Years later I found my Honda's key would fit my cousin's Honda.

Unfortunately, the remotes for my various ratty old Jeeps have never opened any others, so no new Jeeps for a while.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2019, 07:18 AM   #47
Steve
Philosopher
 
Steve's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 5,316
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
Nothing new in that. Back in the "analogue" key world of the 1970's and 1980's the same physical key could open several different cars. One friend's Morris 1800's key also opened another friend's MG1300.
We have two Toyotas, different models and years. The keys look the same and I have keys for both cars on the same key ring. A few weeks ago I drove my car home from work and discovered that I had started it with the valet key for my wife's car.
__________________
Caption from and old New Yorker cartoon - Why am I shouting? Because I'm wrong!"
Steve is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2019, 11:32 AM   #48
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 15,679
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
We have two Toyotas, different models and years. The keys look the same and I have keys for both cars on the same key ring. A few weeks ago I drove my car home from work and discovered that I had started it with the valet key for my wife's car.
I was aware that car manufacturers often employ only a limited number of "keyings" when creating mechanical keys and locks, so that a given Toyota mechanical key can open and start a significant number of Toyotas. This saves money, makes record keeping easier, and probably reflects the limits on the number of different keyings that can be physically imposed on a key/lock system (compared to the millions and millions of Toyotas sold).

But I had assumed that the electronic lock codes were much more diverse from car to car. but maybe not (re Trebuchet's post).

Last edited by Giordano; 10th June 2019 at 11:33 AM.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2019, 11:41 AM   #49
bruto
Penultimate Amazing
 
bruto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Way way north of Diddy Wah Diddy
Posts: 24,316
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
I was aware that car manufacturers often employ only a limited number of "keyings" when creating mechanical keys and locks, so that a given Toyota mechanical key can open and start a significant number of Toyotas. This saves money, makes record keeping easier, and probably reflects the limits on the number of different keyings that can be physically imposed on a key/lock system (compared to the millions and millions of Toyotas sold).

But I had assumed that the electronic lock codes were much more diverse from car to car. but maybe not (re Trebuchet's post).
My experience suggests that they are at least a little more diverse. Remember too that owing to tolerances and wear, some keys, at least the older type, will substitute for near neighbors, especially if you jiggle a little.

So far on a number of cars I've never had a remote that operated another.
__________________
I love this world, but not for its answers. (Mary Oliver)

Quand il dit "cuic" le moineau croit tout dire. (When he's tweeted the sparrow thinks he's said it all. (Jules Renard)
bruto is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2019, 11:47 AM   #50
ahhell
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,472
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
Apparently the Russians are pushing this conspiracy theory. Don't know why.

https://bgr.com/2019/05/13/5g-vs-hea...-nyt-explains/
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Seems pretty obvious why.
I'm not sure its so obvious, it seems to be just because they like to stir up ****.

Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Unlikely, Elagabalus. Huawei might be prevented from selling 5G telecom technology for vague "national security" reasons in a Trump executive order. Maybe the idea that data sent by 5G would be siphoned off to China. TVs are not telecom equipment so the order cannot be applied.
How are TVs not telecom equipment?

Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
I was aware that car manufacturers often employ only a limited number of "keyings" when creating mechanical keys and locks, so that a given Toyota mechanical key can open and start a significant number of Toyotas. This saves money, makes record keeping easier, and probably reflects the limits on the number of different keyings that can be physically imposed on a key/lock system (compared to the millions and millions of Toyotas sold).

But I had assumed that the electronic lock codes were much more diverse from car to car. but maybe not (re Trebuchet's post).
My understanding is that Japanese manufacturer's were especially notorious for there relatively small number of keyings.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2019, 11:52 AM   #51
Elagabalus
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 4,629
But how did Trebuchet manage to acquire somebody else's car key?
Elagabalus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th June 2019, 02:45 PM   #52
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 24,880
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
How are TVs not telecom equipment?
What does Telecommunications Equipment mean?
TVs are receivers of the telecommunications supplied by telecommunications equipment.

