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 18th July 2019, 12:21 PM   #81
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,736
Missed this one ...
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
<snip>

The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) first classified RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) in 2011. <snip>
Didn't they also classify coffee as a possible human carcinogen?
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, 12:38 PM   #82
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,736
Since you cited it, perhaps you can answer some questions on it...

Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
<snip>

(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

<snip>
1) What is a "gigahertz transverse electromagnetic (GTEM) cell"?

2) How robust would you say the statistical analysis is? For example, "The study was carried out on 24 male Fischer 344 rats, randomly divided into four groups (n = 6 in each group)", "Low intensity microwave exposure resulted in a frequency dependent significant increase ... (p < 0.05)."

3) What papers have cited Megha+ (2015)?

4) How does "specific absorption rates (SARs) 0.59, 0.58 and 0.66 mW/kg" compare with what your brain experiences, from a microwave router on your desk? What is the SAR your brain experiences from a summer thunderstorm which passes directly over your house?
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, 12:54 PM   #83
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,736
Another one ...

Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
<snip>

(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.

<snip>
On p15 and 16: "The results reported here are limited to ..." and "... completion of this process is anticipated by fall 2017, and the draft NTP Technical Reports are expected to be available for completion of this process is anticipated by fall 2017, and the draft NTP Technical Reports are expected to be available for peer review and public comment by the end of 2017."

As far as you know, has the process been completed? If so, has the draft been made available ("for peer review and public comment")?
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, 02:37 PM   #84
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 24,870
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). ...
One again you need to read what you cite more carefully. That is not an article on the health risks of 5G technology - the subject of this thread.

This is an opinion article from Lennart Hardell about a WHO meeting ! Physics and biology tells us that radiofrequency radiation should have biological effects on human beings. The question still unanswered is whether RF radiation for cell towers have measurable adverse heath effects. The current status is that there is no convincing evidence that is the case generally. However there are some evidence for increased risk of some conditions. Thus WHO classified RF radiation as Group 2B, a possible human carcinogen, in 2011. The author believes that classification should be revised.
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 18th July 2019, 02:46 PM   #85
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 24,870
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Reality Check already offered his dismissal of the huge US National Toxicology Program study.
Wrong. I have never mentioned the US National Toxicology Program study, MattNelson !

I have dismissed the irrelevant, bad sources you have been providing because they were irrelevant and/or bad!
  • This is a thread about the heath risks of 5G technology, not RF radiation in general.
  • Science is not published in YouTube videos.
  • A personal PDF on some web sites is not a scientific paper.
  • A deluded "directed energy weapons" web site is not a good source for anything.
  • The Epoch Times newspaper is not a good source for science.
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 18th July 2019, 09:27 PM   #86
MattNelson
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 108
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
Since you cited it, perhaps you can answer some questions on it...


1) What is a "gigahertz transverse electromagnetic (GTEM) cell"?

2) How robust would you say the statistical analysis is? For example, "The study was carried out on 24 male Fischer 344 rats, randomly divided into four groups (n = 6 in each group)", "Low intensity microwave exposure resulted in a frequency dependent significant increase ... (p < 0.05)."

3) What papers have cited Megha+ (2015)?

4) How does "specific absorption rates (SARs) 0.59, 0.58 and 0.66 mW/kg" compare with what your brain experiences, from a microwave router on your desk? What is the SAR your brain experiences from a summer thunderstorm which passes directly over your house?
Can I just say you're awesome? Thanks for your input. I'll be researching as time allows.

Cancer is one of my lesser concerns, really. Yet there's a case of a woman blaming her cell phone for breast cancer, presented in the relatively new documentary-style video "Generation Zapped" seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUx9vqoJ95Y That makes me want to warn women not to store your phones in your bra. See 6:00 to 11:00.+

Our kids will be the ones exposed to this tech all their lives and in the womb. A long list of adverse effects can be found in the "International Appeal: Stop 5G on Earth and in Space" at https://www.5gspaceappeal.org/the-appeal There are 100,091 signatories from at least 187 countries as of June 7, 2019. Effects listed include, sorry sources not linked here:

Alteration of heart rhythm[12]
Altered gene expression[13]
Altered metabolism[14]
Altered stem cell development[15]
Cancers[16]
Cardiovascular disease[17]
Cognitive impairment[18]
DNA damage[19]
Impacts on general well-being[20]
Increased free radicals[21]
Learning and memory deficits[22]
Impaired sperm function and quality[23]
Miscarriage[24]
Neurological damage[25]
Obesity and diabetes[26]
Oxidative stress[27]

I've seen autism linked as a possible result of EMF/RF exposure in a few (3) sources you will likely dismiss.

