Re: Now that we know Cellphone radiation causes Cancer

If a glass window admits sunlight then UV must be an optional component of sunlight.

--
  When I tried casting out nines I made a hash of it.
Reply to
Jasen Betts
Loading thread data ...

Window glass admits the visible, IR and very near UV components of sunlight. What's your point?

--
  Rick C. 

  -- Get a 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
gnuarm.deletethisbit

Not from visible light. It doesn't have enough energy to cause ionization.

You need ionizing wavelengths, which start about 400nm, or above the ultraviolet. This is called UVA, UVB, and UVC. It is invisible to human eyes. You can buy sunglasses that are certified to block ultraviolet light. They are highly recommended to help prevent cataracts. Many weather sites include the UV index to show the amount of UV radiation to be expected:

formatting link

This is a bit like the problem solved by Einstein, which gained him the Nobel Prize in 1921. He explained the Photoelectric effect, which showed light below a certain frequency could not eject electrons from a surface. It takes higher frequency, or energy, to eject electrons.

formatting link

This show why command centers often use red light for illumination. It is the lowest energy that is still visible to human eyes.

Reply to
Steve Wilson

"As Controversial Cell Tower Is Shut Down, Officials Are Now Looking At Soil In Cancer Cases At Ripon School" It would be interesting to see the history of cancer cases in the skool over the last 10 years or so.

More:

formatting link

Papers on how 5G can kill or hurt you:

--
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com 
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jeff Liebermann

It is interesting to note that some people hate cell phone towers and think that they cause high signal strengths. Apparently they have not heard of the inverse square law (for line of sight) or actually inversely proportional to third or fourth power of (when communicating below eves height in urban areas).

The high radiation levels occur from the cellular phone siting against your ear. The better cell tower support, the cell phone can use lower transmission power and hence reduce the radiation level into the head.

Reply to
upsidedown

Here is another explanation that shows the difference between UVA, UVB and UVC:

formatting link

Reply to
Steve Wilson

More like, some law firms see profit in creating hatred of something that is very remunerative. And then gambling on either true believers sponsoring a bit of legal business, or on timorious executives deciding to quietly settle a series of legal challenges, with cash, rather than defend against a new urban legend.

The 'study' that found cancers caused by cellphone-like radiation was designed to generate 'findings' of dubious veracity.

Reply to
whit3rd

snipped-for-privacy@downunder.com wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

a KILOWATT microwave beam next to your head can toggle your cells and heat 'em up and destroy cell nucleus'.

A milliwatt phone signal does not even have the juice to toggle the atoms in your body.

The energy produce by our old 5 Watt CB radios was more, and so was the old 2 meter handhelds, and there were not any great increases in cancer incidence among them. Same thing about military radiomen carrying transmitters on their backs. HIGH wattage transmitters.

If our RF rich realm in the world was a problem, the entire human race would be dropping dead.

Reply to
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno

I said "sunlight." Then you scientifically pontificated deep into absurdity.

What blather. I've had sunburns even if you never have.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

You said:

It is clear you meant visible light. This cannot cause skin cancer.

Of course I've had sunburns. This could have been avoided by using a sunscreen. However, Hawaii recently passed a law prohibing sunscreens containing chemicals that harm the coral reefs. You are trying to cover up your ignorance by resorting to insults.

This thread is over.

Reply to
Steve Wilson

No, it would not. The school is not large enough for any data to be statistically significant. Clusters of cancers are not at all uncommon.

--
  Rick C. 

  -+ Get a 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
gnuarm.deletethisbit

"Toggle"??? Is that a technical term???

--
  Rick C. 

  +- Get a 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
gnuarm.deletethisbit

More absurdity. You can't declare a thread over any better than you can lie about the wavelengths present in sunlight. Or claim that I said or implied that "visible light" causes skin damage.

Too many demented people post here.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 

lunatic fringe electronics
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

.

There is the irrational leap of logic.

It was over pretty much before it began.

I'm glad there aren't people here who talk about microwaves "aggregating" t o cause chemical changes or breaking of hydrogen bonds which also happen fr om thermal agitation. I've had conversations with people who are absolutel y convinced cell phones cause cancer. It is hard to reason with the unthin king.

--
  Rick C. 

  ++ Get a 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
gnuarm.deletethisbit

Do you mean this report? "Electrosmog and autoimmune disease" The author of the paper is quite respectable: and was the originator of the biquad wi-fi antenna way in about 2001.

However, if you're worried, you can purchase an Electrosmog meter: and RF protective clothing: some of which can double as a portable sauna.

Cancer of the vocabulary perhaps. When technology, emotions, dollars, and politics mix, the discussions do tend toward the irrational.

--
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com 
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jeff Liebermann

John Larkin wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

The point is what do you think the cancer rate among native American tribes was? Many of them were all but bare in the summer months.

And many of them had longer lifespans than the average euro-h*mo- sapiens did.

Reply to
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno

Skin is opaque to UV, it's where that light STOPS. So, if you had a sunburn it's because your skin is more transparent than most black-skinned humans. The UV did damage to the epidermis, but that just sloughs off. There was (less) damage to the living dermis, which can start a cancer.

There's no EM radiation interaction mechanism known for RF that causes cancer, except for heating effects. Drinking too-hot coffee probably is a causative agent in throat cancers (according to statistics).

Cellphone heating effects aren't nearly as profound as hot coffee. Evidence doesn't suggest ANY carcinogenic effect, nor does theory.

Reply to
whit3rd

Africans are well protected against UV-induced cancer. Probably native Americans were some too, but Eskimos would be interesting. Apparently northern europeans, not getting much sunlight and wearing more clothes to keep warm, optimized melatonin content more towards vitamin D production. Some other useful compounds are produced by UV on skin.

--
John Larkin         Highland Technology, Inc 
picosecond timing   precision measurement  
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
John Larkin

If you read the articles you link to, they don't talk about microwaves aggregating to create chemical changes.

The paper asks a very pertinent question, answers it to show why effects from EM are NOT seen, then goes on to discuss how EM may interact with VDR activation, without addressing the original question in that context.

--
  Rick C. 

  --- Get a 1,000 miles of free Supercharging 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
gnuarm.deletethisbit

"Electrosmog and autoimmune disease" "..,we note that characteristic modes of instability lie in the microwave frequency range, which is currently populated by cellphone and WiFi communication signals, and that the susceptibility is ligand dependent."

Please note the words "microwave" and "electrosmog" in the above quotation from the abstract. Electrosmog is the same as RF aggregation. Neither term is rigorously defined. I assume that a chemical change is required to make changes in how VDR (Vitamin D Receptors) act.

Hmmm... I didn't see that on first read. I'll read it again.

--
Jeff Liebermann     jeffl@cruzio.com 
150 Felker St #D    http://www.LearnByDestroying.com 
 Click to see the full signature
Reply to
Jeff Liebermann

ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.