Last edited by Reality Check; 10th June 2019 at 02:46 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 05:45 AM   #53
MattNelson
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 108
Let's talk about the issue. An Epoch Times article, "The Threat 5G Poses to Human Health: What you don't know will alarm you," by James Grundvig:

https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-th...h_2790506.html

See my 5G thread in the conspiracy section also: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=337575
MattNelson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 04:30 PM   #54
MattNelson
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 108
"World’s Largest Study On Cell Tower Radiation Confirms Cancer Link"

Quote:
“All of the exposures used in the Ramazzini study were below the US FCC limits. These are permissible exposures according to the FCC. In other words, a person can legally be exposed to this level of radiation. Yet cancers occurred in these animals at these legally permitted levels. The Ramazzini findings are consistent with the NTP study demonstrating these effects are a reproducible finding,” explained Ronald Melnick Ph.D., formerly the Senior NIH toxicologist who led the design of the NTP study on cell phone radiation now a Senior Science Advisor to Environmental Health Trust (EHT). “Governments need to strengthen regulations to protect the public from these harmful non-thermal exposures.”
- https://www.collective-evolution.com...s-cancer-link/
MattNelson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 05:11 PM   #55
MattNelson
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 108
Video: "Scientists Speak On Health Effects of Cell Phones: American Academy of Pediatrics Recommendations"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWGb-BjFrFA
MattNelson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 05:20 PM   #56
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,739
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Let's talk about the issue. An Epoch Times article, "The Threat 5G Poses to Human Health: What you don't know will alarm you," by James Grundvig:

https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-th...h_2790506.html

See my 5G thread in the conspiracy section also: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=337575
Which is where, IMHO, your posts in this thread belong.

As noted by another ISF member in your thread in that section, you seem very confused as to what “5G” actually is.
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 05:24 PM   #57
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 24,880
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Let's talk about the issue. An Epoch Times article,
This is The Epoch Times
Quote:
The Epoch Times is a multi-language newspaper[2] headquartered in New York City. The company was founded in 2000 by John Tang and a group of Chinese Americans associated with the Falun Gong spiritual movement.[3] The newspaper covers general interest topics with a focus on news about China and human rights issues there. It draws from a network of sources inside China, as well as Chinese expatriates living in the West.[4][5][6][7] It has been criticised by mainstream news outlets for its favorable coverage of right-wing politicians in the West, including Donald Trump,[8][9][10] and of far-right groups in Germany.[11][12]
This is not a credible source of science for a Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology thread.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 05:47 PM   #58
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 24,880
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
"World’s Largest Study On Cell Tower Radiation Confirms Cancer Link"...
"www.collective-evolution.com" is another dubious source for a Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology thread.

The study is Report of final results regarding brain and heart tumors in Sprague-Dawley rats exposed from prenatal life until natural death to mobile phone radiofrequency field representative of a 1.8 GHz GSM base station environmental emission
Their results were that Sprague-Dawley rats exposed only to the highest level of radiation had a statistically significant increase in the incidence of heart Schwannoma (male only) and a statistically insignificant increase in heart Schwann cells hyperplasia (male and female).

But: Leszczynski: Ramazzini study shows that cell tower radiation does not increase risk for Schwannoma and glioma casts doubts on their statistical analysis. A critical analysis of the latest cellphone safety scare covers the same ground - their data also supports reduction of the risk of cancer in some of the experimental groups! A sex bias is neglected (a control group in a Faraday cage developed tumors only in females, not males) leading to an exaggerated significance of males developing tumors n the test groups.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 05:49 PM   #59
MattNelson
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 108
From that Epoch Times article we read:

Quote:
Dr. Martin Pall, professor emeritus at Washington State University and one of the leading EMF experts in the world, presented at the National Institute of Health about the dangers of 5G, stating: “Each of these EMF effects will lead to existential threats to our survival … In mice, EMF led to a drop in reproduction to essentially zero. … 5G will incur much higher frequencies and pulsations to that of being in a microwave.”
Find Dr. Pall's paper "5G: Great risk for EU, U.S. and International Health! Compelling Evidence for Eight Distinct Types of Great Harm Caused by Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Exposures and the Mechanism that Causes Them" here and here... and more of his research here: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin_Pall

See video with Dr. Pall, "Dr. Martin Pall To The NIH: 'The 5G Rollout Is Absolutely Insane.'"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBsUWbUB6PE