YouTube video of a Dr. Martin Pall lecture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yydZZanRJ50 See slides here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/5e617kju8v...nPall.pdf?dl=0
"The Autism Epidemic Is Caused by EMFs, Acting via Calcium Channels and Chemicals Acting via NMDA-Rs" ... found on the emfsafetynetwork.org webpage titled "Dr. Martin Pall: EMF’s are the major cause of autism"

Next,

Quote:
"All of this does not prove that EMF/RFR exposures cause autism, but it does raise concerns that they could contribute by increasing risk, and by making challenging biological problems and symptoms worse in these vulnerable individuals. Placed alongside the dramatic rise in reported cases of ASDs, that parallels the dramatic rise in deployment of wireless technologies, a strong case can be made for aggressively investigating links between ASDs and EMR/RFR, and minimizing exposures for people with autism as well as families preconceptionally, during pregnancy, and around infants and children at home, at school, and in health care centers and hospitals."
- Martha Herbert, PhD, MD, Pediatric Neurology, "Findings in Autism (ASD) Consistent with Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) and Radiofrequency Radiation (RFR)" TRANSCEND Research Program, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School and Cindy Sage, MA, Sage Associates, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, For the BioInitiative Working Group, December 2012, p. 52.

In the documentary "Take Back Your Power" by Josh Del Sol (YouTube, or see takebackyourpower.net), we find at the 57:23 mark a "study" (wouldn't qualify for some) following women through pregnancy to estimate time spent near/intensity of WIFI or other wireless. This makes me wonder about my TWO friends who have autistic kids and my other friend whose girlfriend has breast cancer.

Another link I hope you click is about why Amish people rarely get cancer. Numerous ideas are put forward, including the lack of "cancer-causing EMFs in their daily life because they simply don’t own any appliances or electronics." I duplicated the link in the sentence to the article "Over 2,000 Studies Confirm TOXIC Effects of EMF..." Source of the quote is https://dailyhealthpost.com/heres-wh...ly-get-cancer/ ... so, grain of salt there.

Last edited by MattNelson; 18th July 2019 at 10:35 PM. Reason: Added Dr. Martin Pall source for autism 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 18th July 2019, 09:54 PM   #87
MattNelson
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 108
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Wrong. I have never mentioned the US National Toxicology Program study, MattNelson !

I have dismissed the irrelevant, bad sources you have been providing because they were irrelevant and/or bad!
  • This is a thread about the heath risks of 5G technology, not RF radiation in general.
  • Science is not published in YouTube videos.
  • A personal PDF on some web sites is not a scientific paper.
  • A deluded "directed energy weapons" web site is not a good source for anything.
  • The Epoch Times newspaper is not a good source for science.
Rats!

I'm unable to exclude RF from 5G. It is integral. Since there are not enough studies on 5G (and its huge new infrastructure), I must refer to the basic elements used in making 5G. Here's a video of a woman standing by the road in Wisconsin, near a small cell 5G installation with her RF Acoustimeter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z34ukXhIigo

YouTube videos have data. Much is BS, for sure. Don't you watch videos? Sorry to offend if you are blind.
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, 10:03 PM   #88
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 11,000
There are plenty of threads about the supposed dangers of RF where your posts would be on topic. This appears to be the most recent one:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=335501
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 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 19th July 2019, 12:03 AM   #89
Planigale
Illuminator
 
Planigale's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 3,201
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Can I just say you're awesome? Thanks for your input. I'll be researching as time allows.

Cancer is one of my lesser concerns, really. Yet there's a case of a woman blaming her cell phone for breast cancer, presented in the relatively new documentary-style video "Generation Zapped" seen here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUx9vqoJ95Y That makes me want to warn women not to store your phones in your bra. See 6:00 to 11:00.+

Our kids will be the ones exposed to this tech all their lives and in the womb. A long list of adverse effects can be found in the "International Appeal: Stop 5G on Earth and in Space" at https://www.5gspaceappeal.org/the-appeal There are 100,091 signatories from at least 187 countries as of June 7, 2019. Effects listed include, sorry sources not linked here:

Alteration of heart rhythm[12]
Altered gene expression[13]
Altered metabolism[14]
Altered stem cell development[15]
Cancers[16]
Cardiovascular disease[17]
Cognitive impairment[18]
DNA damage[19]
Impacts on general well-being[20]
Increased free radicals[21]
Learning and memory deficits[22]
Impaired sperm function and quality[23]
Miscarriage[24]
Neurological damage[25]
Obesity and diabetes[26]
Oxidative stress[27]

I've seen autism linked as a possible result of EMF/RF exposure in a few (3) sources you will likely dismiss.