Last edited by MattNelson; 17th July 2019 at 06:07 PM.
MattNelson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 06:00 PM   #60
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 24,880
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Video: "Scientists Speak On Health Effects of Cell Phones: American Academy of Pediatrics Recommendations"
Science is not opinions stated by scientists or news reports in a 4 minute long YouTube video.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 06:02 PM   #61
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,739
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
From that Epoch Times article we read:



Find Dr. Pall's paper "5G: Great risk for EU, U.S. and International Health! Compelling Evidence for Eight Distinct Types of Great Harm Caused by Electromagnetic Field (EMF) Exposures and the Mechanism that Causes Them" here: https://peaceinspace.blogs.com/files...18-6-11us3.pdf and more here: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin_Pall

See video with Dr. Pall, "Dr. Martin Pall To The NIH: 'The 5G Rollout Is Absolutely Insane.'"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBsUWbUB6PE
MH, a straightforward question for which I’d like a straightforward answer: are you prepared to discuss the technical (scientific) details of these, um, claims?
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 06:26 PM   #62
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 24,880
Exclamation Science is not opinions stated by a scientist in long YouTube video

Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
From that Epoch Times article we read:
A bad source (The Epoch Times) citing a deluded source - a "peaceinspace" blog with a "There is substantive evidence of a planned and ongoing massive depopulation of targeted human communities using a roll-out of 5G+ devices and DEW directed energy weapons" on the main page !
Science is not a book written by a Dr. Pall in a PDF hosted on a deluded "peaceinspace" web site !
A book is not a published, peer-reviewed scientific paper.
Science is not opinions by this Dr. Martin L Pall in a YouTube video.

Dr. Martin L Pall is a retired professor of Biochemistry and Basic Medical Sciences with an idea about EMFs causing "life threatening cardiac effects", "very early onset dementias, including Alzheimer’s, digital and other types of dementias", "ADHD and autism", etc. He has a theory about voltage-gated calcium channels being the mechanism via which EMFs do that. We can only hope that his book being on a deluded web site is them stealing it rather than him willingly giving it to them.

Last edited by Reality Check; 17th July 2019 at 06:31 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 06:27 PM   #63
MattNelson
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 108
MH? Claims? I'm an English B.A. I'll try to discuss anything with you to further everyone's understanding of this controversial issue.
MattNelson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 06:32 PM   #64
MattNelson
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 108
Good catch before I edited my post with another link to the same paper on another site. We're talking about a Ph.D. who spent a good portion of his life researching this. Your dismissal requires matching credentials. What are yours, Reality Check?

Last edited by MattNelson; 17th July 2019 at 06:35 PM.
MattNelson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 06:35 PM   #65
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 24,880
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
MH? Claims? I'm an English B.A. I'll try to discuss anything with you to further everyone's understanding of this controversial issue.
Good. Then start with citing Dr. Martin Pall's relevant published scientific papers so that we can discuss them in a thread about 5G technology.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 06:42 PM   #66
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,739
Thanks.

Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
MH? Claims? I'm an English B.A. I'll try to discuss anything with you to further everyone's understanding of this controversial issue.
Cool.

Let’s start with this simple question: in your sources, what is the frequency (or wavelength, if you prefer) range of the “5G”?

In what units is the intensity (or flux, or luminosity, or ...) measured?

In that “5G” frequency band, what other sources are there? Please include both man-made and natural (e.g. the Sun).
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 06:49 PM   #67
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 24,880
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Good catch before I edited my post with another link to the same paper on another site.
Again with the "paper" error - it is a personal PDF on a few web sites.

Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
We're talking about a Ph.D. who spent a good portion of his life researching this.
Wrong - we're talking about a Ph.D. who spent a good portion of his life researching other things. You have not cited a single paper by Pall relevant to this thread. You have not even extracted his relevant papers to 5G technology papers from his PDF.

Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Your dismissal requires matching credentials. What are yours, Reality Check?
My dismissal requires the fact you have not cited any scientific literature relevant to his thread.

Credentials are irrelevant. You have an English B.A. but that does not mean that you do not understand what you cite. I have an M.Sc. but that does not mean that I understand what you cite. What is relevant is what experts in the field write about what you cite.