YouTube video of a Dr. Martin Pall lecture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yydZZanRJ50 See slides here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/5e617kju8v...nPall.pdf?dl=0
"The Autism Epidemic Is Caused by EMFs, Acting via Calcium Channels and Chemicals Acting via NMDA-Rs" ... found on the emfsafetynetwork.org webpage titled "Dr. Martin Pall: EMF’s are the major cause of autism"

Next,


- Martha Herbert, PhD, MD, Pediatric Neurology, "Findings in Autism (ASD) Consistent with Electromagnetic Fields (EMF) and Radiofrequency Radiation (RFR)" TRANSCEND Research Program, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School and Cindy Sage, MA, Sage Associates, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, For the BioInitiative Working Group, December 2012, p. 52.

In the documentary "Take Back Your Power" by Josh Del Sol (YouTube, or see takebackyourpower.net), we find at the 57:23 mark a "study" (wouldn't qualify for some) following women through pregnancy to estimate time spent near/intensity of WIFI or other wireless. This makes me wonder about my TWO friends who have autistic kids and my other friend whose girlfriend has breast cancer.

Another link I hope you click is about why Amish people rarely get cancer. Numerous ideas are put forward, including the lack of "cancer-causing EMFs in their daily life because they simply don’t own any appliances or electronics." I duplicated the link in the sentence to the article "Over 2,000 Studies Confirm TOXIC Effects of EMF..." Source of the quote is https://dailyhealthpost.com/heres-wh...ly-get-cancer/ ... so, grain of salt there.
Can I challenge you on this? Amish people do get cancer. They get it quite frequently, about 75% of the rate for the general population. Similar effects are seen in Mormons. The reasons are fairly clear, very few tobacco associated cancers, sex related cancers, (this includes increased breast cancer rates in nulliparous women and women who delay pregnancy), and low rates of some genes e.g. BRCA that are associated with cancer. Mormons do not have the technology restrictions of Amish but have a similar pattern of cancer reduction. It seems unlikely that technology unuse is a significant cause of the reduced but still significant cancer deaths in the Amish.

ETA the original paper quoted in your reference above gives the rates as 75%, they do not say virtually none. It is the scientifically illiterate author who turns that stat in to the statement 'virtually none'. This is why relying on popular commentary does not substitute for going back to the original science.

Last edited by Planigale; 19th July 2019 at 12:06 AM.
Planigale 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 19th July 2019, 05:25 AM   #90
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,736
Originally Posted by Pixel42 View Post
There are plenty of threads about the supposed dangers of RF where your posts would be on topic. This appears to be the most recent one:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=335501
I agree.

It wasn’t obvious in the beginning, but MH is clearly interested in much more than 5G.

Let’s keep this thread for the health risks of “5G technology”.
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 19th July 2019, 05:28 AM   #91
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,736
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Rats!

I'm unable to exclude RF from 5G. It is integral. Since there are not enough studies on 5G (and its huge new infrastructure), I must refer to the basic elements used in making 5G. Here's a video of a woman standing by the road in Wisconsin, near a small cell 5G installation with her RF Acoustimeter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z34ukXhIigo

YouTube videos have data. Much is BS, for sure. Don't you watch videos? Sorry to offend if you are blind.
If you can’t provide relevant, primary sources, what’s the point of posting here, in the SMM&T board of the ISF?
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 19th July 2019, 05:38 AM   #92
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,736
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Can I just say you're awesome? Thanks for your input. I'll be researching as time allows.
<snip>
If you can’t answer such questions on sources you yourself post, why did you post them in the first place?

I note that there is a growing list of posts with direct questions on what you wrote, that you have yet to even acknowledge, much less address.

Are you familiar with the term “seagull”? I think it refers to the release of fecal matter from a great height and a swift exit from the scene.
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 19th July 2019, 07:14 AM   #93
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,675
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
"World’s Largest Study On Cell Tower Radiation Confirms Cancer Link"
Already debunked. The Ramazzini was shredded by scientists a year ago.

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:
Let's not. Epoch News is a Falun Gong rag of no intellectual merit. Will you be citing their other headlines, like:
Space Aliens Live Quietly Among Us, Say Some Scientists and Officials
5 Best UFO Sightings This Week


James Grundvig is a nut who promoted all kinds of drivel, like the debunked health risks of vaccination.
__________________
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 19th July 2019, 07:42 AM   #94
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,675
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
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.
It's known as 'spectrum allocation'. The global body involved in managing regional and national allocations is the International Telecommunications Union (which the oldsters will remember as the CCITT). It meets in plenary session every four years to manage coordination and is part of the UN.

The other major bodies are CEPT (the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations) in Europe (and some other countries) and CITEL (the Inter-American Telecommunication Commission) which runs under the auspices of the OAS. APT (Asia) and ATU (Africa) are similar, but less important, bodies.

Most countries have national bodies; the US has two, with the FCC managing most frequencies and NTIA managing Federal use.
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
Would the information from such a body (or bodies) be a better source than a slide from a YT video?
Vastly. However they tend to be factual rather than doon-laden conspiratorial nonsense.
There's also the IEEE which actually handles the technical specifications and takes inputs from everyone. I'm a member.
This is an IEEE Spectrum publication on 5G. It may be of interest.

Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
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.
Lots of it. Including actual ionising radiation like UK, X and gammas.

Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
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?
Also true. Though the CMB isn't exactly energetic.

Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
In my house we have “a microwave”. I guess that emits EMR.
Hundreds of watts. Perhaps more than a kilowatt. Often more, and more concentrated, than any cellular station.
Your "average" cellular base might emit less than 100W.

Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
So too does our “wireless router”, I guess.
WiFi, technically IEEE 802.11, emits about a watt (you can get USB powered WLAN adapters)

Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
Then there’s “Bluetooth”, whatever that is.
It's basically a wireless replacement of cables in low data rate applications, eliminating cables for things like headphones
Bluetooth emits tiny amounts of energy, a couple of milliwatts.
A cellphone emits up to about 3W.

Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
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?
Yes, lots of it.

Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
We had quite a light show last night; I wonder, does lightning emit EMR?
Oh, it shows up on RADAR systems.

Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
Is there any particular reason you didn’t answer my second question? The one about units of intensity?
Was that me?
__________________
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 19th July 2019, 07:53 AM   #95
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,675
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Understood. There are so many, though.
Only when you distort, cherry pick or use disproved "sources" as you have a habit of doing.


Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) first classified RFR as a possible human carcinogen (Group 2B) in 2011.
An excellent example of your habit of distorting thing to suit your unsupported opinions. The IARC classification was based on lack of actual information. If you'd bothered to actually check this is explained on their website.
BTW the IARC classification was, and is, 3: Not Classifiable for all but ELF magnetic fields linked to Childhood leukaemia.


This places EMF in the same category as wearing Acrylic fibres, drinking coffee and/or tea, being illuminated by fluorescent lighting, caffeine and cholesterol.
I await with bated breath your diatribe on how modern offices are causing cancer with synthetic fibres and free coffee...
__________________
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 19th July 2019, 07:55 AM   #96
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,675
Originally Posted by JeanTate View Post
Missed this one ...
Didn't they also classify coffee as a possible human carcinogen?

Yes. It's in exactly the same category (3) and EMF. As is tea...
It's in the "Agents classified by the IARC Monographs", volumes 1–124, which I'm sure MattNelson has studied.
__________________
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 19th July 2019, 07:59 AM   #97
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,675
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Cancer is one of my lesser concerns, really. Yet there's a case of a woman blaming her cell phone for breast cancer, presented in the relatively new documentary-style video
Worthless. We're still awaiting your, and your fellow conspiracy nuts, to show some actual science.

Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
A long list of adverse effects can be found in the "International Appeal: Stop 5G on Earth and in Space"
Nuts who also provide no science. Worthless.
Here's EU Fact Check's take on your "sources".
Mostly false
__________________
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 19th July 2019, 08:03 AM   #98
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,675
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
I'm unable to exclude RF from 5G. It is integral. Since there are not enough studies on 5G (and its huge new infrastructure), I must refer to the basic elements used in making 5G.
You have no understanding of the science you're wittering on about.
Go and learn.

Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Here's a video of a woman standing by the road in Wisconsin, near a small cell 5G installation with her RF Acoustimeter:
So effing what? Some nut who doesn't know what she's ranting about is not science.

Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
YouTube videos have data.
SHOW US THE DATA!!!

Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Much is BS, for sure. Don't you watch videos? Sorry to offend if you are blind.
Real science isn't done by YouTube videos. I know this may be difficult for you to grasp, have no experience with the scientific method.
__________________
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 19th July 2019, 12:38 PM   #99
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sacramento
Posts: 44,596
Everytime a new technology comes along you get this kind of paranoid crap.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb 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 19th July 2019, 12:47 PM   #100
MattNelson
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 108
Apologies for my amateurish approach, everyone. Let's consider the data from RF Meters.

1. WIFI from a foot or 2 away: around 4.87 V/m (YouTube)
2. 5G small cell installation from 100-200 feet: around 4.89 V/m (YouTube -- Another example gives a slightly lower value, perhaps explained by the windshield, since she's in her car. I understand these are not scientific studies, but it is useful in understanding the correlation between "5G technology" and WIFI.)

As I said before, WIFI was banned in France for nursery schools, with other restrictions for elementary schools. The French national library along with other libraries in Paris, and a number of universities have "removed all Wi-Fi networks," according to http://www.wifi-in-schools-australia...worldwide.html

Consulting a list found at the last link, we see many more laws being passed or recommended because of the dangers comparative to 5G, in Israel, Germany, Russia, Austria, Switzerland, and Europe in general.

See also a Southern Ontario, Canada clip from "Testimony on 5G and Wi-Fi in Schools to Peel Regional Council" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3zdHJ764p4 which lists Australia, India, Spain, Switzerland, Italy, Austria, Germany, Israel, Cyprus, and Finland all taking measures to protect people.