Last edited by Reality Check; 17th July 2019 at 06:52 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 06:50 PM   #68
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,739
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Good catch before I edited my post with another link to the same paper on another site. We're talking about a Ph.D. who spent a good portion of his life researching this. Your dismissal requires matching credentials. What are yours, Reality Check?
I think you are new to this, the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology board of the ISF.

Here, we like to insist on primary sources, which is usually (but not always) a paper published in a relevant, peer-reviewed journal. Many of us are both comfortable and familiar with such sources.

Asking for “credentials”, but not discussing content, is IMHO a poor way to begin.
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 07:01 PM   #69
MattNelson
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 108
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
Thanks.


Cool.

Let’s start with this simple question: in your sources, what is the frequency (or wavelength, if you prefer) range of the “5G”?

In what units is the intensity (or flux, or luminosity, or ...) measured?

In that “5G” frequency band, what other sources are there? Please include both man-made and natural (e.g. the Sun).
5G uses a number of frequencies. Here's a good snapshot of them, by country. (source is a slide by Polish engineer Pawel Wypychowski here) I'm not clear on how the lower bands (600-700 MHz and 3.3-7.1 GHz) are used in combination with the higher (24-71 GHz) millimeter waves, but I know the lower offer more coverage area than the higher. Your last question seems like you have a specific answer in mind, so how about you go ahead and share? ☺

Last edited by MattNelson; 17th July 2019 at 07:22 PM.
MattNelson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th July 2019, 07:34 PM   #70
MattNelson
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 108
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Again with the "paper" error - it is a personal PDF on a few web sites..
..
You have not cited a single paper by Pall relevant to this thread. You have not even extracted his relevant papers to 5G technology papers from his PDF.
I appreciate your high standards for source info. I will do more research and find better, more original sources. Yet the content to fuel our discussion does seem to be there, conveniently disregarded by such standards.

Last edited by MattNelson; 17th July 2019 at 07:38 PM.
MattNelson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 03:44 AM   #71
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,688
Originally Posted by snoop4truth View Post
I was unable to find a discussion here relating to 5G technology. So, I thought I'd start one.

There are those who claim 5G technology emits extremely high levels of radiation and that it causes reduced fertility and cancer, etc.

(If really pressed for time, begin the video below at 15:30.).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UdsIY5ixxyw

Conspiracy theory?

Genuine risk to health?

What are your thought?
It's rubbish.

Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
Rather OT, but I feel a better question might be just how much 5G is hype (including the rollout schedule)?

Secure IoT backbone? Please!

Coverage as good as 4G? In your dreams!

Etc.
1. Lots of hype. Be skeptical.
2. Wrt the rollout schedule I can't speak about the US. In Europe it's going ahead fairly well.
3. There's been a lot of interest in IoT security and much emphasis on it. The main problems are always going to be cheap, mass markets, consumer devices.
4. Almost certainly not, especially in rural areas. In urban centres the coverage will be as good.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 03:46 AM   #72
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,688
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Well no because 5G isn't like an actual thing that exists. It's a marketing term that doesn't really apply to any specific technology.
It refers to the use of far higher radio frequencies than currently, typically >30GHz rather than <6GHz.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 03:50 AM   #73
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,688
Originally Posted by kedo1981 View Post
I doubt that 5G fries your brain but one thing it does is interfere with the weather radar that local metrologists use too scan for storms.
This is another over-hyped myth. I assume you're referring to McMahon and the Nature article? One word:
Propagation.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 03:53 AM   #74
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,688
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
5G poses the same health risks as other cell phone technologies, and I'm ashamed to see skeptics trying to push these under the rug. The list of risks is huge:

1. Texting while driving
2. Walking into traffic while staring at Candy Crush on the phone
3. Inciting murder while blocking the line at the fast food place while you just finish up that "quick text"

There are hundreds more...