Do you argue against these protective measures? Wouldn't you appreciate the advice to turn off your WIFI -- or 5G Home device -- if your kids slept nearby, or if you were pregnant and unaware of the scientific evidence being suppressed by the industry?

What's that? Check out a 14 July, 2018 Guardian article by Mark Hertsgaard and Mark Dowie, "The inconvenient truth about cancer and mobile phones: We dismiss claims about mobiles being bad for our health – but is that because studies showing a link to cancer have been cast into doubt by the industry?"

Quote:
A closer look reveals the industry’s sleight of hand. When Henry Lai, a professor of bioengineering at the University of Washington, analysed 326 safety-related studies completed between 1990 and 2006, he discovered that 44% of them found no biological effect from mobile phone radiation and 56% did; scientists apparently were split. But when Lai recategorised the studies according to their funding sources, a different picture emerged: 67% of the independently funded studies found a biological effect, while a mere 28% of the industry-funded studies did. Lai’s findings were replicated by a 2007 analysis in Environmental Health Perspectives, which concluded that industry-funded studies were two and a half times less likely than independent studies to find health effects.
On the subject of 5G from the same Guardian article, we read:

Quote:
There is a catch, though: the Internet of Things will require augmenting today’s 4G technology with 5G technology, thus “massively increasing” the general population’s exposure to radiation, according to a petition signed by 236 scientists worldwide who have published more than 2,000 peer-reviewed studies and represent “a significant portion of the credentialled scientists in the radiation research field”, according to Joel Moskowitz, the director of the Center for Family and Community Health at the University of California, Berkeley, who helped circulate the petition. Nevertheless, like mobiles, 5G technology is on the verge of being introduced without pre-market safety testing.
The steps taken by lawmakers around the world to limit the same basic technology used in 5G shows that the answer to the question posed by this thread is, "YES." It should be obvious to you now that there is risk.

Yet this is as a classic example/application of Betteridge's law of headlines. Sadly, the first post/OP was only a question linking a conspiracy video "5G APOCALYPSE EXTINCTION EVENT by Sacha Stone" that talks about directed energy weapons and chemtrails (but which also has compelling evidence/info).

Quote:
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?
If it hadn't been phrased as a question, however, the thread would have been chucked in the Conspiracy bin.

We can argue about this forever, as the industry wishes, or we can begin to take measures to protect ourselves.
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 19th July 2019, 01:01 PM   #101
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,736
Thanks!

Originally Posted by catsmate View Post
It's known as 'spectrum allocation'. The global body involved in managing regional and national allocations is the International Telecommunications Union (which the oldsters will remember as the CCITT). It meets in plenary session every four years to manage coordination and is part of the UN.

The other major bodies are CEPT (the European Conference of Postal and Telecommunications Administrations) in Europe (and some other countries) and CITEL (the Inter-American Telecommunication Commission) which runs under the auspices of the OAS. APT (Asia) and ATU (Africa) are similar, but less important, bodies.

Most countries have national bodies; the US has two, with the FCC managing most frequencies and NTIA managing Federal use.
FWIW, I knew most of that, and knew where to find what I didn't know.

My question was directed to MattNelson, with the hope that he'd do the necessary, basic, research himself. His lack of response may count as evidence for the "seagull hypothesis".

Quote:

Vastly. However they tend to be factual rather than doon-laden conspiratorial nonsense.
There's also the IEEE which actually handles the technical specifications and takes inputs from everyone. I'm a member.
This is an IEEE Spectrum publication on 5G. It may be of interest.


Lots of it. Including actual ionising radiation like UK, X and gammas.


Also true. Though the CMB isn't exactly energetic.


Hundreds of watts. Perhaps more than a kilowatt. Often more, and more concentrated, than any cellular station.
Your "average" cellular base might emit less than 100W.


WiFi, technically IEEE 802.11, emits about a watt (you can get USB powered WLAN adapters)


It's basically a wireless replacement of cables in low data rate applications, eliminating cables for things like headphones
Bluetooth emits tiny amounts of energy, a couple of milliwatts.
A cellphone emits up to about 3W.


Yes, lots of it.


Oh, it shows up on RADAR systems.
Again, thanks; very helpful.

I wonder how much of it MH actually understands?

Quote:
Was that me?
No. It was MH.
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 19th July 2019, 01:09 PM   #102
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,736
Thanks.

Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Apologies for my amateurish approach, everyone. Let's consider the data from RF Meters.

1. WIFI from a foot or 2 away: around 4.87 V/m (YouTube)
2. 5G small cell installation from 100-200 feet: around 4.89 V/m (YouTube -- Another example gives a slightly lower value, perhaps explained by the windshield, since she's in her car.
How about:
* a leaky microwave oven, from 1m?
* during a thunderstorm, before the rain starts, from 500m (say)?