Indeed, these risks should be addressed. In the last three weeks I've seen four people in text based accidents. Well one wasn't an accident, the scrape I inflicted on his car was entirely deliberate...
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 03:55 AM   #75
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,688
Originally Posted by Trebuchet View Post
That reminds me (off topic warning!) of a few years ago when I came out of a supermarket, walked up to our car, pulled out my key and pushed the button, and was rewarded with an answering beep. Except it was the wrong key and our car was still locked.
I've since regretted not pushing the lock button to lock it back up. Whoever's it was.
'Master' keys are very easy to obtain or make. Not long ago a co-worker lost his keys and I opened his car and started the engine for him.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 03:57 AM   #76
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,739
Thanks.
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
5G uses a number of frequencies. Here's a good snapshot of them, by country. (source is a slide by Polish engineer Pawel Wypychowski here) I'm not clear on how the lower bands (600-700 MHz and 3.3-7.1 GHz) are used in combination with the higher (24-71 GHz) millimeter waves, but I know the lower offer more coverage area than the higher.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t there an agency, a regulating body, that oversees the allocation of EMR to classes of users or for purposes? Maybe an international body, with at least some regional and/or national ones too.

Would the information from such a body (or bodies) be a better source than a slide from a YT video?

Quote:
Your last question seems like you have a specific answer in mind, so how about you go ahead and share? ☺
I do not have “a specific answer in mind”. I am pretty sure, though, that the Sun emits EMR right across the spectrum, including kHz to THz. Also, isn’t the universe bathed in an almost perfectly isotropic sea of EMR? One that’s got a spectrum that’s an almost perfect black body?

In my house we have “a microwave”. I guess that emits EMR. So too does our “wireless router”, I guess. Then there’s “Bluetooth”, whatever that is. When he was much younger, my brother was quite a handyman. I vaguely remember the racket his electric welder made, and how we couldn’t listen to the radio while he was using it. Maybe it was emitting EMR? We had quite a light show last night; I wonder, does lightning emit EMR?

Is there any particular reason you didn’t answer my second question? The one about units of intensity?

Last edited by JeanTate; 18th July 2019 at 05:17 AM. Reason: Fixed typo
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 05:20 AM   #77
casebro
Penultimate Amazing
 
casebro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,691
It has to be more dangerous, it has more 'G's. 66% more than 3G does.
__________________
Great minds discuss ideas.
Medium minds discuss events.
Small minds spend all their time on U-Tube and Facebook.
casebro is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 05:31 AM   #78
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 83,920
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
"World’s Largest Study On Cell Tower Radiation Confirms Cancer Link"


- https://www.collective-evolution.com...s-cancer-link/
You should pick better sources, not just those that agree with you.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 11:23 AM   #79
MattNelson
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 108
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
You should pick better sources, not just those that agree with you.
Understood. There are so many, though. Try this one, "World Health Organization, Radiofrequency Radiation and Health – A Hard Nut to Crack (Review)." Hardell, L., International Journal of Oncology, 51:405-413 (2017).

Quote:
Several laboratory studies have indicated mechanisms of action for RF radiation carcinogenesis such as on DNA repair, oxidative stress, down regulation of mRNA and DNA damage with single strand breaks (9–13). A report was released from The National Toxicology Program (NTP) under the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in USA on the largest ever animal study on cell phone RF radiation and cancer (14). An increased incidence of glioma in the brain and malignant schwannoma in the heart was found in rats. Acoustic neuroma or vestibular schwannoma is a similar type of tumour as the one found in the heart, although benign. Thus, this animal study supported human epidemiological findings on RF radiation and brain tumour risk (8).
(8) Carlberg M and Hardell L: Evaluation of mobile phone and cordless phone use and glioma risk using the Bradford Hill viewpoints form 1965 on association or causation. BioMed Res Int. 2017:92184862017. View Article

(9) Markovà E, Malmgren LO and Belyaev IY: Microwaves from mobile phones inhibit 53BP1 focus formation in human stem cells more strongly than in differentiated cells: Possible mechanistic link to cancer risk. Environ Health Perspect. 118:394–399. 2010. PubMed/NCBI

(10) Megha K, Deshmukh PS, Banerjee BD, Tripathi AK, Ahmed R and Abegaonkar MP: Low intensity microwave radiation induced oxidative stress, inflammatory response and DNA damage in rat brain. Neurotoxicology. 51:158–165. 2015. View Article

(11) Dasdag S, Akdag MZ, Erdal ME, Erdal N, Ay OI, Ay ME, Yilmaz SG, Tasdelen B and Yegin K: Effects of 2.4 GHz radio-frequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi equipment on microRNA expression in brain tissue. Int J Radiat Biol. 91:555–561. 2015. View Article : PubMed/NCBI

(12) Yakymenko I, Tsybulin O, Sidorik E, Henshel D, Kyrylenko O and Kyrylenko S: Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagn Biol Med. 35:186–202. 2016. View Article

(13) Akdag MZ, Dasdag S, Canturk F, Karabulut D, Caner Y and Adalier N: Does prolonged radiofrequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi devices induce DNA damage in various tissues of rats? J Chem Neuroanat. 75:116–122. 2016. View Article

(14) Wyde M, Cesta M, Blystone C, Elmore S, Foster P, Hooth M, Kissling G, Malarkey D, Sills Rhttps://mail.yahoo.com/, Stout M, et al: Report of Partial findings from the National Toxicology Program Carcinogenesis Studies of Cell Phone Radiofrequency Radiation in Hsd: Sprague Dawley® SD rats (Whole Body Exposures). US National Toxicology Program (NTP); 2016, doi: org/10.1101/055699. http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...55699.full.pdf http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...55699.full.pdf. Accessed on April 1, 2017.

Reality Check already offered his dismissal of the huge US National Toxicology Program study. Here's some words of wisdom:

Quote:
The NTP findings are most important because the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified RFR as a “possible human carcinogen” based largely on increased risks of gliomas and acoustic neuromas (which are Schwann cell tumors on the acoustic nerve) among long term users of cell phones. The concordance between rats and humans in cell type affected by RFR strengthens the animal-to-human association. This commentary addresses several unfounded criticisms about the design and results of the NTP study that have been promoted to minimize the utility of the experimental data on RFR for assessing human health risks. In contrast to those criticisms, an expert peer-review panel recently concluded that the NTP studies were well designed, and that the results demonstrated that both GSM- and CDMA-modulated RFR were carcinogenic to the heart (schwannomas) and brain (gliomas) of male rats.
- Ronald L. Melnick, "Commentary on the utility of the National Toxicology Program study on cell phone radiofrequency radiation data for assessing human health risks despite unfounded criticisms aimed at minimizing the findings of adverse health effects," Environmental Research, Vol. 168, January 2019, Pages 1-6.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) first classified RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) in 2011. Authors of the literature review say IARC should now upgrade RFR’s designation to carcinogenic to humans (Group 1).

This of course would devastate the modern world. Thus, it won't ever happen because we need cell phones and wireless communication. The solution is to create laws that limit EMF/RF exposure, such as in France where WIFI is not permitted in nursery schools and used only when needed at elementary schools.

As a "possible human carcinogen" in the same category as lead, we must wonder why lead paint is no longer used, why leaded gasoline is not used, and why the electronics industry adopted the RoHS (restriction of hazardous substances) standard to reduce lead content, but the telecom industry has done nothing to inform the public of its status as a proven hazard. That's because they own the FCC (https://ethics.harvard.edu/files/cen...ncy_alster.pdf ).

Where are the tests on lab rats with 5G millimeter wave tech? Until we get the results of such tests hopefully in the works now, WE are the rats. Since there are no studies available, people can wrongly argue the higher frequencies will be less dangerous. The opposite is true, because 5G antennae will be on street corners, the sides of buildings, light poles, and utility poles, less than 300 meters apart, beaming millimeter waves at people directly and by ricochet. See video from IEEE Spectrum, "Everything You Need To Know About 5G," vrt 3:21 - 4:19.
MattNelson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th July 2019, 12:16 PM   #80
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,739
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Understood. There are so many, though. Try this one, "World Health Organization, Radiofrequency Radiation and Health – A Hard Nut to Crack (Review)." Hardell, L., International Journal of Oncology, 51:405-413 (2017).