Quote:
I understand these are not scientific studies, but it is useful in understanding the correlation between "5G technology" and WIFI.)
Really? If there's no science, how does it help understand anything (except, perhaps, how pernicious fact-free internet memes can be)?

Quote:
As I said before, WIFI was banned in France for nursery schools, with other restrictions for elementary schools. The French national library along with other libraries in Paris, and a number of universities have "removed all Wi-Fi networks," according to http://www.wifi-in-schools-australia...worldwide.html

Consulting a list found at the last link, we see many more laws being passed or recommended because of the dangers comparative to 5G, in Israel, Germany, Russia, Austria, Switzerland, and Europe in general.

See also a Southern Ontario, Canada clip from "Testimony on 5G and Wi-Fi in Schools to Peel Regional Council" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3zdHJ764p4 which lists Australia, India, Spain, Switzerland, Italy, Austria, Germany, Israel, Cyprus, and Finland all taking measures to protect people.

Do you argue against these protective measures? Wouldn't you appreciate the advice to turn off your WIFI -- or 5G Home device -- if your kids slept nearby, or if you were pregnant and unaware of the scientific evidence being suppressed by the industry?

What's that? Check out a 14 July, 2018 Guardian article by Mark Hertsgaard and Mark Dowie, "The inconvenient truth about cancer and mobile phones: We dismiss claims about mobiles being bad for our health – but is that because studies showing a link to cancer have been cast into doubt by the industry?"



On the subject of 5G from the same Guardian article, we read:



The steps taken by lawmakers around the world to limit the same basic technology used in 5G shows that the answer to the question posed by this thread is, "YES." It should be obvious to you now that there is risk.

Yet this is as a classic example/application of Betteridge's law of headlines. Sadly, the first post/OP was only a question linking a conspiracy video "5G APOCALYPSE EXTINCTION EVENT by Sacha Stone" that talks about directed energy weapons and chemtrails (but which also has compelling evidence/info).



If it hadn't been phrased as a question, however, the thread would have been chucked in the Conspiracy bin.

We can argue about this forever, as the industry wishes, or we can begin to take measures to protect ourselves.
This provides evidence that is consistent with the "seagull hypothesis", wouldn't you agree?

Do you intend to answer the questions I've asked you, or address any of my (or others') posts in any way? If so, when?
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 19th July 2019, 01:29 PM   #103
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,675
Originally Posted by MattNelson;1Rr2760073
<snippets of unscientific, irrelevant drivel with misused DR meters>
Why would anyone with a working brain care about idiots playing with devices they don't understand. Learn some science.

Originally Posted by MattNelson;1Rr2760073
As I said before, WIFI was banned in France for nursery schools, with other restrictions for elementary schools.
You may indeed have said it before but it's still not true.
Pathetic.

Did you know France leads the world in free public WiFi?

Originally Posted by MattNelson;1Rr2760073
Consulting a list found at the last link, we see many more laws being passed or recommended because of the dangers comparative to 5G, in Israel, Germany, Russia, Austria, Switzerland, and Europe in general.
Maybe you should see what the "laws" actually say ? Rather than unquestioningly parroting nonsense.

Originally Posted by MattNelson;1Rr2760073
See also a Southern Ontario, <snip>
How's about seeing some actual science instead of your continued, pathetic, posting of YouTube videos?


Originally Posted by MattNelson;1Rr2760073
Do you argue against these protective measures? Wouldn't you appreciate the advice to turn off your WIFI -- or 5G Home device -- if your kids slept nearby, or if you were pregnant and unaware of the scientific evidence being suppressed by the industry?
Ah, back to the paranoid fantasies...


Originally Posted by MattNelson;1Rr2760073
What's that? Check out a 14 July, 2018 Guardian article by Mark Hertsgaard and Mark Dowie, "The inconvenient truth about cancer and mobile phones: We dismiss claims about mobiles being bad for our health – but is that because studies showing a link to cancer have been cast into doubt by the industry?"
The single study was wrong, as shown within days of its publication.




Originally Posted by MattNelson;1Rr2760073
The steps taken by lawmakers around the world to limit the same basic technology used in 5G shows that the answer to the question posed by this thread is, "YES." It should be obvious to you now that there is risk.
Paranoid fantasies.
__________________
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 19th July 2019, 06:08 PM   #104
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,736
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Apologies for my amateurish approach, everyone. Let's consider the data from RF Meters.

1. WIFI from a foot or 2 away: around 4.87 V/m (YouTube)
2. 5G small cell installation from 100-200 feet: around 4.89 V/m (YouTube -- Another example gives a slightly lower value, perhaps explained by the windshield, since she's in her car. I understand these are not scientific studies, but it is useful in understanding the correlation between "5G technology" and WIFI.)
<snip>
Now here’s something that may, just may, be of relevance ...