(8) Carlberg M and Hardell L: Evaluation of mobile phone and cordless phone use and glioma risk using the Bradford Hill viewpoints form 1965 on association or causation. BioMed Res Int. 2017:92184862017. View Article

(9) Markovà E, Malmgren LO and Belyaev IY: Microwaves from mobile phones inhibit 53BP1 focus formation in human stem cells more strongly than in differentiated cells: Possible mechanistic link to cancer risk. Environ Health Perspect. 118:394–399. 2010. PubMed/NCBI

(10) Megha K, Deshmukh PS, Banerjee BD, Tripathi AK, Ahmed R and Abegaonkar MP: Low intensity microwave radiation induced oxidative stress, inflammatory response and DNA damage in rat brain. Neurotoxicology. 51:158–165. 2015. View Article

(11) Dasdag S, Akdag MZ, Erdal ME, Erdal N, Ay OI, Ay ME, Yilmaz SG, Tasdelen B and Yegin K: Effects of 2.4 GHz radio-frequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi equipment on microRNA expression in brain tissue. Int J Radiat Biol. 91:555–561. 2015. View Article : PubMed/NCBI

(12) Yakymenko I, Tsybulin O, Sidorik E, Henshel D, Kyrylenko O and Kyrylenko S: Oxidative mechanisms of biological activity of low-intensity radiofrequency radiation. Electromagn Biol Med. 35:186–202. 2016. View Article

(13) Akdag MZ, Dasdag S, Canturk F, Karabulut D, Caner Y and Adalier N: Does prolonged radiofrequency radiation emitted from Wi-Fi devices induce DNA damage in various tissues of rats? J Chem Neuroanat. 75:116–122. 2016. View Article

(14) Wyde M, Cesta M, Blystone C, Elmore S, Foster P, Hooth M, Kissling G, Malarkey D, Sills Rhttps://mail.yahoo.com/, Stout M, et al: Report of Partial findings from the National Toxicology Program Carcinogenesis Studies of Cell Phone Radiofrequency Radiation in Hsd: Sprague Dawley® SD rats (Whole Body Exposures). US National Toxicology Program (NTP); 2016, doi: org/10.1101/055699. http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...55699.full.pdf http://biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/e...55699.full.pdf. Accessed on April 1, 2017.

Reality Check already offered his dismissal of the huge US National Toxicology Program study. Here's some words of wisdom:


- Ronald L. Melnick, "Commentary on the utility of the National Toxicology Program study on cell phone radiofrequency radiation data for assessing human health risks despite unfounded criticisms aimed at minimizing the findings of adverse health effects," Environmental Research, Vol. 168, January 2019, Pages 1-6.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) first classified RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) in 2011. Authors of the literature review say IARC should now upgrade RFR’s designation to carcinogenic to humans (Group 1).

This of course would devastate the modern world. Thus, it won't ever happen because we need cell phones and wireless communication. The solution is to create laws that limit EMF/RF exposure, such as in France where WIFI is not permitted in nursery schools and used only when needed at elementary schools.

As a "possible human carcinogen" in the same category as lead, we must wonder why lead paint is no longer used, why leaded gasoline is not used, and why the electronics industry adopted the RoHS (restriction of hazardous substances) standard to reduce lead content, but the telecom industry has done nothing to inform the public of its status as a proven hazard. That's because they own the FCC (https://ethics.harvard.edu/files/cen...ncy_alster.pdf ).

Where are the tests on lab rats with 5G millimeter wave tech? Until we get the results of such tests hopefully in the works now, WE are the rats. Since there are no studies available, people can wrongly argue the higher frequencies will be less dangerous. The opposite is true, because 5G antennae will be on street corners, the sides of buildings, light poles, and utility poles, less than 300 meters apart, beaming millimeter waves at people directly and by ricochet. See video from IEEE Spectrum, "Everything You Need To Know About 5G," vrt 3:21 - 4:19.
Perhaps you already know - if so, please provide sources - but has there been any work done on the effect of leaky microwave ovens on humans? rats?

How about the effects of RFR from TV and radio stations (lots of people live very close to transmitters of such)?

Ditto, RFR from radars, say near airports, air force or navy bases, or meteorological stations?

How well studied is the incidence of cancer in regions with exceptionally high numbers of thunderstorms?

If you think "cell phone RFR" is deadly (as in, causes cancer), are you not even more worried about all the other sources of RFR (many of which have been with us for far longer than cellphones)?
JeanTate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:19 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.