In fair weather, at ground level, 50 to 200 V/m is normal.

During a thunderstorm, this is ... well, MH, would you care to tell us?

Sorry, I don’t have a YT video ... but I did find a paper (from 1960, I think) ... would you like to read it, MH?
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 19th July 2019, 09:58 PM   #105
Dabop
Muse
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Oz
Posts: 891
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Apologies for my amateurish approach, everyone. Let's consider the data from RF Meters.
snip

As I said before, WIFI was banned in France for nursery schools, with other restrictions for elementary schools. The French national library along with other libraries in Paris, and a number of universities have "removed all Wi-Fi networks," according to http://www.wifi-in-schools-australia...worldwide.html
snip
I don't know about your other sources, but I recognised one in particular...
http://www.wifi-in-schools-australia...worldwide.html
If this is any indication of the others, it puts them in serious doubt...

This group attracted a lot of attention here in Australia a while back- a 'fairly long' while back...

2012 in fact

And were quite quickly dismissed as a small set of 'special people' ie nutters that were spreading scare tactics throughout schools (mostly in Qld and NSW), several schools had to calm parents who believed their (printed out) hand flyers that they were handing out outside schools
http://www.wifi-in-schools-australia...ou-can-do.html

In fact a quick glance at their website seems to show that they haven't updated it in over a half decade... since 2013 in fact... so a 'perfect' source for information on 5G... in 2019

__________________
It's a kind of a strawman thing in that it's exactly a strawman thing. Loss Leader

'When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.' George Carlin
Dabop 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 20th July 2019, 08:13 AM   #106
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,675
Originally Posted by Dabop View Post
I don't know about your other sources, but I recognised one in particular...
http://www.wifi-in-schools-australia...worldwide.html
If this is any indication of the others, it puts them in serious doubt...

This group attracted a lot of attention here in Australia a while back- a 'fairly long' while back...

2012 in fact

And were quite quickly dismissed as a small set of 'special people' ie nutters that were spreading scare tactics throughout schools (mostly in Qld and NSW), several schools had to calm parents who believed their (printed out) hand flyers that they were handing out outside schools
http://www.wifi-in-schools-australia...ou-can-do.html

In fact a quick glance at their website seems to show that they haven't updated it in over a half decade... since 2013 in fact... so a 'perfect' source for information on 5G... in 2019

That would be around the time of the 4GEN rollout. EM sensitivity was fashionable woo then too.
__________________
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 20th July 2019, 09:16 AM   #107
Dabop
Muse
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Oz
Posts: 891
We didn't get 4G until 2015 for Telstra and 2016 for Optus and Vodaphone here in Oz, we got 3G in 2006ish so it wasn't really near any new network rollouts...

(we still had 2G running until 2018, and 3G is going to shut down next year- we only just got 4gx a year or so ago, so I'm not holding my breath on 5G lol)
__________________
It's a kind of a strawman thing in that it's exactly a strawman thing. Loss Leader

'When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.' George Carlin
Dabop 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 20th July 2019, 09:27 AM   #108
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,675
Originally Posted by Dabop View Post
We didn't get 4G until 2015 for Telstra and 2016 for Optus and Vodaphone here in Oz, we got 3G in 2006ish so it wasn't really near any new network rollouts...

(we still had 2G running until 2018, and 3G is going to shut down next year- we only just got 4gx a year or so ago, so I'm not holding my breath on 5G lol)
Ah, I didn't realise the technological curve was so much shallower down under...
__________________
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 21st July 2019, 09:50 PM   #109
Dabop
Muse
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Oz
Posts: 891
Unfortunately, we have had a few years of the Liberal party having the government (which confusingly is the conservative bunch here...) who have been for decades rather 'anti' internet so anything that improves it tends to get the thumbs down from them....
__________________
It's a kind of a strawman thing in that it's exactly a strawman thing. Loss Leader

'When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.' George Carlin
Dabop 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 22nd July 2019, 01:58 PM   #110
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 24,870
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Yet there's a case of a woman blaming her cell phone for breast cancer, ...
That is a woman trying to find some reason for getting breast cancer and probably falling for some crank on the Internet obsessing with cell phones, MattNelson.

You need to read the definition of of science !

Science is not people looking for any reason no matter how invalid for getting diseases.
Science is not propaganda videos on YouTube.
Science is not an letter.
Science is not an obvious crank (Dr. Martin Pall) blaming autism and just about everything else on RF radiation.
Science is not a Dr. Martha Herbert's musings about a connection between autism and EMF/RFR.
Science is not a crank's "study".
Science is not fantasies about the Amish who do have lower overall cancer rates.
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 22nd July 2019, 02:07 PM   #111
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 24,870
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
....
More of the same ignorance about what science is, MattNelson. Science is not some woman in a video. We know that cell towers emit RF radiation - that is their function !

RF is a general risk. No one advocates turning off the Sun just because it emits RF ! What we do in the real world is take reasonable measures, e.g. sunscreen and covering up. Similarly for cell towers. Don't put a cell tower in a nursery. Don't strap a cellphone to your head for extended periods.
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 22nd July 2019, 02:21 PM   #112
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 24,870
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Let's consider the data from RF Meters.....
Lets consider yet more YouTube videos abysmally ignorant about the decades of scientific research on cell towers and the fact that they have published specifications stating exactly what they emit!

More non-science from MattNelson.
Heath agencies taking a conservative approach to heath is what they are supposed to do.
A "many more laws being passed or recommended because of the dangers comparative to 5G" fantasy.
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 26th July 2019, 01:25 AM   #113
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,675
So, given that MN has apparently flown the nest, does anyone have any questions or queries at 5G technology?
__________________
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 26th July 2019, 08:50 AM   #114
JeanTate
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,736
Originally Posted by catsmate View Post
So, given that MN has apparently flown the nest, does anyone have any questions or queries at 5G technology?
I do.

But they’re not related to health risks. Maybe a new thread?
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 27th July 2019, 09:22 PM   #115
Roger Ramjets
Illuminator
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 4,100
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Everytime a new technology comes along you get this kind of paranoid crap.
Not every time. It's understandable that people might be paranoid about wireless because it's invisible, so you can't tell if it's affecting you or not. In the past we have been assured by industry that some new technology was safe, only to find out later that it wasn't. So naturally people are suspicious of reassurances, especially when a lot of money is involved.

Those of us who are familiar with the technical aspects of a technology tend to be a bit blasé about it, even to the point of not realizing the real risks that may be involved. The truth is, even though cellphone signals at normal levels don't seem to have any health issues, we don't know what the long-term effects may be. And as the technology advances it may evolve into something quite different to what has been tested and proven safe in the past. That is why independent scientific testing and studies must continue to be done, and we should be wary of blanket assurances.

Paranoia could be reduced by explaining to people what is actually involved and what the science says about it. Unfortunately nobody seems to be keen on doing that. The Wikipedia article on 5G says:-
Quote:
Because the higher millimeter wave used in 5G do not easily penetrate objects, this requires the installation of antennas every few hundred meters, which has sparked concern among the public.

Critics of 5G say that these millimeter wave frequencies used by 5G have not been extensively tested on the general public and some experts believe that more scientific research is required, even as millimeter wave technology has been used in technology such as radar for many decades.
But people don't hold 28GHz radars to their heads, and any microwave engineer can tell you that even quite low transmit levels can be dangerous in the wrong places. So at this point we are relying on the industry making sure it is safe. Well they they told us that lead paint and asbestos was safe too, and they still put lead in aviation gas!

If people are paranoid they have good reason to be - not because 5G might cause cancer etc., but because nobody can prove to them that it doesn't.
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets 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 28th July 2019, 08:26 AM   #116
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,532
The are outbreaks of geasles all over the US and that's with 4G. % will only make it worse.
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab 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 28th July 2019, 04:57 PM   #117
Spektator
Watching . . . always watching.
 
Spektator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southeastern USA
Posts: 1,692
Originally Posted by Wolrab View Post
The are outbreaks of geasles all over the US and that's with 4G. % will only make it worse.
Didn't Geasle write the Dr. Seuss books?
Spektator 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 28th July 2019, 07:27 PM   #118
MattNelson
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 108
Here's a U.S. Senator, Patrick Colbeck. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-UEuOYOED4
Skip to 2:00 for talk of health effects.

Last edited by MattNelson; 28th July 2019 at 07:32 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 28th July 2019, 07:59 PM   #119
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 24,870
Originally Posted by MattNelson View Post
Here's a U.S. Senator, Patrick Colbeck....
That is repeated ignorance of what science is, MattNelson !

Science is not the opinions of a politician - in this case the pretty much anti-vaccination and "anti-LGBTQ bigot" Senator Patrick Colbeck. See Senator Patrick Colbeck’s embrace of pseudoscience goes farther than I thought

Colbeck misleads the meeting - there is no convincing evidence of cancer tumors, etc. from wireless transmission such as cell phone towers. High levels of EM radiation do cause harmful heath effects. Colbeck definitely lies about EM radiation and ties to autism.

Last edited by Reality Check; 28th July 2019 at 08:12 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 28th July 2019, 10:17 PM   #120
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 18,860
Originally Posted by Wolrab View Post
The are outbreaks of geasles all over the US and that's with 4G. % will only make it worse.
Really? 5G is tied to the fed?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?


...love and buttercakes...
abaddon 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
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 11:49 PM.
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.